P.L. v. Aubert’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Fabio v. Bellomo · Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & Clinics · Hunt v. IBM Mid America Employees Federal Credit Union · Ponticas v. K.M.S. Investments · Lange v. National Biscuit 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An agent is acting within the scope of his employment when he is performing services for which he has been employed or while he is doing anything which is reasonably incidental to his employment. The conduct must occur within work-related limits of time and place. The test is not necessarily whether the specific conduct was expressly authorized or forbidden by the principal but rather whether such conduct should fairly have been foreseen from the nature of the employment and the duties relating to it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Oslin v. State
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.