768 F. Supp. 2d 121 - Chen v. Bell-Smith’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
9 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 2607 · 12 U.S.C. § 2614
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp. · Langley v. Federal Deposit Insurance · Henderson v. Shinseki
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“courts applying D.C. law may look to Maryland law when there is no controlling D.C. authority directly on point”). 17 . This is consistent with the law of Maryland, where the Court of Appeals, quoting Prosser, has held that liability may lie in one of three circumstances:”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“generally aware of [their] role as part of an overall illegal or tortious activity at the time [they] provides the assistance; and (3)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the primary violator in performing a wrongful act that causes an injury;”
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.