Case law

MacKe Co. v. Comptroller of Treasury

302 Md. 18 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 26, 1984

Moreover, the Comptroller's administrative practice is clearly in conflict with the plain meaning of § 324(f)(i). … does not qualify for use tax exclusion.

Wash. Gas Light Co. v. Md. Pub. Serv. Comm'n

460 Md. 667 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 14, 2018

On May 27, 2015, Chief Judge Romine issued an order, concluding that for “an infrastructure replacement project to be an ‘eligible infrastructure replacement’ under the STRIDE law,” and thus qualifying for accelerated … Clearly, Washington Gas did not discuss using the STRIDE statute with regard to out-of-state infrastructure projects.

YIVO Institute for Jewish Research v. Zaleski

386 Md. 654 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 11, 2005

Paul Zaleski, who qualified as personal representative, *662 denied YIVO’s request for payment of the bequest on the basis that Dr. Karski’s earlier gift satisfied the legacy. … Hence, the transfers to the trust did not adeem the testamentary trust established under Mr. Selby’s Will.

Kadan v. Board of Supervisors of Elections

273 Md. 406 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 23, 1974

“Wherever the purpose of the framers of a constitution is clearly expressed, it will be followed by the courts. … There is no justification for retaining, as part of the Constitutionally-established judicial system, a separate Orphans’ Court staffed for the most part by lay judges, sitting perhaps once a week for the purpose of signing

Public Service Commission v. Panda-Brandywine, L.P.

375 Md. 185 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 10, 2003

The character, credit, and resources of Frederick had been tested and established before the contract was renewed. … Section 292.303(d), dealing with indirect purchases, provides that, “[¿] f a qualifying facility agrees, an electric utility which would otherwise be obligated to purchase energy or capacity from such qualifying facility

Owens v. State

399 Md. 388 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 5, 2007

We pay deference to the trial court’s factual findings, upholding them unless “they are clearly erroneous.” … Under the Article, “[a] person is qualified to serve as a juror unless he [or she]: (1) Is not constitutionally qualified to vote in the county where the court convenes ....” 37 Cts. *416 & Jud. Proc., § 8-207(b)(l).

ARMCO STEEK CORP. v. Dept. of Assess. & Tax.

236 Md. 168 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 28, 1964

The record clearly established and the trial judge found that the profits normally realized by Asarco for each ton of ore refined for others was approximately $1.50. … The history of Section 5 clearly supports the above conclusion. When Section 5 was adopted in the 1949 revision of the City's Charter, it replaced former Section 4 thereof.

Cahill v. Mayor of Baltimore

173 Md. 450 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 13, 1938

An Act of 1783, ch. 24, providing for the appointment of port wardens “to preserve the navigation of the bason and harbor of Baltimore-town,” qualified the right to build wharves by prohibiting their construction without … The ordinance of 1926 seems clearly enough a provision for the property occupied by the Shipbuilding Corporation.

Lamone v. Schlakman

451 Md. 468 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 1, 2017

A temporary restraining order may be granted only if it clearly appears from specific facts shown by affidavit or other statement under oath that immediate, substantial, and irreparable … Sparaco’s candidacy as early as August 2, 2016, when the State Board posted the names of the qualified candidates on its website.

Heath v. M. C.C. of Baltimore

187 Md. 296 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 22, 1946

Paragraph 8 of the Baltimore City Zoning Ordinance excludes garages from residential use districts, but this general exclusion is qualified by paragraphs 13 and 14, which relate to private garages without repair facilities … It is well established that the Court will not substitute its discretion for that of the board.

DeLeon v. Slear

328 Md. 569 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 10, 1992

To reiterate, the complaint filed in the United States District Court clearly embraced the statements by Nurses Slear and Broussard which are the subject of this state court suit. … Nevertheless, the district court found that Dr. deLeon "failed to establish a triable issue of fact under any of the legal theories advanced.”

Gambrill v. Schooley

52 L.R.A. 87 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 21, 1901

The Court distinguished the case very clearly from Pullman v. … The plaintiff’s first and second prayers were not questioned at the argument and are so clearly correct as to-require no notice.

Franklin Surety Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.

164 Md. 362 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 20, 1933

A bank qualifying as a depository for county funds is required to pay interest on the average daily balance at a rate to be agreed upon, not less than two per cent.; and when more than one bank in a county qualifies as depository … question, whether, given the existence of Liability on the bond, the reinsurance contract, not controlled by the statutes, but only by its own' terms, was likewise extended to cover a loss after January 15th, 1931, seems clearly

Mahoney v. Board of Supervisors of Elections

205 Md. 344 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 8, 1954

Beck, supra, the Legislature of 1912 nevertheless clearly intended to provide for such contests in primaries, and to the provisions for the right of such contest, they added the right to a recount, which is far more limited … The section provides that no one who is not registered as a qualified voter shall be entitled to vote or to receive a ballot.

Chew v. State

317 Md. 233 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 8, 1989

He said he “didn’t want anyone on that panel that knew of the establishment or Mr. Wills.” … The trial judge need only determine whether that reason qualifies as a racially neutral explanation.

Stewart v. American Bridge Co.

108 Md. 200 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 15, 1908

This circumstance clearly discriminates the cases, and deprives that decision of all persuasive authority in this case.. … Rollins, 82 Md. 14 , and other cases in this State, was clearly right in admitting these reports.

Wise v. State

471 Md. 431 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 24, 2020

The Court of Special Appeals qualified its holding with a materiality requirement. … Because Nance and its progeny involved such obvious inconsistencies, they never warranted an explanation of the minimum showing necessary to establish an inconsistency.

Harris v. Pue

39 Md. 535 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 20, 1874

This rule is clearly stated by all the judges in Tilghman vs. Stewart, 4 H. & J., 156 . … Pue, as establishing many of the facts upon which the validity of the will depends.

Bell v. Board of County Commissioners

195 Md. 21 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 12, 1950

The appellant in the case before us is a resident who claims he is qualified under the act, and his position is that the entire act should be upheld. … That was clearly indicated by the Governor in 1947 when he vetoed ten local acts legalizing gambling in six of the counties of the State.

Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission v. Montgomery County

267 Md. 82 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 16, 1972

In each of those cases where the appeal was allowed, the appellant clearly fell within the language of the statute. … Indeed, appellant’s contention, if pursued to its logical conclusion, could mean that every planning expert testifying before the Board of Appeals might qualify as a party for appeal purposes.