Green v. Zile’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 1 district · 32 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ (a) In general. — The driver of a vehicle shall come to a full stop as required by this article at the entrance to a through highway and shall yield the right-of-way to other vehicles approaching on said through highway. “(b) Stopping in obedience to stop sign.— The driver of a vehicle shall likewise come to a full stop in obedience to a stop sign and yield the right-of-way to a vehicle approaching on the intersecting highway as required herein at an intersection where a stop sign is erected at one or more entrances thereto although not a part of a through highway.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cornias v. Bradley · Nicholson v. Page

2. ““It is true that this Court has jealously guarded and upheld the favored driver’s right of way in boulevard cases, but if has never held that the favored driver had an absolute and complete right of way, which relieved him of all duty to exercise reasonable and ordinary care and caution for his own safety. On the contrary, the Court said, as early as 1939 in Greenfeld v. Hook, 177 Md. 116 , 8 A. 2d 888 , that, ‘the traveller on the favored highway [does not have] an absolute, unqualified, and complete right of way, at all times and under all circumstances, over persons who have lawfully entered the street, nor [can he] proceed thereon in blind indifference to the danger to which his progress may expose others,’ but, ‘where a traveller on a favored highway knows or should know that his progress will endanger a traveller entering the same from a restricted highway, he must exercise reasonable care to avoid injuring him.’ “Again, it was pointed out in Belle Isle Cab Co. v. Pruitt, 187 Md. 174, 179 , 49 A. 2d 537 , that, ‘the driver on the favored highway does not have an absolute right to proceed under all circumstances.’ See also 4 Md. L. Rev. 207 , 213; Shedlock v. Marshall, 186 Md. 218, 236 , 46 A. 2d 349 ; Fowler v. DeFontes, 211 Md. 568, 574 , 128 A. 2d 395 . “Our most recent consideration of the subject was in the case of Harper v. Higgs, 225 Md. 24 , 169 A. 2d 661 . There, we held that the circumstances presented one of those rare instances in which the conduct of the fav”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nicholson v. Page

3. ““What the statutes, as interpreted by these decisions, mean is that a driver who enters, from an unfavored highway, an intersection with a favored boulevard or arterial highway where there are no traffic controls must yield the right of way to all the traffic he finds there during the entire time he is there. If he does not, and a collision results, he is at fault and cannot recover against the other driver unless the doctrine of last clear chance enters the case.” (Emphasis supplied.)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Trionfo v. R. J. Hellman, Inc.