2004 Pa. Super. 249 - Rothstein v. Polysciences, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Criss v. Wise · 148 Pa. Super. 138 - Adelman, Trustee v. J. McShain, Inc. · 2003 Pa. Super. 500 - Amicone v. Rok · 2003 Pa. Super. 271 - Nagy v. Best Home Services, Inc. · 143 Pa. Commw. 86 - Connor v. Westmoreland County Board of Assessment Appeal
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The denial of an appeal nunc pro tunc is within the discretion of the trial court, and we will only reverse for an abuse of that discretion. Freeman v. Bonner, 761 A.2d 1193, 1194 (Pa.Super.2000). In addition to the occurrence of “fraud or breakdown in the court’s operations,” nunc pro tunc relief may also be granted where the appellant demonstrates that “(1) [his] notice of appeal was filed late as a result of nonnegligent circumstances, either as they relate to the appellant or the appellant’s counsel; (2) [he] filed the notice of appeal shortly after the expiration date; and (3) the appellee was not prejudiced by the delay.” Criss v. Wise, 566 Pa. 437 , 781 A.2d 1156, 1159 (2001).”
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.