Case law

Anderson v. United States

427 Md. 99 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 22, 2012

The language of the statute of repose, § 5-108, indicated clearly that the Legislature intended to tie the accrual of the cause of action to the date of completion of a particular property improvement because traditional … The Briefing Paper provided to the General Assembly describing the impact of this Court’s decision in Hill indicated clearly that the statute, which triggered the limitations period based on injury, could allow potentially

Myerberg v. Hall

162 Md. 578 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 20, 1932

Tabeling el ail. against said building association, and have duly qualified; that one H. … At any rate, it is manifestly an incomplete paper, and clearly not in shape for delivery. It is not likely that the building association would have taken it in that shape. It would at least have had it acknowledged.

Connors v. Government Employees Insurance

442 Md. 466 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 17, 2015

The Connors contend that the two commas “convert the statement into the qualifying clause.” … We recognized that qualifying clauses are ordinarily “confined to the immediately preceding words or phrase—particularly in the absence of a comma before the qualifying clause.” Id. (quotations omitted).

Newkirk v. State

134 Md. 310 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 8, 1919

anything, established only the absence of testimony to convict. … Was- Doctor Branham qualified to make the experiments- ? In Chaleaugay *318 Ore & Iron Company v. Blake, 144 U.

Culp v. Commissioners of Chestertown

154 Md. 620 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 4, 1928

The words ‘assessable property of the town’ clearly mean all property in the town liable to be assessed for the purpose of taxation, and any one reading the title or hearing it read would naturally suppose that the cost of … It is thus clearly apparent that the things authorized to be done by section 2 of the act, and the agency by which they are directed to be done, are entirely different from the things indicated in the title.

Wallace v. State

452 Md. 558 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 21, 2017

First, the “Court 24 may strike down a decision that is, ‘clearly wrong and contrary to established principles.’” Id. at 64 (quoting State v. … Wallace believes Fuster to be “clearly wrong and contrary to established principles.”

Harwood v. Marshall

9 Md. 83 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 15, 1856

.” — “It ought to be used upon all occasions where the law has established no specific remedy, and where, in justice and good government, there ought to be one.” … In this view of the point the case is clearly within the tenth section of the act of 1826, ch. 200, as expounded in Kennerly vs.

Witte v. Azarian

369 Md. 518 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 18, 2002

The parties agree that the actual giving of testimony is to be *532 included; they clearly disagree whether the conducting of medical evaluations, without treatment, upon referral from an attorney or insurance carrier is … He may. or may not qualify as a “professional witness” in the more generic conception of that term, but the evidence did not suffice to establish that he devoted more than 20% of his professional activity to activities that

York v. Maryland Trust Co.

150 Md. 354 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 7, 1926

After qualifying as executor, the Maryland Trust Company sent Mr. … If the intention of the testator can be gathered from the will, his wishes should be gratified in these matters as well as others, unless in conflict with some well established rules of law.”

Ruby v. Bowlus

217 Md. 115 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 22, 1958

Other decisions establish the right of a bankrupt to appeal if the trustee will not or does not. Carroll v. Hannon (Pa.), 136 A. 212, 213 ; Kagey v. Fox West Coast Theatres Corp. (Kan.), 31 P. 2d 67 . … Under this testimony, clearly the price received for the property at the sale was not so inadequate or insignificant that it could shock the conscience of the court.

Dorf v. Skolnik

280 Md. 101 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 11, 1977

Once a domicile, is determined or established a person retains his domicile at such place unless the evidence affirmatively shows an abandonment of that domicile. … Given that background, we find the judgment of the chancellor not to have been clearly erroneous when he concluded that she had abandoned her domicile at the home of her parents and had established a home of her own in Baltimore

Simon v. Robinson

221 Md. 200 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 5, 2001

Even though the defendant did not, either in his brief or in his oral argument, clearly indicate that he was appealing the adverse ruling on the demurrer, yet it may be concluded that it was this point to which he was directing … Thus, the question of Simon’s reasonable belief in the existence of a qualified privilege was a question of fact for the jury to decide. That was done.

Maryland Agricultural College v. Keating

58 Md. 580 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 12, 1882

session to withdraw any part or all of said endowment of six thousand dollars hereinbefore appropriated, or to repeal, vacate and make void, all and every part of the incorporation aforesaid, and all rights, privileges and- immunities … Bringing the Acts of Assembly involved in this controversy to the test established by these decisions, we have no difficulty in saying, that the clauses in the Acts making appropriations to the Agricultural College for the

Riverdale Park v. Askhar

474 Md. 581 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 15, 2021

The Town contends that because Ashkar, in its estimation, was not as qualified as AlleyCat, he cannot establish a prima facie case for discrimination. … Ashkar was not required, as the Town contends, to show that Greg’s was more qualified than AlleyCat to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.

Jung Chul Park v. Cangen Corp.

416 Md. 505 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 27, 2010

The Court held that the partnership qualified as a collective entity, so the partner, as a custodian of the records of that entity, could not invoke the privilege. … immunize the act of production; such immunity would preserve the appellant's Fifth Amendment rights with respect to his conduct in producing the documents, Kastigar v.

Rockville Fuel & Feed Co. v. Board of Appeals

257 Md. 183 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 4, 1970

Clearly the applicant has the burden of adducing testimony which will show that his use meets the prescribed standards and requirements. Board of County Comm’rs v. Luria, 249 Md. 1, 3 . … Federline, who owns the plumbing supply company, a non-conforming use built after a heavy industrial use already was established on the site of the proposed concrete plant.

Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Corp. v. Beebe-Lee

431 Md. 474 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 25, 2013

Additionally, PCIGC notes that the umbrella policy excluded recreational vehicles and questions whether the go-cart qualified for coverage. . … Section 9-310(b) establishes a priority of recovery if an insured could recover from more than one guaranty association, but that is not an issue in this case.

State v. Madison

240 Md. 265 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 5, 1965

Almost a century ago, this Court held that, when the method of selection of a grand jury is clearly invalid, the challenge of a defendant to his indictment by that body must be sustained, without any showing of prejudice. … The state statute required that the names be, selected from the names of all qualified voters, which the court construed to mean there could be no exclusion because of sex.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Wright

306 Md. 93 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 2, 1986

In response to the Petitioner’s contention that the Complainants did not need the services of an attorney, William Mitchell, Jr., Esquire, after being qualified as an expert, testified as follows: “... … The theory underlying the use of time records and hourly rates for the billing of legal services is that the resultant bill will be a reasonable one within the range established by the governing factors set forth in DR 2-

Maryland Committee for Fair Representation v. Tawes, Governor & Board of State Canvassers

228 Md. 412 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 25, 1962

Clearly, Section 1343 (3) and (4) has no application at all, since there is no question pertaining to the jurisdiction of a Federal District Court. Section 1983 of Title 42, U. S. … Had the actual facts been established, by stipulation or otherwise, much time and expense possibly would have been saved. .