Case law

Mayor of Ocean City v. Bunting

168 Md. App. 134 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 4, 2006

“specific” and “technical” in nature that it is clearly an issue for the Council and not the voters to resolve. … Municipal corporations in Maryland, such as Ocean City, are authorized by Article XI-E, §§ 3 and 4 of the Constitution of Maryland to adopt charters, and to amend or repeal provisions thereof, either by a petition of qualified

Fisher v. State

128 Md. App. 79 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 8, 1999

Judge Levitz clearly did not abuse his discretion in this case. … Now, clearly that’s not what we are dealing with here.

Hippler v. State

83 Md. App. 325 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 5, 1990

Determinations by the trial judge regarding the weight to be accorded evidence and issues of witness credibility will not be disturbed on appeal unless clearly erroneous. Byrd v. … Detective Tabor was duly qualified at trial as an expert regarding controlled dangerous substances, and it was established that he had previously testified as an expert concerning PCP. 3 .

Bama, Inc. v. Anne Arundel County

53 Md. App. 14 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 5, 1982

The ordinance referred to as Section 13-121 (c), which is the only clearly expressed authority to impose such condition, was not enacted until after the condition was imposed and agreed to by Bama on April 4, 1977. … The protection of compensation for governmental taking is qualified by the rightful exercise of the police power, bearing a substantial relation to the protection of the public welfare.

Suburban Hospital, Inc. v. Dwiggins

83 Md. App. 97 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 30, 1990

In establishing this principle in Hines v. … The contractual system would then cease to qualify as an adequate mechanism to secure individual redress for damaging failure of the employer to abide by the contract.” See also Bowen v.

Younie v. State

19 Md. App. 439 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 28, 1973

Loretta Scully was granted immunity and testified as a State’s witness. She testified that she left Hartford on December 26 in the company of the appellant, McCormack and Grondin. … The factual premises are by no means established. Mr.

DENO CONSTANTINE KANARAS v. State

54 Md. App. 568 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 6, 1983

After about forty-five minutes, they left for the Golden Forty, another drinking establishment, arriving there at about 1:20 A.M. … Such attempted immunity extended to a man’s dwelling or mansion house has been said to be attributable to the early common-law principle that a man’s house is his castle.

In re Michael W.

89 Md. App. 612 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 24, 1991

Whether the lower court was clearly erroneous in concluding that Michael W. was not a child in need of assistance. I. … While appellant complains that there is no evidence to support the court’s finding, the record clearly established that Michael W. had been sleeping with his grandmother, *626 that he awoke crying and screaming at 5:00 a.m

Welsh v. Welsh

135 Md. App. 29 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 2, 2000

court’s ruling to be clearly erroneous. … The court will therefore order that the proceeds be distributed on an if, as, and when basis [sic] and will prepare the appropriate Qualified Domestic Relations Order.

Pacific Mortgage and Investment Group, Ltd. v. Horn

100 Md. App. 311 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 1, 1994

State, 59 Md.App. 694, 699 , 478 A.2d 321 (1984), we approved the following jury instruction: Willfulness may be established through proof, that Mr. … Allnutt must have known clearly and without a doubt, that he had a legal duty which was clearly stated to him____ Pacific’s contention that its action were not willful is essentially based on its assertion that it did not

State v. Rogers

240 Md. App. 260 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 28, 2019

Rogers qualified as a tier II sex offender and was required to register upon release from prison because he was convicted of violating CR § 11-303 and his victim was a minor. Mr. … Rogers filed a complaint in the circuit court seeking a declaratory judgment that he was not required to register as a sex offender because, he argued, the State had failed to establish that his victim was, in fact, a minor

Archie v. State

161 Md. App. 226 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 14, 2005

The knock and announce rule is not immune from exceptions, however. … Only if the trial court's factual findings are clearly erroneous will we disturb its ruling. Wengert v. State, 364 Md. 76, 84 , 771 A.2d 389 (2001). 6 .

Tyler v. State

105 Md. App. 495 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 30, 1995

The transcript, therefore, did not qualify as Former Testimony. … Responsibility for Unavailability There is a second, and totally independent, reason why we cannot say that Judge Ahalt clearly abused his discretion.

Petition of Mayor & City Council of Baltimore

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 2, 2025

Information about a donation made to another person or entity clearly constitutes “information about the finances of a person.” … Indeed, even the Compliance Board stated that “donations to a § 527 political organization might broadly qualify as ‘financial activity.’”

Waine v. State

37 Md. App. 222 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 9, 1977

The main concern of the police, therefore, would be to establish an accurate list to protect them from false claims. … that proof of one tends to establish the other, and (5) the identity of the person charged with the commission of a crime on trial.

Crise v. Maryland General Hospital, Inc.

212 Md. App. 492 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 27, 2013

Sherman, 234 Md. 179, 181 , 198 A.2d 71 (1964); and whether a defendant possesses qualified immunity, Artis v. Cyphers, 100 Md.App. 633 , 653-54 & n. 3, 642 A.2d 298 , aff'd, 336 Md. 561 , 649 A.2d 838 (1994). … Assoc., 54 Md.App. 685, 695 , 461 A.2d 7 (1983) (stating it is “axiomatic that a qualified medical expert can render an opinion as to whether a hospital did or did not comply with applicable standards of care ... permitting

Sparks v. State

91 Md. App. 35 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 6, 1992

by the judges clearly erroneous. … We affirmed the trial judge’s ruling that a prima facie case had not thereby been established, holding at 28 Md.App. 255 , 345 A.2d 110 : “The ruling was clearly correct.

Laser v. Wilson

58 Md. App. 434 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 10, 1984

To the extent that the inspector changed his mind regarding the interpretation of the illusory code, he was not offered or qualified as an expert in anything, let alone legal interpretation of county laws. … Clearly their conduct was not negligent as a matter of law. They were not required to put a leash or chain on Adam and hold him in one place by the lead.”

Edenbaum v. Schwarcz-Osztreicherne

165 Md. App. 233 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 28, 2005

Later, however, Colson qualified his answer, stating that he was talking about “cash flow” and not “profits.” … Thus, the “salary” she was to receive was clearly intended to compensate for her work in that capacity.

Herring v. State

198 Md. App. 60 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 31, 2011

A critical component of that principle, however, is the qualifying clause “because it must.” It is not with any sense of satisfaction that a court reverses on a technicality. … This appeal is not a case of outraged innocence qualifying for an act of grace. [Emphasis in original]. In sum, we find neither error nor abuse of discretion.