Cain v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on United States v. Kubrick · Hohri v. United States · Rapaport v. United States · Barrett v. United States · Richards v. Mileski
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Appellee argues that ‘the facts giving notice of the particular cause of action at issue’ include only the fact of injury and the identity of the inflictor.... We do not agree. As already noted, in assessing the import of fraudulent concealment we are first and foremost concerned with its legal effect. Once a defendant has effectively closed the courthouse door to all plaintiffs it is of little significance that the defendant has not also concealed his identity or the fact of injury.”
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.