Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
9 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1922–2024 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Maryland courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Thomas v. Nadelgreen2 sentences2022Thomas v. Nadel, 427 Md. 441, 444 (2012) (citing Greenbriar Condo v. Brooks, 387 Md 683, 688 (2005) (explaining that, prior to the foreclosure sale, the debtor had the right to file a motion to enjoin the sale under Rule 14-209, but that after the sale went forward, an injunction was not permissible to overturn the sale, nor were exceptions to the sale filed 5 under Maryland Rule 14-304 appropriate to “upset retroactively a sale properly held”), superseded by Rule as stated in Thomas v. Nadel, 427 Md. 441 , 444 n.5 (2012)). 2022The Substitute Trustees cite Thomas, where the Supreme Court of Maryland stated that, in a foreclosure action, following a sale of the property, “the debtor’s later filing of exceptions to the sale may challenge only procedural irregularities at the sale or the debtor may challenge the statement of indebtedness by filing exceptions to the auditor’s statement of account.” 427 Md. at 444 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Consolidated Real Estate & Fire Insurance v. Cashow
green
2 sentences2024Id. at 79–80. 2024Id. at 79–80. | 3 | 2024–2024 |
Greenbriar Condominium v. Brooks
green
2 sentences2012Greenbriar Condo. v. Brooks, 387 Md. 683, 688 , 878 A.2d 528 (2005). 5 In a subsequent case, the Court of Special Appeals read Greenbriar narrowly to allow a post-sale exception that at tacked the validity of the underlying lien. 2010“Should a sale occur,” we cautioned, “the debtor’s later filing of exceptions to the sale may challenge only procedural irregularities at the sale or ... the statement of indebtedness----” Id. (emphasis added). | 3 | 2010–2012 |
Clarke v. Lacy
green
2 sentences1972This distinction becomes critical because time, even if not specified, is of the essence in an option contract, Dixon v. Haft, supra; Shea v. Marton, 214 Md. 539 , 136 A. 2d 247 (1957) ; Clarke v. Lacy, 213 Md. 482 , 132 A. 2d 478 (1957) ; Foard v. Snider, 205 Md. 435 , 109 A. 2d 101 (1954) ; while in a bilateral contract, it is not unless specifically made so by the provisions of the agreement. 1972This distinction becomes critical because time, even if not specified, is of the essence in an option contract, Dixon v. Haft, supra; Shea v. Marton, 214 Md. 539 , 136 A. 2d 247 (1957) ; Clarke v. Lacy, 213 Md. 482 , 132 A. 2d 478 (1957) ; Foard v. Snider, 205 Md. 435 , 109 A. 2d 101 (1954) ; while in a bilateral contract, it is not unless specifically made so by the provisions of the agreement. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Shea v. Marton
green
2 sentences1972This distinction becomes critical because time, even if not specified, is of the essence in an option contract, Dixon v. Haft, supra; Shea v. Marton, 214 Md. 539 , 136 A. 2d 247 (1957) ; Clarke v. Lacy, 213 Md. 482 , 132 A. 2d 478 (1957) ; Foard v. Snider, 205 Md. 435 , 109 A. 2d 101 (1954) ; while in a bilateral contract, it is not unless specifically made so by the provisions of the agreement. 1972This distinction becomes critical because time, even if not specified, is of the essence in an option contract, Dixon v. Haft, supra; Shea v. Marton, 214 Md. 539 , 136 A. 2d 247 (1957) ; Clarke v. Lacy, 213 Md. 482 , 132 A. 2d 478 (1957) ; Foard v. Snider, 205 Md. 435 , 109 A. 2d 101 (1954) ; while in a bilateral contract, it is not unless specifically made so by the provisions of the agreement. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Foard v. Snider
green
2 sentences1972This distinction becomes critical because time, even if not specified, is of the essence in an option contract, Dixon v. Haft, supra; Shea v. Marton, 214 Md. 539 , 136 A. 2d 247 (1957) ; Clarke v. Lacy, 213 Md. 482 , 132 A. 2d 478 (1957) ; Foard v. Snider, 205 Md. 435 , 109 A. 2d 101 (1954) ; while in a bilateral contract, it is not unless specifically made so by the provisions of the agreement. 1972This distinction becomes critical because time, even if not specified, is of the essence in an option contract, Dixon v. Haft, supra; Shea v. Marton, 214 Md. 539 , 136 A. 2d 247 (1957) ; Clarke v. Lacy, 213 Md. 482 , 132 A. 2d 478 (1957) ; Foard v. Snider, 205 Md. 435 , 109 A. 2d 101 (1954) ; while in a bilateral contract, it is not unless specifically made so by the provisions of the agreement. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
State v. . McBrayer
neutral
1 sentence1922In State v. McBrayer, 98 N. C. 619 , a physician was indicted for violating a statute forbidding a dealer in intoxicating liquors from selling or giving the same to unmarried minors. | 1 | 1922–1922 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.