Skip to main content

Tadjer v. Montgomery County

Citations

  • 479 A.2d 1321
  • 300 Md. 539
  • 1984 Md. LEXIS 334

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • remarking that “distinction between governmental and proprietary functions is sometimes illusory in practice”
  • explaining that we assess whether “the income derived was in an amount substantially in excess of the County’s expenses for rent, operation and the like, so that the [activity] was a real moneymaking proposition”
  • relying on the definition of a public nuisance from section 82IB of the Restatement
  • observing that the third-party plaintiffs had not alleged that any land of the original plaintiff had been invaded and that “[w]hat the third-party plaintiffs have attempted to do in their nuisance counts is simply to frame an action in negligence using somewhat different terms”
  • discussing both public and private nuisance principles in connection with third- party claims for indemnification and damages against a county arising from an explosion caused by a landfill operation
  • “The duty to maintain streets and highways in a reasonably safe condition is a major exception to the immunity from suit in Maryland of counties and municipalities.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Smith, Eldridge

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

43 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Tadjer v. Montgomery County

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.