445 Pa. Super. 479 - Dodson v. Elvey’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
121 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 121 later decisions — most recently February 2011 · most notably Washington v. Baxter (1998), 452 Pa. Super. 378 - Chanthavong v. Tran (1996)
121 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 Nanty-Glo Boro. v. American Surety Co. · Klusman v. Bucks County Court of Common Pleas · Marks v. Tasman · Singer v. Sheppard · Penn Center House, Inc. v. Hoffman
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 121 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(a) What body function, if any, was impaired because of injuries sustained in a motor vehicle accident? “(b) Was the impairment of body function serious?” Dodson, supra at 499 , 665 A.2d at 1233 , citing DiFranco v. Pickard, 427 Mich. 32, 39 , 398 N.W.2d 896, 901 (1986).”
8 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Oravic v. Sprigg · Yannuzzi v. Reed“[e]ach person who elects the limited tort alternative remains eligible to seek compensation for economic loss sustained in a motor vehicle accident as the consequence of the fault of another person pursuant to applicable tort law. Unless the injury sustained is a serious injury, each person who is bound by the limited tort election shall be precluded from maintaining an action for any noneconomic loss....”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage““Notice To Named Insureds “(A) ‘Limited, tort’ option — The laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania give you the right to choose a form of insurance that limits your right and the right of members of your household to seek financial compensation for injuries caused by other drivers. Under this form of insurance, you and other members of your household covered under this policy may seek recovery for all medical and other out-of-pocket expense but not for pain and suffering or other nonmonetary damages unless the injuries suffered fall within the definition of ‘serious injury’ as set forth in the policy, or unless one of several other exceptions noted in the policy applies . ...” 75 Pa.C.S. § 1705(a)(1)(A).”
2 later decisions 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.