Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 712 F.2d 391 - Jablonski Pahls v. United States

Jablonski Pahls v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

712 F.2d 391 · 1983

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
9
states following
May 2016
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 8 district · 17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions — most recently May 2016 · most notably McLinn F/v Fjord Johnson F/v Supersonic Churchill v. F/v Fjord F/v Supersonic F/v Supersonic (1984), Konizeski v. Livermore Labs (1987)

29 federal appellate · 8 district · 17 state decisions

4101983199020002010decided

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

Relies on Mansfield Ry Co v. Swan · 17 Cal. 3d 425 - Tarasoff v. Regents of University of California · 27 Cal. 3d 741 - Thompson v. County of Alameda · Maryland ex rel. Levin v. United States · Fair 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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[a]ny claim ... based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function or duty on the part of a federal agency or an employee of the Government, whether or not the discretion involved be abused.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in which the Tenth Circuit held that a suit alleging injury resulting from the negligent release of a mental patient from a government hospital was barred by the discretionary function exemption.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “operational acts, not discretionary acts involving planning.”
    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.