Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 1997 ND 161 - Pechtl v. Conoco, Inc.

Pechtl v. Conoco, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1997

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
states following
April 2024
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently April 2024

3 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

501997200020102020decided

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 Standard Oil Company v. Edward Anderson · Duplantis v. Shell Offshore, Inc. · Nepstad v. Lambert · Doucet v. Gulf Oil Corp. · Fleck v. ANG Coal Gasification Co.

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “One who entrusts work to an independent contractor, but who retains the control of any part of the work, is subject to liability for physical harm to others for whose safety the employer owes a duty to exercise reasonable care, which is caused by his failure to exercise his control with reasonable care.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “an express contractual provision giving the employer the right to control the operative details of the independent contractor's work, or by the employer's actual exercise of retained control of the work.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “To establish actionable negligence, a plaintiff must show the existence of a duty by the defendant to protect the plaintiff from injury.”
    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.