Serra v. Pichardo’s Empirical Analysis
786 F.2d 237 · 1986
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently September 2022 · most notably Ting v. United States (1991), Thomas v. Oldham (1995)
23 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 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. § 2672 · 28 U.S.C. § 2674 · 28 U.S.C. § 2676 · 28 U.S.C. § 2679 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680
Relies on Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Carlson v. Green · Easton v. United States · United States v. Gilman · Ford v. Hutson
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The judgment in an action under section 1346(b) of this title shall constitute a complete bar to any action by the claimant, by reason of the same subject matter, against the employee of the government whose act or omission gave rise to the claim.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In the instant case, an examination of the substance of the Bivens claims reveals that they arise from the same actions toward plaintiff by defendants as those that defined the FTCA case. The Bivens claims and the FTCA claim focus on the acts and omissions of the doctor and the warden with respect to the treatment of plaintiff on June 2 and 3, 1983. The only difference between the claims is that the Bivens claims involve an examination of the intent of the defendants. Furthermore, each of the claims centers upon the same injury to plaintiffs leg.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Arevalo v. Woods“The acceptance by the claimant of any ... settlement shall be final and conclusive on the claimant, and shall constitute a complete release of any claim against the United States and against the employee of the government whose act or omission gave rise to the claim, by reason of the same subject matter.”
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.