Commonwealth v. Bender

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “We should be extremely reluctant to infer a criminal intent to harass solely from the filing of complaints with appropriate government agencies and the making of telephone calls during regular office hours lest we impermissibly chill a citizen’s constitutional freedoms”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Losch v. Borough of Parkesburg
  Third Circuit· 1984-06-14· cited 144×
• Com. v. Coniker, M.
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 2023-02-15· cited 28×
• Commonwealth v. Weiss
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-03-22· cited 23×
• Commonwealth v. Wheaton
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1991-11-04· cited 20×
• Commonwealth v. Evans
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1982-05-21· cited 18×
• Commonwealth v. Spiropoulos
  Carbon County Court of Common Pleas· 1992-05-13

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Zwickler v. Koota
  Supreme Court· 1967-12-05· cited 1,325×
• Commonwealth v. Hubbard
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1977-01-28· cited 854×
• Commonwealth v. Duncan
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1976-03-29· cited 41×
• Commonwealth v. Long
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1977-01-28· cited 21×
• People v. Hotchkiss
  New York County Courts· 1969-05-26· cited 17×
• Commonwealth v. Schnabel
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1975-09-22· cited 17×
• People v. Smolen
  Criminal Court of the City of New York· 1972-04-12· cited 9×
• People v. Jemzura
  New York Court of Appeals· 1971-07-07· cited 7×
• People v. Carvelas
  New York Court of Appeals· 1974-11-20· cited 3×
• People v. Carvelas
  Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York· 1973-09-26· cited 1×