Porto v. Peden’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently June 1998
2 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Thatcher v. Pierce · Jamison v. A. M. Byers Co. · Zielinski v. Philadelphia Piers, Inc. · Capozi v. Hearst Publishing Co. · Levin v. Van Horn
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The specific denial of agency warned plaintiff that he must prove agency as part of his prima facie case; such a denial is a negative defense, contradistinguished from an affirmative defense.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.