Hull v. Wolfe’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2005
2 federal appellate · 7 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 Adams v. Iten Biscuit Co. · Booth & Flinn, Ltd. v. Cook · Brown v. Sinclair Refining Co. · Markley v. White · Walker v. Von Wedel
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This Court declared the Act was intended to cover all accidental injuries, but did not include willful or intentional injuries whether inflicted by the employer or the employee, since [they are] ... not accidental.” (emphasis added). Both the terms of 85 O.S.2001 § 12 and Oklahoma's jurisprudence bar contributory negligence as a defense against the claim. The text of 85 O.S.2001 § 11 clearly provides that an injury is compensable”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“malicious, willful and unprofessional acts resulting in injury are not within the purview of the Compensation Act.”
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.