26 Md. App. 175 - Baltimore County v. Stitzel’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently October 1997
15 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 Baltimore Transit Co. v. State Rx Rel. Schriefer · Cotham and Maldonado v. Board of County Commissioners · Wood v. Abell · Lang v. Catterton · Smith v. Whitmore
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“§ 16. Definitions. For purposes of this subtitle: (a) “Joint tort-feasors” means two or more persons jointly or severally liable in tort for the same injury to person or property, whether or not judgment has been recovered against all or some of them. (b) “Injured person” means any person having a claim in tort for injury to person or property. § 17. Right of contribution. (a) Right exists. — The right of contribution exists among joint tort-feasors. (b) Discharge of liability or payment of share. — A joint tort-feasor is not entitled to a money judgment for contribution until he has by payment discharged the common liability or has paid more than his pro rata share thereof____”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If in a single action a judgment is entered against more than one defendant, and if one defendant pays more than his pro-rata share of that judgment, may a court enter a judgment for contribution against the defendant who has failed to pay his pro-rata share when no cross-claims have been filed?”
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.