Case law

Hamilton, Superintendent v. Verdow

287 Md. 544 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 23, 1980

Wilner . .., I am informed that all communications and records from which information was obtained was with the qualified consent of Arthur F. Goode, III, and originated in confidence, and was to be kept in confidence. … The court went on to set forth the second policy justifying the privilege (id. at 325-326): "As important as are these considerations, the cases, analyzed critically, demonstrate that the immunity of intra-governmental opinions

Clermont v. State

348 Md. 419 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 20, 1998

A cross-examiner must be given wide latitude in attempting to establish a witness’s bias or motivation to testify falsely. Ebb, 341 Md. at 587 , 671 A.2d at 978 ; Smallwood v. … But, in that context, the court’s discretion in establishing the defendant’s range of options is additionally subject to the constraints of a jury proceeding.

Smith v. Merritt Savings & Loan, Inc.

266 Md. 526 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 16, 1972

There are at least two reasons why the chancellor was not clearly in error in holding that, on the facts of the present case, Mr. … The chancellor was not clearly in error in holding Mr. Smith entirely at fault in this regard. (2) Secondly, Mr.

West. Md. T.R. Co. v. Baltimore City

106 Md. 561 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 13, 1907

is actually made land, wharves, permanently filled in with earth, and the like," to use the language of his brief, and we are of the opinion that such is the law, unless of course the provisions of a particular charter clearly … Rep. 1016, it was said that "The Century Dictionary defines a pier to be `projecting quay, wharf, or other landing place;' and, without some qualifying adjective this is the ordinary meaning of the word.

Oglesby v. Baltimore School Associates

484 Md. 296 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 26, 2023

Oglesby and found that she had numerous limitations and qualified as a “Cognitively Disabled” person. Ms. … Clearly, issues concerning the frequency of Ms. Oglesby’s visits to the Lafyette property on weekends and whether the Lafayette property and other properties that Ms.

Maus v. State

311 Md. 85 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 4, 1987

Then he noted that the Public Defender had said Wilkes did not qualify for that office’s services. … For provisions pertaining to the establishment and functions of the Maryland Judicial Conference, see Md.Rule 1226. 4 .

Brethren Mutual Insurance v. Buckley

437 Md. 332 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 4, 2014

Responding, Buckley contended that the Release only applied to Betts and his insurer, and that her execution of it was clearly in accordance with § 19-511. … The world of insurance is not immune from this doctrine. In Federal Insurance Company v.

Colvin v. State

299 Md. 88 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 16, 1984

When attempting to prove a constitutional violation one must be able to establish that the procedures employed in the selection system resulted in continued unrepresentation of a cognizable group or class of qualified citizens … These facts clearly establish the finding of an aggravating circumstance under § 413(d)(10).

Comptroller v. FC-GEN Operations Inv.

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 19, 2022

The provisions pertaining to the newly established Tax Court were set forth in amendments to Article 81 of the Maryland Code (1957). … Jones had Maryland income from sources other than FC-GEN and, therefore, were not qualified to be included in the Composite Return.

Victory Sparkler & Specialty Co. v. Francks

147 Md. 368 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 12, 1925

The statute becomes its own expositor when the subject of the enactment is known, and the object to be accomplished by it is understood, and the words employed ,are free from *378 ■uncertainty and doubt, .and express clearly … expresses the notion of the thing or event, i. e., the wrong or damage done to the person; while “accidental” qualifies and describes the noun by' ascribing to “injuries” a quality or condition of happening or coming by chance

Taylor v. Mandel

402 Md. 109 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 9, 2007

Because the husband had failed to raise the issue of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order earlier, Sommerfelt argued that Steinhoff had not preserved the issue for appeal. … Although the legislation did not become law, it clearly demonstrates that the General Assembly is cognizant of third party custody issues. One of our recent cases, McDermott v.

Schifanelli v. Wallace

271 Md. 177 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 28, 1974

Our statute is clearly a remedial one, and the exception to it should be narrowly construed. … In a system of justice which has established as a general rule that all persons should be qualified to testify, and that disqualification should be the exception, there is no sound reason why the survivor in a negligence

J.L. Matthews, Inc. v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission

368 Md. 71 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 5, 2002

If the public interest clearly will be hurt if the question is not immediately decided, if the matter involved is likely to recur frequently, and its recurrence will involve a relationship between government and its citizens … It is well-established that after the judge’s preclusion of the evidence in question, Petitioner was not required to proffer that evidence at trial. See Reed v.

Modular Closet Systems, Inc. v. Comptroller of the Treasury

315 Md. 438 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 28, 1989

.- — (1) To qualify for an award under this section when the agency has initiated a contested case, the business must make a claim to the agency before taking any appeal. (2) The agency shall act on the claim. … The court stated ( 325 F.Supp. at 1247 ) (emphasis in original): “This case involves ... the University’s right to exclude [the plaintiff] under the standards established by section 577B.

Abromatis v. Amos

127 Md. 394 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 12, 1916

Under the rulings of this Court on the former appeal the.evidence embraced in these exceptions was clearly inadmissible for the purpose of establishing title in the defendant. … The first, seventh and eighth exceptions are to the admission of evidence offered by the plaintiffs to show the rental value of the property on the ground that the witnesses were not qualified to testify.

State Department of Assessments & Taxation v. the Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission

348 Md. 2 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 14, 1997

As stated by the appellee in his brief, the concession granted by the lease was the concession “in its hotel,” and was clearly intended to be the concession of the privilege for the entire hotel. … In fact, as the Court of Special Appeals observed: “testimony heard by the Tax Court established that the Restaurant was available to serve and served both patrons and non-patrons of the Calvert Road Park.” Id.

Scull v. Groover, Christie & Merritt, P.C.

435 Md. 112 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 30, 2013

To support this form of health care insurance, the Maryland Health Maintenance Organization Act establishes the ground rules for HMOs, HMO members, and health care providers. … CL § 13-4A-02(b)(l). 15 Notably, the statute that establishes HEAU carves out disputes concerning quality of professional service or treatment.

Commission on Medical Discipline v. Stillman

291 Md. 390 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 9, 1981

The former announces principles on which the government, about to be established, will be based. … This point is more clearly indicated in Friedman v. Rogers, 440 U.S. 1 , 99 S. Ct. 887 , 59 L. Ed. 2d 100 (1979).

Devincentz v. State

460 Md. 518 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 13, 2018

His answers clearly revealed the relevance of his testimony. Joshua’s statement that K.C. … Even if Devincentz had established that K.C.’s statement occurred right before she moved out of his house—which, again, he did not—K.C.’s statement would still be too remote in time to qualify for the “statement of intent

Webster v. State

359 Md. 465 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 29, 2000

subject to reinterpretation, that the trial court had no authority to reduce a sentence legally imposed pursuant to mandatory sentencing provisions, simply because the Legislature amended those provisions to remove the qualifying … The Committee believes that the mandatory minimum sentences established in this section should be applicable only to crimes against persons or crimes that directly involve a threat to human life.