311 Pa. Super. 177 - Bumbarger v. Kaminsky’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Stanton Brooks 82-3364 82-3380 v. Astra Pharmaceutical Products Inc 82-3364 82-3380 (1983), 342 Pa. Super. 89 - Lokay v. Lehigh Valley Cooperative Farmers, Inc. (1985)
17 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 Decker v. Kulesza · 252 Pa. Super. 203 - Albert v. Alter · Handfinger v. Philadelphia Gas Works · 289 Pa. Super. 424 - Carnicelli v. Bartram · 267 Pa. Super. 548 - Weaver v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Section 288A. Excused Violations (1) An excused violation of a legislative enactment or an administrative regulation is not negligence. (2) Unless the enactment or regulation is construed not to permit such excuse, its violation is excused when (a) the violation is reasonable because of the actor’s incapacity; (b) he neither knows nor should know of the occasion for compliance; (c) he is unable after reasonable diligence or care to comply; (d) he is confronted by an emergency not due to his own misconduct; (e) compliance would involve a greater risk of harm to the actor or to others.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Teply v. Lincoln“It is entirely possible that a statute may impose an absolute duty, for whose violation there is no recognized excuse ... In such a case the defendant may become liable on the mere basis of his violation of the statute. No excuse is recognized, and neither reasonable ignorance nor all proper care will avoid liability. Such a statute falls properly under the head of strict liability, rather than any basis of negligence ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“standard of conduct is taken over by the court from that fixed by the legislature, and jurors have no dispensing power by which to relax it, except in so far as the court may recognize the possibility of a valid excuse for disobedience of the law .”
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.