Salisbury Board v. Bounds’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

47 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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘ § 1. Hardship Caused by Affirmative Acts of Commission. Where property, due to unique circumstances applicable to it, cannot reasonably be adopted to use in conformity with the restrictions of the zoning ordinance, hardship arises which is capable of being relieved through the grant of a variance.... If the peculiar circumstances which render the property incapable of being used in accordance with the restrictions contained in the ordinance have been themselves caused or created by the property owner or his predecessor in title,[ 9 ] the essential basis of a variance, i.e., that the hardship be caused solely through the manner of operation of the ordinance upon the particular property, is lacking. In such case, a variance will not be granted.... ‘There is a uniform application of the rule in those cases in which there has been an act on the part of the property owner or his predecessor which has physically so affected the property as to create a unique circumstance or which in itself created either a practical difficulty or hardship in conforming to the restrictions of the ordinance.’ ””

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cromwell v. Ward · Stansbury v. Jones

2. ““... Rules B2 e and B5 do not require any showing of prejudice to the adverse party and Rule B5 plainly states that the trial court, in the absence of cause to the contrary, shall dismiss the appeal for noncompliance with Rule B2 e. . . . [W]e think it was reversible error for the trial court to deny the motion to dismiss the appeal. . .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 22 Md. App. 115 - Jacober v. High Hill Realty, Inc.

3. “The only evidence before the Board as to hardship or injustice involving the property was the fact that repairs and alteration work had been substantially completed before an application for either a variance or a building permit had been made and that what had been done could not be undone without financial hardship to appellees----”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cromwell v. Ward