Johnson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
749 F.2d 1530 · 1985
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 14 U.S.C. § 1 (Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2006) · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2674 · 49 U.S.C. § 106
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Feres v. United States · Parker v. Levy · Indian Towing Company v. United States · Chappell v. Wallace
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death caused by the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment, under circumstances where the United States, if a private person, would be liable to the claimant in accordance with the law of the place where the act or omission occurred.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“absolutely no hint . . . that the conduct of any alleged tortfeasor even remotely connected to the military will be scrutinized if this case proceeds to trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[W]hen the Feres factual paradigm is present, the issue is whether the injury arose out of or during the course of an activity incident to service.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.