Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 83 N.H. 29 - McCarthy v. Souther

McCarthy v. Souther’s Empirical Analysis

1927

Citation profile

116
cited by 116 later decisions
20
states following
April 2008
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 105 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently April 2008 · most notably Throop v. FE Young and Company (1963), Marshall v. Nugent (1955)

7 federal appellate · 105 state decisions — followed in 20 states

460192719301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 46 Cal. App. 707 - Barton v. Studebaker Corp. of America · Aldrich v. Tyler Grocery Co. · Pyyny v. Loose-Wiles Biscuit Co. · West v. Boston & Maine Railroad · Tuttle v. Dodge

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

  1. “Where no control may be implied from the situation and none has been expressly reserved, the mere fact that the relationship is of agency or service should not be enough to subject the employer to liability. And if, under the contract of employment, the employer has control over part only of the service to be rendered, liability for the manner in which the rest of the service is performed does not thereby follow. "For service not subject to the employer's control and direction in its details, on principle, he is no more to be held for its faulty performance than for the liability of an independent contractor. If the employer may not direct how a thing shall be done, then what the agent or servant does is not the employer's act. That he has the right under the contract of employment to have the thing done is not enough to impose liability. That right obtains as well in cases of independent contracts. The further right to direct the manner of performance must appear.”
    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.