LoPresti v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1978
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2017
8 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 175 Pa. Super. 265 - Rybitski v. Lebowitz · 165 Pa. Super. 346 - Combs v. Cole Brothers Circus, Inc. · Rabenstein v. State Workmen's Insurance Fund · Keim v. BURKHOLDER · Ristine v. MOORE
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he decedent was purposefully pursuing, during his usual and normal working hours, the performance of his obligations for the benefit and convenience of his employer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“in which the employe was engaged ... by order of the employer, express or implied, and not simply for the convenience of the employe.”
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.