Griffin v. Bierman’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently December 2024 · most notably Janusz v. Gilliam (2008), Questar Builders, Inc. v. CB Flooring, LLC (2009)
2 federal appellate · 36 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 Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · Mennonite Board of Missions v. Adams · Tulsa Professional Collection Services, Inc. v. Pope · City of New York v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad · Dusenbery v. United States
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When an action has been tried without a jury, the appellate court will review the case on both the law and the evidence. It will not set aside the judgment of the trial court on the evidence unless clearly erroneous, and will give due regard to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“often commented that such state constitutional provisions are in pari materia with their federal counterparts or are the equivalent of federal constitutional provisions or generally should be interpreted in the same manner as federal provisions. Nevertheless, we have also emphasized that, simply because a Maryland constitutional provision is in pari materia with a federal one or has a federal counterpart, does not mean that the provision will always be interpreted or applied in the same manner as its federal counterpart. Furthermore, cases interpreting and applying a federal constitutional provision are only persuasive authority with respect to the similar Maryland provision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Our holding would be different, however, had the first-class mail notices been returned undelivered or the certified mail had been returned as something more revealing than “unclaimed!.]” Had the Trustees known that their attempts to convey notice to Griffin failed, in accordance with Jones, reasonable follow-up measures to attempt to give notice to the interested property owner might be required.”
1 later decision 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.