Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 371 Pa. Super. 583 - Brown v. Delaware Valley Transplant Program

371 Pa. Super. 583 - Brown v. Delaware Valley Transplant Program’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
April 2013
most recently cited

28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently April 2013 · most notably 424 Pa. Super. 559 - Shears v. Rigley (1993), 429 Pa. Super. 273 - Panitz v. Behrend (1993)

28 state decisions

2301988199020002010decided

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 Plum v. Tampax, Inc. · Garrett's Estate · Women's Homoeopathic Hospital of Philadelphia Case · Echon v. Pennsylyania Railroad · MacKarus Estate

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

  1. “(1) the plaintiff's choice of forum should be given significant weight; (2) the interests of the parties should be considered, including relative ease of access to sources of proof, availability of compulsory process for the attendance of unwilling witnesses, cost of obtaining attendance of willing witnesses . . . enforceability of a judgment, and any other problem which affects the ease, celerity or expense of the litigation; and (3) public interest; litigation should not be piled up in congested centers rather than being handled at its origin [and] jury duty should not be imposed on the people of a community which has no relation to the litigation.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]he supreme court has described the heavy burden facing the appellant from a discretionary trial court determination: “[I]t is not sufficient to persuade the appellate court that it might have reached a different conclusion if, in the first place, charged with the duty imposed on the court below; it is necessary to go further and show an abuse of the discretionary power.” Mackarus’s Estate, 431 Pa. 585, 596 , 246 A.2d 661, 666-67 (1968), quoting Garrett’s Estate, 335 Pa. 287, 292-93 , 6 A.2d 858, 860 (1939). If there is any basis for the trial court’s decision, the decision must stand. Id.”
    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.