Case law

Prince George's County v. Brent

185 Md. App. 42 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 27, 2009

to qualified immunity for any amount above the existing motor vehicle insurance limit, pursuant to either § 5—507(b)(2) or § 5—511(c). … Additional Claims of Immunity As noted above, the County was granted qualified immunity pursuant to the provisions of § 5-524, thereby reducing the amount directly recoverable from the County to $20,000.

Md. Bd. of Physicians v. Geier

241 Md. App. 429 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 26, 2019

Under that form of qualified immunity, “‘government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … Are defendants entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983, where non-Board and non-voting members did not disclose information, and it is not clearly established that publication violated plaintiffs’ constitutional

Branch v. McGeeney

123 Md. App. 330 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 2, 1998

This issue is relevant to the officers’ claims of qualified immunity from suit for violations of the federal constitution, as no such immunity exists for violations of such “clearly established” rights. Harlow v. … As we noted, *359 qualified immunity is available unless the official violates a clearly established federal constitutional right. That exception applies here.

Holloway-Johnson v. Beall

220 Md. App. 195 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 25, 2014

A damages cap simply establishes that governmental immunity is not being waived above the level of the cap. There is absolutely nothing that Off. … For one thing, the fact that it is an alternative to gross negligence, which also will defeat the qualified immunity, indicates clearly - 33 -  that the Legislature

Laws v. Thompson

78 Md. App. 665 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 26, 1989

We will consider the qualified immunity first. … There is a distinc *677 tion between qualified immunity and absolute immunity.

Davis v. DiPino

121 Md. App. 28 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 16, 1998

In § 1983 actions where qualified immunity is at issue, it has been the rule that the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that the fact-specific constitutional right allegedly violated was clearly established at the time … to qualified immunity on summary judgment.

TOLLENGER v. State

199 Md. App. 586 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 5, 2011

That does not follow, and clearly such a broad exemption from the State’s waiver of sovereign immunity was not intended by the drafters of the MTCA. … and (3), if the Act does grant such qualified immunity, whether the plaintiffs evidence of malice was sufficient to generate a triable issue as to whether the immunity was defeated.

Mayor of Baltimore v. Guttman

190 Md. App. 395 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 2, 2010

Gallagher”) because he is not entitled to legislative or qualified immunity- II. Whether the court’s denial of Ms. Mullins’ petition for attorney fees is an abuse of discretion. … Gallagher is entitled to qualified immunity because they did not raise it at the trial level. See Maryland Rule 8-131 (a). 9 .

Cahill v. Montgomery County

72 Md. App. 274 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 16, 1987

Qualified immunity means that “government officials performing discretionary functions, generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … was adopted by the court, maintain that they have demonstrated their entitlement to the qualified immunity defense.

Murray v. Transcare Maryland, Inc.

203 Md. App. 172 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 9, 2012

[Appellees’ counsel] points out very clearly that there was no fee charged to [appellant] in this matter, Bryson Murray, and therefore since no compensation flowed from the victim to Transcare then Transcare qualifies under … And 5-604 does not use the word ambulance it only used fire and rescue companies as the, as the entities that are entitled to qualify for immunity.

Biser v. Deibel

128 Md. App. 670 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 29, 1999

The circuit court granted summary judgment in favor of appellees and held that Deibel qualified for immunity by virtue of her position, but Docken did not. … Clearly, the positions of Director of Planning and of Zoning Administrator are established by the Code of the Town of Bel Air as public offices that are appointed by the commissioner and created by law.

Kerpelman v. Bricker

23 Md. App. 628 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 16, 1974

It is distinguished from a qualified privilege in that the former provides immunity irrespective of the purposes or motive of the defendant or the reasonableness of his conduct, while the *630 latter is conditioned upon the … Clearly the filing of the complaint in this case initiated a judicial proceeding by setting in motion the grievance procedure.

Lovelace v. Anderson

126 Md. App. 667 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 3, 1999

Once the two factors are established, “a qualified immunity attaches; namely, in the absence of malice, the individual involved is free from liability.” Clea v. … Thus, a law enforcement officer is entitled to qualified public official immunity.

Chase v. Mayor of Baltimore

126 Md. App. 427 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 26, 1999

. *430 On 26 January 1998, appellees filed a motion for summary judgment on the bases that either of two Maryland statutes provided qualified immunity to Mr. … GROSS NEGLIGENCE Because the circuit court held that both the Good Samaritan Act and the Fire and Rescue Company Act granted qualified immunity to Mr.

Callahan v. Bowers

131 Md. App. 163 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 13, 2000

The order in this case: 1) conclusively determined as a matter of law that appellant did not qualify for qualified immunity, 2) resolved an important issue because if appellant is entitled to immunity, he may be entitled … We now turn to the remaining elements of qualified public immunity to determine appellant’s status.

Mills v. Galyn Manor Homeowner's Ass'n, Inc.

239 Md. App. 663 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 21, 2018

In this case, Galyn Manor qualifies as a “person” subject to liability under the MCPA. … Clearly, the Court of Appeals has treated “immunity” and “exemption” as synonyms, and we similarly do so here. 5 Galyn Manor and Andrews further maintain that the Homeowners have not presented any issue of

Zimmer-Rubert v. Board of Education

179 Md. App. 589 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 5, 2008

, clearly outweighs this factor. … . § 5-518(c) clearly and unambiguously abrogates sovereign immunity for any claim, up to $100,000, against a county board of education.

Samuels v. Tschechtelin

135 Md. App. 483 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 13, 2000

assessed in light of the legal rules that were “clearly established” at the time it was taken. … action is a violation) violates a clearly established right.

Espina v. Prince George's County

215 Md. App. 611 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 20, 2013

Applications “of tradi *642 tional or well-established immunities from suit” do not violate Article 19. Id. … Moreover, in Dackman , if a qualified offer was rejected, the landlord had full immunity, including immunity against future claims by an injured child once she reaches majority, leaving a lead paint poisoned child with no

Tavakoli-Nouri v. State

139 Md. App. 716 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 30, 2001

Qualified Immunity Appellant also complains that the trial court erred in holding that individual troopers could not be held liable be *734 cause they had qualified immunity. … See Md.Code (1984, 1999 Repl.Vol.), § 12-105 of the State Government Article (“SG”) (“state personnel” have the qualified immunity established in Md.Code (1974, 1998 Rep.