United States v. Whitcomb’s Empirical Analysis
314 F.2d 415 · 1963
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 2008
7 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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)
Relies on Erie Co v. Tompkins · Helvering v. Stockholms Enskilda Bank · Rowley v. Chicago & Nw Ry Co · James Moody Vaughan v. Henry Northup James Moody · Maddy v. Jones
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“«* * * [A] resident of this State or the owner of a motor vehicle registered in this State or a resident of another state, territory or federal district of the United States or province of the Dominion of Canada, or foreign country, in which recourse is afforded to residents of this State, of substantially similar character to that provided for. by this subtitle * * (emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The United States as a sovereign is a resident of territorial United States, and we think it not unreasonable to hold the United States to be a resident of every state.”
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.