Case law

Chesapeake Supply & Equipment Co. v. Manitowoc Engineering Corp.

232 Md. 555 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 6, 1963

In my view the Court is clearly correct in holding, under our prior decisions, that Manitowoc was not doing business in Maryland, but it is equally clear to me that the contract which led to the effort by Chesapeake and Linder … It is of no moment that Manitowoc could have qualified its proposal by saying that the negotiations would not become a contract until it so agreed in Wisconsin, in writing, or otherwise, because it did not do so.

Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Ford

433 Md. 426 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 26, 2013

We will find an abuse of discretion when the court’s ruling is “clearly against the logic and effect of facts and inferences before the eourt[,]” when the decision is “clearly untenable, unfairly depriving a litigant of a … It has an MCL of 5 ppb, as established by the EPA. The MDE has promulgated the same standard for benzene. See COMAR 26.04.01.07(D). .

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Hamilton

444 Md. 163 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 27, 2015

This violates clearly MLRPC 1.4 as Respondent failed to communicate promptly important case information. … When no exceptions are filed, and the findings are not erroneous clearly, we are inclined to accept the hearing judge’s findings of fact.

Nolan v. State

213 Md. 298 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 9, 1957

In August, 1952, its offices were moved to Silver Spring where it qualified under the Maryland law in order to do a small loan business. Although Mr. Abrams did not work in the office he visited there frequently. … She had been promised immunity by the State if she would testify against Nolan. She said that from October 20, 1952, through October 31, 1952, the dates charged in the indictment, and also at other times,.

Katz v. Simcha Company, Inc.

251 Md. 227 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 23, 1968

“When an action has been tried by the lower court without a jury, this Court will review the case upon both the law and the evidence, but the judgment of the lower court will not be set aside on the evidence unless clearly … The significance of Rule 886 a cannot be minimized in this case because the several legal theories upon which the appellants relied to establish their defense became inapplicable be *233 cause of their failure to prove the

Marshall v. State

428 Md. 363 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 24, 2012

It thus establishes yet another, more restrictive “bright line.” … A preliminary examination of a prospective juror by a judge or lawyer to decide whether the prospect is qualified and suitable to serve on a jury. 2.

Rosales v. State

463 Md. 552 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 17, 2019

Therefore, a time limit in a court rule only qualifies as jurisdictional if Congress sets forth the limitation in statute. Id. … As to credibility: To fall into the category of “other crimes relevant to credibility,” the crime itself, by its elements, must clearly identify the prior conduct of the witness that tends to show that

Makowski v. Mayor and City of Baltimore

439 Md. 169 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 24, 2014

on the City to establish that immediate need.” … Issues with regard to compensation, therefore, are not before us. 26 not acquired title” and the evidence adduced at trial clearly supports Judge Carrion’s finding. Mr.

Moore v. RealPage Utility Management

476 Md. 501 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 30, 2021

The Revisor’s Note to PU § 7-301 clearly states that the “section is new language derived without substantive change from former Art[icle] 78, § 51(b)[.]” … Reviewing these definitional provisions, it is evident the PSC interpreted a narrow definition as to what qualifies as an energy allocation system and energy allocation equipment.

Fangman v. Genuine Title, LLC

447 Md. 681 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 20, 2016

We concluded that the child, who was three years old at the time of the accident, “was clearly a member of this protected class.” Id. at 126, 90 A.3d at 479. … Thus, COMAR clearly created a duty that was specifically intended to protect young children. See id. at 125, 90 A.3d at 479.

Jacron Sales Co. v. Sindorf

276 Md. 580 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 8, 1976

Section 601 thus embodied the common law rule that one was held to have abused a qualified privilege if he did not believe the statement to be true or if he did not have reasonable grounds to believe in its truth. … Suffice it to say that any standard less than negligence in media-defendant cases not presenting matters of public or general interest would clearly run afoul of Gertz as a matter of federal constitutional law. 9 .

Neusbaum v. State

156 Md. 149 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 7, 1928

That they are not essential elements of the crime of manslaughter or murder in such a case as this is established by what seems to be the decided weight of authority, and for purposes of illustration we will refer to some … And she wound down the window on the right side of my care and said *164 U-.1-6-4 — 1-1-6-4 and I think a 9.’ ” That testimony was clearly hearsay and should not have been admitted.

Palmer Ford, Inc. v. Wood

298 Md. 484 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 8, 1984

Standard Maryland works state that the majority rule is “clearly settled” as the law of Maryland. … They establish probable cause.

Carter v. State

374 Md. 693 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 14, 2003

THE COURT: Well, clearly, the count that the State is bringing is a crime, there’s no question about that. … Prior to his arrest on those charges, Old Chief had been convicted of “assault causing serious bodily injury,” a crime that qualified as a felony.

State v. Matthews

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 21, 2022

[The evidence] does have … certainly a qualifier as [defense counsel] correctly points out. … The court acknowledged the “qualifier” that was part of Meline’s testimony, but decided that any flaws in Meline’s conclusions attributable to this qualifier were properly the subject of cross-examination or competing

Smith v. Higinbothom

187 Md. 115 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 3, 1946

Consequently it has been customary for the bar association in many cities of the country to urge the election of qualified judicial candidates in the press and by radio. … At common law the tendency of the courts was to apply a strict rule of evidence in cases of corruption, and alleged fraud, bribery, coercion or intimidation was required to be established clearly.

James v. State

193 Md. 31 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 27, 1949

approve of the method by which the confession of the appellant was obtained, a confession made under such circumstances [which did not include threats or promises or prevent a finding that the confession was voluntary] was clearly … If criminals were required to pass a character and fitness test to qualify to confess guilt, there would be few confessions admitted in evidence or pleas of guilty accepted.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Dyer

453 Md. 585 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 23, 2017

Dyer and myself, who tried to protect the clearly established First Amendment rights of our clients and secure for these individuals their Charter established right to vote on zoning matters. . . . . … This Court determines whether clear and convincing evidence establishes that a lawyer violated an MLRPC. See Md.

Galloway v. State

365 Md. 599 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 19, 2001

Clearly the statute was not intended to cover such actions. See supra pp. 612-613 (discussing the legislative purpose of § 123). Cf. … The statute clearly provides that the focus is on the caller; it is the malicious intent with which the transmission is made that establishes the criminality of the conduct.

Barnum v. Barnum

26 Md. 119 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 21, 1866

After a careful examination of these papers, as spread *164 out in the record, we can present the following as an analysis of them, by which their provisions will be the more clearly understood, and the intention of the testator … But, we think, this clause will not admit of this interpretation^ The participle left must have reference to and qualify the word with which it stands connected in the sentence, express or implied..