Case law

McIver v. Russell

264 F. Supp. 22 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 31, 1967

Defendants have argued that dismissal by a Grand Jury of a presentment for indictment does not constitute a “termination” of the criminal proceeding for purposes of establishing that element of the tort. … Plaintiff does not deny that these are necessary elements in the definition of the tort which must be established before recovery may be had under the fourth count.

Berlyn, Inc. v. Gazette Newspapers, Inc.

214 F. Supp. 2d 530 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 13, 2002

Clearly, Shaffer cannot qualify under the general requirements of Rule 702, which requires “knowledge, skill, experience, training or education.” … This case is clearly analogous as the plaintiff intends to establish relevant market through Shaffer, whose highest level of education is an MBA, who has minimal formal training in applied economics, and who admittedly has

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.

Jackson v. Baltimore Curriculum Project, Inc.

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 20, 2021

Each of these claims against Richetta is a state law claim, rendering Defendants’ invocation of § 1983 case law on qualified immunity unavailing. Instead, Maryland’s common law qualified immunity applies. … This Court is not empowered to disregard such clearly established Supreme Court precedent merely because Plaintiff thinks it would be a good idea to do so.

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

United States v. Horn

185 F. Supp. 2d 530 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 31, 2002

Only after a scientific expert establishes the evidentiary reliability of the scientific principles underlying the test may a qualified police officer testify about administering of the test. … First, it held that police officers are not qualified to testify about the scientific bases underlying the HGN test and are not competent to establish that the test is reliable. 976 P.2d at 32 .

Poling v. Foxwell

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 11, 2021

Defendants argue they are entitled to qualified immunity because they did not violate any of Mr. Poling’s clearly established constitutional rights. Defs.’ Mot. Mem. 13. … According to Defendants, any violation here was not based on sufficiently established law for Mr. Poling to carry his burden to rebut qualified immunity. Defs.’ Mot. Mem. 14 (citing Bryant v.

G & M OIL CO. v. Glenfed Financial Corp.

782 F. Supp. 1085 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 10, 1991

The applicable standards for analyzing a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 are well-established. … Glenfed asserts that G & M can neither establish that Glenfed owed it a duty of care nor that Glenfed asserted any false statements.

Moore

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 27, 2026

Under the Eleventh Amendment, states generally enjoy immunity from suit unless a state waives its immunity, or the immunity is abrogated by Congress. See Board of Trustees of Univ. of Ala. v. … But Plaintiffs do not allege any of them sought to qualify as a social equity applicant.

McGowan v. P.G. County Police, District 1

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 9, 2019

Courts apply a two-step test in determining whether a police officer is entitled to qualified immunity, inquiring, first, “whether the facts alleged or shown, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, establish … that the officer's conduct violated the plaintiff's constitutional right,” and, second, if the first prong is satisfied, “whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the officer's conduct.”

McCann-McCalpine v. Lt McElligott

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 23, 2025

This appears to be an attempt to raise qualified immunity, which protects government officials performing discretionary functions from liability for civil damages “insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established … Nance appears to argue that qualified immunity is appropriate because the right allegedly violated was not “clearly established at the time” at the time of the alleged violation.

Proctor v. Scruggs

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 20, 2024

clearly established such that, at the time of the violation, a reasonable person would have understood that her actions violated a constitutional right. … established for the purposes of qualified immunity.

Allen v. Rumsfeld

273 F. Supp. 2d 695 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 15, 2003

Terms, conditions, or benefits of a person’s employment do not typically, if ever, include general immunity from the application of basic employment policies. Von Gunten, 243 F.3d at 869 . … As such, Plaintiffs unpaid suspension qualifies as an adverse employment action. See Spriggs v.

Rockwell v. MacK Trucks, Inc.

8 F. Supp. 2d 499 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 11, 1998

Only hours actually worked qualify for credit toward this total. … Rockwell has failed to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge in violation of the FMLA because he has failed to establish that he was an “eligible employee” entitled to the rights and protections that the

Jamil v. White

192 F. Supp. 2d 413 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 28, 2002

A list of 20 applicants, deemed “best qualified” by the Re-sumix system, was compiled. Plaintiff was listed as one of these twenty. A panel of three individuals was then established to interview the twenty applicants. … Evidence of record indicates that plaintiff has under Title VII established a pri-ma facie ease of discriminatory failure to promote. He has clearly satisfied the first three elements of the test.

Burns v. Buser

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 15, 2021

In Officer Turner’s memorandum in support of dismissal and summary judgment, he argued that he was entitled to qualified immunity if he was being sued in his individual capacity, and to Eleventh Amendment immunity if … The Court determined that Officer Turner was not entitled to qualified immunity because Officer Turner might have violated Burns’s clearly established rights by denying Burns medical care, despite the fact that he was

Friendship Villa-Clinton, Inc. v. Buck

512 F. Supp. 720 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 31, 1981

What clearly emerges from Trainor in any event is the proposition that the Eleventh Amendment forbids federal court determination of liability on the part of a state for past benefits owed by a state even when that state … In that case, the district court had ordered the establishment of certain remedial educational programs to counteract the effects of de jure segregation in Detroit public schools and had directed that part of the cost of

Jefferson v. United States

74 F. Supp. 209 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 23, 1947

o hold that it was not the intention of Congress to impose liability for personal damage to members of the ship’s company arising on the ship but not caused by the ship itself as a juridical entity, in view of the long established … It therefore clearly covers claims against the government by virtue of negligent acts of military personnel, damaging private citizens and even civilian federal employees who have not accepted benefits under the Federal Employees

In Re Sabin Oral Polio Vaccine Products Liability Litigation

743 F. Supp. 410 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 12, 1990

Moreover, OPV permitted the creation of “herd immunity” because a person who has not been administered the vaccine can pick up immunity from one who has been vaccinated. … For example, although a minor skin irritation resulting from a vaccination may in a sense be deemed to be “harmful,” it clearly is not “harmful” if measured against the benefits provided by immunization from disease.

West v. Police Officer Powers

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 29, 2023

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity from suit. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable