Case law

City of Gaithersburg v. Montgomery County

271 Md. 505 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 1, 1974

which establishes it free of fundamental objections.” … City of Baltimore, 179 Md. 407, 409 , 19 A. 2d 704 (1941) (“It appears also that subsequent clauses should not be limited by independent'precedent clauses unless the intention be clearly expressed.”). 3 .

Williams v. State

329 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 23, 1992

Their relationship thus established, Jackson told Gary he wanted to purchase four more ounces. On March 15, Gary phoned Jackson to offer the four ounces that Jackson desired. … Relative to the usual vagueness challenge, Ricky’s assertion is clearly without merit.

State v. Runge

317 Md. 613 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 27, 1989

He bases this entitlement solely on the Maryland statute; we need not concern ourselves with disclosure principles established in cases, such as Ritchie, supra; United States v. … Thus, if a custodian discloses pursuant to court order, the custodian is immune.

McCauseland v. Baltimore Humane Impartial Society

95 Md. 741 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 17, 1902

Barnitz qualified as the executor thereof and proceeded to administer the estate. … It also appears clearly from the evidence submitted by the appellee that the mortgage debt, evidenced by the note, remains unpaid.

Jones v. State

310 Md. 569 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 16, 1987

As Jones’s suppression motion was clearly based on a claim of impermissible suggestiveness, the issue to be considered is whether the excluded question had any relevance in establishing this claim. … Thus, the rationale of Mills is clearly controlling in this case.

Duvall v. Hess

188 Md. 145 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 18, 1947

The *149 testimony in this case may be said to establish the following facts: Many years ago there was a little place called “Branchville” in the area in question. … Luers, 129 Md. 521, 528 , 99 A. 710 , the title to the Act was: “An Act for the incorporation of the town of Bowie, in Prince George’s County, and for the submission of this charter to the qualified voters of said town for

Kuenne v. Kuenne

219 Md. 101 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 17, 1959

This is the reason why a subscribing witness may express an opinion as to testamentary capacity without first demonstrating he is qualified to testify. Townshend v. Townshend, 7 Gill 10, 27 (1848). … The reason for the ruling was clearly wrong but, so far as we can de *109 termine from the record, the result was right.

City of Takoma Park v. Citizens for Decent Government

301 Md. 439 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 8, 1984

III, § 16-4 specifies that “[t]he board of supervisors of elections of the county, established by public general law, shall constitute a special board of election supervisors for the conduct of any referendum on any public … Although the affidavit in the present case fully complies with the requirements of Section 4 as to the first mandatory requirement, it clearly fails in regard to the second mandatory requirement, i.e., to state that of the

Dobbs v. State

148 Md. 34 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 9, 1925

For the reasons so clearly stated by Judge Adkins, speaking for this Court in McAllister v. State, 140 Md. 651 , there was error in these rulings. … The doctrine that a court must be presumed in criminal cases to be immune from the influence of improper evidence admitted by it seems to me dangerous, radical and unsound.

Supermarkets General Corp. v. State

286 Md. 611 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 6, 1980

Maxwell, 282 Md. 422 , 384 A.2d 748 (1978): A statute enacted under the police power carries with it a strong presumption of constitutionality and the party attacking it has the burden of affirmatively and clearly establishing … It in no way relates to subsection (c) 3 as defining or qualifying the word “persons” as used therein. Subsection (d) provides no more than another business exemption to the prohibitions of § 534 L.

Henry v. State

324 Md. 204 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 11, 1991

For the requested instruction to be warranted, Henry would have had to establish that the witnesses had a qualifying conviction. This was not done. … Yet, Henry did not establish through evidence that Robert Williams was convicted of a qualified crime.

Mundey v. Erie Insurance Group

396 Md. 656 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 16, 2007

We conclude that the plain language of the policy in this case is unambiguous and clearly indicates who is covered by the policy. … The court held that the named insured’s son did not qualify as a “resident” of the named insured’s household.

County Council v. Potomac Electric Power Co.

263 Md. 159 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 15, 1971

Judge Loveless, on appeal to the Circuit Court, found that Pepeo had established the need for the electric substation; that the criteria for the requested special exception had been clearly established by it; and that, in … Coles was eminently qualified as an expert. He received a Bachelor of Science Degree from Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1957 and a Master’s Degree in 1959 in Electrical Engineering.

Billig v. State

157 Md. 185 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 5, 1929

With the validity of the ordinance established, the remaining grounds for the demurrer to every one of the ten counts of the indictment- will next he examined. … The ninth and tenth counts were clearly demurrable. These counts were intended to charge violations of subsection (e) of the ordinance.

Philadelphia, Baltimore & Washington Railroad v. Green

110 Md. 32 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 13, 1909

This under all the authorities establishes the relation of carrier and passenger. … It is difficult to see how this testimony can have the slightest tendency to prove the facts sought to be established.

McClain v. State

425 Md. 238 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 21, 2012

Billings’ statement into evidence because it did not qualify for admission under any of the hearsay exceptions. Clearly, it could not be admitted under Rule 5-612; after Ms. … This was clearly inconsistent with her statement.

Slagle v. Russell

114 Md. 418 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 11, 1911

Baukhages of Baltimore, should they be the purchasers to whom you refer, I would expect a commission from the sale, and I write to this effect so that you may not enter into a contract until we clearly understand just what … It is also the established law that, after negotiations, begun through a broker’s intervention, have virtually culminated in a sale, the agent cannot be discharged, so as to deprive him of his commissions.

State v. Smith

487 Md. 635 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 13, 2024

App. 283, 314 (2023) (“It is well-established in our jurisprudence that hearsay will be excluded, unless the proponent demonstrates its probable trustworthiness by establishing that a recognized exception to the rule against … Continuing objections only apply to matters “clearly” within their scope. Md. Rule 4-323(b).

Cull v. Wheltle

114 Md. 58 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 30, 1910

Act of 1900, Chapter 15, the Governor was .authorized to appoint, by and Avith the advice and consent of the Senate, three Commissioners for the term of two years and until their respective successors were appointed and qualified … Carter and similar cases are simply to the effect that, in the absence of some limitation, officers in this State hold over until their successors are appointed and qualify, in order to prevent an interregnum.

Cannon v. Southland Life Insurance

263 Md. 463 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 15, 1971

The absence of such power was clearly set forth not only in the application, but in the receipt itself, upon which the plaintiff’s claim must stand or fall.” … The applicants were all younger than twenty and would not have qualified even if Southland had lowered the general minimum of twenty-five to twenty before they made application.