Kendrick v. Gackle Drilling Company’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably Brown Ex Rel. Brown v. Safeway Stores, Inc. (1971), Lozano v. Archer (1962)
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 37 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 Allen v. Industrial Commission · Whyte v. Industrial Commission · Seay v. Lea County Sand and Gravel Company · La Rue v. Johnson · Reese v. Dempsey
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any other reason [Subsection B] will not fairly compute the average weekly wage.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“We construe § 59-10-12(m)(3), N.M.S. A.1953 to permit the trial court to determine the pre-injury average weekly wages of an injured workman by any method supported by the evidence in the particular case which fairly represents his average weekly wage if they cannot be fairly determined by one of the formulae set out in § 59-10-12(m)(2). (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“seeks to develop a broad and liberal method of determining not a loss of earnings or income caused by the injury, but rather a method of arriving at the difference between the average weekly wage fairly computed before the accident and the employee’s wages or wage earning ability after the accident.”
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.