Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 338 U.S. 366 - United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

United States v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.’s Empirical Analysis

338 U.S. 366 · 1949

Citation profile

1,569
cited by 1,569 later decisions
47
cited 47 times by the Supreme Court
26
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

492 federal appellate · 174 district · 165 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 1,569 later decisions (47 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2024 · most notably United States v. Mitchell (1983), Dalehite v. United States (1953)

492 federal appellate · 174 district · 165 state decisions — followed in 26 states

3690194919501960197019801990200020102020decided

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

reviewedÆtna Casualty & Surety Co. v. United States (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Munsey Trust Co. · William Shields v. Robert R Barrow · Liverpool & Great Western Steam Co. v. Phenix Insurance · Hobbs v. McLean

Cited together with United States v. Shannon · United States v. Yellow Cab Co. · Feres v. United States · Luckenbach v. W. J. McCahan Sugar Refining Co. · United States v. Sherwood

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 1,569 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “If then, [the anti-assignment statute] is inapplicable, the [United States] Government must defend suits by subrogees as if it were a private person. Rule 17(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C., which were specifically made applicable to Tort Claims litigation, provides that “Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest,” and of course an insurer-subrogee, who has substantive equitable rights, qualifies as such. If the subrogee has paid an entire loss suffered by the insured, it is the only real party in interest and must sue in its own name.”
    47 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The exemption of the sovereign from suit involves hardship enough, where consent has been withheld. We are not to add to its rigor by refinement of construction, where consent has been announced.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances”
    11 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.