2004 Pa. Super. 24 - Harris v. Brill’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 2024
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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on 2002 Pa. Super. 42 - Werner v. Plater-Zyberk · Craig v. W. J. Thiele & Sons, Inc. · 438 Pa. Super. 231 - Mathues v. Tim-Bar Corp. · 2003 Pa. Super. 268 - Wood v. EI Du Pont De Nemours and Co. · 267 Pa. Super. 74 - PA. HIGHER ED. ASSIST. AGCY. v. Devore
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.
“While we have, no difficulty concluding that the facts underlying the federal lawsuit against Appellant occurred in Washington County, the same is not true for Appellant’s action for wrongful use of civil proceedings against Appel-lees. Appellant’s claim for wrongful use of civil proceedings is based on a civil action brought against him and tried entirely in Allegheny County. As discussed above, the alleged facts that satisfy all the elements of this cause of action occurred in Allegheny County. Furthermore, we decline to hold that one part of Appellant’s lawsuit, i.e., his alleged damages, is sufficient to establish that the occurrence from which Appellant’s cause of action arose transpired in Washington County. Instead, we conclude that the occurrence was the federal lawsuit in Allegheny County[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In reviewing a trial court’s ruling transferring venue, we will not disturb the ruling if the decision is reasonable in light of the facts. An abuse of discretion occurs when the trial judge overrides or misapplies the law, or exercises judgment in a manifestly unreasonable manner, or renders a decision based on partiality, bias, or ill will. However, if there exists any proper basis for the trial court’s decision to ... transfer venue, the decision must stand.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(a) Except as otherwise provided ..., a personal action against a corporation or similar entity may be brought in and only in (1) the country where its registered office or principal place of business is located; (2) a county where it regularly conducts business; (3) the county where the cause of action arose; (4) a county where a transaction or occurrence took place out of which the cause of action arose[.]”
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.