Case law

State v. Young

462 Md. 159 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 18, 2018

Rather, the prosecutor clearly spelled out her reasons for excluding the prescription evidence, and they all clearly focused on challenging the prescriptions as inadmissible hearsay. … A letter stating as much would clearly be hearsay.

Turner v. Rusk

53 Md. 65 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 6, 1880

The condition of insanity at this period, prior to the deed, being thus clearly established, it is a question more interesting than important, whether the insanity was of such a character as to bring into operation the maxim … But it clearly shows he was not the man he had formerly been, and that they so thought at that time.

Smirlock v. Potomac Development Corp.

235 Md. 195 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 8, 1964

In our opinion, under 212(e) a single transaction of the kind therein described is enough to establish that a person performing, or agreeing to perform, for compensation a function of a real estate broker is such a real estate … None of our previous decisions has actually applied the bar of § 228 to a suit for compensation by an unlicensed real estate broker, but we think that they point towards its validity, and in terms it is clearly applicable

Carr v. State

284 Md. 455 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 22, 1979

He denied on cross-examination that he had been promised immunity if he implicated someone else. It was later learned that such a promise had been made. … Such a finding is permissible only if supported by evidence establishing guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Whitfield v. State

287 Md. 124 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 15, 1980

Moreover, the choice which confronts the State here is no different from that which it makes when granting immunity — letting one individual go unprosecuted in order to obtain evidence to prosecute another individual or to … Once such custody is established, a court must still determine whether an “interrogation” took place before a violation of Miranda exists.

Radio Communications, Inc. v. Public Service Commission

271 Md. 82 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 30, 1974

It is qualified as a public service company, so that by the plain, clear and unambiguous language of subsection (b), it “s/ia££”(emphasis added) receive a certificate of convenience and necessity from the PSC authorizing … In short, the procedure which I think the General Assembly established in the legislation under consideration in the present case is quite analogous to procedures previously adopted by the General Assembly in prior legislation

MacK v. MacK

329 Md. 188 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 2, 1993

establish the patient's choice about terminating life support. … Even absent legislative guidance I believe the courts have a responsibility, which they should not abdicate, to establish a procedure whereby incompetent patients, who have failed to or have never been able to clearly and

Fleisher v. Ensminger

140 Md. 604 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 5, 1922

The first and second are to rulings of the court on testimony and are clearly unimportant. It is sufficient to say as to them that we find no error in those rulings. … The modification simply qualifies the prayer as to the one proposition contained in it *621 as offered.

Babcock & Wilcox, Inc. v. Steiner

258 Md. 468 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 8, 1970

The record further reveals that although the attorneys for the parties qualified the total permanent disability of the claimant to work in his occupation, the medical testimony which we will later recite, and which was uncontroverted … We believe that such a decision comes clearly within the powers of the Board to make that it is an aspect of the Board’s fact-finding power, and that this Court should not say as a matter of law that a man who is actually

Goldsmith v. State

337 Md. 112 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 12, 1995

Another difference in Ritchie was that the Pennsylvania statute making the CYS records confidential created only a qualified privilege similar to the qualified privilege created for the school records in Zaal . … There was no showing of any likelihood of obtaining information relevant to the defense in the records. 5 In addition, there clearly was no repressed memory syndrome in the instant case.

State Center, LLC v. Lexington Charles Ltd. Partnership

438 Md. 451 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 27, 2014

Then, the Circuit Court found “that Plaintiffs’ claims for declaratory and equitable relief are not barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity” because “[s]overeign immunity is not a bar to Plaintiffs challenging ‘the … The Court explained, With regard to a contract claim, the Board clearly has jurisdiction over disputes arising out of performance, breach, modification or termination of a procurement contract.

State ex rel. Baltimore, Canton & Point Breeze Railway Co. v. Latrobe

81 Md. 222 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 4, 1895

A qualifying proviso then follows. Its terms and provisions, which vitally affect the pending controversy, will be fully stated later on. … having asserted an enforcement of the consequences following from a breach of that condition, the case, as thus presented, materially differs from those cited above, and whilst they announce a perfectly correct and well-established

Timanus v. Dugan

46 Md. 402 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 8, 1877

expressions, may be conceded to be the well established doctrine of the law. … Nutwell, 13 Md., 415 , relied on by the defendants, seems to have proceeded upon the conclusion that there was nothing in the will there construed to clearly indicate an intention on the part of the testator that the words

Cabrera v. Penate

439 Md. 99 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 20, 2014

In prior gubernatorial primaries, by the deadline to file a certificate of candidacy, both the deadline to change party affiliation and the deadline to establish 10 See supra p. 5. … We find the language of § 5-203 to express, quite clearly, its mandate.

Paul Construction Co. v. Powell

200 Md. 168 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 9, 1952

Mattax is certainly qualified to point out, for what it may be worth, his opinion as to any lacunae in Dr. Arnold’s reasoning. … Neither could be deduced from mathematical or other general principles or from facts undisputed or established by laboratory tests.

O. C. Taxpayers for Equal Rights, Inc. v. Mayor of Ocean City

280 Md. 585 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 13, 1977

However, the Supreme Court struck down this classification because the exclusion of otherwise qualified voters was not shown to be necessary to promote a compelling state interest. … Clearly the dominant purpose of the legislation was to limit the vote to domiciliaries of Ocean City.

Graham v. Whitridge

99 Md. 248 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 23, 1904

In execution of that restricted, qualified power of appointment, Mrs. … Ward, and is, for that reason, clearly distinguishable from Albert v. Albert, 68 Md. 372 .

Hetrich v. County Commissioners

222 Md. 304 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 14, 1960

Clearly, the manager exercises continuously a substantial part of the governmental power in Anne Arundel County. *308 We agree with the trial court also that the offices oí County Business Manager and County Commissioner … The Court held that a member of the Board of Authority was a public officer and that “well-established public policy prohibits respondent and his colleagues from using their official appointing power as councilmen of the

Tracey v. Solesky

427 Md. 627 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 26, 2012

did in this case) or should have had such knowledge, a prima facie case is established. … However, the language of that case clearly forecasted the direction the Court might take in the proper case. This is that case.

Simmons v. State

333 Md. 547 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 28, 1994

by the proponent to qualify a statement as a declaration against penal interest. … Coley’s statement was clearly not spontaneous.