Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 149 PACOMMW 337 - Commonwealth v. Mano

Commonwealth v. Mano’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
January 2015
most recently cited

7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently January 2015

7 state decisions

40199220002010decided

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 Commonwealth v. McGrogan · Commonwealth v. Logan · Jacobs v. Nether Providence Township · 120 Pa. Commw. 199 - McGaffic v. RED. AUTH., CITY OF N. CASTLE · 8 Pa. Commw. 491 - Rawls v. Central Bucks Joint School Building Authority

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

  1. “[a] preliminary objection in a de facto taking case serves a broader purpose than the ordinary preliminary objections. The trial court must determine first whether, as a matter of law, the averments of the petition for the appointment of viewers, taken as true, in addition to any stipulated facts, are sufficient to state a cause of action for a de facto taking.... If the averments, taken as true, might establish a de facto taking, the trial court must take evidence by depositions, or otherwise, so that a judicial determination might be made. (Emphasis in original).[ 2 ] Consequently, a trial court may not overrule preliminary objections in a de facto taking case without first conducting an evidentiary hearing to ascertain whether a de facto taking occurred.”
    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.