229 Md. App. 187 - Elec. Gen. Corp. v. Labonte’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “1. Whether the previously determined finding that [La-Bonte] sustained a subsequent intervening accident barred any further liability of [Electrical General] for workers’ compensation benefits due to a prior [accidental personal] injury? 2. Whether the Circuit Court erred by allowing the jury to consider whether [LaBonte] sustained a subsequent intervening accident to his back because litigation of that issue was precluded under the doctrine of collateral estoppel? 3. “Whether the Circuit Court erred in submitting the jury question of whether [LaBonte]’s back condition was causally related to the [accidental personal] injury because the question was insufficient to resolve the factual disputes between the parties and improperly shifted the burden of proof to [Electrical General]? 4. "Whether the Circuit Court erred by allowing the jury to decide issues that were not previously decided by the [ ] Commission?”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Electrical General Corp. v. Labonte · Elec. Gen. Corp. v. LaBonte

2. “permanent disability benefits, unlike temporary disability benefits, can be caused by both an initial [accidental personal injury] and a subsequent accident so as to preserve the liability of the employer for that portion of the disability that is attributable to the initial accident.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Elec. Gen. Corp. v. LaBonte

3. “As the Court of Appeals has explained, where an order involves an interpretation and application of Maryland constitutional, statutory or case law, our Court must determine whether the trial court's conclusions are 'legally correct[.]'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 242 Md. App. 123 - Harford Cnty. v. Md. Reclamation Assocs., Inc.