Feres v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
340 U.S. 135 · 1950
Citation profile
2,226 federal appellate · 559 district · 234 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4,846 later decisions (74 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2025 · most notably Dalehite v. United States (1953), Richards v. United States (1962)
2,226 federal appellate · 559 district · 234 state decisions — followed in 34 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
reviewedFeres v. United States (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Standard Oil Co. · Brooks v. United States · Ickes v. Fox Same · Kurtz v. Moffitt
Cited together with United States v. Brown · Stencel Aero Engineering Corporation v. United States · Brooks v. United States · United States v. Shearer · Chappell v. Wallace
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 4,846 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to service.”
257 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““The Feres case: The District Court dismissed an action by the executrix of Feres against the United States to recover for death caused by negligence. Decedent perished by fire in the barracks at Pine Camp, New York, while on active duty in service of the United States. Negligence was alleged in quartering him in barracks known or which should have been known to be unsafe because of a defective heating plant, and in failing to maintain an adequate fire watch. The Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, affirmed. 1 “The Jefferson case: Plaintiff, while in the Army, was required to undergo an abdominal operation. About eight months later, in the course of another operation after plaintiff was discharged, a towel 30 inches long by 18 inches wide, marked 'Medical Department U. S. Army,’ was discovered and removed from his stomach. The complaint ■alleged that it was negligently left there by the army surgeon. The District Court, being doubtful of the law, refused without prejudice the •Government’s pretrial motion to dismiss the complaint. 2 After trial, finding negligence as a fact, Judge Chesnut carefully reexamined the issue of law and concluded that the Act •does not charge the United States with liability in this type of case. 3 The Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, affirmed. 4 “The Griggs case: The District Court dismissed the complaint of Griggs’ executrix, which alleged that while on active duty he met death because of negligent and unskillful medical treatment by army surgeons.”
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.