126 Md. App. 237 - Porter v. Schaffer’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably 133 Md. App. 583 - B & P ENTERPRISES v. Overland Equipment Co. (2000), Comptroller of Treasury v. Gannett Co. (1999)
2 federal appellate · 2 district · 35 state decisions
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 Jones v. Howard · Bottoson v. Florida · United States v. Oregon · Demos v. Supreme Court of Washington · Colvin v. State
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a]ny person in actual peaceable possession of property, ... either under color of title or claim of right by reason of his ... adverse possession for the statutory period, when his title to the property is denied or disputed, or when any other person claims, of record or otherwise to own the property, ... the person may maintain a suit in equity in the county where the property lies to quiet or remove any cloud from the title, or determine any adverse claim. (Emphasis added.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he appellate court will review the case on both the law and the evidence. It will not set aside the judgment of the trial court on the evidence unless clearly erroneous, and will give due regard to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The purpose of an action to quiet title is to “protect the owner of legal title ‘from being disturbed in his [or her] possession and from being harassed by suits in regard to his [or her] title by persons setting up unjust and illegal pretensions...." Wathen v. Brown, 48 Md.App. 655, 658 , 429 A.2d 292 (1981) (quoting Textor v. Shipley, 11 Md. 473, 475, 77 Md. 473 , 26 A. 1019 (1893)). In pressing such a claim, the plaintiff has the burden of establishing both possession and legal title by “clear proof.” Stewart v. May, 111 Md. 162, 173 , 73 A. 460 (1909); see Polk v. Pendleton, 31 Md. 118, 124 (1869)”
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.