Linam v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis
1950
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably Gibson v. Brewer (1997), Lange v. Nelson-Ryan Flight Service, Inc. (1961)
2 federal appellate · 25 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
Applies 44 U.S.C. § 307
Relies on Galveston, Harrisburg & San Antonio Railway Co. v. Currie · Wilson v. Colonial Air Transport, Inc. · Berry v. Emery, Bird, Thayer Dry Goods Co. · Parker v. James Granger, Inc. · Mattan v. Hoover Company
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In taking over the controls he was acting within the scope of his employment, no matter what his motive may have been_ In our opinion it was impossible for [the instructor] to have ‘deviated’ from or gone without the scope of his employment from the time the plane took off from the Joplin airport.... It does not suffice to say that [the instructor] took the controls for the purpose of ‘going on a frolic of his own’ and then ‘did the buzzing’ for his personal enjoyment. His motive is not material if he was still engaged in defendants’ business.... ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““Nor does it suffice to say that Cooke may have been violating defendants’ instructions. We will assume that defendants had instructed Cooke not to ‘buzz’ objects when he had the controls of a training plane with a student in the other seat. * * * Violation of the master’s instructions does not relieve the master from liability for the negligent acts of the servant done within the scope of the latter’s employment.””
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.