Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 387 Md. 683 - Greenbriar Condominium v. Brooks

Greenbriar Condominium v. Brooks’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

2 district · 42 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. v. Neal (2007), D'AOUST v. Diamond (2012)

2 district · 42 state decisions

280200520102020decided

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 Harris v. Harris · Golden Sands Club Condominium, Inc. v. Waller · Union Trust Co. v. Biggs · Simard v. White · Martin v. Howard County

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. “(1) How taken. A party ... may file exceptions to the sale. Exceptions shall be in writing, shall set forth the alleged irregularity with particularity, and shall be filed within 30 days after the date of a notice issued pursuant to section (c) of this Rule or the filing of the report of sale if no notice is issued. Any matter not specifically set forth in the exceptions is waived unless the court finds that justice requires otherwise. (2) Ruling on exceptions; hearing. The court shall determine whether to hold a hearing on the exceptions but it may not set aside a sale without a hearing. The court shall hold a hearing if a hearing is requested and the exceptions or any response clearly show a need to take evidence.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[P]rior to the sale, the debtor may seek to enjoin the foreclosure sale from proceeding by filing a motion to enjoin as provided in [the Maryland Rules]. Should a sale occur, however, the debtor’s later filing of exceptions to the sale may challenge only procedural irregularities at the sale or the debtor may challenge the statement of indebtedness by filing exceptions to the auditor’s statement of account.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““Such procedural allegations may charge that ‘the advertisement of sale was insufficient or misdescribed the property, the creditor committed a fraud by preventing someone from bidding or by chilling the bidding, challenging the price as unconscionable, etc.’ ””
    2 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.