Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 391 Pa. Super. 162 - Commonwealth v. Bethlehem

391 Pa. Super. 162 - Commonwealth v. Bethlehem’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
June 2018
most recently cited

17 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 2018

17 state decisions

1501989199020002010decided

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 380 Pa. Super. 555 - Commonwealth v. Willis · Commonwealth v. CARDONICK · 286 Pa. Super. 146 - Commonwealth v. Eackles · 367 Pa. Super. 173 - Commonwealth v. Allem · 357 Pa. Super. 509 - Commonwealth v. Alvin

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

  1. “person responsible for the child's welfare”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “construe[d] the provision to apply to persons under whose permanent or temporary control the parent(s) or legal guardian(s) have placed a child, in other words, those who stand in loco parentis to the child.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “there is a fundamental difference between knowledge of the existence of a statutory provision and receipt of notice that the prosecution will seek application of a given provision in a particular case with sufficient time prior to trial to prepare to challenge application of the provision.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.