291 Pa. Super. 145 - Bickell v. Stein’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 40 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently October 2014 · most notably Van Buskirk v. Carey Canadian Mines, Ltd. (1985), 332 Pa. Super. 48 - Bartanus v. Lis (1984)
4 federal appellate · 40 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 Nesbitt v. Erie Coach Co. · Lewey v. H. C. Fricke Coke Co. · 284 Pa. Super. 81 - Anthony v. Koppers Co., Inc. · Smith v. Blachley · Gee v. CBS, INC.
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he start of the statutory limitation on an action in tort may be delayed by plaintiffs ignorance of his injury and its cause, until such time as he could or should have discovered it by the exercise of reasonable diligence. Lewey v. Fricke Coke Co., 166 Pa. 536 , 31 A. 261 (1895); see Anthony v. Koppers Co., Inc., 284 Pa.Super. 81 , 425 A.2d 428, 431-35 (1981), and cases cited therein; Gee v. CBS, Inc., 471 F.Supp. 600, 617 (E.D.Pa.1979). The plaintiff has the burden of justifying any delay beyond the date on which the limitation would have expired if computed from the date on which the acts giving rise to the cause of action allegedly occurred. He must allege and prove facts [that] show that he made reasonable efforts to protect his interests and [that] explain why he was unable to discover the operative facts for his cause of action sooner than he did. Patton v. Commonwealth Trust Co., 276 Pa. 95 , 119 A. 834, 836 (1923). Where the facts are neither disputed nor close, the decision on reasonableness is made by the court as a matter of law, instead of by the jury as a matter of fact. A.J. Aberman, Inc. v. Funk Bldg. Corp., 278 Pa.Super. 385 , 420 A.2d 594 (1980).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[W]hen considering preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer, we accept as true all well-pleaded material facts in the complaint, as well as all inferences reasonably deducible therefrom .. . [Preliminary objections should be sustained and a complaint dismissed only in cases that are clear and free from doubt, i.e., it must appear with certainty that, upon the facts averred, the law will not permit recovery by the plaintiff.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“doctrine of fraudulent concealment appears somewhat narrower than the discovery rule, because it requires a showing that defendant himself prevented plaintiff from discovering the facts by acts of deception which were independent of the acts giving rise to [the] cause of action.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Beauty Time Inc
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.