Case law

In re: M.H.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 29, 2021

The Department also contends that, even if the issue is preserved, the Report is admissible because it qualifies under the public records exception to the hearsay rule. … The Circuit Court’s Findings of Fact Are Clearly Erroneous.

Blum v. Blum

59 Md. App. 584 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 12, 1984

Our scope of review is limited to whether those findings are clearly erroneous in light of all the evidence. … held that if one of the spouses incurs debt during the marriage to purchase marital property, and that debt or a portion thereof is outstanding when a monetary award is being considered, the value of the marital property qualified

Pinkney v. State

151 Md. App. 311 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 20, 2003

But this expression must be qualified, lest it mislead. … The above quotation is clearly a plea for some sense of moral relativism in the law of homicide.

Gibbs v. State

18 Md. App. 230 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 3, 1973

The search, and subsequent seizure, palpably cannot qualify as “incidental to a lawful arrest.” … We do not read the reference to “local judge” in Dean as establishing a sine qua non.

Cooper v. Singleton

217 Md. App. 626 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 26, 2014

The evidence clearly established that Mrs. Presnell did not react, when confronted with an imminent collision, as a conscious person would. … App. at 623, and the verbatim requested jury instruction clearly stated: The procedural consequences, once a prima facie case is established, require that the person against whom the presumption is directed

Disclosure Information Group v. Comptroller of the Treasury

72 Md. App. 381 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 3, 1987

Clearly, a reasoning mind could reasonably have reached the conclusion reached by the Tax Court, that the subscription lists were tangible personal property, consistent with a proper application of the legal principles set … The Internal Revenue Service promulgated a regulation, Treas.Reg. § 1.48-l(f), providing that “[i]ntangible personal property, such as patents, copyrights, and subscription lists, does not qualify” for the credit.

Maslow v. Vanguri

168 Md. App. 298 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 11, 2006

The trust will be established and approved by the Attorney General’s Office. … Qualifying the rule that rescission requires the joint will of the parties, the general principle has been well established that if there has been well established breach of a contract, and, the injury caused thereby is irreparable

Nationwide General Insurance v. Government Employees Insurance

81 Md. App. 104 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 7, 1989

arena insurance companies battle over which company is required to provide a defense, primary coverage, or any coverage at all, *106 for a successor permittee under an omnibus clause. 1 Before presenting the issues, we must establish … It stated, "[H]e [the son] could probably qualify under (a)(2), as a person actually using the owned automobile with the permission of the named insured, although we need not decide.”

Dent v. Cahill

18 Md. App. 117 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 6, 1973

a specialized agency of the government delegated with the responsibility and the alleged expertise in the field to make such determinations as a result of the evidence produced on behalf of the claimant, the law is well established … 2d *126 147 (1967), the Court approved a jury instruction which read in part: “[T]otal disability means incapacity to do work of any kind and not mere incapacity to perform that work which the employee was accustomed and qualified

In Re GARY T.

222 Md. App. 374 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 6, 2015

If, for purposes of Rule 5-609, the crime that the witness had agreed to commit is an infamous one or one that is relevant to the witness’s credibility and thus would qualify as an impeachable offense, the conspiracy to … The judge clearly believed Fofana’s version and not appellant’s. That was quintessentially a credibility determination.

Hill v. Hill

47 Md. App. 460 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 7, 1981

The wife’s sole argument on appeal is that "the chancellor erred by excluding appellee’s military retirement benefits and the value thereof in his determination of what property qualified as marital property.” … The conclusion follows that husband’s federal military retirement pay must be considered community property in accordance with established principles of California law.

Meanor v. State

134 Md. App. 72 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 7, 2000

Instead, the State charged the defendant with driving while intoxicated in a way which clearly appeared to exclude the lesser charge. Id. at 415, 578 A.2d 220 . … As the State correctly points out, the “mere possibility that an offender might qualify to participate in the Ignition Interlock System Program” is a privilege or a bonus, not a sanction.

Howard Research & Development Corp. v. Howard County

46 Md. App. 498 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 8, 1980

Article 25A, § 5 (U) empowers charter counties to enact local laws establishing a county board of appeals. … In determining that a planning commission was better qualified than a board of adjustment to handle large scale planning decisions, the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania relied on the expertise of Professor Krasnowiecki of the

In Re Julianna B.

177 Md. App. 547 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 5, 2007

None of the circuit court’s factual findings was clearly erroneous. … that the Respondent possessed a qualifying weapon on public school property!)]”

Pleasant v. Pleasant

97 Md. App. 711 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 27, 1993

From the testimony of an economist who qualified as an expert in valuing pensions, the trial judge determined that the marital portion of appellant’s pension had a present value of $167,907, and that the marital portion of … Choice of Disposition On two occasions during the trial, the trial judge presented appellant with a choice of the method of payment to be established.

Richwind Joint Venture 4 v. Brunson

96 Md. App. 330 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 7, 1993

The court refused to qualify Dr. Barry Hurwitz, a psychologist, as an expert on the issue of medical causation. Appellants claim that the court erred when it did permit Dr. … Chodak received notice of lead nuisance violations at other rental properties on four separate occasions and had been a housing inspector in Baltimore City — he clearly knew of the dangers associated with lead poisoning,

Bey v. State

140 Md. App. 607 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 26, 2001

The burden, of course, is on appellant’s counsel to state clearly what the problem is and to state clearly what precise instruction is being requested. … However, in murder, such conduct demonstrates the degree of consciousness of risk that establishes depraved heart murder, which is a general intent crime.

Keefover v. Giant Food, Inc.

83 Md. App. 306 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 5, 1990

Ein are clearly hearsay insofar as Keefover’s claim against Giant is concerned. Searching for an exception to the hearsay rule, Keefover asserts that, if Dr. … It is well established in this State that jury instructions will be considered as a whole.

Cirincione v. State

75 Md. App. 166 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 9, 1988

Nor is diminished capacity an issue in this case because it’s not recognized under Maryland law and that is clearly set forth in Johnson v. State, 292 Md. 405 [439 A.2d 542 *175 (1982)]. … His argument that a death-qualified jury was more likely to have found him guilty has been squarely rejected by the Supreme Court of the United States. Lockhart v.

Owens v. Prince George's County Department of Social Services

182 Md. App. 31 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 16, 2008

A practical qualifying pressure valve — “unless the context of the statute would indicate otherwise” — is invariably adhered to a recitation of that principle. See, e.g., Maryland St. Bar Ass’n v. … Clearly, [Mrs. Owens] made a commitment to care for and raise Sandy.