Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 381 Pa. Super. 354 - Commonwealth v. Meadows

381 Pa. Super. 354 - Commonwealth v. Meadows’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
1
states following
April 2005
most recently cited

36 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on McKnight v. Commonwealth · Commonwealth v. Clark · Commonwealth v. Bighum · Commonwealth v. Rhodes · Commonwealth v. Bolish

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

  1. “[t]he admission or exclusion of evidence is a matter specifically within the discretion of the trial judge, and we will not reverse his decision absent an abuse of that discretion. ‘The test to be applied in determining the admissibility of such evidence involves weighing the inflammatory nature of this evidence against its essential evidentiary value.’”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[W]hen prompt curative or cautionary instructions are given by the court, an abuse of discretion will not readily be found.”
    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.