Commonwealth v. Emerick’s Empirical Analysis
1953
Citation profile
166 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 168 later decisions — most recently May 1994 · most notably Tp. of Moon v. POL. OFFICE. OF TP. OF MOON (1985), Virnelson Motor Vehicle Operator License Case (1968)
166 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 Harry Gundling v. City of Chicago · Davis v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts · Commonwealth v. Funk · Commonwealth ex rel. McClain v. Locke · Kaufman Construction Co. v. Holcomb
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 168 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The learned court below set aside the suspension of the operator’s license and restored same solely upon the ground of economic hardship. The court said in its order: ‘[It] would work an undue hardship upon the defendant and his family, in that he is a steel worker with no other practical means of obtaining transportation to his employment [***], the appeal of the defendant is allowed and the suspenison of his operator’s license is set aside and the same restored to him.’”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““Where the testimony of the Commonwealth . . . is undisputed, but there are submitted . .. extenuating facts and circumstances, such as, inter alia, inadvertence, emergency, unintentional or accidental violations, including, among other reasons, economic hardship . . . the exercise of the hearing judge’s discretion [reversing the action of the Secretary] will not be disturbed.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In such de novo hearing neither the action of the Secretary nor the testimony taken before him, or his representative, is properly a part of the record in the court of common pleas. . . . (p. 396) nevertheless the exercise of his discretion, if made in accordance with the provisions and spirit of the statute, is entitled to consideration. . . .”
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.