45 Md. App. 271 - Barb v. Wallace’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 district · 17 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently October 2011
2 district · 17 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 Impala Platinum Ltd. v. Impala Sales (U.S.A.), Inc. · Berkey v. Delia · Washington Homes, Inc. v. Interstate Land Development Co. · Putensen v. Clay Adams, Inc. · 357 So. 2d 172 - In Re Inquiry Concerning a Judge, Etc.
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.
“The Court of Appeals on numerous occasions has stated that the function of the summary judgment procedure is not to try the case or decide the issues of fact raised; it is merely to determine whether there is an issue of fact to be tried, and if there is none, to cause judgment to be issued accordingly, [citations omitted]. In ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the inferences to be drawn from the underlying facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion, and even if it is found unlikely that the party opposing the motion will prevail at trial, this is insufficient to authorize a summary judgment, [citations omitted].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.