371 Pa. Super. 368 - Storm v. Golden’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
88 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 98 later decisions — most recently December 2025 · most notably 437 Pa. Super. 108 - Terletsky v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance (1994), 441 Pa. Super. 1 - Sprague v. Walter (1995)
88 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 Commonwealth v. Sneed · Gans v. Mundy · Morena v. South Hills Health System · Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Razumic · Francioni v. Gibsonia Truck Corp.
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 98 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[I]f all the primary facts can be accurately described to a jury and if the jury is as capable of comprehending and understanding such facts and drawing correct conclusions from them as are witnesses possessed of special training, experience or observation, then there is no need for the testimony of an expert.” Reardon v. Meehan, 424 Pa. 460, 465 , 227 A.2d 667, 670 (1967). Expert testimony becomes necessary when the subject matter of the inquiry is one involving special skills and training not common to the ordinary lay person.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. The employment of the attorney or other basis for duty; 2. The failure of the attorney to exercise ordinary skill and knowledge; and 3. That such negligence was the proximate cause of damage to the plaintiff. Schenkel v. Monheit, 266 Pa.Super. 396, 399 , 405 A.2d 493, 494 (1979). Accord Gans v. Gray, 612 F.Supp. 608, 615 (E.D.Pa.1985); Duke & Co. v. Anderson, 275 Pa.Super. 65, 71 , 418 A.2d 613, 616 (1980). Trice v. Mozenter, 356 Pa.Super. 510 , 515 A.2d 10, 13 (1986).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The express language of Pa. R.Civ.P. 280.1 and the above cited authorities compel us to conclude that the trial court was not empowered to enter the initial nonsuit because the appellant had offered evidence. Nonetheless, even though it was procedurally improper for the trial court to enter a nonsuit, we find that as a matter of law the error was harmless. We reach this determination upon review of the evidence which discloses that the trial court did not take [the expert’s] testimony into consideration in disposing of the nonsuit motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shannon v. McNulty
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.