Case law

Wagner v. Shank

59 Md. 313 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 2, 1883

The gross iniquity of this whole transaction, manifest enough upon its face, is abundantly established by the proof. … There is here, however, no question as to the facts that Locke was, at the time, duly commissioned, and had duly qualified by taking the requisite oath at the proper time.

Nagle & Zaller, P.C. v. Delegall

480 Md. 274 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 11, 2022

For example, to qualify for a license, the applicant must demonstrate, among other things, that its “business will promote the convenience and advantage of the community in which the place of business will be located[]” … Clearly, the statute does not apply to businesses where the primary business purpose is something other than making consumer loans in an amount of $25,000 or less.

State v. Sayre

314 Md. 559 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 23, 1989

This accounts for the established practice in the federal courts that the sentencing judge may recall the defendant and increase his sentence, at least (and we venture no comment as to this limitation) so long as he has not … The Court, speaking though Justice Black, upheld the “increase” of sentence and said that “[t]he Constitution does not require that sentencing should be a game in which a wrong move by the judge means immunity for the prisoner

State v. Harris

428 Md. 700 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 27, 2012

Clearly, therefore, at the very least, the latter *716 part of the communication — the inquiry as to whether the juror could continue — “pertain[ed] to the action.” … The respondent was clearly prejudiced by the trial court’s failure to disclose the communication.

Reichard v. Izer

95 Md. 451 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 19, 1902

agreed under their hands and seals not to contest the validity of the will and codicil, and had given their assent to the approval and ratification of an account stated by the executors more than nine months after they had qualified … Exhibit C was signed by all the children of the testratrix, but unless the Court approves and ratifies that account, it does not very clearly appear how that paper would of itself be material, excepting in so far as it reflects

Emerald Hills Homeowners' Ass'n v. Peters

446 Md. 155 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 27, 2016

The opening phrase “[u]nless otherwise provided on this plat” in the signature block qualifies the limiting language that follows. … Conclusion Dubrowin and Kobrine make clear that a plat can establish an express easement in certain circumstances and we have no difficulty holding that the Emerald Hills Subdivision Plat established an express

Dallas v. State

413 Md. 569 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 26, 2010

The court instructed defense counsel to re-qualify his client. During that colloquy, Petitioner asked: “So he [the prosecutor] can use—it all depends on what I say?” … In Portash , the state trial court ruled on a motion in limine that Portash could be impeached with grand jury testimony that he had given under a statutory grant of immunity. Portash did not testify.

Shepherd v. Burson

427 Md. 541 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 20, 2012

The Notice, on stationery of the substitute trustees, was in a standard format established by the State Commissioner of Financial Regulation. … However, that does not mean that OneWest does not also qualify as a secured party, as the definition can encompass trustees and agents in some instances.

MacKie v. Mayor of Elkton

265 Md. 410 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 10, 1972

Clearly they are innocuous and temporary effecting only minimal incidental damage and little, if any, disturbance. … When this seemingly absolute protection is found to be qualified by the police power, the natural tendency of human nature is to extend the qualification more and more until at last private property disappears.” * * * “We

Snyder v. Grand International Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers

157 Md. 322 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 15, 1929

The scheme outlined by these provisions seems to be clearly enough one for carrying inactive members, and for carrying them only while they continue to be members. … The cancellation or forfeiture of rights which the member then had, or may have had, is not clearly retroactive *328 in its effect.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Green

441 Md. 80 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 21, 2014

“‘[W]e generally will accept the hearing judge’s findings of fact, unless those findings are clearly erroneous.’” Harmon, 433 Md. at 612, 72 A.3d at 562 (quoting Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. … We accept the facts 14 as found by Judge Callahan as they were not clearly erroneous based on our review of the record.

Hunter v. State

397 Md. 580 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 16, 2007

If the child’s allegations were believed, they would establish both the corpus delicti of the crimes charged and the criminal agency of Bohnert.” Id. … Thus, the trial court abused its discretion when qualifying the investigator as an expert because her conclusion that Alicia had been abused was a mere guess and because the groundwork for the “expert’s” opinion was inadequately

Massey v. Secretary, Department of Public Safety & Correctional Services

389 Md. 496 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 21, 2005

Clearly, control over prison management is vested in DOC, subject to the Secretary’s overall supervision, and not the “voting public” or, indeed, the Judiciary. See State v. … The question is simply whether inmate discipline procedures adopted by the Secretary that can directly or indirectly affect an inmate’s actual length of incarceration qualify as merely internal management guidelines, and,

Saldiveri v. State

217 Md. 412 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 26, 1958

Even if we assume, without deciding, that the State had the burden of showing the competency of the prosecuting witness, this burden was met when the defendant qualified the girl by asking her on cross-examination: “Do you … Since there was legally sufficient evidence from which the court could and did find the defendant sane, we are unable to rule that its finding was clearly erroneous. Maryland Rule 741 c.

Mayor of Rockville v. Stone

271 Md. 655 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 21, 1974

While the area east of the railroad may not qualify for the appellation of Camelot, it has the appearance of a suburban residential neighborhood interspersed with minimal storage facilities and proximate to some commercial … Md. 611, 622 , 212 A. 2d 508, 514 (1965): ‘The legal principles whose application determines whether or not the restrictions imposed by the zoning action on the property involved are an unconstitutional taking are well established

City of Seat Pleasant v. Jones

364 Md. 663 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 27, 2001

illegal, capricious, or unreasonable acts; but in exercising that power care must be taken not to interfere with the legislative prerogative, or with the exercise of sound administrative discretion, where discretion is clearly … If this long-established safeguard has become unnecessary, it is not for this Court to change or abolish it.” Id. at 149 , 49 A.2d at 80 .

Booth v. Robinson

55 Md. 419 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 2, 1881

Here, the stock that was purchased on account of the Steam Packet Company was transferred to the names of Robinson and Shoemaker, who held it as trustees for the benefit of the Steam Packet Company; and being thus qualified … The cases maintaining this doctrine are numerous, and they may he found collected, and the result of them clearly stated, in the American note to the leading cases of Thornbrough vs. Baker, and Howard vs. Harris, 3 L.

Dulany v. Middleton

72 Md. 67 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 6, 1890

These limitations of the interests of the cestuis que trust are followed by restrictions upon the power of alienation, lien or incumbrance of the property, with a qualified right to authorize the transfer and reinvestment … Upon careful consideration of the whole will, and all its separate provisions and limitations, we are clearly of opinion that they do not.

Stottlemyer v. Kline

255 Md. 635 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 20, 1969

The doctrine of res judicata clearly applies in the present case which involves the question of ownership of the same land between the same parties, as were involved in the first case. … It is also well established that the line of an adjacent tract, if proved and established, may serve as a call in a deed as well as a natural object. Id., 195 Md. at 495 , 73 A. 2d at 879 .

Mayor of Baltimore v. Williams

6 Md. 235 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 15, 1854

first of these cases are, that if a man seized of land in fee, makes a feoffment to the use of such persons and for such estates as he may appoint by his will, by operation of law the use vests in the feoffor, and he has a qualified … These authorities clearly establish the principle, that inadequacy of price, in connection with other sustaining proof, may be considered in a question like the present.