Richardson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
577 F.2d 133 · 1978
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 2004
8 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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.
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2674
Relies on Cities Service Co. v. United States · 72 So. 2d 285 - Jones v. Florida Power Corp. · 287 So. 2d 56 - Conklin v. Cohen · Roelofs v. United States · Miami Roofing & Sheet Metal Co. v. Kindt
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“does not entitle the [defendant] to the exclusivity defense of Sec. 440.11. In Florida, an employer is entitled to the exclusivity defense only to the extent that such employer has a duty to provide workmen's compensation coverage.”
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.