Aimable’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently January 2025
1 district ·
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 Bonner v. City of Prichard · Rutherford Food Corp. v. McComb · United States v. Rosenwasser · Bonnette v. California Health & Welfare Agency · W. J. Usery, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor, Plaintiff v. Pilgrim Equipment Company, Inc.
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[cjontrol arises, we believe, when the [owner] goes beyond general instructions, such as how many acres to pick in a given day, and begins to assign specific tasks, to assign specific workers, or to take an overly active role in the oversight of the work.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[Plaintiffs’] argument follows the transitive property of geometry: first, [defendants] controlled the amount [Luxama] received; second [Luxama] controlled the amount [plaintiffs] received; therefore, [defendants] controlled the amount [plaintiffs] received. This relationship is validated, [plaintiffs] assert, by [Luxama’s] refusal to pay [plaintiffs] more money unless he received more money from [defendants]. To summarize, because of [Luxama’s] intransigence regarding pay increases, [plaintiffs] conclude that they were economically de-pendant upon — and thus employees of— [defendants]. Unfortunately for [plaintiffs], the laws that bind the Euclidian world do not apply with equal force in federal employment law; the [plaintiffs’] leap of logic is unfounded.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) The nature and degree of control of the workers; (2) The degree of supervision, direct or indirect, of the work; (3) The power to determine the pay rates or the methods of payment of the workers,; (4) The right to hire, fire, or modify the employment conditions of the workers; (5) Preparation of payroll and payment of wages; (6) Ownership of facilities where work occurred; and (7) Whether the employee performs a “specialty job” integral to the business.”
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.