Commonwealth v. Scott

How courts have described this case

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

• “It is true that plurality opinions do not automatically have - 10 - J-S45022-15 precedential authority.”
• \It would be unreasonable to require payment of costs every time the Commonwealth wanted to challenge a finding of lack of prima facie case when there had not even been a hint of harassment or failure to show probable cause.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Robert Stewart v. Lynne Abraham
  Third Circuit· 2001-12-26· cited 311×
• Gravinese v. Johns-Manville Corp.
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-01-20· cited 44×
• In Re the Interest of C.K.
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1987-12-30· cited 34×
• Commonwealth v. Murray
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-12-20· cited 20×
• Petition of Daily Item
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1983-02-11· cited 18×
• Commonwealth v. Davies
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-05-17· cited 12×
• Commonwealth v. Bracero
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1984-03-16· cited 11×
• Deonier v. State, Public Employee Retirement Board
  Idaho Supreme Court· 1988-06-17· cited 9×
• Commonwealth v. Vincent
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-08-30· cited 9×
• Commonwealth v. Bricker
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1988-09-26· cited 5×
• Commonwealth v. Poindexter
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1982-07-16· cited 2×
• Commonwealth v. Zigler
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1985-07-19

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Commonwealth v. Hetherington
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1975-01-27· cited 110×
• Commonwealth v. Davenport
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1975-07-07· cited 85×
• Commonwealth v. Cartagena
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1978-10-05· cited 64×
• Commonwealth v. Flanders
  Superior Court of Pennsylvania· 1977-03-31· cited 11×