Case law

Cunningham v. Feinberg

441 Md. 310 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 27, 2015

Appellate courts “ ‘accept and [are] bound by findings of fact in the lower court unless they are clearly erroneous.’ ” State Sec. Check Cashing, Inc. v. … All employers operating a business shall establish regular pay periods and rates of pay for employees except executive personnel.

Metheny v. State

359 Md. 576 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 24, 2000

The Court is likewise concerned that this defendant qualified for the death penalty when another defendant who performed the same acts but buried the victim in her clothes would not qualify. I. … Adams, 961 F.2d 505, 509 (5th Cir.1992)(applying the clearly erroneous standard). Cf. United States v.

Office of the Governor v. Washington Post Co.

360 Md. 520 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 12, 2000

The record clearly shows that none of the three officials have either offices or designated telephone lines at these locations. … Clearly, none of the above-described records constitutes a “letter of reference.”

Medstar Health v. Maryland Health Care Commission

376 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 18, 2003

In addition, and consistently, to promote a system of higher volume cardiac surgery programs, the Commission established Policy 1.5: “The establishment of a new adult cardiac surgery program should permit existing programs … With respect, I dissent. *28 The Court seems transfixed with the fact that, because Washington Hospital Center (WHC), which is located in the District of Columbia and thus is entirely immune from any regulation by the State

Lonaconing Trap Club, Inc. v. Maryland Department of the Environment

410 Md. 326 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 26, 2009

Statutes reviewed pursuant to this level of scrutiny are presumed constitutional, “and will be invalidated only if the classification is clearly arbitrary.” … As stated previously, Lonaconing does not satisfy its burden to establish that § 3—401(c)(6)(ii) is without a rational basis.

Riley v. Carter

19 L.R.A. 489 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 13, 1893

Schmucker was elected by the creditors, and approved by the Court as his permanent trustee, and duly qualified as such trustee. … This we think, is clearly the right of the creditor; but we must not be understood as deciding that the permanent trustee, after he has qualified as such, can delay the commencement of proceedings to set aside the assignment

Port v. Cowan

426 Md. 435 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 18, 2012

The Circuit Court received testimony at a hearing on 15 October 2010 establishing and corroborating the divorce ground of mutual separation. … Other states intending to prevent recognition of valid foreign same-sex marriages have done so expressly and clearly, rather than by implication, subtlety, or indirection.

Middleton v. Middleton

329 Md. 627 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 16, 1993

award of its inherent power of enforcement by contempt. *640 The courts have a duty to provide an effective, realistic means for enforcing a support order, or the parent or former spouse for all practical purposes becomes immune … The respondent proposes that we hold that what must be shown clearly and convincingly is that there are no adequate remedies at law.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Kreamer

387 Md. 503 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 21, 2005

We conduct an independent review of the record, accepting the hearing judge’s findings of fact unless clearly erroneous. … Being subjected to "extremely violent acts” and "intimidation by guns, swords, and other weapons” qualifies as cruelty of treatment. 12 . In fact, Ms.

Hildreth v. Tidewater Equipment Co.

378 Md. 724 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 18, 2003

Hildreth appealed, arguing that (1) officers and directors of a foreign de jure corporation are not personally liable for corporate debts solely because the corporation fails to qualify to do business in Maryland, (2) the … If the conduct in Bart Arconti, clearly designed to cause the corporation to evade a legal obligation, did not suffice to *739 justify disregarding the corporate entity, surely Hildreth’s conduct here does not. 3 That conduct

Stinchcomb v. Mercantile-Safe Deposit & Trust Co.

257 Md. 482 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 3, 1970

H. 434, 450, 31 A. 900, 903 , 28 L.R.A. 328 , ‘The context may show clearly that the testator meant to put two different senses upon the same word.’ … Nor do we think that this interpretation is in anyway qualified by the testator’s language that the remainder-men should receive the proceeds of the sale “but without any accumulation of interest thereon.”

United States v. Ambrose

403 Md. 425 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 20, 2008

“Used by the public” clearly does not indicate a requirement that the public have an unrestricted right to access. … Requiring a private roadway, driveway, or parking lot to have an unrestricted right of use by the public would, in *440 total, render every private roadway, driveway, or parking lot immune to the motor vehicle laws contained

Robinson v. Hospelhorn

169 Md. 117 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 18, 1935

regarded as primary in its nature, but when it went on to say that that “asset” should be for the benefit of the depositors and creditors of the corporation, “if necessary to pay the debts of such corporation,” it seems clearly … The test is whether *139 it is needed to pay the debts of the corporation, not how that necessity is to be established, so long as it is recognized or established in some judicial proceeding.

Copinol Restaurant v. 26 N. Market

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 11, 2025

The Lease established an annual minimum rent, which was payable in monthly installments, defined in the Lease as “Minimum Rent.” … “Tenancy” clearly includes both: (1) a periodic tenancy that has been “fully ended” by giving notice; and (2) a tenancy for a term that has “expired.”

Attorney Grievance v. Cassilly

476 Md. 309 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 22, 2021

Cassilly clearly engaged in intentionally dishonest conduct on those two occasions as well. … Huffington, his fate was sealed – unless he could establish that the judge’s findings were clearly erroneous. That is a steep hill to climb and I concur in the Court’s conclusion that he did not succeed.

Marshall v. Safeway, Inc.

437 Md. 542 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 26, 2014

Under the lower courts’ reading, an employer would be immune from an employee’s suit under § 3-507.2 if it unlawfully withholds all but one cent of the wages due, which cannot have been the legislative intent. … Safeway conceded that it had used the $145 per week standard except in the four Eastern Shore counties because that is what the Maryland statute clearly required, but that it was no longer doing so (and cannot lawfully do

American Union of Baptists, Inc. v. Trustees of Particular Primitive Baptist Church at Black Rock, Inc.

335 Md. 564 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 28, 1994

Clearly, the propriety vel non of an “open communion” in the Primitive Baptist faith is not within the purview of the civil courts. … among the members of a neighboring church of the same religious persuasion or, if there is no such church, from among the members of any other church; and (2) The two appointed individuals shall select a third, similarly qualified

Uthus v. Valley Mill Camp

472 Md. 378 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 4, 2021

Uthus to vacate the property, which he hasn’t, which clearly shows that his presence on the property is without the consent of [Valley Mill]. … That process is delineated in § 8-401(b)(1): “Whenever any landlord shall desire to repossess any premises to which the landlord is entitled . . . the landlord or the landlord’s duly qualified agent or attorney shall file

Johnson v. State

292 Md. 405 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 7, 1982

Sup_p.), § 9-120 of the Courts Article provides that a psychologist, duly licensed and qualified as an expert witness, "may testify on ultimate issues, including insanity, competency to stand trial, and matters within the … The jury found both aggravating factors to be present in this case and the evidence clearly supports the jury’s findings in this regard. .

Cashcall, Inc. v. Maryland Commissioner of Financial Regulation

448 Md. 412 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 23, 2016

Jackson Hewitt disagreed, arguing that it did not qualify as a credit services business because it was not paid directly by the consumer. Gomez, 427 Md. at 147, 46 A.3d at 454. … “The facts in Gomez established that there were, in the Commissioner’s words, ‘two separate commercial relationships’ between Ms.