Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 47 PACOMMW 277 - Hoffner v. Hodge

Hoffner v. Hodge’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
states following
March 2002
most recently cited

27 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently March 2002 · most notably 324 Pa. Super. 123 - Cathcart v. Keene Industrial Insulation (1984), 293 Pa. Super. 122 - Banyas v. Lower Bucks Hospital (1981)

27 state decisions

1901979198019902000decided

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 Dillon v. Legg · Sinn v. Burd · Niederman v. Brodsky · Knight v. ANNON

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

  1. “(1) Whether [the] plaintiff was located near the scene of the accident as contrasted with one who was a distance away from it. (2) Whether the shock resulted from a direct emotional impact upon [the] plaintiff from the sensory and contemporaneous observance of the accident, as contrasted with learning of the accident from others after its occurrence. (3) Whether [the] plaintiff and the victim were closely related, as contrasted with an absence of any relationship or the presence of only a distant relationship.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““Niederman ... no longer represents the law of the Commonwealth in [the area of negligent infliction of emotional distress]. ... In an attempt to eliminate the ‘arbitrariness’ inherent in the ‘zone of danger’ test, the Supreme Court substituted therefore an analysis based on the traditional tort law concept of foreseeability.” Id. (citations omitted)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The exceedingly able and detailed discussion of the law applicable to this case by Chief Justice Eagen, Justice Roberts, and Justice Nix in Sinn makes it unnecessary to discuss the matter here. All three opinions expressed the view that the law in Pennsylvania requires the personal observation of the event. No exception is made for an identical twin who alleges she is present at all times with her twin sister, albeit she is in a different physical location. The traumatic impact from viewing the negligent injury of one’s close relative is wholly absent in this case.”
    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.