Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 317 Md. 428 - Talley v. Talley

Talley v. Talley’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

54
cited by 54 later decisions
1
states following
April 2018
most recently cited

52 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 54 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably Department of Health & Mental Hygiene v. Campbell (2001), 89 Md. App. 448 - Fowler v. Printers II, Inc. (1991)

52 state decisions

3901989199020002010decided

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 Roadway Express, Inc. v. Piper · Miranda v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co. · 75 Md. App. 214 - Legal Aid Bureau, Inc. v. Bishop's Garth Associates Ltd. Partnership · Bornstein v. State Tax Commission · 36 Md. App. 583 - Colonial Carpets, Inc. v. Carpet Fair, Inc.

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

  1. ““The justification for this requirement [of an evidentiary finding of bad faith or lack of substantial justification] lies not only in the clear language of the rule, but also in the logic that before such an extraordinary sanction is imposed there should be evidence that there has been a clear focus upon the criteria justifying it and a specific finding that these criteria have been met. Moreover, some brief exposition of the facts upon which the finding is based and an articulation of the particular finding involved are necessary for subsequent review.””
    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.