Case law

O'BANNON v. Friedman's, Inc.

437 F. Supp. 2d 490 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 28, 2006

This would be especially nonsensical in the case at bar, where Friedman’s is immune from liability damages and Federal and St. Paul are Plaintiffs’ only means for recovering on a successful claim. … The court made no attempt at qualifying their holding with an explanation as to the peculiarity of cases involving uninsured and underinsured motorist insurance. 2 .

Doali-Miller v. Supervalu, Inc.

855 F. Supp. 2d 510 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 11, 2012

Johnston’s medical group must be established at trial by the records custodian or “another qualified witness,” or by a Rule 902(11) certification. … Instead, it merely “provides that the qualified witness can establish the foundation without being called to testify.” Id.

Costar Group Inc. v. Loopnet, Inc.

164 F. Supp. 2d 688 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 28, 2001

Even if LoopNet qualifies as a service provider, it must meet the other criteria. b. … R. § 202.3(b)(3)(A), while still qualifying as separate “works” for the purposes of awarding statutory damages.

Ademiluyi v. Albright

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 10, 2025

Lastly, the doctrine of sovereign immunity applies to officials sued in their individual capacity and the doctrine of qualified immunity also protects government officials from liability when their “conduct does not violate … clearly established statutory or constitutional rights within the knowledge of a reasonable person.”

Rico v. Green

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 30, 2021

In ruling on a defense of qualified immunity, a court must (1) identify “the specific right allegedly violated”; (2) determine “whether at the time of the alleged violation the right was clearly established”; and (3) if … established law, it may be that the qualified immunity question cannot be resolved without discovery.”

Nation. Bd. Certif. Occup. v. Amer. Occup. Therapy

24 F. Supp. 2d 494 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 30, 1998

Consequently, AOTA's attempt to freeze the definition of "duly qualified" is misguided. … This action, however, is immune from antitrust liability, pursuant to Eastern R.R. Presidents Conference v.

Giove v. Weinberger

380 F. Supp. 364 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 29, 1974

“Part B,” referred to in § 1395ff, is the designation for that section of the Medicare Act establishing the broad general framework of eligibility for and operation of a program of supplemental medical insurance for qualified … Since the United States has sovereign immunity, the maxim that “every wrong has its remedy” is inapplicable.

State of Maryland v. Wirtz

269 F. Supp. 826 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 13, 1967

Leaving aside for the moment the question of state sovereignty, I conclude that these activities are clearly within the power of Congress to regulate commerce. … “All I want to do is to establish equity in application of the bill. Let me tell why. I believe I can best explain it by giving an example.

Nicholson v. Jaecksch

679 F. Supp. 518 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 30, 1987

Because the essence of plaintiffs argument is so clearly contrary to established precedent, the Court will discuss these issues first. … The Supreme Court has held 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

National Metal & Steel Corp. v. Reich

858 F. Supp. 62 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 24, 1994

. §§ 901 , et seq., (the “LHWCA” or “Act”) establishes a detailed and comprehensive workers’ compensation scheme for maritime employees. … the careful scheme of workers’ compensation for maritime employees that Congress established in the LHWCA.

Sutton v. Director Gail Watts

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 17, 2023

Under the doctrine 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 … at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of [the] alleged misconduct.”

Attkisson v. Bridges

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 27, 2021

Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil liability and suit “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Jay Dee/Mole Joint Venture v. Mayor & City Council

725 F. Supp. 2d 513 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 26, 2010

Under Maryland law, state and municipal governments are immune from some tort lawsuits under the common law doctrine of sovereign immunity. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. … Code art. 23A, § 1A — which purports to waive immunity for "municipal corporations” for "written contract[s] executed ... by an official or employee acting within the scope of his authority” — implies that the City is immune

Jenkins v. Massinga

592 F. Supp. 480 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 3, 1984

Thus, unless the defendants have waived their immunity, an order directing the state to refund money deposited in that general revenue fund clearly would violate the Eleventh Amendment. … After reviewing the Act, this court can find no other waiver of immunity.

Moore v. Peitzmeier

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 7, 2020

judgment on the excessive force claim based on qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which

Wilson v. Detweiler

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 28, 2021

defendants violated plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights, defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity. (ECF No. 31 at 25-30). … Because neither of the two required prongs to defeat a finding of qualified immunity have been established, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity on Counts 1 and 2. IV.

Tovar v. Covington

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 18, 2021

Other actions, such as administrative duties and investigatory functions, are entitled only to qualified immunity. Buckley, 509 U.S. at 273. … Kopelmen fall within the umbrella of absolute immunity. Previous courts have held that preparation of an indictment is clearly within the ambit of absolute prosecutorial immunity.

Moenius v. Stevens

688 F. Supp. 1054 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 20, 1988

In prior briefing, however, plaintiff argued that the jailor who has “[t]he sole decision of what cell a particular prisoner is placed *1057 in” qualifies as the “one who establishes governmental policy as to where to place … Such overbroad application of the term "policy” after its introduction in Monell has unfortunately added some analytical confusion to such simple situations: by its own terms, § 1983 clearly applies to "any statute, ordinance

Bodden v. Walsh

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 28, 2024

“The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from liability for civil damages when their conduct does not violate clearly established constitutional ....rights a reasonable officer would have … Thus, Plaintiff has failed to plead sufficient facts under the first prong of the qualified immunity test from Ashcroft, and Defendants Carpenter and Madden are thus entitled to qualified immunity. IV.

Kerr v. Enoch Pratt Free Library

54 F. Supp. 514 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 7, 1944

regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges or immunities … While it would doubtless be competent for the State to create and maintain a public library corporation as a feature of public education, clearly the State has not undertaken to do so in this case.