Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 240 Md. 1 - Good v. State

Good v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1965

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
April 1998
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently April 1998

9 state decisions

401965197019801990decided

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 Madison v. State · Keane v. State · Adams v. Commissioners of Trappe · Matter of Hogan v. N.Y. Supreme Court · Eisenberg, Admin. v. Air Cond., 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““If the truth of the allegations in the appellant’s petitions be assumed, it would appear that there is no adequate judicial remedy for the wrong of which the appellant complains, but, as was said in Keane v. State, 164 Md. 685, 694 , 166 Atl. 410 (1933), ‘this Court cannot create a remedy where none exists, since its function is to discover and apply existing law and not to make new law.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The purpose of the writ of error coram nobis, which is an old common-law writ recognized in this State, is to bring before the court a judgment previously rendered by it for the purpose of modification on account of some error of fact which affected the validity and regularity of the proceedings, and which was not brought into issue at the trial of the case....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““We note that relief under the Uniform Post Conviction Procedure Act, Code (1964 Cum.Supp.), Art. 27, secs. 645A, et seq., even as amended by Ch. 422 of the Acts of 1965, is not available to appellant since she is not incarcerated or under probation or parole.””
    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.