Slagle v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
612 F.2d 1157 · 1980
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Attallah v. United States (1992), California First Bank v. State (1990)
16 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (Federal Tort Claims Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 2401 · 28 U.S.C. § 2671 · 28 U.S.C. § 2674 · 28 U.S.C. § 2675 · 28 U.S.C. § 2680
Relies on Holt v. Alleghany Corp. · Van Arsdale v. Hollinger · 24 Cal. 3d 502 - Aceves v. Regal Pale Brewing Co. · Blessing v. United States · Downs v. United States
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in general the activities of an informant are not subject to the actual control or right of control of a federal agent.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he extent of control over the details of [the informant's] work by [the FBI special agent] was extremely small.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In determining whether one acting for another is a servant or an independent contractor, the following matters of fact, among others, are considered: (a) the extent of control which, by the agreement, the master may exercise over the details of the work; (b) whether or not the one employed is engaged in a distinct occupation or business; (c) the kind of occupation, with reference to whether, in the locality, the work is usually done under the direction of the employer or by a specialist without supervision; (d) the skill required in the particular occupation; (e) whether the employer or the workman supplies the instrumentalities, tools, and the place of work for the person doing the work; (f) the length of time for which the person is employed; (g) the method of payment, whether by the time or by the job; (h) whether or not the work is part of the regular business of the employer; (i) whether or not the parties believe they are creating the relation of master and servant; and (j) whether the principal is or is not in business.”
1 later decision 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.