Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 73 Md. App. 663 - Jones v. Johnson

73 Md. App. 663 - Jones v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
June 2000
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 2000

8 state decisions

40198819902000decided

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 State v. Roll and Scholl · Rutherford v. Katzenberger · State v. Bryan · McDaniel v. McDaniel · Johnson v. Johnson

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

  1. “In all civil contempt proceedings, any order imposing a penalty upon the defendant must contain a purging provision with which the defendant has the ability to comply— The “choice” must be the defendant’s “as to whether [he can] comply.” ****** Consequently, with regard to civil contempt proceedings based upon the defendant’s failure to comply with a decree ordering support payments, “imprisonment may be avoided by showing that one has neither the money nor the ability to pay.” ... Moreover, the issue is not the ability to pay at the time the payments were originally ordered; instead, the issue is his present ability to pay. (citations omitted).”
    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.