Case law

Estate of Steiner

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 28, 2022

Nor is an attestation clause required in order to establish the presumption of due execution. … The Court in Slack reasoned: “[I]f subscribing witnesses were required to recollect all the formalities prescribed by statutory 18 requirements, few wills would be immune to

Jarrell v. State

36 Md. App. 371 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 9, 1977

“The ultimate test remains that which has been the only clearly established test in Anglo-American courts for two hundred years: the test of voluntariness. … Since it is uncontradicted that the suspect was in fact in the sole presence of this police interrogator, that specific person must rebut the allegations of coercion as no one else is qualified to do so ....

Anaweck v. State

63 Md. App. 239 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 17, 1985

It was clearly inferable that the suspect house was the home of Edward and Lena Anaweck. … A defense which, albeit good trial advocacy perhaps, hardly qualifies the appellant Edward Anaweck, under the circumstances of this case, as "Husband, Father, or Grandfather of the Year.”

Chester Haven Beach Partnership v. Board of Appeals

103 Md. App. 324 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 9, 1995

Ordinance clearly intended] that the character of the existing neighborhood was to be preserved____ Clearly, the Applicant envisions an apartment complex in an area where apartments do not exist. *337 The Board then noted … It recommended favorably that, which, if granted, would have been clearly illegal and arbitrary.

Molter v. State

201 Md. App. 155 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 7, 2011

State, 225 Md. at 475-76 , 171 A.2d 244 (“Clearly these established facts were sufficient to support a credible inference that the possessor was the burglar as well as the thief.”); Ponder v. … Having been taken between seven and nine days earlier, the goods clearly qualified as having been recently stolen. From all of this, the permitted inference arose that the appellant was the thief.

Gebhardt & Smith LLP v. Maryland Port Administration

188 Md. App. 532 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 29, 2009

Second, the MPA argued that it was entitled to summary judgment based on sovereign immunity. … The MDOT auditors followed established audit procedures that were for the purpose of documenting the allowable “operating expenses in accordance with the standard lease agreement.” Mr.

Murphy v. Fishman

207 Md. App. 269 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 4, 2012

Had the 2007 Deed been found void ab initio, and even had the Lender qualified as a bona fide purchaser, appellees would not have prevailed. … As to the establishment of the constructive trust, we observe that, in cases where a constructive trust was established as a result of finding a confidential relationship, Maryland appellate courts have not held that the

Smiley v. State

216 Md. App. 1 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 29, 2014

Proof of an excited utterance, for instance, does not demand a psychiatrist to establish distraught emotion clearly and convincingly nor does a dying declaration insist on a priest administering last rites to establish … Employing that deference, we cannot say that Judge Jackson's findings were clearly erroneous or that his ruling was an abuse of discretion.

Taylor v. State

224 Md. App. 476 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 27, 2015

6 unless clearly erroneous, and give due regard to the court’s opportunity to assess the credibility of witnesses.” Id. … First, Mothersell clearly stated that in his experience, “I’ve had several DUI arrests where there’s plenty of open containers left in the vehicle.”

In the Matter of Boyce Living Trust

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 9, 2025

Section 14.5-605, therefore, provides permanent immunity for those defendants through the implementation of the time bar by requiring parties to file within the defined period. … THE CIRCUIT COURT DID NOT CLEARLY CONSIDER THE REQUEST FOR ASSUMPTION OF JURISDICTION. Appellants contend that “[t]he circuit court also erred in dismissing petitioners’ request for an accounting . . .

Jackson v. State

190 Md. App. 497 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 4, 2010

State, 189 Md.App. 653 , 985 A.2d 175 (2009) (“It is well established that an alert to a vehicle by a qualified drug-sniffing dog furnishes probable cause to perform a warrantless search of the vehicle.”). … We hold that that finding was not clearly erroneous. Bleib!

Eiland v. State

92 Md. App. 56 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 8, 1992

To be sure, it did not establish his criminal agency. … A pattern clearly was present.

Logan v. Dietz

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 2, 2023

Clearly, RP § 11B-116 itself only authorizes a “homeowners association”—not individual unit owners—to amend a governing document with 60% approval. … As we have discussed, for Dietz and the other homeowners to rely on § 11B-116 of the Act, there had to be a qualifying homeowners association, which in turn required a qualifying declaration.

MacPhail v. Comptroller

178 Md. App. 115 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 4, 2008

issue as “whether the Comptroller sustains his burden under the Maryland Public—[sic] for acts under the Maryland Public Information Act to deny my request since the Maryland Legislature at [MPIA § 10—617(f)(2) & (3) ] clearly … Courts have held that § 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code, cited above, qualifies as a statute that comes within the nondisclosure provisions of § 552(b)(3) of the FOIA. See e.g., Landmark Legal Foundation v.

McKinney v. State of Maryland Deposit Insurance Fund Corp.

99 Md. App. 124 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 26, 1994

The Clerk resisted the garnishment on a number of grounds, including sovereign immunity and the fact that the funds were in custodia legis and were not subject to attachment. … Circuit Court of Appeals, was concluded and MDIF did establish its right to the funds, the motion was premature.

Moniodis v. Cook

64 Md. App. 1 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 20, 1985

Spevock was no longer employed by Rite-Aid at the time of the meeting and apparently spoke to Redmond with the intention of obtaining immunity from prosecution. … This finding was not clearly erroneous and shall be affirmed. 7.

Akonom v. State

40 Md. App. 676 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 6, 1978

The only “expert” testimony in the present case came from the polygraph examiner himself, an individual apparently qualified in polygraphy but without any broader scientific training. … In any event, acceptance among polygraphers is clearly not the “general acceptance” required under the Frye-Reed test and acceptance among psychologists and psysiologists “cannot be demonstrated, because such acceptance does

Kohr v. State

40 Md. App. 92 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 14, 1978

The record clearly indicates that the detective qualified as an expert in the field of narcotics investigation. … The record clearly indicates that both defense counsel and the trial court were aware of this fact.

McComas v. Criminal Injuries Compensation Board

88 Md. App. 143 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 28, 1991

Bd., 307 Md. 606, 614 , 516 A.2d 573 (1986) (“[Pjecuniary loss criteria clearly limit the extent to which the Board may make an award where financial need is demonstrated.”) … Clearly this application affects acts that have already occurred which potentially may give rise to these rights.

Blackstone v. Sharma Shanahan v. Marvastian

233 Md. App. 58 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 6, 2017

Money owed on a note secured by a deed of trust or a mortgage certainly qualifies as an account receivable. … They support that contention with the following argument: Foreclosures are not mentioned [in B.R. § 7-101(c)], although the Legislature clearly knew how to do so if it had wished.