• Home
  • Blog
  • LSGT 201 UMUC Deering Woods Condo Assn v Spoon 833 A 2d at 269 Case Analysis

LSGT 201 UMUC Deering Woods Condo Assn v Spoon 833 A 2d at 269 Case Analysis

0 comments

Background:   As work progresses on the Hastings case, Chong wants you to complete work on citing quotes and paraphrases for the three cases central to the case.  

She has given you some citation examples to review before beginning the case citations for the Hastings case.

After the review of the examples, Chong tasks you with providing citations for the three cases and submitting them to her for approval.

Instructions:

Part 1.  Review Exercises:

Notice in the following quote how and where the citation is placed:

On the other hand, “evidence establishing beyond a reasonable doubt a connection of a defendant with the conspiracy, even though the connection is slight, is sufficient to convict him with knowing participation in the conspiracy.”  United States v. Dunn, 564 F.2d 348, 357 (9th Cir. 1977)

  • The cite is placed after the quote.
  • This is a full citation (parties, reporter, court, year).  In addition, there is a second number after the start page number.  The 357 is the page where the information is found.

Notice in the following quote how and where the citation is placed:

It is well settled that “where the terms and manner of employment are disputed and different inferences may be drawn therefrom, the issue as to the relation that existed between the parties is a mixed question of law and fact, to be determined by the trier of the facts, under proper instructions, . . . but where the essential terms and manner of employment are undisputed, the question is one of law for the Court.” Clayburn v. Soueid, Inc., 211 A.2d at 731.

  • The cite is placed after the quote. 
  • The cite has the names of the parties. 
  • The cite has the volume # and reporter abbreviation. 
  • The cite has the page on which the quote is printed.

Note:  The start page, the court, and the year are missing.  This is a short citation and can be used if somewhere previously in the document you have provided the full citation.

When there is a paraphrase of legal information from an opinion, instead of a direct quote, the same rules as above for quotes.

Part 2.  Citation Exercises

Chong instructs you to use Westlaw Next (access in Read Me First in Content) to look up each court opinion below and to provide full or short-form citations (as instructed) in correct Bluebook format.  Citations must include the page on which each quote is found.

  1. Provide the regional citation to this information quoted from the Deering Woods Condominium Association which can be found at 377 Md. 250:

“Whether a condition on the possessor’s land is one which the possessor should know involves an unreasonable risk of harm to invitees is closely related to, if not indistinguishable from, the extent of the possessor’s duty to inspect, at least in cases in which the claimant relies on constructive notice.”

2.  Provide the regional short form citation to this information quoted from the Deering Woods Condominium Association which can be found at 377 Md. 250 (assume that you have already provide the full regional citation in your document and need to cite to the case again after citing to other cases):

“[I]f a defendant, whether an individual or a municipality, knew or should have known of such a condition on a way under his control, and did not take sufficient precautions to prevent it, he is liable.”

3.  Provide the regional citation to this information quoted from Maans which can be found at 161 Md. App. 620:

“The Maryland rule has two purposes: (1) it requires a demonstration of how long the dangerous condition existed prior to the accident so that the fact-finder can decide whether the storekeeper would have discovered it if he or she had exercised ordinary care; and (2) it also shows that the interval between inspections was at least as long as the time on the floor.”

4. Provide the regional citation to this information quoted from Joseph which can be found at 173 Md. App. 305: 

“It is a truism that a violation of a statute or regulation cannot operate to excuse a knowledge requirement if proof of the violation itself requires the satisfaction of the knowledge requirement.”

Label all parts of analysis, as needed.

About the Author

Follow me


{"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}