Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 302 Mich. 154 - Buskirk v. Ide

Buskirk v. Ide’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
March 2002
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently March 2002

3 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

301942195019601970198019902000decided

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 · Higgins v. . Western Union Telegraph Co. · Tuttle v. Embury-Martin Lumber Co. · Janik v. Ford Motor Co. · Rockwell v. Grand Trunk Western Railway 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is a well-settled rule of law that when one person hires or lends his servant tb another for some particular work and resigns full control over him while performing that work, he ceases for the time to,be the servant of the original master and becomes the servant of the party to whom he is hired or lent. In determining whose servant he was the test is, who had the right to control him.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The rule is long settled that, a servant in the general employment of one person may also become the special servant of another, with all the mutual-rights and obligations of master and servant between them for the time of, and in relation to, the special service in which the servant is temporarily engaged. ’ ’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““There was conflicting testimony from which the. jury could reasonably find, as it did, that plaintiff at the time of his injury was an employee and not an independent contractor.””
    1 later decision 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.