410 F. Supp. 2d 142 - Barnaby v. Quintos’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1442 · 28 U.S.C. § 1444 · 28 U.S.C. § 2410 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 2679 · 42 U.S.C. § 233 (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009)
Relies on Minnesota v. United States · Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad · Arizona v. Manypenny · Pt United Can Company Ltd v. Crown Cork & Seal Company Inc W · Celestine v. Mount Vernon Neighborhood Health Center
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“eliminate the doctrine of derivative jurisdiction in FTCA cases because it could always be argued that the state court had jurisdiction when the federal defendant was sued and only lost jurisdiction sometime thereafter, after the federal government was actually certified by the Attorney General as a federal employee acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incident out of which the claim arose, see 28 U.S.C. § 2679 (d)(2), removal had occurred, and a motion to substitute the United States had been decided. This would be contrary to those cases that have employed the doctrine of derivative jurisdiction to dismiss FTCA claims after their removal from state court.”
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.