Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 329 Md. 428 - Moore v. Pomory

Moore v. Pomory’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

40
cited by 40 later decisions
2
states following
December 2017
most recently cited

2 district · 36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently December 2017 · most notably Montgomery County v. REVERE NATIONAL CORP., INC. (1996), Dorsey v. Bethel A.M.E. Church (2003)

2 district · 36 state decisions

200199320002010decided

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 Houghton v. County Comm'rs of Kent Co. · Makovi v. Sherwin-Williams Co. · Houghton v. COUNTY COM'RS OF KENT CTY. · Williams v. Snyder, Adm'r · Gross v. Stone

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

  1. “[A] dismissal of the plaintiff's entire complaint "without prejudice” does not mean that the case is still pending in the trial court and that the plaintiff may amend his complaint.... Rather, the case is fully terminated in the trial court.... The effect of the designation "without prejudice” is simply that there is no adjudication on the merits and that, therefore, a new suit on the same cause of action is not barred by principles of res judicata.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““On the other hand, an order dismissing or granting a motion to dismiss a plaintiffs entire complaint, without granting leave to amend, and where there are no counterclaims, cross-claims or third-party claims, puts the plaintiff out of court and terminates the particular action in the trial court. This is true regardless of whether the dismissal was with or was without prejudice. The effect of the designation ‘without prejudice’ is simply that there is no adjudication on the merits and that, therefore, a new suit on the same cause of action is not barred by principles of res judicata.” (Citation omitted).”
    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.