Newman v. Reilly’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
59 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably Walzer v. Osborne (2006), Breslin v. Powell (2011)
59 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 Budinich v. Becton Dickinson & Co. · 61 Md. App. 122 - Dent v. Simmons · Md.-Nat'l Cap. P. & P. Comm'n v. Crawford · 75 Md. App. 214 - Legal Aid Bureau, Inc. v. Bishop's Garth Associates Ltd. Partnership · Bailey v. Woel
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The philosophy of these cases is also reflected in the Notes of the Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, 1979 Amendment, Note to Rule 3, subdivision c: ‘Because of the fact that the timely filing of the notice of appeal has been characterized as jurisdictional ... it is important that the right to appeal not be lost by mistakes of mere form. In a number of decided cases it has been held that so long as the function of notice is met by the filing of a paper indicating an intention to appeal, the substance of the rule has been complied with.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]f Zerivitz had signed, as attorney for the plaintiff, a paper reading, “Please note an appeal to the Court of Special Appeals” and the paper were filed within thirty days of the entry of the sanctions judgments, the legal effect would have been to bring up for appellate review all appealable judgments in the case.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“‘If this problem is governed by analogy to actions in courts, we simply observe that, under the majority rule, an appeal from a trial court judgment on the merits does not deprive the judgment-rendering court of jurisdiction to consider an •award of counsel fees.’”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.