Scott v. Jenkins’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
18 district · 86 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably Okwa v. Harper (2000), Philip Morris Inc. v. Angeletti (2000)
18 district · 86 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 Rawlings v. Apodaca · Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia · Alexander & Alexander Inc. v. B. Dixon Evander & Associates, Inc. · H & R BLOCK, INC. v. Testerman · Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Gardiner Dairy Co.
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) [it] provides notice to the parties as to the nature of the claim or defense; (2) [it] states the facts upon which the claim or defense allegedly exists; (3) [it] defines the boundaries of litigation; and (4) provides for the speedy resolution of frivolous claims and defenses.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“Lest there be any remaining doubt, in order to recover punitive damages in any tort action in the State of Maryland, facts sufficient to show actual malice must be pleaded and proven by clear and convincing evidence, and a specific demand for the recovery of punitive damages must be made before an award of such damages may be had. (Emphasis in original.)”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[t]he mere allegation of the fact, without detailing a variety of minute circumstances that constitute the evidence of it, is sufficient. Generally speaking, a declaration is sufficient under the modern system of pleading if it contains a plain statement of the facts necessary to constitute a ground of action. Where the injury complained of is an injury to the person, it is sufficient to describe it briefly and in general terms.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.