Case law

Simms v. State

49 Md. App. 515 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 2, 1981

Only where the pretrial publicity in and of itself is so passive and widespread that it is clearly prejudicial, or where the publicity is so inherently prejudicial that it "saturated the community” is the remedial step of … (b) Immunity of law enforcement officer from civil liability. — Any law enforcement officer responding to such a request shall be immune from civil liability in complying with the request as long as the officer acts in good

Suburban Hospital, Inc. v. Kirson

128 Md. App. 533 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 27, 1999

As the case law clearly indicates, the presumption rests in Smith’s favor that she did, in fact, perform her duties adequately. … Kirson early in the trial and would not qualify for § 3-2A-08(a)’s limited admissibility only after a verdict has been rendered.

Furst v. Isom

85 Md. App. 407 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 17, 1991

He makes the point that, because the court in Pleet merely interpreted the statutory provision at issue and did not establish any new principle of law, neither overruling past precedents nor involving an issue of first impression … , not clearly foreshadowed, see Chevron Oil Company v.

Mta Lodge No. 34 v. Mta

195 Md. App. 124 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 30, 2010

First, we must clearly stake out the doctrinal terrain on which the parties battle. … That issue is not before us. [26] "[T]he General Assembly has the power to establish the terms under which it will permit a waiver of immunity...." Rios v.

Pulliam v. Motor Vehicle Administration

181 Md. App. 144 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 4, 2008

At that time, Arizona statutory law required the MVD to establish a Medical Advisory Board, but it had not done so. As a result, there were no medical standards established to address Bilodeau’s disorder. … The court rejected the state’s argument, explaining that the statute only limited governmental tort immunity to decisions involving the exercise of policy judgment, and did not immunize decisions that implemented or applied

Khawaja v. Mayor of Rockville

89 Md. App. 314 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 25, 1992

That subsection provides, “[a] local government may not assert governmental or sovereign immunity to avoid the duty to defend or indemnify an employee established in this subsection.” (Emphasis added). … A legislative waiver of immunity by a municipality is ineffective unless its legislature has clearly stated an intention to waive immunity and either there are funds available for satisfying the judgment or the defendant

Gordon v. Posner

142 Md. App. 399 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 31, 2002

The *430 Court then proceeded to consider whether, as a matter of law, Eagan’s conduct barred his immunity defense. … It explained that Eagan’s guilty plea could not be used to establish the intentional killing required to abrogate parent-child immunity in the wrongful death case, because Eagan had disputed the nature of the killing in his

Nathanson v. Tortoise Capital Advisors

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 28, 2025

The district court dismissed all claims based on the State’s immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. Id. at 537. … Directors are immune from liability for acts taken in accordance with this standard. Corps. & Ass’ns § 2-405.1(e).

McCarthy v. Bd. of Comm'rs, Frederick Cnty.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 27, 2025

The summary judgment evidence clearly established that the John Hanson House was reconstructed to be incorporated into the Complex, sharing the same footprint and address. … She asserts that the performance of maintenance obligations arising from the lease, which was intended to serve the tenant (the OPD), does not qualify as a governmental function.

Linz v. Montgomery Cnty.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 1, 2022

The defendant moved to dismiss based on qualified immunity under the Maryland Tort Claims Act (MTCA), Md. Code (1984, 2021 Repl. Vol.) §§ 12-101 through 12-110 of the State Government Article (SG). … The circuit court dismissed the claim against the employee based on qualified immunity, and then dismissed the claim against the State based on limitations.

Ramsey v. Prince George's County

18 Md. App. 385 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 11, 1973

Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 151 Md. 11 , 133 A. 888 (1926), and that when they are within the scope of their law enforcement function they are clearly acting in a discretionary capacity.” … Application of established principles of statutory construction force the conclusion that the new charter was not intended to become legally operative prior to the date it was to take effect and thus requires our rejection

Franklin v. Gupta

81 Md. App. 345 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 3, 1990

Terry Walman, who was associated with Johns Hopkins Hospital and was qualified as an expert in anesthesiology. Dr. … Hosp., 191 Md. 617 , 62 A.2d 574 (1948); Annotation, Immunity of Nongovernmental Charity From Liability for Damages in Tort, 25 A.L.R.2d 29 (1952), superseded, Tort Immunity of Nongovernmental Charities—Modern Status, 25

Montz v. Mendaloff

40 Md. App. 220 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 18, 1978

such immunity’ in Latz at 728-734 . … Clearly the stepfather’s liability, as he was not operating or present in the ear at the time of the accident, could only be dependent on the mother’s own liability. As she was not liable, neither was the stepfather.

Supervisor of Assessments of Baltimore City v. Har Sinai West Corp.

95 Md. App. 631 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 6, 1993

For example, HUD establishes eligibility requirements for tenants and controls rent. … It is able to meet the ownership requirements of § 7-202 so it clearly meets the requirements of § 7-502(a)(2)(i).

Daughton v. Maryland Automobile Insurance Fund

198 Md. App. 524 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 28, 2011

Motor Vehicle Administration, 302 Md. 634 , 490 A.2d 694 (1985), established that MAIF is a State agency entitled to sovereign immunity when it acts as the successor to the UCJF, the court found that MAIF also serves a “Statewide … Sovereign Immunity In Katz v.

Parker v. State

92 Md. App. 540 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 13, 1992

Still, the statutes, and to some extent the Rules, have tended to mix the terminology, using some language more appropriate to an appellate proceeding and some that is more consistent with the established notion of an original … Fisher as underpinning the doctrine of judicial immunity.

In Re Matthew S.

199 Md. App. 436 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 1, 2011

The only difference is that now ... the State is giving him, very clearly, use and transactional immunity for this, and you can cross-examine him about that. So it’s up to you what you’d like to do. … Given the court’s statements, the evidence clearly was admitted, and considered, as nonhearsay.

Sanford v. Sanford

15 Md. App. 390 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 19, 1972

Moore, 197 Md. 61 , clearly sets up an exception to the general rule that a child cannot sue his father; 3. There is a modern trend abolishing such immunity.” … In regard to reason (3), we discussed “the modern trend establishing such immunity” in Latz at 728-734 .

Montgomery County v. Voorhees

86 Md. App. 294 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 4, 1991

It is well established in this State that the weight of the evidence is a matter for the jury to determine. Rollins Outdoor Advertising, Inc. v. … The verdicts are clearly consistent and supported by the weight of the evidence and, therefore, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the County’s motion for a new trial. C.

CC of Baltimore Co. v. Patient First Corp.

219 Md. App. 69 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 29, 2014

McCoy was not identified, or qualified, as an expert, but the court allowed him to “express an opinion as to whether the bill [was] reasonable.” It asserts that Mr. … Cadle Co. of Ohio, Inc., 848 P.2d 1079, 1083-84 (1993) (General Counsel qualified to testify with respect to the reasonableness of attorneys’ fees).