106 Pa. Commw. 173 - Farber v. ENGLE’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
60 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently December 2016 · most notably 377 Pa. Super. 83 - Salerno v. Philadelphia Newspapers, Inc. (1988), Goldey v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania (1996)
60 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 Kuchinic v. McCrory · Hammermill Paper Co. v. Rust Engineering Co. · Reamer's Estate · Delaware River Port Authority v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission · 280 Pa. Super. 115 - MacIna v. McAdams
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“• A duty or obligation recognized by the law, requiring the actor to conform to a certain standard of conduct, for the protection of others against unreasonable risks; • A failure on his part to conform to the standard required; • A reasonably close causal connection between the conduct and the resulting injury; and • Actual loss or damage resulting to the interests of another.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he general rule is that absent some new evidence, it is improper for a trial judge to overrule an interlocutory order entered by another judge of the same court involving the same issue.... The policy underlying this rule ... is that there must be some finality to the determination of all pretrial applications so that judicial economy and efficiency can be maintained.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“where an appellate court has considered and decided a question on appeal, that court will not, in a subsequent appeal of another phase of the same case, reverse its previous ruling, even though convinced it was erroneous.... The doctrine is inapplicable here because the rule applies only to appellate courts....”
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.