Case law

Abuc Trading & Sales Corp. v. Jennings

151 Md. 392 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 10, 1926

That distinction is clearly and we think accurately stated in 31 Cyc. 1219. … In connection with that question the appellee, who was qualified to answer the question, was asked to state the difference between brass and copper.

State Security Check Cashing, Inc. v. American General Financial Services

409 Md. 81 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 9, 2009

Thus, the decision of the District Court is not clearly erroneous. *89 State Security pressed on. … The business check is not the welfare or payroll check usually cashed at such an establishment.

Caruso Builder Belle Oak v. Sullivan

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 28, 2025

In this case, Caruso Builder Belle Oak, LLC (“Caruso”) entered into a contract with Ronalda Sullivan on July 17, 2015, for a qualifying piece of real property that was subject to RP § 14-117(a)(3)(i). … If we are satisfied that the statute’s plain language is unambiguous and clearly communicates the General Assembly’s intent, then our inquiry ends, “and we apply the statute as written, without resort to other rules of

Moser v. Heffington

465 Md. 381 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 16, 2019

Heffington pled guilty in the criminal case and that those convictions establish the defense of “truth” as a matter of law. … First, Morganroth involved clearly different proceedings, not the same proceeding. And as we have noted, waiver of the privilege at a deposition waives the privilege at the trial of the same case.

Alavez v. Motor Vehicle Administration

402 Md. 727 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 9, 2008

Nor are we concerned with whether New Jersey's contrary policy is wise or fair; that is an issue for the New Jersey legislature, which established the policy. … Construction of TR § 16-103.1 The rules of statutory construction are well-established. As we pointed out most recently in Sprenger v.

Bn v. Kk

312 Md. 135 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 29, 1988

These allegations suffice, if established, to support the first element of the tort. Even if Dr. … This is so because according to the facts we must take as established for the purposes of this case, Dr.

Attorney Grievance v. Tatung

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 26, 2021

Tatung and the DHS prosecutor, where they were all clearly grappling with the complex issue. … § 1003.102 clearly apply to the proceedings before the federal immigration tribunal.

Grasslands Plantation, Inc. v. Frizz-King Enterprises, LLC

410 Md. 191 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 25, 2009

This type of appeal on the record is clearly distinguishable from a de novo appeal. Id. at 527-28 , 813 A.2d at 321-22 . In Southern Resources, the CSA reviewed a St. … standards to be met in order to qualify for the requested conditional use approvals, and whether the Board will apply those standards to [the petitioners'] applications, are issues that are not before us.”

Watson v. Peoples Security Life Insurance

322 Md. 467 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 12, 1991

As established in Adler v. … The majority today, however, seems to hold that, absent a statute clearly establishing a mandate of public policy, an employer may fire an employee for suing the employer, regardless of the basis of the complaint.

Harris v. State

353 Md. 596 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 20, 1999

Had the Legislature intended to relieve the State of the burden of proving intent to deprive for any period of time, it could have, and I submit would have, refrained from using the qualifying word, “permanently,” in subsection … established that the intended deprivation was only temporary, 2) the situation in which the intended deprivation was probably permanent but where there is a failure to carry the burden of persuasion in that regard, 3) the

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Foltz

411 Md. 359 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 13, 2009

Garvey, Jr., (hereafter “Garvey”), was called by the Petitioner and qualified as an expert in accounting, forensic accounting and fraud examination. … These transactions were clearly personal in nature and not related to any client matters.

Prahinski v. Prahinski

321 Md. 227 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 6, 1990

Because of the personal nature of this asset, it was not considered by the court as an earned or vested property right at the time of the divorce, and did not qualify as property subject to division in a divorce proceeding … This rule clearly prohibits Leo from making Margaret a partner in his law practice. In fact, the practice was set up as “Leo F.X. Prahinski, Attorney-at-Law” and there is no indication that Rule 5.4(d) was not followed.

Hill v. State

418 Md. 62 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 26, 2011

In Hillard , we established a two-pronged test for determining whether a confession is the result of an improper inducement by law enforcement. … We disagree with the State, however, that only statements offering or implying the officer’s assistance in avoiding prosecution qualify as inducements under Hillard and its progeny.

Bellamy v. State

403 Md. 308 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 14, 2008

First, “the district court must be satisfied that the prior argument involves an assertion of fact [clearly] inconsistent with similar assertions in a subsequent trial.” … The assertion that Welch shot Carter is clearly inconsistent with the State’s later assertion that Bellamy shot Carter twice.

Woodlin v. State

484 Md. 253 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 11, 2023

Under CJP § 10-923, the State may introduce evidence of prior sexually assaultive behavior involving different victims to help establish credibility in qualifying sexual assault cases. … See Thompson, 412 Md. at 503–04 (acknowledging and discussing the rule established in Vogel).

Patterson v. State

401 Md. 76 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 24, 2007

Clearly, exceptions (1) and (2) are inapposite here. … No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor

Kramme v. Mewshaw

147 Md. 535 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 20, 1925

He is engaged in real estate development in the neighborhood of the property in question, and wasi qualified to speak in support of his charge that .the price was inadequate, but he did not testify. … not denied, it was established that he had1 had tire property for private safe as a reial estate agent, through the consent of Mrs.

Manikhi v. Mass Transit Administration

360 Md. 333 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 24, 2000

In the instant matter the conduct attributed to Ovid clearly satisfies the first three elements of a hostile environment violation of Title VII. … The court held that these were not “ ‘interlocutory or mediate decisions,’ ” but rather qualified as adverse employment action. Id. at 136-37 (quoting Page, 645 F.2d at 233 ).

Mayor of Ocean City v. Taber

279 Md. 115 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 6, 1977

Jones 1939): “An estate in fee simple determinable, sometimes referred to as a base or a qualified fee, is created by any limitation which, in an otherwise effective conveyance of land, creates an estate in fee simple and … The trial judge “specifically” found that the 1967 deed established “the fact that the United States of America, as of that date, did ‘fail to use the said Life Saving Station’.” This finding was not clearly erroneous.

Koshko v. Haining

398 Md. 404 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 12, 2007

We have said that “one attacking [the] validity [of a law passed in the exercise of polieé power] has the burden of affirmatively and clearly establishing its invalidity; every intendment is in favor of the validity of the … The State’s interest in encouraging the salutary contributions grandparents make to the lives of their grandchildren is clearly a compelling one.