Smith v. Coyne’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
17 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on James v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority · Smith Case · Williams v. Guzzardi · Lecates v. Justice of Peace Court No. 4 · 356 Pa. Super. 269 - Allegheny Clarklift, Inc. v. Woodline Industries of Pennsylvania, Inc.
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Strict scrutiny is applied to classifications affecting a suspect class or fundamental right. Intermediate scrutiny is applied to important rights and ‘sensitive’ classifications. In all other cases, the challenged legislation will be upheld unless there is no rational basis for its enactment.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Trial by jury shall be as heretofore, and the right thereof remain inviolate.”); see also Smith v. Coyne, 555 Pa. 21, 26 , 722 A.2d 1022, 1024 (1999). . See Smith v. Coyne, 722 A.2d at 1027 (Cap-py, J., concurring); Haines v. Levin, 51 Pa. 412, 414 (1866) (”
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.