277 Pa. Super. 70 - Shearer v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently December 2014 · most notably Dillon v. Coles (1984), 410 Pa. Super. 621 - Wrenfield Homeowners Ass'n v. DeYoung (1991)
49 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 LaRocca Estate · Hempstead v. Meadville Theological School · Reliance Electric Co. v. Emerson Electric Co. · Hedgebeth v. Medford · White v. Sutherland
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) the ... personal property of any person shall be liable for the expenses of his support, maintenance, [and] assistance ... incurred by any public body or public agency, ... if a right or cause of action existed during the time such expenses were incurred from which the ownership of such property resulted. Any public body or agency may sue the owner of such property for moneys so expended.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Camp · Dillon v. Coles“In effect, the Commonwealth became subrogated to the rights of [Tracy] to the extent of $1,703. We have held that where a subrogor’s attorney creates a common fund for the benefit of the subrogor and subrogee, the attorney is entitled to reimbursement from the subrogee for its proportionate share of reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation. We are of the opinion that ... the rule should be the same where the subrogee is the Commonwealth. ... It would be manifestly unjust to permit the Commonwealth to recover its entire claim and permit it to avoid any part of the cost of creating the fund while requiring [Tracy] to pay a disproportionately large share.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“There are two closely related reasons for reimbursement. The first rests on the basic principle that public assistance supplements resources and that whenever assistance is granted in lieu of the utilization of resources, the assistance should be repaid wherever these resources become available. The second reason relates to the financing of the program. Reimbursement results in a recovery of money that is then available for redistribution as assistance, thereby reducing to this extent the need for additional tax revenues.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Camp
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.