Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 93 Ind. App. 365 - Estes v. Anderson Oil Co.

93 Ind. App. 365 - Estes v. Anderson Oil Co.’s Empirical Analysis

1931

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
December 1969
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently December 1969

3 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

1301931194019501960decided

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 Davis v. Mercer Lumber Co. · Burke v. Mead · Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Gossett · Gregory v. Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati & Indianapolis Railroad · Reissner v. Oxley

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

  1. ““The law very zealously protects one against whom a motion for a directed verdict is addressed”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““[I]f from such a consideration there was any construction which a jury could legitimately have placed thereon which would under any view of the evidence have warranted a verdict for the plaintiff, it was error to direct a verdict.” Estes v. Anderson, 93 Ind.App. 365 , 372, 176 N.E. 560 , 562 (1931) and cases there cited.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““... the relation of respondeat superior may depend entirely upon the conduct of the parties,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.