Case law

Eldridge v. State

329 Md. 307 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 10, 1993

In addition, once you were in the premises, it’s at that time that you pulled that weapon out and put it to the head of the victim and clearly established an intent to injure that victim. … The evidence clearly established that the charges here arose from one incident and that only one weapon was involved.

White v. State

419 Md. 265 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 27, 2011

Before trial, the Circuit Court granted Henrickson’s motion to dismiss the complaint on the basis of qualified immunity. … Charles Key, who was qualified as an expert in “police training, protocol and procedures[,] including high-speed pursuit and dispatch communications!]

County Commissioners of Charles County v. ST. CHARLES ASSOCIATES LTD.

366 Md. 426 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 8, 2001

Judge Davidson, writing for the Court of Special Appeals, clearly recognized our holdings in the “restriction” case of Metius v. … Therefore, if a provision of the 1989 Agreement might not qualify as a covenant running with the land for the purpose of section 1.1, section 1.3 could sweep-up such non-qualifying provision as an otherwise transferable or

State Ex Rel. Kalives v. Baltimore Eye, Ear, & Throat Hospital, Inc.

177 Md. 517 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 24, 1940

ordered the answer stricken out, We find no error in this ruling: (a) because such transaction as was indicated by the question was not relevant to the subject of inquiry; and (b) assuming its relevancy for the purpose of establishing … Evidence (3rd Ed.), sec. 370, it is said: “While it is impossible to lay down any unyielding rule as to the form of the hypothetical question in such cases, it is clear that the question should be so framed as to fairly and clearly

Smith v. Humphreys

104 Md. 285 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 15, 1906

If that be so, then she was called upon to establish such an agreement as could be specifically enforced. To say the least, Mrs. … But regardless of those questions, we are satisfied that the evidence fails to establish the fact that Mr.

Attorney General of Maryland v. Waldron

289 Md. 683 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 13, 1981

Tribe at 1090. 16 To date, this group clearly encompasses gender discriminations, e.g., Caban v. Mohammed, 441 U.S. 380 , 99 S. Ct. 1760 , 60 L. Ed. 2d 297 (1979); Craig v. … is required for the protection of the public health, safety, or morals ... is settled, it may not exercise that power arbitrarily or capriciously, or in such a manner as to deprive the individual of rights, privileges, immunities

Carey v. Safe Deposit & Trust Co.

168 Md. 501 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 12, 1935

Carey, Jr., was appointed administrator of the estate of his father, and .duly qualified. On the 9th day of February, 1933, George G. … dispense at pleasure with its own rules, or to innovate upon established practice.

White v. Caterpillar Tractor Co.

235 Md. 368 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 29, 1964

However, in the case at bar, there are additional factors which, when considered as a whole, clearly indicate that Caterpillar was in fact doing business in Maryland. … I see no reason why this Court should depart from its established views as to what constitutes doing business, simply because the Supreme Court of the United States has limited the constitutional immunity from suit once afforded

Md.-Nat'l Cap. P. & P. v. MONT. CTY.

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.

Macgill v. Hyatt

80 Md. 253 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 18, 1894

The executor named in the will, after duly qualifying, died without having fully or at all administered the estate. … But we are not willing to sanction the rule of practice which is sought to be established by the case of Tessier v.

State v. Walker

345 Md. 293 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 10, 1997

Because that issue—the secondary inquiry—had not been clearly raised or decided in the circuit court, the Court of Special Appeals made no ruling on it. Citing Foster v. … admission under the categorical exception, it would clearly qualify under the residual exception.

Akers v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 19, 2025

the established standard. … In my view, the answer is clearly yes.

Annapolis Market Place, L.L.C. v. Parker

369 Md. 689 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 18, 2002

According to the intermediate appellate court, facts regarding the off-site storm water drainage system were not “clearly established in the record,” and Petitioner “failed to direct [the court] to any evidence supporting … established in the record.”

Peters v. Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund Board

271 Md. 304 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 18, 1974

Referring to the language of the state military law which was virtually identical to § 525, the New York Court of Appeals said: “This plain language clearly indicates an intention to confine its limitation for the bringing … The special fund is a third party and cannot qualify. . . .” 87 N.E.2d at 428-29 .

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Keiner

421 Md. 492 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 19, 2011

Respondent was clearly responsible for all of the files in question and the effort to deceive the firm was clearly consistent. … Respondent is clearly remorseful and has generally been very cooperative with Bar Counsel.

Colburn v. Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services

403 Md. 115 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 14, 2008

Grievants are being required to perform duties and responsibilities that are clearly applicable to a different class, in violation § 7-102(e) of the State Personnel and Pensions Article, Md. … We hold that the ALJ did not err in concluding that appellants’ job duties qualified them for the administrative employee overtime exemption.

Perry v. State

381 Md. 138 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 7, 2004

It is apparent from the record that the court was satisfied that competency had been established, and properly so. … When the State offered the witness as qualified, defense counsel objected and asked permission to question the witness. Id.

Western Maryland Railroad v. Kehoe

83 Md. 434 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 17, 1896

on the siding, and it was obvious error, in view of the special exception taken to this.prayer and founded on the want of such evidence, to leave to the jury the finding of a fact which there was no evidence whatever to establish … And his right to use it at all was obviously qualified by an obligation on his part to exercise proper care himself in using it; and hence his right to use it with due care gave him no right to use it recklessly.

Bledsoe v. Bledsoe

294 Md. 183 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 9, 1982

The real question is whether the Bledsoe home can qualify as a "family home” in light of the definition given to the term "child” as used in the statute. … Clearly, that phrase does not connote any different meaning than "children of the parties.”

Shell Oil Co. v. CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE

225 Md. 463 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 12, 1961

Ewell then qualified as a traffic expert, and stated he had made an inspection and study of the corner in question. … We hold that the record clearly shows a reasonable basis to support the Board’s refusal to issue the permit, as an exercise of the police power.