Moberly v. Day’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Estate of Suskovich v. Anthem Health Plans of Virginia, Inc. (2009), Beatty v. LaFountaine (2008)
1 federal appellate · 19 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 Prest-O-Lite Co. v. Skeel · In re Dunnuck · GKN Co. v. Magness · Ayres v. Indian Heights Volunteer Fire Department, Inc. · Indiana Department of State Revenue v. Caylor-Nickel Clinic, P.C.
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(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 a 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.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) right to discharge; (2) mode of payment; (3) supplying tools or equipment; (4) belief of the parties in the existence of an employer-employee relationship; (5) control over the means used in the results reached; (6) length of employment; and, (7) establishment of the work boundaries.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“'employed to perform services in the affairs of another and whol[,] with respect to the physical conduct in the performance of the services[,] is subject to the other's control or right to control'”
4 later decisions 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.