181 Md. App. 711 - Worsham v. Ehrlich’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 district · 29 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The question of whether a trial court’s grant of summary judgment was proper is a question of law subject to de novo review on appeal. Summary judgment is appropriate when there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the party in whose favor judgment is entered is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. On appeal, the appellate court will review the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and construe any reasonable inferences that may be drawn from the facts against the moving party. In reviewing a grant of summary judgment under Maryland Rule 2-501, we independently review the record to determine whether the parties properly generated a dispute of material fact and, if not, whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Evergreen Associates, LLC v. Crawford

2. “Injunctive relief is an equitable remedy. Pursuant to [C.J.], § 4-402(a) .. ., “[e]xcept as provided in § § 4-401 and 4-404 of [subtitle 4, Civil Jurisdiction], the District Court does not have equity jurisdiction.” Section § 4-401 lists matters over which the District Court has exclusive original jurisdiction. Pursuant to that section, injunctive relief, except with respect to landlord/tenant disputes!,] [peace orders, 5 ] and certain other property matters, is not a remedy within the province of the District Court. Section 4-404 provides the District Court with concurrent jurisdiction over matters involving domestic violence. Thus, ... the District Court does not have general equity jurisdiction ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 187 Md. App. 601 - Davidson v. Seneca Crossing Section II Homeowner's Ass'n

3. “the trial court here treated the motion as one for summary judgment by allowing matters outside the pleading into evidence [on] the day of the hearing on Appellant’s Show Cause Order. Since the trial court treated the motion as one for summary judgment, it must provide the parties with a reasonable opportunity to present, in a form suitable for consideration on summary judgment, additional pertinent material.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 186 Md. App. 684 - Baltimore Street Builders v. Stewart