United States v. Mraz’s Empirical Analysis
255 F.2d 115 · 1958
Citation profile
20 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently August 1987 · most notably Hinson v. United States (1958), Cooner v. United States (1960)
20 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 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
Relies on Rayonier Incorporated v. United States a Arnhold · Williams v. United States · United States v. Eleazer · United States v. Campbell · United States v. Sharpe
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.
““there is a demonstrable difference between the relationship of an army officer traveling from one permanent base to another at government expense, with leave en route, and one without leave whose travel is expressly ‘deemed necessary in the military service.’ In the former instance, the officer’s only duty is to report at a certain place at a certain time; while in the latter, his time belongs to the government and is measured out to him.” 255 F.2d at 117 .”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * There is doubtless a philosophical divergence in the theory that a master is not liable for the wrongful acts of his servant, unless done in respect to the very transaction out of which the injury arose, and the theory that a master is liable for his servant’s negligent acts if done while engaged in the master’s business and did not arise from some external, independent and personal motive on his part. * * *””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ ‘Acting within the scope of his office or employment’, in the case of a member of the military or naval forces of the United States, means acting in line of duty. June 25, 1948, c. 646, 62 Stat. 982 , amended May 24, 1949, c. 139, § 124, 63 Stat. 106 .””
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.