Miller v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
643 F.2d 481 · 1980
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 1475 · 10 U.S.C. § 1481 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2680
Relies on Feres v. United States · Indian Towing Company v. United States · United States v. Muniz · United States v. Brown · United States v. Standard Oil Co.
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In a series of decisions now known as the Feres doctrine, the Supreme Court established a judicially created exception to the waiver of sovereign immunity in the FTCA, holding that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries to servicemen where the injuries arise out of or are in the course of activity incident to military service.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“the conduct of Miller's military superior would be called in question in the civil courts, a circumstance that might well have [a] destructive effect on military authority and discipline”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“PFC Miller was off duty, working in a civilian capacity at a part-time job for a private contractor. He was not performing any military duties or complying with any orders, nor was he taking advantage of a military privilege. This work was not something that a serviceman would ordinarily do while off duty. Even though he was on active duty and on a military base, he was exactly in the same position as any civilian employee of the private contractor might have been at that time and place. PFC Miller had permission from his superior officers to work the part-time job. The Army “loaned” him out to a private contractor and, for all practical purposes, temporarily released their jurisdiction and control over him. At the time of the injury, the decedent was subject to the control and authority of his civilian employer — not his military superiors. The government takes a risk when it permits the members of the military to engage in outside activities totally unrelated to military life. If the government chooses to “loan” out the members of its military to civilian government employees, it must bear the risk of liability for resulting injuries. PFC Miller’s death did not arise out of activities incident to service, and, therefore, the facts of the case do not fall within the rationale of Feres .”
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.