20 Md. App. 284 - Hoffman v. Glock’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
2 district · 31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2005 · most notably Buckhannon Board and Care Home Incs v. West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources (2001), University National Bank v. Wolfe (1977)
2 district · 31 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 M & R Contractors & Builders, Inc. v. Michael · Bartlett v. Stanchfield · Freeman v. Stanbern Construction Co. · Achenbach v. Stoddard · Urquhart v. Alexander & Alexander, 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Unless otherwise provided by law, or ordered by the court, the prevailing party shall be entitled to the allowance of court costs, which shall be taxed by the clerk and embraced in the judgment.. ..””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Attempts of parties to tie up by contract their freedom of dealing with each other are futile. The contract is a fact to be taken into account in interpreting the subsequent conduct of the plaintiff and the defendant, no doubt. But it cannot be assumed, as matter of law, that the contract governed all that was done until it was renounced in so many words, because the parties had a right to renounce it in any way and by any mode of expression they saw fit. They could substitute a new oral contract by conduct and intimation, as well as by express words.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A contractor who has been wrongfully prevented by the owner from rendering substantial performance, and thus creating a right to the contract price, has, in addition to his remedy in damages as above stated, an alternative restitu-tionary remedy. This is quantum meruit — a judgment for the reasonable value of the work, labor, and materials actually rendered and used in performance of the contract before the defendant’s repudiation or other vital breach.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.