Smith v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis
1925
Citation profile
16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently March 1988
16 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
Relies on Palumbo v. George A. Fuller Co. · Aisenberg v. Adams Co., Inc. · Roush v. Heffelbower
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.
“The respondents claim that the only conclusion legally and logically to be drawn from the mutual agreement of the parties is that of a joint enterprise entered upon which did not create the relation of employer and employee, or a social affair in the nature of a social barn raising or corn husking. Joint enterprise, as used by the appellant, means something in the nature of a partnership.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“During all the time that the claimant was engaged in this work for the respondent, the respondent directed his activities, told him what to do and when to stop. The plaintiff was engaged in running the mechanical operation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The subordinate facts, as found by the commissioner, are that Smith (the claimant) and Jones were dairy farmers owning adjoining farms; that both used silos to store food for their cattle.”
1 later decision 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.