285 Pa. Super. 539 - Commonwealth v. Leymeister’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
December 1982
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Commonwealth v. Perkins · Commonwealth v. Revty · Commonwealth v. Banks · Commonwealth v. Cliff · Commonwealth v. Adkins
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.
““[I]t is well settled that any objection must be made during the argument so that the challenged remarks may be placed in the record at or about the time they are made. Commonwealth v. Perkins, 473 Pa. 116 , 373 A.2d 1076 (1977); Commonwealth v. Adkins, 468 Pa. 465 , 364 A.2d 287 (1976); Commonwealth v. Kollock, 246 Pa.Super. 16 , 369 A.2d 787 (1977). The purpose of this requirement is to ensure an accurate record on appeal. Commonwealth v. Perkins, supra. ‘Otherwise, the recollection of both counsel and the court at the conclusion of the argument may differ and thereby result in unnecessary disputes.’ Commonwealth v. Adkins, surpa [468 Pa.] at 472, 364 A.2d at 291 .” Commonwealth v. Leymeister, 285 Pa.Super. 539, 541 , 428 A.2d 176, 178 (1981) (Emphasis added).”
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.