Apostol v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
838 F.2d 595 · 1988
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently September 2008
11 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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)
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Salem v. United States Lines Company · United States v. Hoffman · Marshall v. Perez Arzuaga
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[f]indings based on witness credibility are lodged firmly in the province of the trial court, and we are loathe to disturb them absent a compelling showing of error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“trial judge has broad discretion in the matter of the admission or exclusion of expert evidence, and his action is to be sustained unless manifestly erroneous.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Shane v. Shane“knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Shane v. Shane
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.