Groff v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
August 1993
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Schmidt v. Commonwealth · 29 Pa. Commw. 415 - Bureau of Traffic Safety v. Forte · Hanna v. Zoning Board of Adjustment
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Sections (sic) 6103 of the Judicial Code (citation omitted), provides that an official record kept by a government unit when admissible may be evidenced by a copy attested by its custodian. Section 6104(a) provides that a copy of a record authenticated as provided in section 6103 shall be admissible as evidence that the governmental action disclosed therein was taken. Section 6104(b) (citation omitted) provides that a copy of a record authenticated as provided in section 6103 which discloses the existence of facts which have been or should have been so recorded had the facts existed shall be admissible as evidence of the existence of such facts. In moving to quash, DOT had the burden to show the fact it asserted that it mailed a notice of suspension to Groff on December 19, 1980. If the attested copy of the notice of suspension had disclosed the fact that it was mailed on December 19, 1980, it would have been admissible as evidence of that fact of mailing on that date under section 6104.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“If the attested copy of the notice of suspension had disclosed the fact that it was mailed ... , it would have been admissible as evidence of that fact of mailing . . . under .Section 6104 [of the Judicial Code 3 ] If, as we believe, the authenticated copy disclosed no date ¡of mailing, there was no admissible evidence on that fact. The fact cannot be supplied for the record by a notation dehors the authenticated copy typed on the attestation. (Emphasis added.)”
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.