Doe v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
2023
Citation profile
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Connecticut District Court)
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Baxter v. Palmigiano · Pace v. Superintendent State Correctional Institution at Graterford · Holland v. Florida · Kronisch 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This standard calls for reasonable diligence, not maximum feasible diligence, which a [plaintiff] may satisfy by showing that he acted as diligently as 30 reasonably could have been expected under the circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“'that some extraordinary circumstance stood in her way' and . . . 'that she has been pursuing her rights diligently.'”
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.