Lord v. Daugherty’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

193 state decisions

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

1. “`(1) the proximity of the scene of the accident to the place of employment, (2) the degree of control the employer had over the scene of the accident, and (3) the benefit the employer received from the injured employee's presence at the scene of the accident.'”

   32 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Callahan v. Proctor Gamble Co., 1-08-19 (9-29-2008) · Crockett v. Hcr Manorcare, Inc., Unpublished Decision (6-24-2004)

2. “* * * whether a ‘causal connection’ existed between an employee’s injury and his employment either through the activities, the conditions, or the environment of the employment.” It is apparent that the same factors have arisen with reference to both prongs of the test. In fact, although the court in Fisher relegated Lord to the “arising out of’ prong of the test, it nevertheless employed some of the Lord factors to its analysis of whether appellant was”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Cline v. Yellow Transp., Inc., 07ap-498 (12-18-2007) · 75 Ohio App. 3d 466 - Fletcher v. Northwest Mechanical Contractors, Inc.

3. “received in the course of, and arising out of, the injured employee's employment.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Stewart v. Bear's Tire · 72 Ohio App. 3d 9 - Faber v. R.J. Frazier Co.