38 Md. App. 644 - Dixon v. Process Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 22 district · 41 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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “3 J. Pomeroy, A Treatise on Equity Jurisprudence § 804 (5th ed. 1941), defines equitable estoppel as “the effect of the voluntary conduct of a party whereby he is absolutely precluded, both at law and in equity, from asserting rights which might perhaps have otherwise existed, either of property, of contract, or of remedy, as against another person, who has in good faith relied upon such conduct, and has been led thereby to change his position from the worse, and who, on his part, acquires some corresponding right, either of property, of contract, or of remedy.” (Footnote omitted.) See Pearre v. Gross- nickle, 139 Md. 1, 8-9 , 114 A. 725, 728 (1921); Rodgers v. John, 131 Md. 455, 462 , 102 A. 549, 551 (1917). Whether the doctrine is to be applied in a given case is dependent solely upon the particular facts and circumstances of that case. Rodgers v. John, supra at 462, 102 A. at 551 . Unless the party against whom the application of the doctrine is sought has been blameworthy “of some unconscientious, inequitable or fraudulent act of commission or omission upon which another has relied and been misled to his injury, the doctrine will not be applied.” Id.; Pearre v. Grossnickle, supra, 139 Md. at 9 , 114 A. at 728-29 . See also Savonis v. Burke, 241 Md. 316, 319-20 , 216 A.2d 521, 523 (1966); Bayshore Indus., Inc. v. Ziats, 232 Md. 167, 176 , 192 A.2d 487, 492 (1963); Dixon v. Process Corp., 38 Md.App. 644 , 382 A.2d 893 , cert. denied, 282 Md. 731 (1978), in which we held tha”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 48 Md. App. 549 - Johns Hopkins Hospital v. Lehninger · 70 Md. App. 355 - Miller v. Insurance Commissioner

2. “(1) the presence in both corporations of the same officers or directors; (2) common shareholders; (3) financial support of the subsidiary’s operations by the parent; (4) underwriting the incorporation and purchase of all of the capital stock of the subsidiary by the parent corporation; (5) the fact that the subsidiary was organized with a grossly inadequate capital structure; (6) a joint accounting and payroll system; (7) the subsidiary lacks any substantial business contacts save the parent and operates solely with assets conveyed by the parent corporation; (8) in the financial statements of the parent, the subsidiary is referred to as a division of the parent corporation or obligations are assumed to be those of the parent; (9) the property of the subsidiary is used by the parent corporation as its own; (10) the individuals who exercise operating control over the subsidiary exercise it in the interest of the parent; and (11) failure to observe formal requirements in the operation of the subsidiary.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 63 Md. App. 55 - Dolan v. Kent Research & Manufacturing Co. · 486 F. Supp. 2d 537 - MECCO, INC. v. Capital Hardware Supply, Inc.

3. “A commercial corporation is a legal entity conceived by the mind of man and legitimated by statute for the avowed purpose of achieving a maximum profit with a minimum exposure to liability. When such an entity is the parent of multiple offspring in the form of subsidiary corporations, woe unto the creditor who seeks to rip away the corporate facade in order to recover from one sibling of the corporate family what is due from another in the belief that the relationship is inseparable, if not insufferable, for his is a herculean task.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 65 Md. App. 726 - Antigua Condominium Ass'n v. Melba Investors Atlantic, Inc.