# Maryland Board of Physicians v. Geier

> Court of Appeals of Maryland · January 23, 2017 · 451 Md. 526

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9871483

## Case

- **Full name:** MARYLAND BOARD OF PHYSICIANS, Et Al. v. Mark R. GEIER, Personal Representative of the Estate of Anne Geier, Et Al.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Maryland
- **Decided:** January 23, 2017
- **Citations:** 451 Md. 526; 154 A.3d 1211; 2017 Md. LEXIS 61; 2017 WL 281914
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by McDonald
- **Judges:** Barbera, Greene, Adkins, McDonald, Hotten, Getty, Battaglia
- **Cited by:** 22 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9871483

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that denial of quasi- judicial immunity did not satisfy Maryland’s collateral order doctrine
- discussing dismissal of a claim by the Montgomery County Circuit Court based on its “finding that [the MCMRA] did not create a private cause of action”
- applying Dawkins v. Baltimore City Police Dep't , 376 Md. 53 , 65, 827 A.2d 115 (2003)

## Opinion text

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by
McDonald, J.
I agree with the Majority opinion to the extent that it addresses the merits of this appeal. I would, however, go farther and address the question of immunity. This Court has adopted from federal practice the collateral order doctrine—a doctrine that provides for consideration of certain interlocutory appeals. Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-47 , 69 S.Ct. 1221 , 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949); Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co. v. Los Angeles Rams Football Co., 284 Md. 86, 91-92 , 394 A.2d 801 (1978); State v. Hogg, 311 Md. 446, 455-57 , 535 A.2d 923 (1988). However, this Court later deviated from the federal version of that doctrine when it overruled Hogg and declined to consider an appeal of an order denying official immunity, except in certain instances (which the Court did not well define). Compare Dawkins v. Baltimore City Police Dep’t., 376 Md. 53 , 827 A.2d 115 (2003) with Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511 , 105 S.Ct. 2806 , 86 L.Ed.2d *575 411 (1985) and Behrens v. Pelletier, 516 U.S. 299 , 116 S.Ct. 884 , 133 L.Ed.2d 773 (1996). The Court of Special Appeals has applied an exception to allow an appeal of an adverse ruling on immunity relating to the alleged actions of a court clerk—an official with less decision-making authority than the Board members in this case. See State v. Keller-Bee, 224 Md.App. 1, 5-7 , 119 A.3d 80 (2015), aff'd, 448 Md. 300 , 138 A.3d 1253 (2016). In my view, Dawkins should be reconsidered.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9871483. Public record. Not legal advice.