Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 141 F.2d 168 - Warlich v. Miller

Warlich v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis

141 F.2d 168 · 1944

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
2
states following
August 2013
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently August 2013

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

5019441950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Jinks v. Currie · Felo v. Kroger Grocery & Baking Co. · Martin v. Marateck · Wenhold v. O'Dea · 144 Pa. Super. 78 - Gaskill v. Melella

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

  1. “"* * * The piaintiff of course had the burden of proving negligence by the defendant. The Pennsylvania rule is that a plaintiff’s case is entitled to go to the jury if his testimony makes out a case sufficient to sustain a verdict in his favor, although the plaintiff introduces further evidence, through another witness, which is conflicting on the issue of defendant’s negligence. [Citing cases.]””
    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.