Case law

Vito v. Grueff

453 Md. 88 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 22, 2017

Here, the settlor established an irrevocable trust for the benefit of his four adult children. … In addition to contending that Amendment V contravened Vito’s clearly stated intention, in her brief and at oral argument, Candace contended that Amendment V violated well-established Maryland law regarding the testamentary

Murphy v. Baltimore Gas & Electric Co.

290 Md. 186 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 14, 1981

Ct. 2774 (1973), as follows: "We believe that common law classifications are now equally alien to modern tort law, primarily because they establish immunities from liability which no longer comport with accepted values and … I do, however, agree with the majority that the trial court did not err in granting Baltimore County’s motion raising a preliminary objection on the ground of immunity.

Jackson v. Walsh

75 Md. 304 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 4, 1892

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 … It has donated to the College large sums of' *313 money received by tbe State from tbe general government under Acts of Congress, -which made appropriations to the several States for the establishment of agricultural experiment

Oak Crest Village, Inc. v. Murphy

379 Md. 229 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 9, 2004

On its face, § 8.11 does not affirmatively impose a requirement that Sherwood pay at the private pay rate for any established period of time, even if he were to qualify for Medicaid benefits. … Renaissance Gardens is clearly a nursing home under that definition. Sections 19-342 through 19-352 provide certain individual rights for patients in hospitals and related institutions.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Wingerter

400 Md. 214 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 30, 2007

The hearing court concluded that the charge of misprision of a felony, while not a crime in Maryland “qualifies as a serious crime in accord with Maryland [Rule] 16.701(k)(3).” … That, he submits, contradicts Paragraph 5 and, in fact, renders it clearly erroneous.

Cathey v. DEPT. OF HEALTH

422 Md. 597 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 25, 2011

The definition of “resident” thus appears in COMAR 10.22.12.03.B(27), and in this case, the Department interpreted its own regulations to provide that “resident” is akin to the well-established concept of a “domicile.” … The post-judgment order clearly delineates when Petitioner is to be where, which in effect eliminates the danger of improper duplicate benefits.

Jenkins v. State

238 Md. 451 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 4, 1966

The jury found him guilty of first degree murder, without qualifying its verdict, and guilty of robbery. The sentences were death for murder and twenty years for robbery. … Appellant does not claim that the police officers were not truthful or accurate when they testified that no force, duress or threats were used to obtain the confession or when they said that no specific promises of immunity

Jessup v. Mayor of Baltimore

121 Md. 562 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 29, 1913

When the formalities which are required by law and established practice for the very purpose of preserving the identity of an Act of the General Assembly appear of record, as in this case, to have been duly observed, the … Hot only must it be sealed with the great seal, and signed by the Governor, but it must be so signed in the presence of those officers of the two Houses who are best qualified to know whether the contents of the paper being

Webster v. Larmore

268 Md. 153 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 9, 1973

The rule of our cases is that urged on us by the caveatee: that while testimony tending to establish competency may relate to periods preceding or succeeding the execution of the will, testimony tending to establish incompetency … (who presumably has not qualified) should similarly be at the expense of the estate.

Tapestry, Inc. v. Factory Mut. Insurance

482 Md. 223 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 15, 2022

,” see Leon Gordis, Epidemiology 26 (5th ed. 2014) (defining “herd immunity” as “the resistance of a group of people to an attack by a disease to which a large proportion of the members of the group are immune”), with no … Contamination qualifies as physical loss or damage only if it renders the subject property unusable or uninhabitable.”); Bel Air Auto, 534 F.

Bridges v. Nicely

304 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 10, 1985

As we said in Dawson, supra, 257 Md. at 313 , 262 A.2d 729 , the adoption must be “clearly warranted.” Or, as we stated in Walker v. … Gardner, 221 Md. 280, 284 , 157 A.2d 273 (1960), adoption “shall not be granted over parental objection unless that course clearly is justified.” To the same effect, see Lippy v.

Hoffman Chev. v. Wash. Co. Nat'l Sav.

297 Md. 691 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 23, 1983

Although the check did not qualify as an attachable credit, we must, nevertheless, determine if the check was otherwise attachable. … The Trust shall not in any manner be liable for, or subject to, the debts, contracts, liabilities, engagements, or torts of any person entitled to benefits hereunder. *706 This language clearly creates a spendthrift trust

Ricketts v. Ricketts

393 Md. 479 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 28, 2006

required: (1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, (2) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, (3) failure to join a party under Rule 2-211, (4) discharge in bankruptcy, and (5) governmental immunity … Whether the parties cohabited, or not, is clearly a question of fact. 4 . We do not construe the appellant's use of the term, "together,” to be an admission that he and Mrs.

Gray v. Peter Gray Orphans' Home & Mechanical Institute

128 Md. 592 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 4, 1916

If there be a manifest design to establish a trust then a trust will be declared though no apt technical words are employed; and if there be an equally manifest design not to establish a trust, then no trust will be declared … Undoubtedly, by the language used in that paragraph the testator expressed an intention that'a certain defined class of white orphan children should be eligible or qualified to be admitted to said Home and Institute.

Zimmerman v. Thomas

152 Md. 263 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 28, 1927

There could be no adoption establishing the legal relation of parent and child except under and in accordance with a statute. Hillers v. Taylor, 108 Md. 148, 155 . … The relation established was to end when the apprentice became of age. There is not the slightest suggestion of an intention to confer upon him any right of inherit *268 anee.”

Grote v. Rogers

158 Md. 685 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 13, 1930

The power of a state to exclude foreign corporations, although not absolute but qualified, is the ground on which such an implication is supported as to them. Pennsylvania F. Ins. Co. v. Gold Issue Mining Co., 243 U. … The privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution, sec. 2, art. 4, safeguards to the citizens of one state the right To pass through, or to reside in any other state for purposes of trade, agriculture, professional

Melton v. State

379 Md. 471 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 12, 2004

If we were to inteypret the statute to establish separate offenses for each separate status, we would, in effect, be criminalizing the status itself. … While this may *502 appear to be insignificant, it puts the emphasis of the statute clearly on the prohibited act, the possession, and not the prior conviction.

State v. Brown

307 Md. 651 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 10, 1986

any evidence in the record supporting such inference.’ ” With respect to the postponement of the trial on September 13, 1983, the Court of Special Appeals was “not persuaded that [County Administrative] Judge Williams was clearly … The date established for the trial of the matter shall not be postponed except for good cause shown by the moving party and only with the permission of the administrative judge of the court where the matter is pending.

Duvall v. Miller

94 Md. 697 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 7, 1902

Here there is nothing to qualify the words used in the provisions we have cited. … We have cited this case among many others of the same class to illustrate more clearly our meaning in the case at bar.

Parks v. Alpharma, Inc.

421 Md. 59 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 19, 2011

Parks, in attempting to establish one of the bases for a wrongful discharge claim, asserted that Alpharma had breached various duties established by state and federal statutes, the first of which, Ms. … own, which of the FDA’s regulations bound the Red Cross to a specific legal duty and which did not: [If a court] were to announce that [the FDA’s regulations] were all sources of Maryland public policy, an employee could immunize