Archer v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
217 F.2d 548 · 1954
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Pfeil v. Rogers (1985), Calnetics Corporation and Meier-Line, Inc. v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., Calnetics Corporation v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., (Five Cases) (1976)
38 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 3
Relies on Feres v. United States · United States v. Standard Oil Co. · Murray v. United States · Doehler Metal Furniture Co. v. United States · F. A. R. Liquidating Corp. v. Brownell
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘The Trial Court was undoubtedly correct in holding that a cadet riding under military discipline on an army plane under control of a superior officer has no claim under the Act for injury sustained through whatever cause. This principle would not vary even though the service man were on leave and whether he were on the plane voluntarily or by command. * * * ’ ” Layne, supra, at 436 , quoting Archer, supra, at 551 .”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Under Rule 12, Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., a defendant waives all defenses and objections which he does not present either by motion or in his answer except that the defense of failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted may also be made by a later pleading if one is permitted or by motion for judgment on the pleadings or at the trial on the merits. The record shows no such defense presented by defendant in a motion or answer and it must be deemed to have waived the defense that the petition did not state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The motion which defendant made for judgment notwithstanding the verdict was on the grounds that ‘the plaintiff’s petition and the evidence discloses that there was no privity of contract between the plaintiff and the defendant’ and that ‘it is uncontroverted in the evidence that the five tanks delivered by defendant complied with the terms specified in the [written] order’ given by Midwest to defendant. It was made after the trial and not on the trial and did not preserve the defense of failure of the petition to state a claim. The defendant is therefore in the position of having waived that defense and may not urge it here.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A “cadet” being “transported” in a “United States Army Plane,” which was operated by an employee of the United States Army, has no valid claim against the government' for an accident causing him damage. Nor has anyone such a claim for his death.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.