Ruiz v. Shell Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis
413 F.2d 310 · 1969
Citation profile
59 federal appellate · 4 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 158 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably Gaudet v. Exxon Corp. (1977), Baker v. Raymond International, Inc. (1981)
59 federal appellate · 4 district · 37 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. Shipman · Standard Oil Company v. Edward Anderson · Linstead v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. · Paliaga v. Luckenbach Steamship 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 158 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Who has control over the employee and the work he is performing, beyond mere suggestion of details or cooperation? (2) Whose work is being performed? (3) Was there an agreement, understanding, or meeting of the minds between the original and the borrowing employer? (4) Did the employee acquiesce in the new work situation? (5) Did the original employer terminate his relationship with the employee? (6) Who furnished tools and place for performance? (7) Was the new employment over a considerable length of time? (8) Who had the right to discharge the employee? (9) Who had the obligation to pay the employee?”
29 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no one of these factors, or any combination of them, is decisive, and no fixed test is used to determine the existence of a borrowed-servant relationship.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) Right of control; (2) Selection of employees; (3) Payment of wages; (4) Power of Dismissal; (5) Relinquishment of control by general employer; (6) Which employer’s work was being performed at the time in question; (7) Agreement, either implicit or explicit between the borrowing and lending employer; (8) Furnishing of instructions and place for performance of the work in question; (9) Length of employment; and (10) Acquiescence by the employee in the new work situation.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.