Whittier v. Emmet’s Empirical Analysis
281 F.2d 24 · 1960
Citation profile
30 federal appellate · 8 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently June 2011 · most notably 23 Cal. 3d 917 - Woodland Hills Residents Ass'n v. City Council of Los Angeles (1979), Cottman Transmission Systems, Inc. v. Martino (1994)
30 federal appellate · 8 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. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 28 U.S.C. § 2111 · 28 U.S.C. § 2411 · 28 U.S.C. § 294
Relies on Sprage v. Ticonic Nat Bank · Bankers Life & Casualty Co. v. Holland · Neirbo Co. v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. · United Mine Workers of America v. Benedict Coal Corporation · Olberding v. Illinois Central Railroad
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An obvious reason for denying this allowance of interest is that Congress has made no provision for its payment. It is elemental that pre-judgment interest cannot be assessed against the Government in the absence of a specific provision authorizing such assessment. 28 U. S.C. §§ 2411, 2516, see United States v. New York Rayon Importing Co., 1947, 329 U.S. 654 , 67 S.Ct. 601 , 91 L.Ed. 577 ; United States v. Thayer-West Point Hotel Co., 1947, 329 U.S. 585 , 67 S.Ct. 398 , 91 L.Ed. 521 . Furthermore, since all but the few named parties to these actions will receive payment of their claims solely under Public Law 85-586 ( 72 Stat. 487 ), rather than under the judgments rendered in these cases, the terms of such payments are to be determined by such statute. It expressly states that the payments authorized are ‘without interest.’ There is no authority in the National Service Life Insurance Act for the allowance of interest claimed by the named plaintiffs in these actions. In fact, the Supreme Court has held that no interest was allowable under the World War I Insurance Act, which is substantially identical to the National Service Life Insurance Act, even in the extreme case of a wrongfully withheld death benefit. United States v. Citizens Loan & Trust Co., 1942, 316 U.S. 209 , 62 S.Ct. 1026 , 86 L. Ed. 1387 ; United States v. Worley, 1930, 281 U.S. 339 , 50 S.Ct. 291 , 74 L.Ed. 887 .””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the erroneous determination of the venue (amounted) to harmless error,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.