Laird v. Nelms’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
247 federal appellate · 136 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 673 later decisions (8 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2017 · most notably Library of Congress v. Shaw (1986), Stencel Aero Engineering Corporation v. United States (1977)
247 federal appellate · 136 district · 20 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedNelms v. Laird (from Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Dalehite v. United States · Indian Towing Company v. United States · United States v. Causby · Rayonier Incorporated v. United States a Arnhold · Hatahley v. United States
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 673 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[T]o permit plaintiff to recover by 'dressing up the substance' of battery in the 'garments' of negligence would be to 'judicially admit at the back door that which has been legislatively turned away at the front door.'”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The necessary consequence of the Court’s holding in Dalehite is that the statutory language “negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government,” is a uniform federal limitation on the types of acts committed by its employees for which the United States has consented to be sued. Regardless of state law characterization, the Federal Tort Claims Act itself precludes the imposition of liability if there has been no negligence or other form of misfeasance of nonfeasance, on the part of the Government.”
6 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.