Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 333 Md. 430 - Fikar v. Montgomery County

Fikar v. Montgomery County’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
August 2022
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably Tidewater/Havre De Grace, Inc. v. Mayor of Havre De Grace (1995), Blondell v. Baltimore City Police Department (1996)

1 federal appellate · 45 state decisions

2901994200020102020decided

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 Kaczorowski v. Mayor of Baltimore · Rowell v. United States · State v. Fabritz · Mazor v. State, Dep't of Correction · Duncan and Smith v. State

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

  1. “(a)(1) If a statute, charter, ordinance, resolution, regulation, or policy, regardless of whether part of a pension system, provides a benefit to a covered employee of a governmental unit or a quasi-public corporation that is subject to this title under § 9-201(2) of this title or, in case of death, to the dependents of the covered employee, payment of the benefit by the employer satisfies, to the extent of the payment, the liability of the employer and the subsequent injury fund for payment of benefits under this title. (2) If a benefit paid under paragraph (1) of this subsection is less than the benefits provided under this title, the employer, the Subsequent Injury Fund, or both shall provide an additional benefit that equals the difference between the benefit paid under paragraph (1) of this subsection and the benefits provided under this title. (3) The computation of an additional benefit payable under paragraph (2) of this section shall be done at the time of the initial award and may not include any cost of living adjustment after the initial award.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[W]here statutory language is plain and free from ambiguity and expresses a definite and sensible meaning, courts are not at liberty to disregard the natural import of words with a view towards making the statute express an intention which is different from its plain meaning.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “that the General Assembly wished to provide only a single recovery for a single injury for government employees covered by both a pension plan and [workers'] compensation,”
    1 later decision 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.