Tully v. Dasher’s Empirical Analysis
1968
Citation profile
2 district · 51 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably Johnson v. State (1985), Hess Construction Co. v. Board of Education (1996)
2 district · 51 state decisions
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 Wilhelm v. State of Maryland Traffic Safety Commission · Plank v. Summers · Kennedy v. Crouch · Fowler v. Benton · Plitt v. Greenberg
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is well established that when a defendant moves for a directed verdict in his favor he must, for the consideration of the motion, concede the truth of all facts that tend to support the right of the plaintiff to recover as well as all inferences which might naturally and reasonably be deduced from those facts, even though these facts may be contradicted. If there is any legally relevant and competent evidence from which a rational mind could infer a fact in issue, the trial court should not invade the province of the jury by directing a verdict for the defendant. Smack v. Whitt, 249 Md. 532, 536 , 240 A. 2d 612, 615 (1968); Plitt v. Greenberg, 242 Md. 359 , 219 A. 2d 237 (1966).””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"There are, unquestionably, many occasions where the causal connection between a defendant's negligence and a disability claimed by a plaintiff does not need to be established by expert testimony. Particularly is this true when the disability develops coincidentally with, or within a reasonable time after, the negligent act, or where the causal connection is clearly apparent from the illness itself and the circumstances surrounding it, or where the cause of the injury relates to matters of common experience, knowledge, or observation of laymen...."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““In any event, there was no motion for a mistrial or any request by counsel for the defendants to the trial court to instruct the jury to disregard the remarks, so that the alleged error is not preserved for our consideration.””
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.