311 Pa. Super. 50 - Rybas v. Wapner’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
152 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 160 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably 328 Pa. Super. 135 - Thorsen v. Iron and Glass Bank (1984), 334 Pa. Super. 295 - Agriss v. Roadway Express, Inc. (1984)
152 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 Corabi v. Curtis Publishing Co. · Matson v. Margiotti · 276 Pa. Super. 527 - Beckman v. Dunn · Boyer v. Pitt Publishing Company · McAndrew v. Scranton Republican Publishing 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 160 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““In reviewing summary judgment, the court must accept as true all well-pleaded facts in the non-moving party’s pleadings, giving the non-moving party the benefit of all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom. To uphold summary judgment, there must be not only an absence of genuine factual issues, but also an entitlement to judgment as a matter of law.””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“In Pennsylvania law, a communication is defamatory if it “tends so to harm the reputation of another as to lower him in the estimation of the community or to deter third persons from associating or dealing with him.” Corabi v. Curtis Publishing Co., 441 Pa. 432, 441 , 273 A.2d 899, 904 (1971)____ The test is the effect the statement would fairly produce, or the impression it would naturally engender, “in the minds of the average persons among whom it is intended to circulate.” Corabi, supra, 441 Pa. at 447 , 273 A.2d at 907 , quoting Boyer v. Pitt Publishing Co., 324 Pa. 154, 157 , 188 A. 203, 204 (1936).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[N]ot every embarrassing and annoying publication is a libel. A publication which charges that an individual is actuated by unpleasant or undesirable prejudice may offend his sensitivities, but is not thereby libelous. We note that to restrict too severely the right to express such opinions, no matter how annoying or disagreeable, would be dangerous curtailment of a First Amendment Right. Individuals should be able to express their views about the prejudices of others without the chilling effect of a possible lawsuit in defamation resulting from their words.”
2 later decisions 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.