Bainbridge v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

14 state decisions

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

1. “[t]he accident in this case is alleged to have been caused by a defect of a road which was allegedly caused by negligence in design, construction and/or maintenance. This is not an instance where it is difficult for an injured party to know. what Commonwealth party should be named in an action for damages. Clearly the failure to name DOT as a party in this case is not a technical defect that may be remedied after the applicable statute of limitations has run. To permit DOT to be named as a party at this point in the litigation of this case would be prejudicial to DOT.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 159 Pa. Commw. 668 - Gitto v. Plumstead Township

2. ““Commonwealth party." A Commonwealth agency and any employee thereof, but only with respect to an act within the scope of his office or employment.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 139 Pa. Commw. 427 - Spencer v. Pavlik