Case law

Maryland Metals, Inc. v. Metzner

282 Md. 31 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 1, 1978

Appellees’ initial act was the formation of a Delaware corporation named “Conservit, Inc.” on December 11, 1973, which qualified to do business in Maryland on January 14, 1974. … Appellant denies that appellees ever notified it of their intention to establish a competing enterprise and challenges the chancellor’s finding to that effect as clearly erroneous.

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COM'N OF MARYLAND v. Tolar

357 Md. 569 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 10, 2000

Following a hearing, the hearing court, as required, filed Findings of Fact, as follows: “FINDINGS OF FACT “Based upon the testimony and exhibits 1 produced at the hearing, the Court finds the following to be established … Clearly Mrs. Hallowell was, and perhaps still is, confused as to her responsibility for attorney’s fees relating to any additional work related to the retirement plans. Mrs.

Nizer v. Phelps

252 Md. 185 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 21, 1969

He had testified in both the Federal and State courts concerning points of impact and how they are established. … He had been qualified and had testified as an expert witness in both the Federal and State courts in regard to the establishment of points of impact in motor vehicle cases.

A Guy Named Moe, LLC v. Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC

447 Md. 425 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 26, 2016

During the pendency of the suit, The League “qualified to do business.” Id. … thus, the failure to qualify can be the result of a ‘bona fide disagreement’”.

Montgomery County v. Glenmont Hills Associates Privacy World

402 Md. 250 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 30, 2007

Not only is there nothing in any of the relevant Federal statutes that unambiguously imposes that limitation, but, as noted, the HUD regulations, at least since 1995 and most clearly since 1999, establish just the opposite … Glenmont clearly violated MCC § 27-12 by refusing to rent apartments to otherwise qualified tenants solely because they proposed to use Section 8 vouchers, thereby discriminating against them by reason of source of income

Gazunis v. Foster

400 Md. 541 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 1, 2007

Did the lower court err in its finding that the Defendant, Board of Education of Montgomery County was entitled to the immunity provided by § 5-518(b) Cts. & Jud. Proc. … Did the [C]ircuit [C]ourt commit reversible error by permitting hearsay testimony to establish an essential element of the defamation claim? 2.

Perdue, Inc. v. State Department of Assessments & Taxation

264 Md. 228 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 18, 1972

The testimony at the hearing in the Tax Court established that Perdue is a Maryland corporation operating principally in Wicomico County where it is engaged in the business of breeding and raising broiler chickens for sale … Surely if eggs qualify as poultry then they should also qualify as young poultry less than six months old. 3 .

Dunn v. State

226 Md. 463 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 13, 1961

and some of the members [of the staff] who were not qualified” to practice psychiatry. … Morgenstern was thoroughly cross-examined on this matter and his testimony clearly shows that each of those concerned with the record was qualified to enter in the record whatever his contribution may have been.

Keller v. State

122 Md. 677 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 25, 1914

"The defendant further says, that undertaking and embalming are performed frequently by the same establishment, but that the business of undertaking is a separate and distinct business from the business of embalming. … That *Page 688 an undertaker in order to be competent and qualified in the undertaking business, must have the following knowledge and be able to perform the following, being, among other things, the duties of an undertaker

Jones v. Holloway

183 Md. 40 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 23, 1944

we now live,” but it did not appear whether a stable in the rear of the house was so connected with it as to pass under the will, Justice Holmes observed: “The mode of use in the testator’s lifetimes does not necessarily establish … In this case there is nothing in the codicils to qualify the meaning of “bungalow home,” as defined in the will.

Whiting-Turner Contracting Co. v. Coupard

304 Md. 340 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 23, 1985

In the case before us we shall assume that the time following Completion within which a claimant for indemnity based on loss arising out of Injury must sue is a “personal” right; but it is clearly not as important as the … The Skinner court in substance viewed as arbitrary the conferral of immunity on architects and builders four years after Completion without conferring similar immunity on other potential defendants involved in the construction

McWilliams v. Hoban

42 Md. 56 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 11, 1875

The number of loaves delivered to the plaintiff were charged to him, and a record was made of the number and delivery in each driver’s account kept in the book of the establishment. … In this case, the appellee’s third prayer, is further qualified by adding to the words used in Munns vs.

County Commissioners v. Board of Managers of the Maryland Hospital for the Insane

62 Md. 127 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 10, 1884

In reference only to their qualified control of the property, such as seeing to its preservation from trespass, or from falling into decay; providing for the compensation of necessary officials and employes ; furnishing supplies … give its sanction; we see no evidence of such expressed or clearly implied intent in the Act of 1876, ch. 101.

Stannard v. Barnum

51 Md. 440 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 17, 1879

But in neither of those cases was it relied on as establishing any other doctrine than that before stated. … It would be a dangerous doctrine to establish, and one with *452 out precedent, that where the language of the will is plain, and the residuary clause, in terms, disposes of the whole estate, and there are no qualifying words

Mitchell v. State

488 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 14, 2024

However, we “may overrule a case that either was ‘clearly wrong and contrary to established principles’ or ‘has been superseded by significant changes in the law or facts.’” Scott v. … The process of examining qualified jurors is governed by Maryland Rule 4- 312(e)(1): The trial judge may permit the parties to conduct an examination of qualified jurors or may conduct the examination after

Oak Lawn Cemetery v. County Commissioners

174 Md. 280 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 21, 1938

It is a gratuity extended to that class of taxpayers who qualify themselves to receive it, and it may be withdrawn by the State at any time, without violating the obligations of a contract. … The State has profited by the taxpayer’s delay in availing itself of the immunity, and no one has been led to change his position thereby.

Ouellette v. Ouellette

246 Md. 604 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 5, 1967

Aside from vigorously contesting the grant of the divorce and the award of the children to the appellee, the appellant, claiming that the evidence firmly established that the parties had voluntarily lived separate and apart … We think that the chancellor was clearly right in granting the appellee a divorce on the ground of adultery, but that he may have been wrong in awarding custody of the children to the father on the premise that the mother

Simms v. State

445 Md. 163 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 23, 2015

Here, the Circuit Court was faced with a petitioner who had already had the benefit of well-qualified and experienced counsel in pursuing DNA testing of a specific item of evidence – evidence that the State had established … Here, he had received the assistance of very qualified counsel who determined that the evidence in question was no longer available for testing.

Bradford v. Jones

1 Md. 351 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 15, 1851

This service was clearly not rendered, because the tax was never collected. … The principles established in Jones vs. Shore, 1 Wheat., 462 , do not apply to the claim of the clerk in this case.

Blades v. Blades

194 Md. 505 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 10, 1950

Nevertheless, the fact is that the 900 pages of the appendices not only fail to convince us that the trial judge was clearly wrong, but indicates that he was clearly right. … But she had no reason to Consider him qualified to act as guardian of her bed *511 chamber. We cannot avoid drawing the only possible inference from such circumstances.