Byrd v. Day’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 state decisions

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

1. ““While there was thus a publication in four different weeks, the notice did not give four clear weeks of notice of the sale. On behalf of the trustee the argument is one which seeks to split the time up by number of days, disregarding the clear intent of the Act, which looked only to weeks as the smallest sub-division of time.” * * * “The latest decision of this Court upon this question was in the case of the Commissioners of Montgomery County v. Henderson, 122 Md. 537 [another tax sale case], where it was said that statutory provisions as to time must be strictly complied with, that they are mandatory not directory: ‘All the provisions prescribed should be strictly observed, because they are equally essential to the authority attempted to be conferred.’ See also 28 Cyc. 982; Young v. Clarendon Township, 132 U. S. 349 ; Detroit, etc., R. R. v. Bearss, 39 Ind. 599 ; Steuart v. Meyers, 54 Md. 454 . In this last case the notice was but one day short of that required by the statute, yet in that case the notice was held insufficient, in a very careful opinion prepared by the late JUDGE ALVEY. Clearly in this case, therefore, the notice itself was insufficient.” Id. at 444-45.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Fleisher Co. v. Grice