Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 511 F.2d 804 - Relf v. Gasch

Relf v. Gasch’s Empirical Analysis

511 F.2d 804 · 1975

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
March 2018
most recently cited

24 federal appellate · 22 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Lamont v. Haig (1978), Light v. Wolf (1987)

24 federal appellate · 22 district ·

25019751980199020002010decided

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 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 2676 · 42 U.S.C. § 1985

Relies on Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Van Dusen v. Barrack · Hoffman v. Blaski · Allied Chemical & Alkali Workers v. Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. · Anderson v. Alabama

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

  1. “For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district ... where it might have been brought.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This limitation, like the earlier doctrine of forum non conveniens, imposes two prerequisites to transferability. Venue must be proper in the transferee district; in addition, the defendants must be subject to the process of the federal court in the transferee district at the time the action was originally filed, (footnotes omitted).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A civil action in which each defendant is an officer of the United States in his official capacity, a person acting under him, or an agency of the United States, may be brought in any judicial district where a plaintiff in the action resides.””
    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.