Tyma v. Montgomery County’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 60 state decisions

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

1. “The trial court properly grants summary judgment in accordance with Maryland Rule 2-501(e), “if the motion and response show that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and that the party in whose favor judgment is entered is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Jones v. Mid-Atlantic Funding Co., 362 Md. 661, 675-76 , 766 A.2d 617, 624-25 (2001); Hartford Ins. Co. v. Manor Inn of Bethesda, Inc., 335 Md. 135, 144 , 642 A.2d 219, 224 (1994); Gross v. Sussex, Inc., 332 Md. 247, 255 , 630 A.2d 1156, 1160 (1993). This Court, like any appellate court, reviews the grant of summary judgment to determine whether the trial court was legally correct in entering the judgment. Murphy v. Merzbacher, 346 Md. 525, 530-31 , 697 A.2d 861, 864 (1997); Goodwich v. Sinai Hosp., Inc., 343 Md. 185, 204 , 680 A.2d 1067, 1076 (1996); Hartford Ins. Co., 335 Md. at 144 , 642 A.2d at 224 ; Gross, 332 Md. at 255 , 630 A.2d at 1160 . And, because an appellate court has [“ ‘]the same information from the record and decide[s] the same issues of law as the trial court,’ ” its review of an order granting summary judgment is de novo. Green v. H & R Block, Inc., 355 Md. 488, 502 , 735 A.2d 1039, 1047 (1999) (quoting Heat & Power v. Air Products & Chemicals, Inc., 320 Md. 584, 591-92 , 578 A.2d 1202, 1206 (1990)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 150 Md. App. 390 - ABC Imaging of Washington, Inc. v. TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA

2. ““Sections 1 and 1A of Article XI-A empower ... the counties of Maryland to adopt a charter form of local government. Section 2 directs the General Assembly to provide a grant of express powers for charter home rule counties. The General Assembly followed that directive and enacted the Express Powers Act by Ch. 456 of the Laws of Maryland of 1918, codified as Code (1957, 1987 Repl.Vol.), Art. 25A. Section 3 of Article XI-A provides (emphasis supplied): ‘From and after the adoption of a charter by the City of Baltimore, or any County of this State, as hereinbefore provided, the Mayor of Baltimore and City Council of the City of Baltimore or the County Council of said County, subject to the Constitution and Public General Laws of this State, shall have full power to enact local laws of said city or county ... upon all matters covered by the express powers granted as above provided____’ ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Holiday Universal, Inc. v. Montgomery County

3. “one that pertains to two or more geographical subdivisions within the State ... and ‘deals with the general public welfare, a subject which is of significant interest not just to any one county, but rather to more than one geographical subdivision, or even to the entire state.’ ” Tyma, 369 Md. at 507 , 801 A.2d at 154 (quoting Cole v. Sec’y of State, 249 Md. 425, 435 , 240 A.2d 272, 278 (1968)). A local law, on the other hand,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission v. Phillips