276 Pa. Super. 203 - Rosenberg v. Rosenberg’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2013
2 district · 6 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 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Beacon Theaters Inc v. C Westover · Wortex Mills, Inc. v. Textile Workers Union of America · Schwab v. Miller Et Ux.
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.
“Article I, Section 6 of the Pennsylvania Constitution does not permit a jury trial in an ordinary equity action. Schwab v. Miller, 302 Pa. 507 , 153 A. 731 (1931). Thus, it is clear that neither plaintiff, nor defendant has the right to a jury trial on plaintiff's action in equity against the defendant. * * * * * * The principal [sic] that equity has jurisdiction to do complete justice between the parties is a long established one. Wortex Mills v. Textile Workers U. of A., 380 Pa. 3 , 109 A.2d 815 (1954). Moreover, due process problems are inherent in a situation where a chancellor under equitable principles hears the complaint and a jury hears the counterclaim under legal principles where the issues raised in both the case in chief and the counterclaim are the same. Such would be the case in the instant matter as both parties' actions arise out of the same agreement. Furthermore, having two different tribunals rule on the same dispute, could very well result in problems of collateral estoppel, thereby working an injustice to one of the parties. It would also result in a burdensome, cumbersome procedure which would not be in the best interests of judicial expediency and would cause great confusion to lawyers, judges and the parties to the litigation. Article I, Section 6 of the Pennsylvania Constitution does not extend the right to a jury trial where such a right did not heretofore exist. The appellee has failed to cite any cases recognizing this right "heretofore".”
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.