Case law

Vournas v. Montgomery County

53 Md. App. 243 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 7, 1982

The Court of Appeals clearly stated this rule in Villa Nova Night Club v. … Therefore, under appellant’s theory, immunity was waived for this transfer, even assuming, arguendo, that the legal incidence had been on the United States.

Robinson v. State

66 Md. App. 246 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 5, 1986

The physical circumstances of the shooting, buttressed by other surrounding circumstances, clearly established a prima facie case with respect to both convictions. … Only the state of mind on September 3, of course, qualifies as the ultimate “state of mind in issue.” Strict contemporaneity is not, however, absolutely required.

In re Michael G.

107 Md. App. 257 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 30, 1995

The roles of the master and the chancellor in juvenile proceedings are well-established. Under CJP § 3-813 and Maryland Rule 911, a master for juvenile causes is expressly authorized to conduct hearings. … Under these circumstances, the statements clearly do not qualify as statements by a party-opponent.

Roynon v. Janet's Cleaning Service

70 Md. App. 554 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 9, 1987

Upon analysis, however, we see that in reality the quoted language establishes but a single condition. … The injured workman’s suit against the buyer was dismissed on the basis that under Virginia’s Act the defendant was the plaintiff’s statutory employer and therefore immune from suit.

Uzzle v. State

152 Md. App. 548 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 2, 2003

These findings were not clearly erroneous, and the ruling based upon them was not in error. 2 *569 E. … This contention is clearly nothing more than a case of undifferentiated post-verdict angst. Gilliam v.

Wilder v. State

191 Md. App. 319 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 25, 2010

The State’s using this solely to show the jury — I mean, it’s clearly gonna prejudice them against my client. I don’t think I can say anything more clearly than that, Your Honor. … Neither officer had been proffered or qualified as an expert witness.

Sweet v. State

163 Md. App. 676 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 6, 2005

I am saying that clearly he is at risk. I don’t think I could look you in the eye and say he is not at risk, because clearly he is at risk if for no other reason than the fact that he re-offended. … There is nothing in the language or history of the statute to suggest that the court must use a quantitative yardstick to measure such risk; nor do we discern any legislative intent to establish a minimum “qualifying” level

Sargent v. BOARD OF EDUC., BALTO. CTY.

49 Md. App. 577 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 3, 1981

We, of course, are not at liberty to depart from that restrictive view, which was established by the Court of Appeals. … The Court stated that, "[i]t may be inferred that he was qualified to do his regular work with no unusual strain or risk, but that he was not qualified to do the work of the 'extra job’ under the extreme weather conditions

Montague v. State

3 Md. App. 66 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 1, 1968

We find that the appellant’s flagrant disregard of the elementary principles of the Maryland traffic laws; operation of a motor vehicle without having qualified for an operator’s permit, which to us raises a prima facie presumption … Upon the record before us, we find that the trial judge’s finding was not clearly erroneous. Maryland Rule 1086. Judgment affirmed.

Barbee v. Hecht Co.

61 Md. App. 356 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 11, 1985

Code art. 101, § 66(1) (1957, 1984 Cum.Supp.), which explains how one qualifies for payments from the Fund, must be read in pari materia with Section 36, which alone provides for the amount and method of payment. … Nevertheless, the Fund persuades us that to the extent Ferretto stands for the proposition that Section 36(4a) is applicable to the Fund’s payments for pre-existing impairments, it must be overruled. 1 The Fund was established

Cole v. State

83 Md. App. 279 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 4, 1990

With the key issue before the jury clearly being a credibility battle between Amy and the appellant, the appellant sought to erode Amy’s credibility by calling the social worker, Charles Bosley, as a defense witness. … Should any of these corroborative indicia of the crime be not established, it would commonly be a just basis for the contention that the woman consented.

Thomas v. Allegany County Board of Education

51 Md. App. 312 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 7, 1982

The appellants, academically qualified students in private schools, contend that as residents of Allegany County they *314 are entitled to participate in any program or instructional classes offered by the Allegany County … In so holding the Court observed: "While there is no question that parents clearly have the right to send their children to non-public schools (Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 , 45 S. Ct. 571 , 69 L.

Shapiro v. Massengill

105 Md. App. 743 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 6, 1995

We conclude that the court was not clearly erroneous in ascribing ambiguity to the agreement. … A qualified privilege may be abused, and thus defeated, if the plaintiff can establish that the defendant acted with constitutional malice or that the statement was not made in furtherance of the reason for the privilege

State v. Beers

21 Md. App. 39 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 19, 1974

App. 465 , 287 A. 2d 310 (1972), cert. denied, 265 Md. 740 (1972), we said, at 475-76: “The qualifying phrase setting out the additional *42 element that the controlled dangerous substance shall be ‘in sufficient quantity … These two rules concerning duplicity are clearly stated in Ayre v. State, supra: 1. “It is firmly established that only one offense may be charged in a single count.

Ray v. Mayor of Baltimore

203 Md. App. 15 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 1, 2012

How To Qualify As Living “Nearby”? Let Us Count the Ways Does he qualify then for prima facie aggrievement? … He can clearly see the Subject Property from his place of employment.

Chew v. State

71 Md. App. 681 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 7, 1987

Batson established clear guidelines by which a criminal defendant can meet this burden of establishing a prima facie case of discrimination. … 13 Will European *712 Spaniards qualify as Hispanics, even without an Indian component to their racial makeup? .

Havilah Real Property Services, LLC v. Early

216 Md. App. 613 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 27, 2014

I think the – he has to do that to overcome the qualifying privilege . . . . … We thus reversed the imposition of sanctions as clearly erroneous. Id. at 480.

Gee v. State

2 Md. App. 61 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 26, 1967

The argument is patently frivolous. *69 II The appellant has framed the second issue in terms of a privileges and immunities violation. … Madison, 240 Md. 265 , bring their cases clearly within the rule set forth in the above case.” *71 The appellant contends that he has been placed in double jeopardy although his first conviction was reversed under Gideon

Vogel v. State

76 Md. App. 56 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 13, 1988

The same is clearly true of the other sexual offense statutes, and of the child abuse statute.” … That fellatio would qualify for the more strictly defined term "sexual act” would not preclude it from also qualifying under the more broadly defined term “sexual contact.”

Dunham v. Univ. of Md. Medical Ctr.

237 Md. App. 628 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 28, 2018

Vol.) §§ 3-2A-01 et seq., of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article (“CJP”) establishes the procedures required for filing a medical malpractice claim against a health care provider. Retina Grp. of Wash., P.C. v. … Appellees disputed the claim that the medical records were “impossible to decipher,” asserting that they had provided electronic medical records, which “clearly identified in type-written format” many of the individual