Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 197 MDAPP 195 - D'Aoust v. Diamond

D'Aoust v. Diamond’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
January 2012
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))

Relies on Daniels v. Williams · Briscoe v. W · Bradley v. Fisher · Pargoud v. United States · Antoine v. Byers & Anderson, Inc.

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

  1. “27. The failure of Defendants Diamond and Brown to provide notice to Plaintiff in accordance with Maryland law and the Maryland Rules of Procedure amounts to constructive fraud under the doctrine of Jannenga v. Johnson, 243 Md. 1 , 220 A.2d 89 (1966). 28. Defendants Diamond and Brown further committed constructive fraud in not advising the Court that they had failed to give Plaintiff a proper notice of the sale of her condominium unit, but instead conveying the unit to the purchasers.”
    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.