Sokolowski’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
7 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently September 2014
7 district · 2 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 Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · The Harrisburg · Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc. · American Trading Transportation Co. v. Escobar · Davis v. Mills
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In tort actions, Maryland adheres to the traditional substantive-procedural conflict of laws dichotomy whereby the law of the state where the tort occurred governs substantive matters while the law of the forum state governs procedural concerns, (citations omitted). In determining whether a law is substantive or procedural, the federal district court accepts the characterizations placed on the involved rale by the state, (citation omitted).... the resolution of this issue appears simple because under Maryland law statutes of limitation are generally considered procedural.”
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.