Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 722 A2D 1087 - McGuire v. Shubert

McGuire v. Shubert’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 2000 Pa. Super. 117 - McKeeman v. Corestates Bank, N.A. (2000), 2008 Pa. Super. 244 - Phillips v. Selig (2008)

3 federal appellate · 15 state decisions

180199820002010decided

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 Greenberg v. Aetna Insurance · Richfield Bank & Trust Co. v. Sjogren · 335 Pa. Super. 141 - Harris by Harris v. Easton Pub. Co. · Werner v. Zazyczny · 379 Pa. Super. 150 - Moses v. McWilliams

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

  1. “Although the appellate courts in Pennsylvania have not previously addressed the issue of whether a bank is under a duty of confidentiality to its customer, it is established in Pennsylvania that the legal relationship between a financial institution and its depositors is based on contract. We find that the duty on a bank and its employees to keep a customer’s bank account information confidential, which has long been recognized [by other] jurisdictions, is present as an implied contractual duty under Pennsylvania common law, as well.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “To state a cause of action for the tort of invasion of privacy in Pennsylvania, a plaintiff must aver that there was an intentional intrusion on the seclusion of their private concerns which was substantially and highly offensive to a reasonable person, and aver sufficient facts to establish that the information disclosed would have caused mental suffering, shame or humiliation to a person of normal sensibilities.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “To be clear and free from doubt that dismissal is appropriate, it must appear with certainty that the law would not permit recovery by the plaintiff upon the facts averred. See Vitteck v. Washington Broadcasting Co., Inc., [], 256 Pa.Super. 427 , 389 A.2d 1197, 1199 (1978). Any doubt should be resolved by a refusal to sustain the objections. Id.”
    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.