Picking v. Yates’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 2021
9 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 Parish v. Maryland & Virginia Milk Producers Ass'n · Toy v. Atlantic Gulf & Pacific Co. · Lissau v. Smith · Eastern Shore Building & Loan Corp. v. Bank of Somerset · Picking v. State Finance Corp.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No principle is better established in our law than that tenants by the entirety, because, unlike joint tenants, they hold per tout et non per my, [by the whole, and not by the moiety] must act together to sell their property, Eastern Shore Bldg. & Loan Corp. v. Bank of Somerset, 253 Md. 525 , 253 A.2d 367 (1969); to subject it to any interest or encumbrance, Lissau v. Smith, 215 Md. 538 , 138 A.2d 381 (1958), or to lease it, Tizer v. Tizer, 162 Md. 489 , 160 A. 163 (1932). Similarly, both spouses must join in an action for damages to property which they own by the entirety, 2 Poe, Pleading and Practice § 428, at 18 (6th ed. 1970)....””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“No principle is better established in our law than that tenants by the entirety, because, unlike joint tenants, they hold per tout et non per my, must act together to sell their property, to subject it to any interest or encumbrance, or to lease it. Similarly, both spouses must join in an action for damages to property which they own by the entirety not only because of the way title is held, but because Maryland may require on motion by a defendant that even tenants in common be joined as plaintiffs in an action ex delicto for damage to real property, (citations omitted.)”
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.