356 Pa. Super. 365 - Wolf v. Wolf’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably 422 Pa. Super. 262 - Styer v. Hugo (1993), 446 Pa. Super. 94 - Schenck v. K.E. David, Ltd. (1995)
2 federal appellate · 48 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 Masgai v. Masgai · Barletta v. Barletta · 43 Colo. App. 391 - Mountain Medical, Inc. v. City of Colorado Springs · 274 Pa. Super. 511 - Grubb v. Delathauwer · Nirmaier v. Hamilton
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[(1)] benefits conferred on defendant by plaintiff, [ (2) ] appreciation of such benefits by defendant, and [ (3) ] acceptance and retention of such benefits under such circumstances that it would be inequitable for defendant to retain the benefit without payment for value.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“Rule 1920.51 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure clearly provides: (a)(1) The court may hear the testimony or, upon its own motion or the motion of either party, may appoint a master with respect to all or any of the matters specified in subdivision (a)(2)(i) to hear the testimony and return the record and transcript of the testimony to the court, together with a report and recommendation. Pa.R.C.P. 1920.51(a)(1) (emphasis added). This provision obviously allows that all actions for divorce or claims which may be joined with the action for divorce or any aspect of the action or claims may be referred to a master.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“At any state of an action, the court may order the joinder of any additional person who could have joined or been joined in the action and may stay the proceedings in whole or in part until such person has been joined.”
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.