United States v. Spelar’s Empirical Analysis
338 U.S. 217 · 1949
Citation profile
162 federal appellate · 71 district · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 379 later decisions (21 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2023 · most notably Dalehite v. United States (1953), Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain (2004)
162 federal appellate · 71 district · 16 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedSpelar v. United States (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Foley Bros. v. Filardo · De Lima v. Bidwell · Vermilya-Brown Co. v. Connell · Vermilya-Brown Co. v. Connell
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 379 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]hough Congress was ready to lay aside a great portion of the sovereign's ancient and unquestioned immunity from suit, it was unwilling to subject the United States to liabilities depending upon the laws of a foreign power.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]ny claim arising in a foreign country.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“MR. SHEA [Assistant Attorney General, explaining the revised language suggested by the Attorney General]. Claims arising in a foreign country have been exempted from this bill, H.R. 6463, whether or not the claimant is an alien. Since liability is to be determined by the law of the situs of the wrongful act or omission it is wise to restrict the bill to claims arising in this country. This seems desirable because the law of the particular State is being applied. Otherwise, it will lead I think to a good deal of difficulty. MR. ROBSION [Member of the House Committee on the Judiciary]. You mean by that any representative of the United States who committed a tort in England or some other country could not be reached under this? MR. SHEA. That is right. That would have to come to the Committee on Claims in the Congress.”
4 later decisions 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.