Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 203 MDAPP 47 - Weems v. State

Weems v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 2012
most recently cited

2 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on State v. Smith · Cunningham v. State · Binnie v. State · Smith v. State · Gardner v. State

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

  1. “1. Are the requirements of § 7-104(d) met if it is shown that a defendant knew that she had obtained property by mistake, learned the identity of the owner, failed to take any measures to restore the property to the owner, and intended to permanently deprive the owner of the property? 2. Was the finder of fact entitled to infer that when [Respondent] — a regular customer of Anchor prior to this incident — learned that she was not entitled to the funds, and yet still refused to return them, she failed to take “reasonable measures” to return the funds?”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “In order to avoid this fiction of the common law which requires a nebulous determination of whether there was an intent to deprive at the time the property was found, it was decided that an intent which is formulated at any time with a purpose of depriving the rightful owner of ... misdelivered property is sufficient to constitute the crime of theft.”
    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.