Case law

Dept. of Env. v. Carroll Cnty. Frederick Cnty. v. Dept. of Env.

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 6, 2019

The agency recognized that jurisdictions that later qualified as medium jurisdictions could be brought into the Phase I program through the residual designation authority. … Slip Op. at 38 n.41; rather, this Court’s holding in that case clearly demonstrates that MDE has exceeded its authority.

Mayor & City Council v. Schwing

351 Md. 178 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 16, 1998

Johns-Manville Products Corp., 139 N.J.Super. 66 , 352 A.2d 591 (App.Div.1976), "clearly on point." Waskiewicz, 342 Md. at 722 , 679 A.2d at 1106 (Chasanow, J., dissenting). … The court concluded: The medical evidence presented by both parties clearly established, and the referee found, that Claimant was suffering from a preexisting condition aggravated by the requirements of his job.

Van Horn v. Atlantic Mutual Insurance

334 Md. 669 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 12, 1994

In addition to requiring uninsured motorist coverage, which will protect the third party if he is an insured under a policy of motor vehicle insurance, the legislature has provided a fund for the protection of qualified persons … The term "otherwise terminate" would clearly encompass a retroactive cancellation.

State Roads Commission v. Parker

275 Md. 651 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 29, 1975

A gasoline filling station, a' fruit stand and a dry cleaning establishment were described as being operated at the intersection of Routes 214 and old Route 202. … LANCASTER: I submit the witness is qualified, Your Honor. “THE COURT: I don’t know that there are any further questions. Are there any further questions! “MR. BRICE: No, Your Honor. “THE COURT: All right.”

In Re: M.P.

487 Md. 53 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 23, 2024

To qualify for immediate appealability under the collateral order doctrine, an order must meet all four elements. See id. at 502-03, 24 A.3d at 109. … Nor does the provision establishing June 1, 2022, as an effective date for the JJRA answer the question. See Landgraf v.

101 Geneva LLC v. Wynn

435 Md. 233 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 18, 2013

Because the order states clearly the grounds on which it vacated the foreclosure sale, we find that we do not need more. … Therefore, [The fee] is much different than a trustee advertising the manner and terms of sale which generally include the date, time, place, and manner of sale (public auction, written bids, etc), how to qualify as a bidder

Harris v. Baltimore Sun Co.

330 Md. 595 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 8, 1993

The same authors, in the earlier edition of the same work, suggested that Model Rule 1.6(a) "must be given a somewhat qualified construction." G. Hazard, Jr. & W. … Other rules clearly preclude a lawyer from doing anything that exposes the client to "a risk or potential for harm." Id.

State v. Brookman State v. Carnes

460 Md. 291 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 31, 2018

It was first established in December 2004. … Most alleged errors can be challenged through the established appellate process.

Washington v. State

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 1, 2016

The Circuit Court dismissed the petition without a hearing on December 14, 2015 because it concluded that Washington did not have standing to file a petition under CP § 8-201(b).2 The court reasoned that in order to qualify … Comparing New York’s statute to Alaska’s, the court reasoned that this standard was less stringent than Alaska’s requirement that DNA evidence would “clearly and convincingly” or “conclusively” establish the petitioner’

Hecht v. Resolution Trust Corp.

333 Md. 324 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 11, 1994

Such actions are clearly adverse to their own interests, unlike the situations in the cited cases. … The defendants also point to a well-established exception to the rule that only directors can bring an action on behalf of a corporation.

FRIEDEL, ETC. v. Blechman

250 Md. 270 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 3, 1968

North’s death, the will was admitted to probate and the executors duly qualified. *273 Thereafter, the four children of Louis Eisner (the caveators) who are the appellees here, filed a petition and caveat in the Orphans’ … The testimony established that Mr.

MEDICAL MUTUAL LIABILITY INS. SOC. OF MARYLAND v. Evans

330 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 29, 1993

Beverly was disabled; a fact that, if established, would almost assure a plaintiff verdict; “4. … Evans sought to qualify White as an expert on whether or not an insurer acted in bad faith, but Judge Mitchell would not permit White to express an opinion on the ultimate question.

Wilson v. State

409 Md. 415 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 20, 2009

We accept the court’s factual findings, unless clearly erroneous, but the ultimate question of reasonableness of a search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment or Article 26 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights is a legal … Application of the emergency aid doctrine is firmly established in Maryland. In Davis v.

Maryland Insurance Administration v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.

451 Md. 323 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 23, 2017

Comer filed a claim with GEICO, asserting that he qualified as “insured” because he lived with his father. See id. at 92 , 18 A.3d at 832 . … Comer’s motorcycle was clearly an underin-sured motor vehicle. Comer, 419 Md. at 98 , 18 A.3d at 835 .

Nationstar Mortgage v. Kemp

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 27, 2021

These provisions clearly focus on persons who originate (or are about to originate) a loan. … Other parts of the Usury Law, however, clearly regulate conduct that occurs later in the life of the loan. They also use the term “lender.”

Smith v. State

412 Md. 150 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 30, 2009

This rule also allocates the appropriate fact-finding responsibilities to the trial court, which we have frequently noted is best qualified to evaluate and weigh the evidence in a case. See, e.g., Schade v. … State, 225 Md. 566 , 171 A.2d 464 (1961), when this Court stated that "[a]lmost anyone can make a slip of the tongue, and judges are not immune from such errors." Id. at 570 , 171 A.2d at 466 .

Sanders v. Bd. of Education, Harford Cnty.

477 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 17, 2021

The Court of Special Appeals concluded that the Commission’s January 4, 2019 order denying Sanders’s request for modification was clearly a summary denial of the request and, as such, not subject to judicial review. … Two months later, after concluding that ordinary retirement benefits qualified as an offset as a result of the 1991 recodification of Md.

Frederick Road Ltd. Partnership v. Sturm

360 Md. 76 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 27, 2000

Quite clearly, reasonable minds could conclude that, to require the petitioners in this circumstance, while the respondents continued to represent them, not only to be suspicious of their lawyers, but to ferret out, by seeking … To qualify for that treatment, the necessary form had to be filed within 30 days prior to or after the beginning of the corporation’s fiscal year.

Scheller v. Schindel

153 Md. 547 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 15, 1927

You qualify that by saying ‘if he has had a remission’ ? A. Yes. Q. Then there would be no remission in elation psychosis at any stage without treatment? A. Perhaps. … This testimony so clearly showed that testator was drunk on that occasion that the court interrupted and asiced what was the materiality of it.

Adelakun v. Adelakun

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 1, 2025

CJ § 12-303(3)(xi) provides that an interlocutory appeal is permissible from an order “[d]enying immunity asserted under § 5-525 or § 5-526 of this article[.]” … General Assembly intended in CJ § 12-303(3) to authorize an appeal from an interlocutory order if a circuit court did not order a requested action or denied the requested relief, the General Assembly used words that clearly