Manko v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
830 F.2d 831 · 1987
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 7 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently June 2012 · most notably Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Havner (1997), Amy Deluca, v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
16 federal appellate · 7 district · 6 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. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1407 · 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 28 U.S.C. § 2674 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 42 U.S.C. § 247B (Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009)
Relies on United States v. Kubrick · Goldsboro Christian Schools, Inc. v. United States · Williams v. United States · Dempsey v. Thompson · Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“an administrative-claims system by which the agency involved could resolve specific claims for specific amounts of money,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Manko court stated that: amendments which add new claims or increase the amount of damages sought change the government settlement calculus. Section 2401(b) permits such changes for up to two years after the claim accrues, but after that time, we think that Congress intended all claims already submitted to become final in their material respects. Allowing material changes in claims after that period would severely disrupt the settlement process. Our conclusion also accords with the fact that Section 2401(b) is a condition of waiver of the sovereign immunity of the United States and we must strictly construe the statute to avoid extending the waiver.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lee v. United States“(b) A tort claim against the United States shall be forever barred unless it is presented in writing to the appropriate Federal agency within two years after such claim accrues or unless action is begun within six months after the date of mailing, by certified or registered mail, of notice of final denial of the claim by the agency to which it was presented.”
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.