Barrett v. Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · United States v. Agurs · Paul v. Davis · United States v. Kubrick · Urie v. Thompson
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“AMY BLAUER, as Administratrix of the Goods, Chattels and Credits of HAROLD BLAUER ... in consideration of the sum of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND ($18,-000.00/100) DOLLARS ... paid by The State of New York, New York State Psychiatric Institute, all doctors, agents and employees thereof and the organization, group, governmental body or agency which furnished the drug used in the drug studies which resulted in the death of HAROLD BLAUER ... remise, release, and forever discharge the said State of New York, New York State Psychiatric Institute, all doctors, agents and employees thereof and the organization, group, governmental body or agency which furnished the drug used in the drug studies which resulted in the death of HAROLD BLAUER ... from all and all manner of action and actions, cause and causes of action, suits, debts, dues ... which against them I ever had, now have, or which I or my heirs, executors, or administrators hereafter can, shall or may have____”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“there are no genuine issues of material fact which must be determined at trial relevant to the issue of when plaintiffs' cause of action accrued,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'knows or has reason to know of the injury which is the basis of his action.' Bireline v. Seagondollar, 567 F.2d 260 , 263 (4th Cir. 1977).”
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.