Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 595 P2D 71 - Abeyta v. Hensley

Abeyta v. Hensley’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
2
states following
February 2010
most recently cited

2 district · 8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 2010

2 district · 8 state decisions

6019791980199020002010decided

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 Simblest v. Maynard · Lemos v. Madden · 61 Wis. 2d 421 - Kruse v. Schieve · Indianapolis & Greenfield Rapid Transit Co. v. Foreman · 50 Wis. 2d 738 - Wasley v. Kosmatka

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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““An agent who, by promise or otherwise, undertakes to act for his principal under such circumstances that some action is necessary for the protection of the person or tangible things of another, is subject to liability to the other for physical harm to him or to his things caused by the reliance of the principal or of the other upon his undertaking and his subsequent unexcused failure to act, if such failure creates an unreasonable risk of harm to him and the agent should so realize.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “shall be in lieu of all rights and remedies as to such injury now existing, either at common law or otherwise against an employer, or its directors, officers, agents or employees * * This act statutorily abolishes the claim plaintiff asserts here. However, the record indicates that Greco's injuries occurred in March 1982, whereas the amended version of § 28-29-20 did not become effective until May 6, 1982. 2 . Wyoming has also held that a supervising or managing coemployee is protected from tort action by his fellow employee if he is acting within the scope of his employment and is not”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““evidence of the actual circumstances surrounding the arrangement between the agent or employee and the master, and the actual circumstances of the master, and the actual circumstances of the injury to the co-employee...””
    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.