190 Md. App. 250 - Bierman v. Hunter’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 2601 (Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act)
Relies on Hill v. Cross Country Settlement, LLC · G.E. Capital Mortgage Services, Inc. v. Levenson · Albert v. Hamilton · Greenbriar Condominium v. Brooks · 178 Md. App. 54 - Jones v. Rosenberg
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The panel of our appellate colleagues continued: In Jones , the appellants’ complaint in federal court, which alleged that the deed of trust violated federal mortgage laws, never asserted that such alleged violations rendered the deed of trust invalid. Indeed, in the complaint in federal court appellants sought only monetary damages as relief for the alleged violations of federal mortgage laws. Additionally, appellants’ fraud allegation, which was also based on alleged violations of federal mortgage laws, was raised in the context of a motion to alter or amend the judgment ratifying the foreclosure sale under Rule 2-535, not as an exception to the foreclosure sale.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bates v. Cohn“[P]rior to the sale, the debtor may seek to enjoin the foreclosure sale from proceeding by filing a motion to enjoin as provided in [the Maryland Rules]. Should a sale occur, however, the debtor’s later filing of exceptions to the sale may challenge only procedural irregularities at the sale or the debtor may challenge the statement of indebtedness by filing exceptions to the auditor’s statement of account.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Thomas v. Nadel“Most importantly, neither Greenbriar nor Jones referenced, and thus did not overrule or reject, the line of cases discussed above, [including Albert and Wilson Brothers ], that permit a mortgagor to challenge the underlying validity of a mortgage by filing exceptions to foreclosure sale pursuant to Rule 14-305. Accordingly, those cases remain good law. 10”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bates v. Cohn
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.