Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 451 Pa. 146 - Phaff v. Gerner

Phaff v. Gerner’s Empirical Analysis

1973

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
2
states following
October 2019
most recently cited

89 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions — most recently October 2019 · most notably 357 Pa. Super. 286 - Washington Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Stein (1986), 249 Pa. Super. 240 - Amabile v. Auto Kleen Car Wash (1977)

89 state decisions

36019731980199020002010decided

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 London v. Kingsley · Adams v. Speckman · Mallesky v. Stevens · Legman v. Scranton School District · Cary v. Lower Merion School District

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

  1. ““A typical case is as follows: A party supports his motion for summary judgment by affidavits or other evidentiary matter sufficient to show that there is no genuine issue as to a material fact. The adverse party, in opposing the motion, does not produce any evidentiary matter, or produces some but not enough to establish that there is a genuine issue for trial. Instead, the adverse party rests on averments of his pleadings which on their face present an issue. . . . The very mission of the summary judgment procedure is to pierce the pleadings and to assess the proof in order to see whether there is a genuine need for trial. The . . . doctrine, which permits the pleadings themselves to stand in the way of granting an otherwise justified summary judgment, is incompatible with the basic purpose of the rule. . . .” Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 56, Notes of Advisory Committee on 1963 Amendment, 28 U.S.C.A. p. 416. [Emphasis added.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “The very mission of the summary judgment procedure is to pierce the pleadings and to assess the proof in order to see whether there is a genuine need for trial. The ... doctrine, which permits the pleadings themselves to stand in the way of granting an otherwise justified summary judgment, is incompatible with the basic purpose of the rule.”
    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.