Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 92 N.M. 697 - F & T CO. v. Woods

F & T CO. v. Woods’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

76
cited by 76 later decisions
11
states following
September 2007
most recently cited

10 district · 61 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 76 later decisions — most recently September 2007 · most notably Di Cosala v. Kay (1982), Destefano v. Grabrian (1988)

10 district · 61 state decisions — followed in 11 states

4201979198019902000decided

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 Mahoney v. JC Penney Company · Archuleta v. Pina · Greenfield v. Bruskas · Bouldin v. Sategna · White v. Montoya

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

  1. ““be remotely considered to have been foreseeable by defendant or to be a natural or probable result of defendant’s retention of its employee, Sanders.” 594 P.2d at 749 . [Emphasis in original]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “At the time of the incident [the employee] was on his own time, was not acting within the scope of his employment, was not in defendant’s business vehicle, and had no authority from defendant to enter plaintiff’s apartment. [The employee] did not enter plaintiff’s apartment to deliver or repair an appliance. The act did not occur in or near defendant’s place of business.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “It is not enough that plaintiff prove that defendant was negligent in hiring or retaining Sanders. In addition, plaintiff must prove that the negligent hiring or retention of Sanders was the proximate cause of the rape.”
    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.