Vining v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
4 district · 11 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680
Relies on Kosak v. United States · J. A. Sullivan Corp. v. Commonwealth · No. 90-6051 · Sena v. Commonwealth · United States v. Boxes of Boned Beef Weighing Approximately Pounds
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 create any new theories of liability, but simply provides that [certain] tort actions brought against governmental entities are governed by the same theories of liability that apply to actions involving private parties.” Vining v. Com., 63 Mass.App.Ct. 690 , 828 N.E.2d 576, 579 (2005); accord Sharon v. City of Newton, 437 Mass. 99 , 769 N.E.2d 738, 748 (2002). In setting out the causes of action in paragraph 23, the complaint alleges that plaintiff has a”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“public employers shall be liable for ... loss of property ... caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any public employee ... in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Evans v. Mendosa“property is lost as a result of negligence of [correction] officers, the Commonwealth is immune because any such loss arose in relation to or out of the lawful detention of property by law enforcement officers.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Evans v. Mendosa
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.