Hebron v. Union Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis
634 F.2d 245 · 1981
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably Trevino v. General Dynamics Corp. (1989), Guidry v. Continental Oil Co. (1981)
31 federal appellate · 5 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
Relies on The Boeing Company v. Daniel C. Shipman · County of Los Angeles v. Chavez-Salido · Ruiz v. Shell Oil Co. · Gaudet v. Exxon Corp.
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he central question in borrowed servant cases is whether someone has the power to control and direct another person in the performance of his work.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A directed verdict is appropriate if the facts and inferences point so strongly and overwhelmingly in favor of one party that the court believes reasonable persons could not reach a contrary verdict. An employee of one person or company may become the servant of another person or company if [the employee] is transferred by the former with [the employee's] own consent or acquiescence to the employ of the latter. The central question in borrowed servant cases is whether someone has the power to control and direct another person in the performance of his [or her] work.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Mimura v. Moeava“In the present case, Union Oil had the power to direct and supervise Hebron. Although Union Oil could not discharge Hebron, it had the right to terminate his services with Union Oil. Hebron lived on and ate at Union Oil facilities and was taking orders from a Union Oil employee at the time of the accident. Under the holding in Gaudet , we find that the district court was correct in directing a verdict for Union Oil on the ground that Hebron was a borrowed servant.”
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.