Case law

Mayor of Baltimore v. Smith & Schwartz Brick Co.

80 Md. 458 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 28, 1895

The jury is authorized by the ordinance to ascertain and\ decide on the amount of damages or benefits, clearly meaning that it can ascertain the amount of the one before it by appeal, but not of both, unless an appeal has … The burden was on the city to establish the benefits this property was to be charged with.

Richwind Joint Venture 4 v. Brunson

335 Md. 661 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 22, 1994

Prince George’s County, for example, this Court discussed the effect of a county charter upon the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity. … properties from this Act; establishing the Lead Paint Poisoning Commission, its duties and membership; establishing a Lead Poisoning Prevention Fund; requiring the Department of the Environment to adopt certain regulations

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Seltzer

424 Md. 94 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 22, 2011

to respond to the Piper-Brandon complaint, established he had violated Rule 8.1(b). … That Seltzer engaged in deceitful conduct outside of the practice of law does not immunize the sanctionable nature of his behavior. See, e.g., Attorney Grievance v.

Chambers v. State

337 Md. 44 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 19, 1994

Of course this is entirely different from a qualified verdict in a murder or rape case. … It *63 simply is not the office of rule construction to invalidate a properly promulgated and clearly worded rule.

Snyder & Blankfard Co. v. Farmers' Bank

178 Md. 601 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 17, 1940

A qualified acceptance varies in express terms the effect of the bill as drawn. … The promise is clearly not absolute but qualified. It does not bind to accept and pay drafts when and as *610 made, with or without funds. On the contrary, it imposes a limitation.

Blumenthal v. Clerk of the Circuit Court

278 Md. 398 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 22, 1976

The result is that (q), by its own terms, qualifies the mandatory effect of those prior subsections. … Here, the counties properly utilized the time before July 1 to establish appropriate tax rates.

Bishop v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance

360 Md. 225 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 18, 2000

State Farm’s interpretation of § 543 is clearly contrary to the public policy favoring prompt payment of PIP benefits. … As heretofore indicated, § 513(b) and (c) establish which insurer is liable for payment of PIP benefits.

Wilson v. Bull

97 Md. 128 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 5, 1903

“it seems to be now established by numerous decisions that .the same rule of construction will be applied to the word ‘survivors’ as to any other. … Without discussing this exception it is sufficient to say that the question asked the witness even if relevant, was one which she did not show herself by her testimony qualified to answer. (Decided April 2nd, 1903.)

Abrams v. Lamone

398 Md. 146 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 26, 2007

The office of the Attorney General 24 was established by constitutional provision at the 1776 Maryland Convention. … The Board shall define, by rule, the subject matter of the examination, prepare the examination, and establish the passing grade.

Mascaro v. Snelling & Snelling of Baltimore, Inc.

250 Md. 215 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 26, 1968

It was further stated “This was clearly not intended by any one.” With great respect, this appears to me to-beg the question. … franchisee’s “market,” •as it were, and Philadelphia Snelling was obliged to give Baltimore Snelling a licensing agreement most beneficial to the franchisee and at a small license payment in order to obtain a •competent and qualified

Eger v. Stone

253 Md. 533 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 15, 1969

Morton Thomas, a well-qualified land planner, civil engineer and land surveyor, who had testified previously before both the Board and the Montgomery County Council as an expert land planning consultant, who testified that … Raker was clearly admissible in evidence and *543 was of sufficient credibility and probative force to support, at least, Mr.

Hickey v. Peck

180 Md. 289 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 13, 1942

The general rule as to the effect of ratification of sales by a court of equity was established in Maryland as far back as 1855, when the court, in Brown v. … Under their general powers they clearly have the right to protect the recovery of overdue taxes by purchasing the property even without a specific statute.

Hawkins v. Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services

325 Md. 621 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 10, 1992

Our responsibility is to insure that citizens are not deprived of fundamental rights by virtue of working for the government; this does not require a grant of immunity for employee grievances not afforded by the First Amendment … Clearly, Hawkins was not attempting to stimulate a dialogue on the Holocaust.

Baltimore Teachers Union v. Maryland State Board of Education

379 Md. 192 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 16, 2004

The General Assembly has clearly ratified the reconstitution regulations. *205 IV. … General Assembly to establish system of free public schools.

Marlow, Infant v. Davis

227 Md. 204 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 12, 1961

Furthermore, since the smaller originals—which would seem to be the better evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs—were received as evidence, the plaintiffs were clearly not prejudiced. … And, on redirect, the plaintiffs not only established the fact (not previously shown) that the officer was fully qualified to testify as an expert, but, by having the witness further testify in detail as to braking distances

Wiggins v. State

275 Md. 689 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 5, 1975

It *693 recommended “an enabling amendment to empower the Legislature to establish a Juvenile Court in Baltimore City.” … The Bond Commission was of the opinion that in order to avoid the multiplication of courts a juvenile court in Baltimore City should be a branch of the Supreme Bench and that a judge of that bench qualified for such work

INGALLS, OF ESTATE OF INGALLS v. Trustees of Mt. Oak Methodist Church

244 Md. 243 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 6, 1966

The will was admitted to probate by the Orphans’ Court of Prince George’s County and letters testamentary were granted to the named executor who duly qualified as executor. The trustees of Mt. … His family moved to Maryland where he established a business selling farm implements and machinery, in partnership with Lyle L. Simmons.

In re: Foster Farm

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 30, 2025

Biosolids that meet pathogen elimination standards set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 503.32(a) qualify as Class A biosolids. … Thus, contrary to the Appellate Court’s assumption, the Board’s findings in this case did not establish that the Foster Farm was necessarily immune from tort liability, but at best provided it with a rebuttable presumption

Brown v. County Commissioners

338 Md. 286 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 17, 1995

The parties do not dispute that Brown did not qualify for benefits under MA for the dental treatment. … First, the language of the federal regulation does not appear *301 to clearly exclude pretrial detainees from coverage.

Derr v. State

422 Md. 211 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 29, 2011

Clearly, Dr. Luttman relied on the report authored by Dr. Donovan as the basis for her testimony. Dr. … The report, therefore, was clearly not “raw data,” but rather was a detailed description of “past events and human actions.” See id.