Case law

Maryland Department of Health & Mental Hygiene v. Brown

177 Md. App. 440 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 27, 2007

Bearing in mind that no participating state’s Medicaid program may establish more restrictive eligibility requirements than those set by federal law, we look to the Medicaid statute and related regulations that establish … Brown “clearly did not meet any of the three criteria that I’ve explained, the three levels, where I could give a level.

Tyrone W. v. DANIELLE R.

129 Md. App. 260 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 3, 1999

Were the trial court’s findings of waiver and lack of ordinary diligence legally incorrect and/or clearly erroneous? DISCUSSION I. … Assembly was empowered to enact legislation that would enable courts to vacate previously enrolled erroneous judgments of paternity and that retroactive operation of F.L. § 5-1038(a) does not impair a vested right that is immune

Kirstel v. State

13 Md. App. 482 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 1, 1971

To this end administration staff and personnel of such an institution may demand of any person desiring to use or come upon the premises identification and evidence that he qualifies for use of the premises. … The act forbidden — not leaving after being requested — is precise, clearly expressed and delineated.

Maness v. Sawyer

180 Md. App. 295 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 19, 2008

Thus far in the residential saga, there was obviously no property that would remotely qualify as the “family home.” … The Maryland General Assembly clearly did not intend that they should be dispossessed. *308 Throughout the entire 19-month period, it was clearly the intention of both the Wife and the Husband to be domiciled at 449 Alfreton

Crowe v. CSX Transportation

242 Md. App. 311 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 28, 2019

It clearly intended to extend the LHWCA’s coverage to protect additional workers. Northeast Marine Terminal, 432 U.S. at 251. … To qualify for coverage under the LHWCA, an employee must meet both the “status” and “situs” requirements of the statute. Mr.

Curtis v. State

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 24, 2023

Hockaday would qualify under that exception . . . . However, the identity of the assailant is inadmissible. … influence of the occurrence clearly produced a spontaneous and instinctive reaction on the part of the declarant . . .

Hans v. Franklin Square Hospital

29 Md. App. 329 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 3, 1975

Often the facts which reveal professional negligence will not establish the requisite legal cause. … Whatever the merits of the application of res ipsa loquitur to the facts in this case, it is beyond our authority to decide contrary to clearly established law set forth by the Court of Appeals.

Watson v. State

68 Md. App. 168 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 10, 1986

If the elements of the crime as established by the foreign jurisdiction are sufficiently limited to those elements by which the crime is established in this State, it qualifies as a violent crime under our statute. … This includes the felony of manslaughter, even involuntary manslaughter, which clearly appears not to fit the definition of infamous crime and the inclusion of which strains the rationale for the classification of all felonies

Dep't of Gen. Serv. v. CHERRY HILL S & G CO.

51 Md. App. 299 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 7, 1982

When sufficient materials are not available from cuts to establish the required grading, the contractor shall supply the fill required.... b. … The State, in its appeal, also raises the issue of sovereign immunity.

Maloof v. DEPT. of ENVIRONMENT

136 Md. App. 682 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 28, 2001

COMAR 26.04.07.11(C) establishes minimum operating procedures for land-clearing debris landfills. … The Court said that “a qualifying clause ... is confined to the immediately preceding words or phrase-particularly in the absence of a comma before the qualifying clause ...” Id.

Bomas v. State

181 Md. App. 204 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 5, 2008

. *208 Discussion Appellant contends that the circuit court “erred in failing to permit” him to “offer[ ] the opinions of a qualified expert, Dr. … The Brownlee Court noted that "while science has firmly established the 'inherent unreliability of human perception and memory, ’ " id., at 142 (quoting Rudolf Koch, Note, Process v.

Richards v. Richards

166 Md. App. 263 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 22, 2005

She certainly qualifies for alimony if you just apply the principles of income and expense. … This account being the one established after (1) Mrs. Goldberg’s death and (2) the establishment of Mrs. Goldberg’s consolidated Schwab account.

Smallwood v. State

106 Md. App. 1 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 13, 1995

On August 29, 1991, appellant was diagnosed as being infected with HIV, the virus that causes Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (“AIDS”). … “Although a different trier of fact may have viewed the evidence as establishing [merely the crime of reckless endangerment], the trial court’s decision was not clearly erroneous.” Id.

Bahn v. Chicago Motor Club Insurance

98 Md. App. 559 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 10, 1993

Thus, these cases clearly establish that a single insurance contract, when it forms the basis of the cause of action, can provide sufficient contacts for assertion of jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant, with no other … These contacts clearly indicate that C.M.C.

Lutheran Hospital v. Levy

60 Md. App. 227 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 8, 1984

Her notions as to hospital immunity removed, her ignorance of attorneys remedied, she sought a lawyer to discuss redress for the wrong she thought she had suffered. … Decker was able to establish Lutheran’s negligence in failing to manipulate properly Ms. Levy’s broken ankle before casting it.

Crandall v. Crandall

14 Md. App. 476 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 15, 1972

The testimony at the hearing for modification established that the appellant is a retired naval captain, with a gross monthly pension of $778.51. 1 Prior to March 24, 1971, he had been employed at a salary of $12,500.00 per … The appellee is attending a university in the District of Columbia in order to qualify “for a teaching position.” She states she had been “looking for a job.”

Sewell v. State

236 Md. App. 96 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 5, 2018

Ct. 301, 302 (1951).7 Marital communications are presumed confidential, which qualifies them for the privilege. State v. Enriquez, 327 Md. 365, 372, 609 A.2d 343, 346 (1992). … Clearly, the prosecutor thought that motive would assist the jury in evaluating the evidence, as reflected in his closing argument.

Davis v. State

100 Md. App. 369 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 2, 1994

Sergeant Burton, due to his previous undercover narcotics work, also qualified as an expert in covert drug operations. … The record clearly demonstrates that Davis did not waive her right to counsel.

State v. Jenkins

178 Md. App. 156 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 6, 2008

Thus, while the “clearly erroneous” test demands some legally sufficient evidence for each and every element to be proved-to wit, that a prima facie case be established— Illinois v. … The Cl’s cooperation with the police was presumably in exchange for some sort of immunity, protection, or other favorable treatment.

Love v. State

95 Md. App. 420 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 26, 1993

Conversely, effective assistance of counsel is not ipso facto the establishment of due diligence. … That also is clearly not the case. Under subsection (c), there are no “trump” cards.