49 Cal. 4th 35 - Martinez v. Combs’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 250 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 151 (§ 1 of the National Labor Relations Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 1801 (Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (Taft-Hartley Act)) · 29 U.S.C. § 201 (American Samoa Labor Standards Amendments of 1956) · 29 U.S.C. § 203 · 29 U.S.C. § 252 · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)
Relies on 57 Cal. 2d 450 - Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court · National Labor Relations Board v. Hearst Publications, Inc. · United States v. Silk · Rutherford Food Corp. v. McComb · 19 Cal. 4th 1 - Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Board of Equalization
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 372 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) to exercise control over the wages, hours or working conditions, or (b) to suffer or permit to work, or (c) to engage, thereby creating a common law employment relationship.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage“A proprietor who knows that persons are working in his or her business without having been formally hired, or while being paid less than the minimum wage, clearly suffers or permits that work by failing to prevent it, while having the power to do so.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“who directly or indirectly, or through an agent or any other person, employs or exercises control over the wages, hours, or working conditions of any person.”
5 later decisions 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.