DiGiovanni v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently January 2019
8 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 McLean v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review · Department of Labor & Industry v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review · Tucker v. Commonwealth · Unemployment Compensation Board v. Stiles · Brennan 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“None of th[o]se decisions resulted in an automatic reversal of a Board decision for the employer or the granting of benefits to the employee simply because the employer failed to appear at the hearing or present any competent evidence of willful misconduct. On the contrary, the employer's burden was carried by the claimant's own testimony, either in whole, ... or in part, by corroborating unobjected-to hearsay evidence of the employer .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“long-recognized duty of the Board to protect the unemployment compensation fund from improper claims, and its corollary that the Board has the power and duty to investigate all the facts of a given case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[I]f a claimant's own testimony establishes with sufficient certainty the crucial facts of a case, we see nothing improper in the Board's relying on that testimony when making its findings of fact .”
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.