Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 47 F.3d 716 - Johnson v. Sawyer

Johnson v. Sawyer’s Empirical Analysis

47 F.3d 716 · 1995

Citation profile

109
cited by 109 later decisions
4
states following
September 2021
most recently cited

46 federal appellate · 7 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 109 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably Russell v. Gregoire (1997), Johnson v. Sawyer (1997)

46 federal appellate · 7 district · 7 state decisions

4301995200020102020decided

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.

Relationships

Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1905 · 18 U.S.C. § 4126 · 26 U.S.C. § 6103 · 26 U.S.C. § 6601 · 26 U.S.C. § 7201 · 26 U.S.C. § 7206 · 26 U.S.C. § 7217 · 26 U.S.C. § 7431

Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · North Carolina v. Alford · United States v. S.A. Empresa De Viacao Aerea Rio Grandense · Indian Towing Company v. United States · Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn

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

  1. “injury or loss of property, or 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.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “It is virtually axiomatic that the FTCA does not apply 'where the claimed negligence arises out of the failure of the United States to carry out a [federal] statutory duty in the conduct of its own affairs.'”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]o allow FTCA recovery merely on the basis of a general doctrine of negligence per se, without requiring that there be some specific basis for concluding that sim ilar conduct by private persons or entities would be actionable under state law, is to in essence discriminate against the United States: recovery against it is allowed, although for similar conduct the private person or entity would not be subject to liability under state law. Plainly, the FTCA waiver of sovereign immunity does not go so far.”
    2 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.