14 Va. App. 354 - Smith v. Hylton’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2017 · most notably 49 Va. App. 17 - Tynes v. Commonwealth (2006), 36 Va. App. 401 - Joynes v. Payne (2001)
28 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 Davis v. United States · Hardcastle v. Pennsylvania · Whittaker v. Commonwealth · 577 So. 2d 1321 - Smith v. Jack Eckerd Corp. · Spencer v. Commonwealth
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The threshold jurisdictional issue which the commission had to decide was whether the employer regularly had in his service three or more employees so as to come within the coverage of the Act. “ ‘Employee’ means ... [ejvery person ... in the service of another under any contract of hire or apprenticeship, written or implied, except ... one whose employment is not in the usual course of the trade, business, occupation or profession of the employer.” Both full-time and part-time employees who are regularly employed to carry out the trade or business of the employer must be counted in determining the number of employees “regularly in service” to the employer. “Any person hired by the employer to work in the usual course of the employer’s business is an ‘employee’ under the Act regardless of how often or for how long he may be employed.” The number of employees regularly in service of the employer is the number “used to carry out the established mode of performing the work of the business ... even though the work may be recurrent instead of constant.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is well settled that when a party's evidence has been ruled inadmissible, the party must proffer or avouch the evidence for the record in order to preserve the ruling for appeal; otherwise, the appellate court has no basis to decide whether the evidence was admissible.”
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.