Moos v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
225 F.2d 705 · 1955
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Doe v. Durtschi (1986), Franklin v. United States (1993)
15 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 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. § 2680
Relies on United States v. Brown · Mohr v. Williams · Bonner v. Moran · Wall v. Brim
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The provisions of this chapter and section 1346(b) of this title shall not apply to— * * * “(h) Any claim arising out of assault, battery, false imprisonment, false arrest, malicious prosecution, abuse of process, libel, slander, misrepresentation, deceit, or interference with contract rights. * * * ’’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the district court, which we think has clearly demonstrated that the plaintiff's claim against the government is, under applicable law, one arising out of an assault and battery, of which the court had no jurisdiction under the Tort Claims Act.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Doe v. Durtschi
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.