Case law

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

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.

Levin v. Levin

60 Md. App. 325 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 7, 1984

Whether the Court’s modification of an alimony order constituted an exercise of discretion arbitrarily used or a judgment so clearly wrong that.it should be disturbed on appeal. E. … After establishing that this case did not involve equitable distribution of pension benefits pursuant to the Marital Property Act, Md.Ann. Code, Cts. & Jud.Proc. Art. §§ 3-6A-01 to 3-6A-08 (1980); Ohm v.

Lahocki v. Contee Sand & Gravel Co.

41 Md. App. 579 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 8, 1979

To the contrary, he adopts the standard of design and workmanship which General Motors established to protect against such injury. Appellee charges G.M. with the failure to comply with its own established standards. … To state such a premise in this case points to its absurdity unless a plaintiff’s experts could qualify as soothsayers. Mr. Lahocki had a single indivisible injury, a thoracic spine injury, *591 a broken back.

Greens at Hilton Run I Ltd. Partnership v. Rollin Building Supply Co.

87 Md. App. 220 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 7, 1991

Even if we were to find The Greens’ argument persuasive, some portion of the lien was clearly not released. *229 The property owner has long had the burden of proof to establish the precise scope and extent of any release … The Court of Appeals has since qualified the Bounds holding in Dickerson Lumber Co. v. Herson, 230 Md. 487 , 187 A.2d 689 (1963).

Shabazz v. Dept of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 18, 2024

He argued that Washington, D.C. did not qualify as a “jurisdiction” within the meaning of the statute. … Clearly, the Department had some process or system in place to review the status of those on the registry in light of legislative and appellate changes.

Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ins. Comm'r

67 Md. App. 727 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 5, 1986

Although the intended purpose of ALIP was rehabilitative, Level III is clearly a dead end. … The evidence clearly established that, despite any inaccuracies, more than enough evidence on the effect of ALIP was before Raimondi to support his decision.

Broseus v. Broseus

82 Md. App. 183 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 6, 1990

Clearly the nature of the Marital Property Act was remedial and the Act should be liberally construed. Harper v. Harper, 294 Md. 54, 64 , 448 A.2d 916 (1982). … “Litigants ... in all judicial proceedings are entitled to have their cause determined ultimately by a duly qualified judge of a court of competent jurisdiction.” Ellis, 19 Md. at 365, 311 A.2d 428 (citations omitted).

Rankin v. Brinton Woods of Frankford, LLC

241 Md. App. 604 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 27, 2019

The language of the advance directive clearly established the condition precedent for its efficacy, by stating “[m]y agent’s authority becomes operative when my attending of adding fewer sheets of paper to the [c]ourt … In Dickerson, the Court of Appeals qualified the applicability of the Health Care Decisions Act (HCDA),9 stating that “the HCDA pertains only to ‘health care decisions,’” and “establishes procedures by which an individual

Hall v. State

3 Md. App. 680 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 16, 1968

. * * * The rule of these cases, which dealt with the Double Jeopardy Clause, has been thought wise because it protects the societal interest in trying people accused of crime, rather than granting them immunization because … The stipulation does not clearly include this fact but we will assume for the purpose of this decision that it is in the record.

State v. McKenzie

17 Md. App. 563 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 18, 1973

In applying the criminal standard to a civil case, it clearly articulated the criminal standard, through Justice Frankfurter, at 356 U. … The competency of accused persons as witnesses was first established, in the common law world, in Maine in 1864.

Action Committee for Transit, Inc. v. Town of Chevy Chase

229 Md. App. 540 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 1, 2016

The Open Meetings Compliance Board is a State agency established by GP § 3-201. … Id. at 157-58.20 20 Although Opinions of the Attorney General have a clearly established place in the firmament of Maryland law, the MPIA Manual does not.

St. James Construction Co. v. Morlock

89 Md. App. 217 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 5, 1991

Clearly, this testimony was sufficient to establish when the house was built (the fact that carpeting and doorknobs remained to be installed is insignificant) and, consequently, what standards were applicable at the time … The trial judge had previously excluded James Morlock from testifying on the diminution of value of the house on the ground that he was not qualified to do so.

Walls v. State

179 Md. App. 234 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 28, 2008

F: Seize articles of personal property tending to establish or corroborate the identity of the person or persons in control of the premises consisting of and including, but not limited to, utility company receipts, rent receipts … Certainly, the defendant in this case would not have been immune from arrest because he was standing in the backyard of the property and not inside the house when the police arrived. ^ ^ ^ In the instant case, we conclude

McLaurin v. State

31 Md. App. 375 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 6, 1976

SILVERMAN: The final stipulation in the case involves the testimony of Sergeant Wayne Henninger who is a qualified expert in identifying and comparing fingerprints in Baltimore County. … We think this evidence too meager to establish appellant’s criminal agency with respect to larceny of the Colvin automobile. The conviction will therefore be reversed.

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Insurance Commissioner

67 Md. App. 727 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 5, 1986

Although the intended purpose of ALIP was rehabilitative, Level III is clearly a dead end. … The evidence clearly established that, despite any inaccuracies, more than enough evidence on the effect of ALIP was before Raimondi to support his decision.

Harwood v. Johns Hopkins University

130 Md. App. 476 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 2, 2000

Courts must “enter the realm of school discipline with caution” and allow schools flexibility in establishing and enforcing disciplinary procedures. Woodis v. … The court did, however, recognize that a school must award a diploma only to a student who “completes the prescribed course of study and who is otherwise qualified.” Id. at 437 (emphasis added). li.

Sam Yonga v. State

221 Md. App. 45 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 28, 2015

It is only an adjectival qualifier. It is not the thrust of the writ. … If, arguendo, the testimony of the victim and her mother had been believed, would such evidence have qualified as having been newly discovered?

Joseph v. Bozzuto Management Co.

173 Md. App. 305 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 15, 2007

Restricting the principle to its proper use is the function of the qualifying words “in some circumstances.” Judge Gilbert’s epiphany, in Fisher v. O’Connor’s, 53 Md. … As earlier pointed out, certain provisions of the Housing Code were clearly enacted to prevent lead poisoning in children.