Conley v. Maattala’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 5 state decisions

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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “42 U.S.C. § 2651 provides in part: “(a) In any case in which the United States is authorized or required by law to furnish hospital, medical, surgical, or dental care . . . to a person who is injured . . . under circumstances creating a tort liability upon some third person ... to pay damages therefor, the United States shall have a right to recover from said third person the reasonable value of the care and treatment so furnished or to be furnished and shall, as to this right be subrogated to any right or claim that the injured . person . has against such third person to the extent of the reasonable value of the care and treatment so furnished or to be furnished. . “(b) The United States may, to enforce, such right, (1) intervene or join in any action or proceeding brought by the injured . . person ... against the third person who is liable for the injury . . .; or (2) if such action or proceeding is not commenced within six months after the first day in which care and treatment is furnished by the United States in connection with the injury . . . involved, institute and prosecute legal proceedings against the third person who is liable for the injury in a State or Federal court, either alone (in its own name or in the name of the injured person , . .) or in conjunction with the injured person . . ..””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cook v. Stuples

2. ““As the Court reads 42 U.S.C. § 2651 , the United States Government has three ways of recovering for medical and hospital care . . . (1) by subrogation ; (2) by intervening or joining in any action brought by the injured person; and, (3) by instituting such an action itself or in conjunction with the injured or deceased person. None of these procedures is mandatory: the choice of method is left to the head of the department or agency furnishing such care.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 343 F. Supp. 692 - Palmer v. Sterling Drugs, Inc.

3. ““The Plaintiff, for the sole use and benefit of the United States of America under the provision of 42 U.S.C. § 2651 , et seq., and with its express consent, asserts a claim for the reasonable value of said past and future care and treatment.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cook v. Stuples