Claffy v. Forbes’s Empirical Analysis
280 F. 233 · 1922
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 9 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently November 1959 · most notably Bradley v. United States (1944), Collins v. United States (1947)
23 federal appellate · 9 district ·
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 United States v. Grimaud · Caha v. United States · United States v. Birdsall · Cassarello v. United States
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The intent to designate the niece as residuary beneficiary is explicitly established. Does the fact that the designation was by misapprehension of the laws sent to the mother, instead of the bureau, defeat the soldier’s intent and right granted him under the insurance contract and law? “This inquiry must be answered in the negative. Is the designation made in harmony with the regulations at the time it was received by the bureau sufficient? Yes.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Steele v. Suwalski
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.