Case law

Carozza v. Peacock Land Corp.

231 Md. 112 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 19, 1963

It is well established that if the question be raised in time, the court will see that no undue advantage is taken of a purchaser at a judicial sale, and he will not be compelled to consummate the sale if it would be inequitable … Without prolonging this opinion further, we think the appellants have clearly shown the materiality of the misrepresentations of the trustee, and that they, in fact, did rely thereon.

Argyrou v. State

349 Md. 587 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 18, 1998

Rather, it clearly seems to be that the court distrusted the circumstances surrounding the confession; it found the timing of it untrustworthy and suspicious. … In any event, the court believed quite clearly that the petitioner and Benner were both involved in the two incidents.

Lynch v. Lynch

342 Md. 509 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 10, 1996

Proof of inability to comply, however, does not guarantee immunity from imprisonment. … That fact is well established by Maryland law, see, e.g., Soldano v.

Armco Steel Corp. v. State Department of Assessments & Taxation

236 Md. 168 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 28, 1964

The record clearly established and the trial judge found that the profits normally realized by Asarco for each ton of ore refined for others was approximately $1.50. … The history of Section 5 clearly supports the above conclusion. When Section 5 was adopted in the 1949 revision of the City’s Charter, it replaced former Section 4 thereof.

Magruder v. State Roads Commission

125 Md. 525 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 7, 1915

Chapter 141 of the Acts of 190S, which created the State Roads Commission, provided for “the establishment of a •system of public roads and highways, in Maryland.” … Presumably, at least, and we may acknowledge it as a fact, those engaged in that character of work are better qualified to determine the localities of roads and the material out of which they are to be made, than courts are

BOARD OF CTY. COMMISSIONERS OF PRICE GEORGE v. Oak Hill Farms

232 Md. 274 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 12, 1963

The Attorney General of the United States named a committee of highly qualified men, fully familiar with the field, to recommend a remedy. … This is clearly the significance of the requirement * * * that courts consider the whole record.”

Neavitt v. Lightner

155 Md. 365 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 24, 1928

The proof on this record having failed to establish that Mrs. … The rule is clearly stated in Devlin on Beal Estate (3rd Ed.), áec. 1044.

Furley v. Warren-Ehret Co.

195 Md. 339 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 11, 1950

We are told that it is an established practice and custom for the Commission to defer sending up the record, upon request. … Moreover, the statute clearly contemplates prompt disposition of claims on appeal. The proceedings on appeal “shall be informal and summary.”

Mealey v. Mayor of Hagerstown

92 Md. 741 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 21, 1901

to be established. … This Act provided for its submission to the qualified voters of Hagerstown before it was to take effect.

Maryland Racing Commission v. Castrenze

335 Md. 284 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 28, 1994

Initially at the hearing, the testimony of the Commission’s chief investigator established that Castrenze had been under a Delaware suspension when he raced ELLOREE in Maryland on July 24, 1990. … The uncontradicted evidence at the hearing established that trainer Pizzurro had been under a suspension by another jurisdiction when he raced the winning horse in Maryland on May 25,1991.

Gonzalez v. State

487 Md. 136 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 29, 2024

(citation omitted). 15 Form I-918, Supplement A (Petition for Qualifying Family Member of U-1 Recipient) is a form that a petitioner fills out with information about any qualifying family member included … That is clearly not correct—if a defendant has multiple reasons to lie, it cannot be the case that a denial of the right to impeach is reversible only if the defendant was denied the right to cross-examine about each reason

Webster v. Cambridge Female Seminary

78 Md. 193 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 16, 1893

At the same time, the Legislature, it is equally clear, has the right.to amend or repeal the franchises, privileges or immunities granted to the corporation. … different opinion, as the Legislature, in conceding that right, made the concessions subject to the reserved power to alter or repeal as ordained in the Constitution of the State and the several statutes mentioned, which clearly

Stanley v. State

313 Md. 50 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 1, 1988

And a “single invidiously discriminatory governmental act” was not “immunized by the absence of such discrimination in the making of other comparable decisions.” Id. … Nor can we say that Judge Buchanan’s implicit finding was clearly erroneous. The first two prongs of the Batson analysis are satisfied.

Mayor City Coun., Cumberland v. Turney

177 Md. 297 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 29, 1939

Immunity from liability is sometimes placed on the ground that municipalities are in the exercise of legislative power in the adoption of plans for local improvements, and sometimes on the ground that the exercise of the … a specific act of negligence, to establish the inherent danger in a particular condition or object, or to establish any collateral issue.” 22 C.

E.N. v. T.R.

474 Md. 346 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 12, 2021

-K. four-factor test, but disagreed “that a person who qualifies as a de facto parent is not required, per se, to establish exceptional circumstances.” Conover, 450 Md. … The Court turned to the four factors for establishment of de facto parenthood and concluded that York had clearly set forth a prima facie case for the second, third, and fourth factors. See id.

Rochkind v. Stevenson

471 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 28, 2020

This Court has articulated two circumstances where a departure from the doctrine of stare decisis is permissible: “(1) when the prior decision is clearly wrong and contrary to established principles[;] or (2) when the … Clearly, neither of the circumstances that would warrant a departure from the doctrine of stare decisis—a prior decision is clearly wrong and contrary to established principles or existing precedent has been superseded

Callaway v. Forest Park Highlands Co.

113 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 31, 1910

The deed purports to convey a lot of ground and a right of way, clearly indicating that, in the mind of the grantors, they did not mean the same thing. … We are not to be understood as in any respect qualifying the doctrine announced in Nicolai’s Case.

Grimes v. Kennedy Krieger Institute, Inc.

366 Md. 29 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 16, 2001

There clearly was more than a minimal risk involved. … The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons.

Prince George's Cty. v. Concerned Citizens

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 22, 2023

Concerned Citizens has not established that CB-17 discriminates arbitrarily, either by providing examples of similarly situated properties that CB-17 treats differently or by establishing that its qualifying criteria are … Summary of Legislative History To summarize, the legislative record and various drafts of the Bill clearly establish the following.

Putzel v. Drovers & Mechanics' National Bank

78 Md. 349 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 12, 1894

To the extent of such use his title is clearly established. We have said that this use was not an ouster of the co-terminous owner from the possession of the soil. … But the. right to take down the wall is not absolute and unconditional; it is qualified in the manner which we have explained in a previous part of this opinion.