Lee's Case’s Empirical Analysis
1922
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently January 2011
4 federal appellate · 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 McNicol's Case · Coronado Beach Co. v. Pillsbury · Hulley v. Moosbrugger · Rayner v. Sligh Furniture Co. · Willis v. State Industrial Commission
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[s]uch acts, whether done in a spirit of play or from a malicious motive, have no relation whatever to the employment; and they are wholly outside the scope of the employment of those who caused the injury.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Cases which hold that an injury resulting from acts of a fellow employee who was known by the employer as a man of dangerous disposition, or who was known to be given to play or fooling, have no application to the present case. McNicol’s Case, supra. See also Reithel’s Case, 222 Mass. 163 ; Cranney’s Case, 232 Mass. 149 ; Marshall v. Baker-Vawter Co., 206 Mich. 466 ; William Baird & Co. Ltd. v. M’Graw, 13 B. W. C. C. 233.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Corbin v. MacLeod
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.