Commonwealth v. Funk’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 2 district · 223 state decisions

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 232 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In the proceedings in the court below, the question arose whether the hearing was de novo, or to review the record as it existed, when the petition under section 616 of the act was filed in the common pleas court. The section in question affords the answer. It says . . . Thereupon to take testimony and examine into the facts of the case, and to determine whether the petitioner is subject to suspension of operator’s license or learner’s permit under the provisions of this act.’ The language of the section clearly indicates that it is the duty of the court to hear de novo the witnesses of the Commonwealth and the witnesses of the licensee, and, from the testimony taken, to determine anew whether the operator’s license should be suspended. The court below was in error when it required the testimony taken before the Secretary of Revenue or his representative to be made a part of the record. If the proceedings before it were in the nature of a certiorari, or a review of the action of the Secretary of Revenue to determine whether he had abused his discretion, then such testimony properly would be a part of the record of this case. But the act otherwise provides, and it may be used only collaterally to impeach the credibility of a witness.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Wagner · Komanecky's Appeal

2. ““This question of the delegation of power to an administrative officer was definitely settled by the decision of this Court in Gima v. Hudson Coal Co., 310 Pa. 480 . We decided there that while the legislature cannot delegate its power to enact a law, it may make a law which delegates the power to determine some fact or state of things upon which the law makes its own action depend. See also Locke’s App., 72 Pa. 491 . Thus the legislature has created, inter alia, the Public Service Commission, the Workmen’s Compensation Board, the Board of Moving Picture Censors, and the Liquor Control Board. Similarly, under the federal Constitution administrative boards, such as the Interstate Commerce Commission, have been created. These agencies perform an administrative rather than a legislative or judicial function, their determinations by express statutory provisions being subject to review by the courts. Uniformly the federal Supreme Court has upheld the power of the state to confer discretionary powers upon such administrative officers or boards: Davis v. Mass., 167 U. S. 43 ; Wilson v. Eureka City, 173 U. S. 32 ; Gundling v. Chicago, 177 U. S. 183 ; People ex rel. Lieberman v. Van DeCarr, 199 U. S. 552 . “The decisions of other jurisdictions reach the same conclusion. See Keck v. Superior Court, 293 Pac. (Cal.) 128; People ex rel. Albrecht v. Harnett, 221 App. Div. 487 . In Tryon v. Willbank, 234 App. Div. 335, 339 (New York) the Court said: ‘While the hearing in such a proceeding [”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Epstein v. Boardman · Spungin's Appeal

3. ““The permission to operate a motor vehicle upon the highways of the Commonwealth is not embraced within the term civil rights, nor is a license to do so a contract or a right of property in any legal or constitutional sense. Although the privilege may be a valuable one, it is no more than a permit granted by the state, its enjoyment depending upon compliance with the conditions prescribed by it, and subject always to such regulation and control as the state may see fit to impose.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Pennsylvania Game Commission v. Craine · Epstein v. Boardman