Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 264 Md. 397 - Shaffer v. Lohr

Shaffer v. Lohr’s Empirical Analysis

1972

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
November 2008
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently November 2008 · most notably Beatty v. Trailmaster Products, Inc. (1993), Salisbury Beauty Schools v. State Board of Cosmetologists (1973)

46 state decisions

1801972198019902000decided

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 Milholland v. Whalen · Whalen v. Milholland · Strickler Engineering Corp. v. Seminar, Inc. · White v. Friel · Frush v. Brooks

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

  1. ““We have held that a mere general denial of a plaintiff’s claim is not enough to show that there is a genuine dispute as to a material fact and that general allegations which do not show the facts in detail and with precision are insufficient to prevent the entry of a summary judgment, Frush v. Brooks, 204 Md. 315, 320-21 , 104 A. 2d 624 (1954). The facts proffered in opposition to the granting of a motion for summary judgment must not only be detailed and precise, but must be admissible in evidence, if there is to be a finding that there is a genuine dispute as to a material fact, Mullan Co. v. International Corp., 220 Md. 248, 257 , 151 A. 2d 906 (1959). Even a dispute as to a fact which is not material to the controversy will not prevent the entry of summary judgment, Meola v. Bethlehem Steel Co., 246 Md. 226, 239-40 , 228 A. 2d 254 (1967).””
    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.