17 Pa. Commw. 427 - Benjamin v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. ““Appellant first argues that the notices of suspension and removal failed to set forth the charges against him with specificity sufficient to satisfy the requirement of due process, complaining of the absence of notice of specific times, dates and places of his alleged wrongdoings. While the suspension or removal notice must be framed in a manner which enables the employee to discern the nature of the charges and to adequately prepare his defense (Begis v. Industrial Board of the Department of Labor and Industry, 9 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 558, 561 , 308 A.2d 643, 645 (1973) ; See 4 Pa. Code §105.3 ), it need not be drafted with the certainty of a bill of indictment. City of Pittsburgh Civil Service Commission v. Beaver, 12 Pa, Commonwealth Ct. 353, 357, 315 A.2d 672, 674 (1974). Due process of law is afforded when the employee is informed with reasonable certainty of the substance of the charges against him, Pittsburgh Press Employment Advertising Appeal, 4 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 448, 457 , 287 A.2d 161, 166 (1972).””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. D'Amico · Morrone v. Commonwealth, Board of Probation & Parole