Arbour v. Jenkins’s Empirical Analysis
903 F.2d 416 · 1990
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 120 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2011 · most notably Gutierrez De Martinez v. Lamagno (1995), Aversa v. United States (1996)
59 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 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. § 2679 · 28 U.S.C. § 510
Relies on Gregory Lumber Co. v. United States · United States v. James · Williams v. United States · Carchman v. Nash New Jersey Department of Corrections · Westfall v. Erwin
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 120 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b)(1) The remedy against the United States provided by section 1346(b) ... for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death arising or resulting from the negligence or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment is exclusive of any other civil action or proceeding for money damages by reason of the same subject matter against the employee whose act or omission gave rise to the claim or against the estate of such employee. Any other civil action or proceeding for money damages arising out of or relating to the same subject matter against the employee or the employee’s estate is precluded without regard to when the act or omission occurred. (2) Paragraph (1) does not extend or apply to a civil action against an employee of the Government— (A) which is brought for a violation of the Constitution .of the United States____ (d)(1) Upon certification by the Attorney General that the defendant employee was acting within the scope of his office or employment at the time of the incident out of which the claim arose, any civil action or proceeding commenced upon such claim in a United' States district court shall be deemed an action against the United States under the provisions of this title and all reference thereto, and the United States shall be substituted as the party defendant.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage“certification of the Attorney General shall conclusively establish scope of office or employment for purposes of removal.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he remedy against the United States provided by the [Federal Tort Claims Act] for injury or loss of property, or personal injury or death arising or resulting from the negligent or wrongful act or omission of any employee of the Government while acting within the scope of his office or employment is exclusive of any other civil action or proceeding for money damages by reason of the same subject matter against the employee whose act or omission gave rise to the claim.... Any other civil action or proceeding for money damages arising out of or relating to the same subject matter against the employee ... is precluded without regard to when the act or omission occurred.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.