Oaks v. Connors’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 26 district · 336 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 380 later decisions — most recently January 2018 · most notably Degren v. State (1999), Mayor of Baltimore v. Chase (2000)
4 federal appellate · 26 district · 336 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 Phipps v. General Motors Corp. · Deems v. Western Maryland Railway Co. · Murphy v. Edmonds · Jones v. State · Rose v. Fox Pool 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 380 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a master will not be held responsible for negligent operation of a servant’s automobile, even though engaged at the time in furthering the master’s business unless the master expressly or impliedly consents to the use of the automobile, and ... had the right to control the servant in its operation, or else the use of the automobile was of such vital importance in furthering the master’s business that his control over it might reasonably [be] inferred.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he [plaintiffs] assert that, although they must be adjudicated concurrently, a claim for loss of consortium by the marital unit is separate and distinct from any claim made by the injured spouse and, therefore, should have its own cap. We believe that damages to a marital relationship are frequently inextricably intertwined with the harm sustained by the injured spouse. As we held in Deems [v. Western Maryland Railway,] “marital interests are in reality ... interdependent [and] injury to these interests is ... essentially incapable of separate evaluation as to the husband and wife.” 247 Md. [95,] 109, 231 A.2d 514 [(1967)]. For example, the pain, suffering, and depression that are personal to the injured victim will inevitably affect the relationship with that person’s spouse. Whether these injuries are claimed individually, by the marital unit, or by both, however, they constitute noneconomic damages flowing from a single source, the tortious injury to the victim spouse.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The cardinal rule of statutory interpretation is to ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature. Fish Market v. G.A.A., 337 Md. 1, 8 , 650 A.2d 705 (1994). See also Jones v. State, 336 Md. 255, 260 , 647 A.2d 1204 (1994); Parrison v. State, 335 Md. 554, 559 , 644 A.2d 537 (1994); Rose v. Fox Pool, 335 Md. 351, 358 , 643 A.2d 906 (1994). The first step in determining legislative intent is to look at the statutory language and "[i]f the words of the statute, construed according to their common and everyday meaning, are clear and unambiguous and express a plain meaning, we will give effect to the statute as it is written.” Jones, supra, 336 Md. at 261, 647 A.2d 1204 . See also Parrison, supra, 335 Md. at 559, 644 A.2d 537 ; Rose, supra, 335 Md. at 359, 643 A.2d 906 ; Outmezguine v. State, 335 Md. 20, 41 , 641 A.2d 870 (1994).”
3 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.