Jackson v. Long’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

20 state decisions

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.

1. “"Since the travel was in furtherance of the employment by the general employer, the risk of accident during travel was a risk interrelated with the nature of the employment, and the plaintiff was protected while traveling to the assigned place of work in obedience to the employer's instructions and for the employer's benefit. " (Emphasis added.) Jackson v. Long, 289 So.2d at 208 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Clark v. Daniel Morine Construction Co. · McCallon v. Key Energy Servs., LLC

2. “|9..., this case does not involve the ordinary employment situation, nor does it involve only one employment contract. In its business of furnishing laborers, Manpower contracted with plaintiff to perform services for Manpower’s customer at a designated time and place, and Manpower further contracted with the customer to dispatch someone to perform the services at that time and place. Therefore, Manpower employed plaintiff not just as a cook, but as a cook to be dispatched in accordance with the customer’s order. [[Image here]] ... plaintiff was an employee who traveled in response to instructions from Manpower’s dispatcher and then performed services for a special employer at the assigned destination. Since the travel was in furtherance of the employment by the general employer, the risk of accident during travel was a risk interrelated with the nature of that employment, and the plaintiff was protected while traveling to the assigned place of work in obedience to the employer’s instructions and for the employer’s benefit.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Boyte v. Ward North American Insurance Co. · 680 So. 2d 1195 - Kennedy v. Martin Gas Transp. Co., Inc.

3. “[The employer was] much more concerned with the employee getting to his place of work than was the ordinary employer .... Consequently, [the] employee, while traveling to the assigned work place, was actually furthering his employer's business interest, and in that respect the trip can be regarded as a necessary and required part of his employment.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sentara Leigh Hospital v. Nichols · McCallon v. Key Energy Servs., LLC