246 Pa. Super. 98 - Mazzocone v. Willing’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2017
2 federal appellate · 16 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 Near v. State of Minnesota Olson · New York Times Company v. United States · Rosenbloom v. Metromedia, Inc. · Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe · Smith v. Crouse
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the case at bar, we perceive no public interest so substantial or significant as to permit defendant’s continuing false accusations concerning plaintiff’s professional conduct. On the other hand, the injury to plaintiff’s reputation can be extensive and irreparable if the defendant is permitted to continue her activities. Under these circumstances, the court below properly granted the injunction.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kramer v. Thompson“"Helen R. Willing, be and is permanently enjoined from further demonstrating against and/or picketing Mazzocone and Quinn, Attorneys-at-Law, by uttering or publishing statements to the effect that Mazzocone and Quinn, Attorneys-at-Law stole money from her and sold her out to the insurance company." Mazzocone v. Willing, 246 Pa.Super. 98, 109 , 369 A.2d 829, 834 (1976).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Willing v. Mazzocone“(1) equity will afford protection only to property rights; (2) an injunction would deprive the defendant of his right to a jury trial on the issue of the truth of the publication; (3) the plaintiff has an adequate remedy at law; and (4) an injunction would be unconstitutional as a prior restraint on freedom of expression.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Kramer v. Thompson
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.