Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 427 MD 691 - Baker v. Montgomery County

Baker v. Montgomery County’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
January 2023
most recently cited

2 district · 15 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 331 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act)

Relies on Cort v. Ash · Cannon v. University of Chicago · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Touche Ross & Co. v. Redington · Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis

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

  1. “(1) Is the plaintiff “one of the class for whose especial benefit the statute was enacted”? (2) Is there any indication of legislative intent, explicit or implicit, either to create such a remedy or to deny one? (3) Is it consistent with the underlying purposes of the legislative scheme to imply such a remedy for the plaintiff?”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[T]he lack of discernible legislative intent to create an implied cause of action in the plain language and structure of the statute, its legislative history, or some other legitimate and reliable source cements the conclusion that the [General Assembly], in enacting [TR] § 21-809, did not contemplate an implied private cause of action. Our conclusion is reinforced by the assumption that legislative bodies know how to “salt the mine” for the enablement of implied private causes of action.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Petitioners maintained steadfastly, albeit quixotically, in the Court of Special Appeals that they were not asserting standing as taxpayers, relying instead solely on their claimed private cause of action theory. Baker, 201 Md. App. at 679 n. 27, 80 A.3d at 289 n. 27. Petitioners acknowledged also that some of them are neither Maryland residents nor Maryland taxpayers.”
    1 later decision 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.