Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 721 A2D 382 - Pantoja v. Sprott

Pantoja v. Sprott’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
February 2003
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Dernovesk v. Commonwealth · 435 Pa. Super. 530 - Rieser v. Glukowsky · Weber v. Lynch · Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. Fritz · 387 Pa. Super. 511 - McGonigle v. Currence

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

  1. “‘to obtain a quicker trial listing than they could have received if they had filed under the category of Major Jury Trial.'”
    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.