2002 Pa. Super. 117 - Stephens v. Messick’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Penn Piping, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of North America · Jacobs v. Halloran · James Bros. Co. v. Union B. & T. Co. of DuBois · Gallagher v. Jewish Hosp. Assn. of Phila. · 425 Pa. Super. 473 - Pine Township Water Co. v. Felmont Oil Corp.
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.
“First, the petition seeking relief from the judgment of non pros must be promptly filed. Second, there must be a reasonable explanation for the delay that preceded the entry of the judgment of non pros. Third, the movant must show facts to exist that would support a meritorious cause of action. A trial court’s decision to deny a petition to open or strike a judgment of non pros is scrutinized on the abuse of discretion standard of appellate review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Londergan v. Asamura“A court may properly enter a judgment of non pros when a party to the proceeding has shown a want of due diligence in failing to proceed with reasonable promptitude, and there has been no compelling reason for the delay, and the delay has caused some prejudice to the adverse party, such as the death or unexplained absence of material witnesses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[NJothing ... relieved [petitioner] of her obligation to timely file a proper petition to strike or open the judgment of non pros ... notwithstanding that she intended to argue on appeal that the judgment should not have been entered in the first place.”
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.