Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 679 F.2d 617 - Pierce v. United States

Pierce v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

679 F.2d 617 · 1982

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
September 2009
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently September 2009 · most notably Moorhead v. Mitsubishi Aircraft International, Inc. (1987), Redhead v. United States (1982)

18 federal appellate · 2 district ·

180198219902000decided

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)

Relies on Indian Towing Company v. United States · Gordon v. United States · Granza v. United States · Ingham v. Eastern Air Lines, Inc. · 110 Ind. App. 633 - Tabor v. Continental Baking Company

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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It is clear that there can be more than one proximate cause of an airplane crash. The “actual” or immediate cause of the crash may not be provable, especially where all of the occupants perish in the accident____ The mere fact that the plaintiffs were unable to show which of two projected causes was the actual cause of the crash did not mean that they had failed in their burden of proof. If they established a breach of duty by the government which was either the sole proximate cause or a concurrent proximate cause, they made out a prima facie case.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[s]ince the FAA has undertaken to advise requesting pilots of weather conditions, thus engendering reliance on facilities such as the Indianapolis FSS, it is under a duty to see that the information which it furnishes is accurate and complete.”
    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.