Schmid v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “concern[ ] that the question at the center of th[at] doctrine--whether at the time of injury the employer was acting as a third party vis-a-vis the employee--is virtually identical to the question the agency must ask in determining whether the employee is eligible for FECA benefits--i.e. whether or not the injury was sustained 'in the performance of his duty.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Elman v. United States

2. “[A]n employer may become a third person, vulnerable to tort suit by an employee, if — and only if — he possesses a second persona so completely independent from and unrelated to his status as employer that by established standards the law recognizes a separate legal person.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gallo v. United States Department of State Foreign Service Grievance Board

3. “a court applying the [dual capacity] doctrine may come perilously close to second guessing the agency's decision about whether the employee is entitled to FECA benefits, something that [the statute] explicitly states the courts must not do.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Elman v. United States