Case law

Naylor v. Naylor

217 Md. 615 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 1, 1958

. * * * That the basis of an effective custody decree is domicile seems fairly well established by authorities. Thus, it has been held that the decree should not be made when the domicile is elsewhere. … For the reasons assigned we think the chancellor was clearly wrong when he found as a fact that the wife had a bona fide domicile in Nevada.

Carver v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 20, 2022

In Hunt, this Court described what qualifies as “newly discovered evidence” within the context of Maryland Rule 4-331(c), which is equally applicable to actual innocence proceedings under Crim. … In my view, this was clearly erroneous. The circuit court did not explain how, under any realistic assessment of what actually transpired at trial, Mr.

Carver v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 20, 2022

In Hunt, this Court described what qualifies as “newly discovered evidence” within the context of Maryland Rule 4-331(c), which is equally applicable to actual innocence proceedings under Crim. … In my view, this was clearly erroneous. The circuit court did not explain how, under any realistic assessment of what actually transpired at trial, Mr.

In Re Faith H.

409 Md. 625 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 22, 2009

Here, the docket entries clearly reflect that the challenged reports were admitted into evidence, not merely proffered. As a result, we do not need to address Mr. B.' … —After a petition is filed under this subtitle, the court may order the local department or another qualified agency to make or arrange for a study concerning the child, the child’s family, *645 the child's environment, and

State v. Earp

319 Md. 156 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 10, 1990

These qualifying malevolent states of mind are: 1) the intent to kill, 2) the intent to do grievous bodily harm, 3) the intent to do an act under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life ( … [S]ince intent is subjective and, without the cooperation of the accused, cannot be directly and objectively proven, its presence must be shown by established facts which permit a proper inference of its existence.

State v. Brown

342 Md. 404 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 17, 1996

Although the intermediate appellate court found that the defendant did not “clearly and unequivocally” indicate a desire to represent himself, the court also stated that: Faretta v. … But the right, as indicated, is only a qualified one, the opportunity guaranteed is only a “fair” one. Id. at 612-13 (emphasis added). See also United States v.

In Re Bauernschmidt's Estate

97 Md. 35 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 1, 1903

the power, though absolute, maybe qualified by restraining words connected with and explaining them, so as to confer only such absolute disposal as a tenant for life may make. … That there may be no mistake about this statement allusion will be made quite briefly to some of the evidence by which it is established.

Hamilton v. Kirson Alston v. 2700 Virginia

439 Md. 501 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 20, 2014

In making that determination, the court shall determine (1) whether the witness is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, (2) the appropriateness of the … As earlier pointed out, certain provisions of the Housing Code were clearly enacted to prevent lead poisoning in children.

Haas v. Lockheed Martin Corp.

396 Md. 469 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 9, 2007

Respondent requests that we view the letter as establishing a fact that is "not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is ... capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably … Supreme Court, clearly is binding on federal courts. Thus, cataloguing federal circuits that follow the rule, applying it to different statutory schemes, is of no moment here. See, e.g., Stephenson v. Am.

Stromberg Metal Works, Inc. v. University of Maryland

382 Md. 151 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 27, 2004

The NLRB Court explained that, although “[t]he quality of a particular agency decision will clearly be affected by the communications received ... prior to the time the decision is made ... it is difficult to see how the … Thus, to shield a record under § 552(b)(5), the agency ordinarily must establish that the record is both pre-decisional and deliberative. See Hopkins v. U.S.

Eastland Food v. Mekhaya

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 5, 2023

These allegations suffice to state a viable cause of action for minority stockholder oppression under the standard articulated in Edenbaum and adopted in Bontempo.16 15 We qualify “profits” with “distributable … The plain text and statutory history of the 2016 amendments to Section 2-405.1 clearly reflect that the business judgment rule applies to direct stockholder claims.

Prince George's Cty. v. Mayor and City of Laurel

262 Md. 171 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 14, 1971

In fact, section 9(c), as finally re-enacted in 1957, specifically mentions the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission and indicates that a qualified municipality (i.e., one “authorized to have and having … However, a reading of the statute shows clearly that it was a restriction on zoning by municipalities within the Regional District, and that Laurel was specifically excluded from the Regional District.

Attorney Grievance v. Proctor

479 Md. 650 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 26, 2022

We may treat any facts not challenged by exceptions as established. Rule 19-740(b)(2)(A). … party shall specify so much of it as is true and deny or qualify the remainder.

Eastland Food v. Mekhaya

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 31, 2023

These allegations suffice to state a viable cause of action for minority stockholder oppression under the standard articulated in Edenbaum and adopted in Bontempo.16 15 We qualify “profits” with “distributable … The plain text and statutory history of the 2016 amendments to Section 2-405.1 clearly reflect that the business judgment rule applies to direct stockholder claims.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Garrett

427 Md. 209 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 25, 2012

We accept the hearing judge’s findings of fact as prima facie correct unless shown to be clearly erroneous; we review de novo the hearing judge’s conclusions of law. Att’y Griev. Comm’n v. … We therefore treat the hearing judge’s factual findings “as established for the purpose of determining appropriate sanctions.” Md. Rule 16-759(b)(2)(A).

Fowlkes v. Choudhry

472 Md. 688 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 13, 2021

Owens, qualified under the statute to seek pecuniary and solatium damages. … He had purchased a part of the furniture in his parents’ home, and a small business had been established with money earned by him. Id.

Frankel v. Deane

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 25, 2022

Kim’s notes, he qualified that statement by saying that it depended on what the notes said. When pressed, Dr. … Clearly, in a medical malpractice case, the finding of an alleged Rochkind, 471 Md. at 67 n.6, 236 A.3d at 669 n.6 (Watts, J., dissenting).

Serio v. Baltimore County

384 Md. 373 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 14, 2004

In order to qualify for a compensation award, (1) the governmental action must constitute a taking, and (2) the taking must be for a public use. See Brown v. … person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State ... subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

Telnikoff v. Matusevitch

347 Md. 561 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 10, 1997

Broome, [1972] AC 1027, [1972] 1 All ER 801, [1972] 2 WLR 645 (English House of Lords assessing punitive damages against defendant for failure to prove defamatory statement true). 31 In England, a qualified privilege can … The stark contrast between English and Maryland law is clearly illustrated by the underlying litigation between Telnikoff and Matusevitch.

Attorney Grievance v. Moawad

475 Md. 424 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 11, 2021

Togbetse clearly testified that he had multiple meetings with Mr. Moawad, and that he signed multiple engagement letters to secure Mr. Moawad’s legal services. Mr. … Moawad points to Petitioner’s Exhibit 4, which he asserts clearly states that Mr.