142 Pa. Super. 433 - Commonwealth v. Mihalow’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently January 1998
7 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 Mills Novelty Company's Appeal · 126 Pa. Super. 533 - American Telephone & Telegraph Company's Appeal · Davies v. Mills Novelty Co. · Times Amusement Corp. v. Moss · Johnston v. Commonwealth
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A `device or apparatus for gambling' is a device or apparatus designed for carrying on the actual gambling — for determining whether the player is to win or lose, like the wheel of fortune . . . and contrivances of that sort.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. (1998)
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.