Case law

Mayor & City Cnc. of Balt. v. ProVen Mgmt.

472 Md. 642 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 2, 2021

, clearly, by law, based on undisputed facts, for the three claims.” … Under the applicable provisions of the Ocean City charter, the referendum petition was required to contain the signatures of at least “20% of the qualified voters of Ocean City.”

Harris v. Consolidation Coal Co.

111 Md. 209 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 29, 1909

The Court held that he had not qualified himself as an expert to testify as to the matters embraced in the interrogatories, and in these rulings we agree. … witness must possess before a party is entitled to his opinion as an expert, which, in the nature of things, must be left largely to the discretion of the trial Court, and its rulings thereon will not be disturbed, unless clearly

Turner v. Kight

406 Md. 167 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 7, 2008

The rules governing the construction of Federal statutes are well-established. … Territory) have clearly opted for the extension approach and rejected the suspension alternative. See Huang v. Ziko, 132 N.C.App. 358 , 511 S.E.2d 305 (1999); Estate of Fennell v.

Armacost v. Davis

462 Md. 504 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 25, 2019

In accordance with the statute, a certificate of merit by a qualified expert in neurosurgery was attached to the statement of the claim and Mr. … Even without these references, the verbatim recital of MPJI-Cv 27:1 clearly portrays the relevant standard of care applicable in the present case.

Pollokoff v. Maryland National Bank

288 Md. 485 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 6, 1980

Beginning with the Judiciary Act of 1789, Ch. 20, § 11, 1 Stat. 78 , diversity and general federal question jurisdiction has been qualified by a monetary minimum limitation, initially expressed in terms of the "matter in … The property loss to them, or the loss of civil rights, which according to our rules must be established as a foundation for the interposition of a court of equity, may be small, when apportioned among them.

Lewis v. Carver

140 Md. 121 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 12, 1922

.: “To raise a case, of election, the language of the testator must clearly express an intention to dispose of property not his own. … parents,” she intended to accomplish that purpose, because that “estate” included her share, an undivided interest in the farm on which they lived, and she did not intend by the use of tlie words “personal properly” to qualify

Real Estate Trust Co. of Philadelphia v. Union Trust Co.

102 Md. 41 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 5, 1905

It is abundantly and clearly proved that the President of the Union Trust Company consulted Mr. T. Wallis Blakistone, Messrs. Slingluff and Slingluff and Mr. … Dec. 262, whilst it was broadly stated that a trustee' who disburses money without competent authority is chargeable, as if the money were in hand, the proposition was qualified and restricted in its application to trustees

Thomas v. State

397 Md. 557 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 16, 2007

As he did in Thomas I, petitioner argues that the State did not establish the necessary foundation to admit evidence of his refusal to submit to blood testing to establish consciousness of guilt. … To be relevant, evidence must tend to establish or refute a fact at issue in the case.

Johnson & Higgins, Inc. v. Simpson

163 Md. 574 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 11, 1933

In other words that evidence was legally sufficient to establish a prima facie case for the appellee. … Items were entered in it *593 where they couldn’t put it any other account, that weren’t clearly expense or entertainment or premiums, things like that. It was just a miscellaneous account, you might say.” Dorothy E.

Murrell v. Mayor of Baltimore

376 Md. 170 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 30, 2003

"[T]his Court adheres to the established principle that a court will not decide a constitutional issue when a case can properly be disposed of on a non-constitutional ground.” Jordan v. … It is clearly not an action for mandamus.

Greenberg v. State

421 Md. 396 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 17, 2011

We have instructed that the “party seeking the protection of the privilege” ultimately “bears the burden of establishing its existence.” … Hessel, which the trial judge granted, adding "I’m satisfied that [Green-berg has] clearly stated the basis” of his "objection on the record.”

State v. Brantner

360 Md. 314 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 23, 2000

It argues that the statute is not under-inclusive, as it clearly covers “all” official papers, “whether kept on a manual or automated basis,” thus including copies. … It is significant that in Reese the documents altered were clearly public records, tax rolls.

Montgomery County Volunteer Fire-Rescue Ass'n v. Montgomery County Board of Elections

418 Md. 463 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 22, 2011

On May 21, 2010, the Montgomery County Council signed into law Bill 13-10, establishing an Emergency Medical Services Transport Fee. … (b) State Board to establish process. — The State Board, by regulation, shall establish the process to be followed by all election authorities for verifying and counting signatures on petitions.

United Parcel Service v. Strothers

482 Md. 198 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 1, 2022

Respondent subsequently filed a claim for workers’ compensation, and the Commission granted the claim, finding that his hernia qualified as a permanent partial disability. … They first argue that “definite proof” under L&E § 9-504(a)(1) references Respondent’s burden of proof in establishing his claim.

Evans v. State

396 Md. 256 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 19, 2006

Applying the statutory criteria, the Public Defender found 415 of those cases to qualify for the death penalty. … It was noted that Baltimore City filed death penalty notices in 10% of qualified cases, whereas Baltimore County filed such notices in 56.5% of qualified cases, and that, notwithstanding that the City accounted for nearly

N.Y., P. N.R.R. v. Prod. Exchange

122 Md. 215 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 13, 1914

Harriman, 227 U.S. 657 , the Supreme Court observed that: "The liability imposed by the statute is the liability imposed by the common law upon a common carrier, and may be limited or qualified by special contract with the … If the clause quoted from the bill of lading could be construed as inconsistent with such a liability, it would be clearly ineffectual.

Sears v. Gussin

350 Md. 552 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 31, 1998

Sears bears the burden of establishing any waiver of the accountant-client privilege. … We note, however, that a client may not immunize otherwise discoverable materials from the reach of another party by transferring possession of those materials to an accountant. See McNair v.

Attorney Grievance Comm'n of Md. v. Sanderson

465 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 23, 2019

Miller, because he was not properly qualified as an expert witness. Mr. … Clearly, based on the verbiage alone, Mr. Sanderson in his exchange with Ms.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Webb

291 Md. 721 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 6, 1981

The insured would have no "option” to finally establish these tort issues in a tort suit against the uninsured motorist. … In no case shall the uninsured motorist coverage be less than the coverage afforded a qualified person under Article 48A, §§ 243H and 243-1.

Santana v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 28, 2026

cannot be held to be clearly erroneous.” … In the circumstances of this case, putting Corporal Cartwright in that position was reckless. 7 The State either should have qualified the 6F 7 The Majority