Blanchard v. Ogima’s Empirical Analysis
1967
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently December 2009
8 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 Amyx v. Henry & Hall · 104 So. 2d 189 - Morton v. American Employers Insurance Co. · Como v. Union Sulphur Co. · Nance v. United Fruit Co. · 155 So. 2d 234 - Walker v. Simmons
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““* * * Ogima was not an employee of Russo over whom he exercised the usual control and supervision. * * *” (Emphasis here and elsewhere has been supplied.) “* * * that the necessary elements of independent contractor status are not present here nor were the elements of employer-employee. The relationship between Russo and Ogima was that of principal and agent.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Blanchard v. Ogima““ * * * General Guaranty did not insure all the used automobiles Russo might have from time to, time for sale, wherever located. Its coverage was limited to the muffler shop, operations and the utility cars used in connection therewith at 1111 North Broad Street. We therefore, hold that the Volkswagen was not covered.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Blanchard v. Ogima
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.