Redhead v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
686 F.2d 178 · 1982
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently September 2024 · most notably Howze v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. (1984), Molthan v. Temple University (1985)
21 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 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 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2674
Relies on Rodriguez v. United States · Miller v. United States · American Airlines, Inc. v. United States · Spaulding v. United States · Hartz v. United States
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 44 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Both the pilot and the air traffic controller owe a duty of care to passengers in an airplane. Negligence by the pilot does not, in and of itself, absolve the government of liability. Each is responsible for the safe conduct of the aircraft and the safety of its passengers ... Thus, there may be concurrent liability. The pilot is in command of the aircraft, is directly responsible for its operation, and has final authority as to its operation ... He must be aware of those facts which are material to its proper operation and is charged with that which he should have known in the exercise of the highest degree of care ... Tower personnel and air traffic controllers are often a source of vital information. If there is negligence on the part of such persons, it must have a causal relationship to the happening of the accident — in other words, their conduct must be a proximate cause.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The controller had a right to assume that in the absence of evidence to the contrary, conditions were such that the aircraft could operate under visual flight rules. He would expect that out of concern for their lives, if for no other reason, the crew members were flying in conformance with FAA regulations.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The pilot . . . must be aware of those facts which are material to [the aircraft's] operation.”
2 later decisions 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.