Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 445 Pa. Super. 1 - Colonna v. Rice

445 Pa. Super. 1 - Colonna v. Rice’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
October 2014
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently October 2014

16 state decisions

100199520002010decided

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 Pocono International Raceway, Inc. v. Pocono Produce, Inc. · Smith v. Bell Telephone Co. · Karis v. Karis · Klusman v. Bucks County Court of Common Pleas · 324 Pa. Super. 123 - Cathcart v. Keene Industrial Insulation

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

  1. “The “discovery rule” provides that where the existence of the injury is not known to the complaining party and such knowledge cannot reasonably be ascertained within the prescribed statutory period, the limitations period does not begin to run until the discovery of the injury is reasonably possible, (citation omitted). The “discovery rule” arises from the inability of the injured party, despite the exercise of reasonable diligence, to know of the injury or its cause, (citation omitted). Its purpose is to exclude the period of time during which the injured party is reasonably unaware that an injury has been sustained so that people in that class have essentially the same rights as those who suffer an immediately ascertainable injury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “On review of an order granting summary judgment, we must determine whether the moving party has established that there is no genuine issue of material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In making this determination, we must examine the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, who is entitled to the benefit of all reasonable inferences. All doubts as to the existence of a factual dispute must be resolved in favor of the non-moving party and the entry of summary judgment is appropriate only in the clearest of cases.”
    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.