45 Md. App. 692 - Howard County v. Dorsey’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 2007
15 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 Rodriguez v. United States · Montgomery County v. Woodward & Lothrop, Inc. · Mayor of Annapolis v. Annapolis Waterfront Co. · Heath v. M. C.C. of Baltimore · Wakefield v. Kraft
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"A perusal of cases, particularly those in which a finding of error was upheld, indicates that the presumption of validity accorded to a comprehensive zoning is overcome and error or mistake is established when there is probative evidence to show that the assumptions or premises relied upon by the Council at the time of the comprehensive rezoning were invalid. Error can be established by showing that at the time of the comprehensive zoning the Council failed to take into account then existing facts, or projects or trends which were reasonably foreseeable of fruition in the future, so that the Council’s action was premised initially on a misapprehension. Bonnie View Club v. Glass, 242 Md. 46, 52-53 , 217 A.2d 647, 651 (1966); Jobar Corp. v. Rodgers Forge Community Ass’n., 236 Md. 106, 112, 116-18, 121-22 , 202 A.2d 612, 615, 617-18, 620-21 (1964); Overton v. County Commissioners, 225 Md. 212, 216-17 , 170 A.2d 172, 174-76 (1961); see Rohde v. County Board of Appeals, 234 Md. 259, 267-68 , 199 A.2d 216, 218-19 (1964). Error or mistake may also be established by showing that events occurring subsequent to the comprehensive zoning have proven that the Council’s initial premises were incorrect. As the Court of Appeals said in Rockville v. Stone, 271 Md. 655, 662, 319 A.2d 536, 541 (1974): 'On the question of original mistake, this Court has held that when the assumption upon which a particular use is predicated proves, with the passage of time, to be erroneous, this is sufficient ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"1. That the Board had considered the subject parcel in the course of its deliberations in formulating the comprehensive zoning map, a part of the Comprehensive Zoning Plan adopted October 3, 1977, held a specific public hearing thereon and at that time the parcel had been reclassified from an R-20 to an R-12 residential classification. "2. The Board further finds that there was no mistake in placing this parcel in the R-12 zoning classification at that time. "3. The Board agrees with the finding of the Department of Planning and Zoning of Howard County that the proposed zoning change is not in accordance or in harmony with the land use as shown on the Howard County General Plan adopted December 6, 1971, as amended on August 2, 1976. All as shown on protestants’ exhibit #1, filed in the case.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“of the opinion that the parcel in question probably should have been zoned in [an industrial] classification” because”
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.