Edmond v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently May 1997
22 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 Weidner v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board · Crangi Distributing Co. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board · Hartman v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal Board · 34 Pa. Commw. 630 - Poli v. WORK. COMP. APPEAL BOARD · Ratchko v. Commonwealth
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he correct procedure ... is for the claimant to make a request, either in writing or on the record, that the referee impose penalties. The referee should then permit the employer to respond to the request, and thereafter schedule a hearing on the issue, if one becomes necessary.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(b) If it appears that' there has not been compliance with this act ... the department may, on its own motion give notice to any persons involved in such apparent noncompliance and schedule a hearing for the purpose of determining whether there has been compliance. The notice of hearing shall contain a statement of the matter to be considered. (d) The department, the board, or any court which may hear any proceedings brought under this act shall have the power to impose penalties as provided herein for violations of the provisions of this act or such rules and regulations or rules of procedure....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is, of course, axiomatic that the ‘reasonableness of contest’ is a legal conclusion that must be arrived at based on facts found by the referee which are supported by substantial evidence.... In order for this Court, and the Board, to review such a conclusion to determine whether an error of law has been committed, the referee must first be given an opportunity to render his opinion on the reasonableness of the contest. We are compelled, therefore, to reverse the Board and to remand this case to the referee so that he may make this necessary legal conclusion. Accordingly, we”
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.