Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 469 Pa. 223 - Commonwealth v. McKetta

Commonwealth v. McKetta’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

10
cited by 10 later decisions
3
states following
December 2015
most recently cited

10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 2015

10 state decisions

5019761980199020002010decided

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

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 301 (Animal Drug Amendments of 1968) · 21 U.S.C. § 353 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 371 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)

Relies on Commonwealth v. Clair · Wiegand v. Wiegand · Commonwealth v. O'SEARO · Commonwealth v. Rose · General Electric Credit Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

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

  1. “[A]ppellee and the trial court are undoubtedly correct in their assertion that an issue of fact must be resolved by the jury and that a court cannot intrude upon this function. Schaefer v. United States, 251 U.S. 466 , 40 S.Ct. 259 , 64 L.Ed. 360 (1920); General Electric Credit Corporation v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 437 Pa. 463, 480, n. 21 , 263 A.2d 448, 458, n. 21 (1970). It is equally axiomatic that questions of law are for the court to decide and not the jury. Schofield Discipline Case, 362 Pa. 201, 218-219 , 66 A.2d 675, 683 (1949). Our difference with the result reached by the court below stems from our belief that the question presented was one of law and therefore solely within the province of the court to resolve. A distinction must be recognized between a challenge to the identity of a substance and where the identity is known and its classification is at issue. The former has traditionally been recognized as a factual dispute and its resolution has been left to the trier of fact.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.