Vasina v. Grumman Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
644 F.2d 112 · 1981
Citation profile
29 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Ferebee v. Chevron Chemical Co. (1984), Shu-Tao Lin v. McDonnell Douglas Corp. (1984)
29 federal appellate · 4 district · 5 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 16 U.S.C. § 457
Relies on Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Liepelt · Stewart v. Sadrakula · Derdiarian v. Felix Contracting Corp. · Arlington Hotel Co. v. Fant · Murray v. Joe Gerrick & 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We decline to make Quadrini the law of this circuit on this point. If the authors of § 457 had had only the narrow purpose ascribed to them in Quadrini , we think that they would have drawn the statute itself more narrowly. The plain language of the provision as drafted, and its later judicial construction, lead us to conclude that § 457 envisions the application of the current substantive law of the surrounding state in actions for death or personal injury occurring within a federal enclave.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The natural reading of the statutory language is that the wrongful-death law of a federal enclave should be identical to that of the surrounding state, whatever that law might be and however it might change over time.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the issue of 'intervening' and 'superseding' negligence was contained in the issue of proximate cause, and was adequately presented to the jury in the latter form”
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.