304 Pa. Super. 438 - McDevitt v. Terminal Warehouse Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
84 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 84 later decisions — most recently November 2010 · most notably 316 Pa. Super. 565 - Fish v. Gosnell (1983), 430 Pa. Super. 36 - Armstrong v. Paoli Memorial Hospital (1993)
84 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 Smith v. Bell Telephone Co. · Corabi v. Curtis Publishing Co. · Draper v. Airco, Inc. · Dively v. Penn-Pittsburgh Corp. · 226 Pa. Super. 381 - ELDRIDGE Et Ux. v. MELCHER
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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... is to decide whether there was sufficient competent evidence to sustain the verdict, granting the verdict winner, [the appellee herein] the benefit of every favorable inference reasonably to be drawn from the evidence. All unfavorable testimony and inferences must be rejected. As to reviewing on appeal the grant or refusal of a new trial, we will not reverse the lower court’s action ‘absent an abuse of discretion or error of law which controlled the outcome of the case.’”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In some circumstances it has been held '“... “‘that one who follows an unfamiliar course in the dark or steps into darkened and unfamiliar space, relying upon his sense of touch instead of obtaining and using adequate lighting facilities, and sustains personal injuries, is guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.’ ” Just v. Sons of Italy Hall, 240 Pa.Super. 416, 422 , 368 A.2d 308, 312 (1976) (emphasis in original), quoting Barth v. Klinck, 360 Pa. 616, 618 , 62 A.2d 841, 842 (1949).’ ” McDevitt v. Terminal Warehouse Co., supra 450 A.2d at 995 (emphasis added).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Under the 1978 amendments, subdivision (d) of Rule 4011 was rescinded and eliminated. This subdivision precluded the discovery of information or other things made or secured by any person or party in anticipation of litigation or in preparation for trial, other than information as to the identity or whereabouts of witnesses. The discovery of trial preparation material is now alloxuable in accordance with Pa.R.C.P. 4003.3 through 4003.5.” McDevitt v. Terminal Warehouse Co., 304 Pa.Super. 438, 455 , 450 A.2d 991, 1000 (1982). (emphasis supplied)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.