Smith v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
953 F.2d 1116 · 1991
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1402 · 28 U.S.C. § 2674 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680
Relies on United States v. Mitchell · Richards v. United States · American Banana Company v. United Fruit Company · Libby, McNeill & Libby v. Alaska Industrial Board · The Hamilton
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Those who have no problem with venue should not be foreclosed from bringing suit simply because others cannot, particularly with respect to a statute such as the FTCA the primary purpose of which, as we have seen, was to expand the jurisdiction of the federal courts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“liable . . . in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[a]ny claim arising in a foreign country.”
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.