Case law

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Deutsch

294 Md. 353 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 5, 1982

The third attorney was given immunity as the key government witness. … He said that estimate was high in order to protect himself under his immunity agreement.

Tserkis v. Baltimore County, Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 19, 2021

Qualified immunity is an “‘immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability[.]’” Ussery v. Mansfield, 786 F.3d 332, 337 (4th Cir. 2015) (quoting Mitchell v. … However, “[b]ecause an official ‘who performs an act clearly established to be beyond the scope of his discretionary authority is not entitled to claim qualified immunity,’ the defendant bears the initial burden ‘of demonstrating

Pelt v. United States Department of Homeland Security

District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 14, 2024

Qualified immunity applies where the officers’ actions either did not violate the plaintiff’s constitutional rights or where such violations were not “clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct.” … But again, the proposed Amended Consolidated Complaint changes none of the pertinent facts that supported this Court’s prior decision to deny dismissal on qualified immunity.

Bailey v. Anne Arundel County, Maryland

259 F. Supp. 2d 421 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 14, 2003

The record here establishes that it was because of the low score received by Bailey that he was not qualified for placement on the certified list of interviewees and that he was therefore not qualified for promotion to captain … On the record here, this Court concludes that this is not a case where the selectee’s qualifications are so clearly below those of the plaintiff that defendant’s proffered reason that the selectee was more qualified can be

St. Louis University v. United States

182 F. Supp. 2d 494 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 25, 2002

Because Danny’s immune system was compromised, the attenuated polio virus contained in the vaccine was able to replicate fast enough to overcome his suppressed immune system, resulting in poliomyelitis. … The evidence clearly establishes that but for ... [the United States’s] negligence, the seeds would not have been used.” 774 F.Supp. at 958 .

Melrod v. Melrod

83 Md. App. 180 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 31, 1990

With respect to the 1990 M Street partnership, the evidence clearly established that the partnership real estate was sold on 22 January 1988, a year before the divorce, and that Mr. … We cannot say, after reviewing the evidence, that that finding was clearly erroneous.

Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Ben Lewis Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.

121 Md. App. 467 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 27, 1998

Further, in light of Lewis’s legal obligation to read the policy, there was clearly no fraud in the inducement of the contract. … Thus the Federal rule, which seems to be clearly established, is that an affirmative defense may be raised for the first time by summary judgment motion when that motion is the defendant’s initial response to the plaintiffs

Brown v. State

359 Md. 180 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 9, 2000

This comparison demonstrates that § 9-106 is clearly not a competency statute and that § 9-105 is clearly not a privilege statute. … In most jurisdictions the issue is qualified by the right of either the testifying spouse, the other spouse, or both, to consent to such testimony.

O'CONNOR v. Keller

510 F. Supp. 1359 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 26, 1981

If a prisoner establishes a constitutional violation, prison officials sued in their individual capacity may be entitled to qualified immunity. Procunier v. … Further, qualified immunity is an affirmative defense with the defendant who asserts it having the burden of proof. McCray v.

Prince of Peace Lutheran Church v. Linklater

421 Md. 664 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 21, 2011

This is clearly an act of retaliation to which the “course of conduct” test is applicable. … Linklater’s claims are prohibited by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and the doctrine of charitable immunity.

Bae Systems Technology Solution & Services, Inc. v. Republic of Korea's Defense Acquisition Program Administration

195 F. Supp. 3d 776 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 19, 2016

Plaintiffs likelihood of success on the merits The plaintiff must “clearly demonstrate that he will likely succeed on the merits,” rather than present a mere “grave or serious question for litigation.” … As discussed previously, Plaintiff has shown that it is likely to establish this Court’s jurisdiction.

Smallwood v. State

343 Md. 97 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 1, 1996

AIDS is thus the acute clinical phase of immune dysfunction .... AIDS is invariably fatal. Id. at 439-40 , 620 A.2d 327 . … Death by AIDS is clearly one natural possible consequence of exposing someone to a risk of HIV infection, even on a single occasion.

Myers v. Town of Elkton, Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 24, 2023

Plaintiffs assert that their right to be free from the unlawful seizure of their dog was clearly established at the time the shooting took place. (ECF No. 42 at 28). … Accordingly, Officer Devine has not established that he is entitled to qualified immunity.

Host Marriott Corp. v. United States

113 F. Supp. 2d 790 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 8, 2000

Moreover, “ ‘an income tax deduction is a matter of legislative grace and ... the burden of clearly showing the right to the claimed deduction is on the taxpayer.’ ” INDOPCO, Inc. v. … The liability for federal income tax deficiency interest arises out of 26 U.S.C. § 6601 (a) under a rate established by § 6621. The liability for workers’ compensation payments arises out of various state laws.

Featherson v. Montgomery County Public Schools

739 F. Supp. 1021 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 18, 1990

They have clearly articulated a legitimate non-dis criminatory reason for the decisions made by MCPS— the selection of • candidates on a race-neutral basis whom MCPS administrators deemed to be more qualified than plaintiff—and … To the contrary, the evidence establishes that if plaintiff had applied for any of the assistant positions in question, the persons who were in fact selected were better qualified than she.

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Md. Auto. Ins. Fund

277 Md. 602 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 5, 1976

Comm'r, 219 Md. 607, 611 , 150 A.2d 421 (1959), we conclude that the "coverage" provided in the State Farm endorsement was clearly less than the "coverage" provided in § 243H. … The approval of the State Farm endorsement by the Insurance Commissioner is hardly persuasive where, as here, the endorsement so clearly limits coverage in violation of a statute.

Schweizer v. Schweizer

301 Md. 626 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 4, 1984

What constitutes “marital property” under § 8-201(e) is clearly “not dependent upon the legalistic concept of title.” Harper, supra, 294 Md. at 78 , 448 A.2d 916 . … The court emphasized: “To qualify under this rule, however, any unpaid marital debt must be directly traceable to the acquisition of marital property.” Id.

Adams, Nelson, and Timanus v. State

200 Md. 133 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 9, 1952

Lenoir’s statement, while it clearly shows that an abortion was performed on her, does not show that it was illegal, because she had previously consulted a Dr. … But these points were clearly waived by the stipulation. Whether the witness could make a claim of privilege in absentia, is open to question.

Robinson v. Pleet

76 Md. App. 173 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 14, 1988

Appellant does not dispute that counsel failed to file the certificate of qualified expert within the applicable 90-day *176 period. … Under the facts herein, however, appellant clearly is not entitled to that same de novo proceeding.

Musick v. Musick

144 Md. App. 494 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 31, 2002

Clearly, that is what the parties intended when they stated that the “denomi *503 nator shall be the total number of months during which benefits were accumulated prior to the time when the payment of such benefits shall … Absent such a qualified order, not only will the pension plan administrator refuse to implement the court's decision, but ... there is at least a reasonable argument that a non-qualified order may be invalid even as between