Case law

Axel v. Apfel

171 F. Supp. 2d 522 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 11, 2000

Harassment and Denial of Choice Claims Two of Plaintiff Axel’s complaints clearly fail to qualify as adverse employment actions. … Therefore, he fails to establish a prima facie case as he is unable to show either that he applied for the position or that he was qualified for the position.

Whipp v. Seafarers Vacation Plan

632 F. Supp. 1487 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 17, 1986

. § 186 , which requires that employee benefit plans be established and administered for the sole benefit of employees. … Clearly, it would be wrong to interpret Knauss as saying that any break-in-service rule that failed to distinguish between voluntary and involuntary breaks was arbitrary per se.

Mayo v. Booker

56 F. Supp. 2d 597 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 21, 1999

Many of these bills seem to be for treatment and therapy rendered to Thurston, and those costs are clearly not properly awarded in an action for attorneys’ fees and litigation costs. … Third, the Mayos have not established an appropriate, reasonable number of hours expended by their attorneys. *600 Clearly, the Mayos are not entitled to reimbursement for (1) any charges for fees and costs related to the

Blanch v. Chubb & Sons, Inc.

124 F. Supp. 3d 622 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 28, 2015

Schs., 666 F.3d 244 , 254 n. 10 (4th Cir.2012) (reaffirming this rule in the context of the -Court of Appeals’ discussion of Maryland sovereign immunity). … Although a poorly written letter might sometimes qualify as a request for information, see, e.g., Boone v.

United States v. Blair

493 F. Supp. 398 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 19, 1980

The mere taping of the boxes shut was not sufficient to create a reasonable expectation of privacy in these containers which were clearly cargo. … The system of filling the Qualified Jury Wheel apparently favors black males rather than excluding them. 14 .

United States v. McGirr

320 F. Supp. 1333 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 13, 1971

Robertson, a qualified member of our psychiatric staff, recently examined Mr. McGirr and the following determinations have been made. … The evidence in this case clearly establishes that rather than a flat affect, defendant's affect was quite normal.

Kravitz v. U.S. Dep't of Commerce

336 F. Supp. 3d 545 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 22, 2018

The Supreme Court precedent cited supra has not clearly established whether the Secretary's acts made pursuant to the Census Act "are permitted to agency discretion by law." … immunity" (citing Heckler , 470 U.S. at 839 , 105 S.Ct. 1649 (Brennan, J., concurring) ) ).

Davis v. Maryland Parole Commission

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 21, 2022

Dep't of Public Safety and Correctional Services, 926 F.3d 97, 100 (4th Cir. 2019) (“The Supreme Court ‘has drawn on principles of sovereign immunity to construe the Amendment to establish that an unconsenting State is … Davis has established that he has a disability.

Verizon Maryland Inc. v. RCN Telecom Services, Inc.

248 F. Supp. 2d 468 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 5, 2003

The state commission may also establish and enforce requirements of state law in its review of a SGAT. Id. … The commissioners have asserted their sovereign immunity from suit.

Frye v. Grandy

625 F. Supp. 1573 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 24, 1986

In her complaint, she alleges *1574 that she was passed over for a promotion in June, 1984 in favor of a less-qualified younger black woman. Since that time, many of Ms. … Municipal or county conduct that results in a single incident is not necessarily immune, provided that it is the product of a policy or custom. What is lacking here is a policy or custom.

Opara v. Modern Manufacturing Co.

434 F. Supp. 1040 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 11, 1977

of the party establishing it, but only permits that finding.” … Her home sewing experience in Nigeria would not necessarily qualify her for a position as a sewer in a factory. Mr.

Canty v. Bishop

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 18, 2023

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity and that summary judgment is appropriate on that basis. … Further, the qualified immunity defense is unavailing, both because the constitutional rights were well-established at the time of the incidents at issue and because there exists a material 3 According to the use of force

Gilliam v. Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 20, 2024

Maryland’s highest court has “adopted a two-part test to determine whether sovereign immunity applies in a specific case:” (1) whether the entity invoking sovereign immunity qualifies; and (2) whether the state legislature … waived the immunity.

Huggins v. PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY, MD.

750 F. Supp. 2d 549 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 9, 2010

During the July 24 hearing, the Court made no findings concerning whether a constitutional violation in fact had occurred, but found that the individual defendants were entitled to qualified immunity for any alleged substantive … Under the clearly erroneous standard, the reviewing court is not to ask whether the finding is the best or only conclusion permissible based on the evidence.

Long v. Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc.

882 F. Supp. 1553 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 4, 1995

Plaintiff clearly is entitled to a back pay award pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(g). … A prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII is established by showing that the individual for whom relief is requested is a member of a protected group, was qualified for the job for which she applied, was rejected

Hitchcock v. Collenberg

140 F. Supp. 894 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 19, 1956

Due consideration, therefore, for the protection of society may well induce the state to exclude from prac- ' tice those who have not such a license, or who are found upon examination not to be fully qualified.” … Plaintiffs claim that the Maryland Medical Practice Act, as interpreted and enforced by the Maryland courts and by the defendants herein, abridges their privileges and immunities, deprives them of property without due process

Nivens v. Tehum Care Services, Inc.

District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 13, 2023

The claims against Blevins and O’Neil are clearly time-barred. … Servs., 926 F.3d 97, 100 (4th Cir. 2019), the Court said: “The Supreme Court ‘has drawn on principles of sovereign immunity to construe the Amendment to establish that an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought

LJ by and Through Darr v. Massinga

699 F. Supp. 508 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 27, 1988

While most of the remaining children do not qualify for CHP enrollment, up to 400 children eligible to participate in CHP are not enrolled. 2. … In the same opinion, the Fourth Circuit also affirmed this court’s ruling that the defendants were not entitled to qualified immunity as to plaintiffs’ claims for damages. 838 F.2d at 123-124 .

Gordon v. Maryland Department of Public Safety and Correctional Services

District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 23, 2021

However, the complaint must allege sufficient facts to establish those elements.” Walters v. McMahen, 684 F.3d 435, 439 (4th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted). … The Eleventh Amendment bars suit against a state, state agents, and state instrumentalities absent congressional abrogation of that immunity or the state’s clear and unambiguous waiver of its immunity.

Hughley v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission

668 F. Supp. 469 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 13, 1987

The McDonnell Douglas Court stated that a prima facie case of discrimination may be established by showing: (i) that [plaintiff] belongs to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied and was qualified for a job for which the … Plaintiff Hughley established a prima facie case of discrimination. He is black, and therefore a minority.