Case law

Horowitz v. Sherman

District Court, D. Maryland · May 11, 2020

Plaintiffs contend that Defendants do not seek qualified immunity here. (Id.). … for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.”

Gary v. USAA Life Insurance Co.

229 F. Supp. 3d 365 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 17, 2017

Co., 39 F.3d 1177 , 1994 WL 592750, at *3 (4th Cir. 1994), the Fourth Circuit held that the record “clearly establishes a material misrepresentation sufficient to warrant rescission of the contract by Ohio Life” under Maryland … Clearly, Ms. Maddox-Gary knew or should have known that she had that echocardiogram.

Doe v. Prince George's County Public Schools

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 6, 2022

Although the Individual Defendants briefly reference qualified immunity and claim that the right at issue was not clearly established at the time of the relevant events, they provide.no meaningful analysis of this defense … In any event, the Court will not dismiss these claims on qualified immunity grounds because it finds that the Fourth Amendment right at issue was clearly established by a consensus of cases of persuasive

Charm City Hemp, LLC v. Moore

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 30, 2025

But Plaintiffs do not allege that they sought to qualify as social equity applicants. … 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.

Ennals

District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 30, 2026

only by qualified immunity.” … And well-established amongst ‘advocative functions is a prosecutor’s “decision as to whether [ ] evidence was exculpatory.” Carter v.

Lancaster v. United States

927 F. Supp. 887 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 4, 1996

The Act also contains several exceptions to this waiver of sovereign immunity. … Assuming for the purposes of this motion that the Hospital Memorandum did establish a policy requiring VAMC management to warn residents of the lead paint hazard, the policy clearly was a general one that left it to the discretion

Haavistola v. Community Fire Co. of Rising Sun, Inc.

812 F. Supp. 1379 · District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 10, 1993

Plaintiff Haavistola asserts that application of the Garrett factors to the facts here clearly indicates that the Eire Company’s members, including the plaintiff, are “employees” under Title VII. … Specifically, Md.Ann.Code, art. 38A § 7, establishes the Office of the Fire Marshal whose responsibilities include “the establishment and enforcement of fire safety practices throughout the State, ...

Schalk v. Associated Anesthesiology Practice

316 F. Supp. 2d 244 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 27, 2004

Moreover, he claimed that he need not establish an employer-employee relationship to state a claim under the Rehabilitation Act. … Schalk clearly raises a claim under the ADA, and he asserts facts that, if proven, would entitle him to relief.

Higgins v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.

671 F. Supp. 1055 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 28, 1987

As Prosser points out, it is really only the immunity of strict liability to negligence-based defenses (like contributory negligence) that distinguishes strict liability from negligence in failure to warn cases. … DuPont, then, clearly qualifies as a knowledgeable industrial purchaser with respect to bulk chemicals in general and the possible teratogenic effects of glycol ether acetates in particular.

Canter v. Mamboob

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 23, 2020

The Court found no basis for qualified immunity because Defendants had not offered sufficient evidence to establish that they did not violate Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment rights. Id. at 11 n.5. … entitled to qualified immunity).

Williams v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 10, 2023

The Compact established WMATA as an interstate agency and instrumentality of each signatory. Id. at 359. Thus, WMATA “enjoys the same rights and privileges as a state, including sovereign immunity.” Bailbey v. Wash. … In finding that the plaintiff’s claims were barred by sovereign immunity, the court adopted a broad, inclusive view of what falls within the scope of law enforcement activity, and thus what qualifies as a quintessential

City Stores Co. v. Shull

161 F. Supp. 459 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 17, 1958

Some tests are well established. … McDougal, 225 U.S. 561, 569 , 32 S.Ct. 704, 706 , 56 L.Ed. 1205 * * * Today, even more clearly than in the past, ‘the federal nature of the right to be established is decisive — not the source of the authority to establish

Bessenyei v. Raiti

266 F. Supp. 2d 408 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 9, 2003

Salvatore Raiti who, according to Raiti, told plaintiff he should report to the hand clinic at Union Memorial Hospital where the doctors were better qualified to treat the injury. (Id. at 19-20.) … Plaintiff has failed to establish the existence of a relationship giving rise to a duty owed to him by Dr. Birely.

Carroll v. United Steelworkers of America

498 F. Supp. 976 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 15, 1980

Nonetheless, summary judgment is properly granted, even in complex cases, where the facts established by the movants’ evidence are opposed solely by the opponents’ conclusory assertions or are clearly uncontroverted, and … Thus, with the establishment of the pool areas, if the employee was qualified to perform the work and if the vacancy had not otherwise been filled, the worker could use his plant seniority to bid on the job vacancy in another

Crowley v. Fox Broadcasting Co.

851 F. Supp. 700 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 3, 1994

Congress enacted this statutory scheme to immunize federal employees from liability for tortious acts caused by them while acting in the scope of their employment. See U.S. v. … Clearly more than two years have passed since December 12, 1990, when Plaintiff was injured.

Predmore v. Allen

407 F. Supp. 1067 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 16, 1976

This may be done by showing (i) that he belongs to a racial minority; (ii) that he applied and was qualified for a job for which the employer was seeking applicants; (iii) that, despite his qualifications, he was rejected … The nature of that explicit waiver of sovereign immunity is presently before the Court. See Brown v.

Younger v. Green

District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 19, 2019

Qualified Immunity. Crowder contends that he is shielded from liability as to Younger’s § 1983 claims under the doctrine of qualified immunity. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability in a § 1983 suit as long as their conduct has not violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have

Baruah v. Young

536 F. Supp. 356 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 24, 1982

During this time Young was interviewing persons for positions the plaintiff alleges he was qualified to fill. … The court need not address at this juncture whether Toll would be entitled to qualified immunity should his culpability be established initially.

Smith v. Bevins

57 F. Supp. 760 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 14, 1944

The holding of this court to the contrary of these Maryland cases was at the time based on the then currently well established federal decisions. Stewart v. Baltimore & O. R. R. … Judge McDowell rejected the view that the only person qualified to sue would be a local administrator.

M.A.B. v. Bd. of Educ. of Talbot Cnty.

286 F. Supp. 3d 704 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 12, 2018

Because § 5-518(c) waives a county board of education's Eleventh Amendment immunity from discrimination claims under federal law and the constitution, the Court concludes that such immunity does not apply to M.A.B.' … Thus, Price Waterhouse establishes that Title VII's prohibition on discrimination because of sex includes-more broadly-gender stereotyping.