Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 438 Pa. Super. 214 - Commonwealth v. Appel

438 Pa. Super. 214 - Commonwealth v. Appel’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

2 district · 11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2015

2 district · 11 state decisions

80199420002010decided

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 Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Codispoti v. Pennsylvania · Commonwealth v. Mayberry

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

  1. “By filing the present appeal seeking review of frivolous issues, Appellant has caused this court to waste precious judicial resources. Appellant’s total disregard for the court system as a whole began in the trial court and has carried over to this court. We admonish Appellant for necessitating review of these claims and direct [his] attention to the many sincere appellants who seek review before this court.”
    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.