Suburban Development Corp. v. Perryman’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
42 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably Suter v. Stuckey (2007), Haskell v. Carey (1982)
42 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 Rocks v. Brosius · Turner v. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission · Kneas v. Hecht Company · Owen v. Freeman · Dubin v. Mobile Land 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 42 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"In directing dismissal of this appeal we are not to be understood as either approving or disapproving the Court of Special Appeals’ conclusion that the revisory powers granted a circuit court by Maryland Rule 625 do not extend to cases involving foreclosure of the right of redemption. However, should the question arise again its resolution should be considered in light of our ruling in Owen v. Freeman, 279 Md. 241 , 367 A.2d 1245 (1977),[ 6 ] concerning Rule 625 as it relates to Dismissal Rule 528 L of the Supreme Bench of Baltimore City, which was decided subsequent to the ruling of the Court of Special Appeals in this case.” Suburban Dev. Corp., 281 Md. at 169 n.1, 377 A. 2d at 1164 n.1 (emphasis added).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is well settled in Maryland, and the law generally is to the effect, that if a party, knowing the facts, voluntarily accepts the benefits accruing to him under a judgment, order or decree, such acceptance operates as a waiver of any errors in the judgment, order or decree and estops that party from maintaining an appeal therefrom.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Perryman has, by his own action in accepting payment of the $586.25 under the circuit court decree, effectively forfeited his right to appellate review.” Id. at 171 , 377 A.2d at 1165 . The Court pointed out that the rule is”
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.