Case law

Carey v. Jackson

165 Md. 472 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 9, 1934

That all appears clearly from sections 203A to 203Q of the City Charter, article 4 of the Code of Public Local Laws, and from the opinion of Judge Parke in Strott v. Broening, 160 Md. 560 , 154 A. 45 . … The purpose of the ordinance was the establishment and organization of the Bureau of Control and Accounts.

Rasin v. State

153 Md. 431 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 8, 1927

suggested in the appellant’s brief, it would be difficult for the jury, in deciding the question of admissibility, not to be influenced by the confession itself, which they ought not to hear unless its admissibility is first clearly … established to the satisfaction of the court.”

Walker v. City of Salisbury

170 F. Supp. 2d 541 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 4, 2001

Although these causes of action clearly arise under state law, plaintiff has chosen to present them to this federal court. … Plaintiff has not alleged facts establishing that defendants violated his right to equal protection of the law.

Gough v. Semexan

District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 9, 2022

An official who commits a constitutional violation is immune under the doctrine of qualified immunity if he 5 As noted above, state personnel are also immune from suit under the MTCA for acts made without gross negligence … The court follows a two-part test to determine whether an officer is immune under qualified immunity: (1) whether a constitutional violation occurred and (2) whether the right violated was clearly established such that

Perkins v. University of Maryland School of Nursing

District Court, D. Maryland · May 12, 2025

’s Eleventh Amendment immunity.” … immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.5 Sovereign immunity deprives this Court of jurisdiction to hear Perkins’ MFEPA claims.

Dunn v. State

65 Md. App. 637 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 17, 1985

keep his *650 freedom ‘as long as he conducts himself in a manner consonant with established communal standards and the safety of society’ ”. … Were it determined that the knife is not a penknife without switchblade, the inference drawn by the majority would clearly be rational.

Lemp v. Majkrzak

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 6, 2025

Defendants argue that these claims are futile because the search warrant was supported by probable cause and, alternatively, that the officers have qualified immunity. ECF No. 35 at 6–11. … “Qualified immunity protects government officials who commit constitutional violations but who, in light of clearly established law, could have reasonably believed that their actions were lawful.” Knibbs v.

Hecht v. Crook

184 Md. 271 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 10, 1945

He held the office by successive appointments of three years each until March 1, 1943, and continued to serve as a holdover until October 18, 1943, when his successor qualified. … Under subsection (7) it is authorized, subject to the limitations of the Article, to establish rules and regulations for the transaction of its business.

Briddell v. Chester

206 F. Supp. 2d 733 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 10, 2002

If those three conditions are met, the public official enjoys a qualified immunity in the absence of “malice.” Baltimore Police Dep’t v. … There can be no dispute that all three conditions for public official immunity have been met. Id.

Boatel Industries, Inc. v. Hester

77 Md. App. 284 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 30, 1988

Hester, while the broader terms of the Act may qualify the boat within the definition of “consumer product,” they clearly exclude Mr. Hester as a “non-consumer.” … Hester clearly did. The courts have interpreted this “resale” provision strictly. In Black v.

Day v. Patapsco & Back Rivers Railroad

504 F. Supp. 1301 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 15, 1981

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under McDonnell Douglas, a plaintiff is required to show, inter alia, that he was qualified for the promotion for which the employer was seeking applicants. … The evidence in this case clearly establishes that the present Patapsco seniority system is identical, in all relevant respects, to the seniority syste ms which existed at the Railroad prior to adoption of Title VII.

Rowley v. Mayor of Baltimore

60 Md. App. 680 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 6, 1984

Although his salary was paid by the City to qualify him for a pension, the City was reimbursed for those payments by FMI. … The defense of governmental immunity was not raised. The activities involved in operating the convention center are clearly of a proprietary nature. 3 .

State Ex Rel. Frederick City Police Department v. One 1988 Toyota Pick-Up Truck Vin. JT4RN63A5J0211499

334 Md. 359 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 15, 1994

do not fall within any of the standards or conditions established by the statute. … The initial language of subsection (i), which introduces the standards that follow, clearly establishes that further limitation: (i) In exercising the authority to seize motor vehicles pursuant to this section the following

(2007)

92 Op. Att'y Gen. 180 · Maryland Attorney General Reports · Dec 17, 2007

The Commission has adopted regulations establishing standards for assessing program duplication in that context. … Md. 2005) (holding that Morgan State University "qualifies for [Eleventh Amendment] immunities as an arm of the State of Maryland").

Lema v. Citibank (South Dakota), N.A.

935 F. Supp. 695 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 20, 1996

Instead, it grants both users of information and consumer reporting agencies “a qualified immunity from common law actions based on information which a consumer reporting agency was required by the [FCRA] to disclose. … This immunity ... is the quid pro quo for compulsory disclosure.” Freeman v. Southern National Bank, 531 F.Supp. 94, 96 (S.D.Tex.1982).

White v. State

11 Md. App. 423 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 15, 1971

Even after the motion for a directed verdict is made, the party whose opening statement is thereby attacked will be afforded full opportunity to qualify or amplify the statement in order to repair any inadequacy. … Under the circumstances of this case, we cannot say that the error was clearly harmless.

Lerner v. Northwest Biotherapeutics

273 F. Supp. 3d 573 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 31, 2017

Dendritic cell immunotherapies work by using human dendritic cells 3 to activate the body’s immune response against cancerous tumors. … skin, and boosts immune responses by showing antigens on its surface to other cells of the immune system.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. McLaughlin

372 Md. 467 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 24, 2002

McLaughlin clearly violated the ethical duty required by Rule 1.4. … If the applicant was unable to qualify for Medicaid, McLaughlin provided various alternative remedies: G. Return of Fee if unable to qualify for Medicaid: 1.

Lundregan v. Housing Opportunities Commission

District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 24, 2024

that the official’s conduct violated a federal right; and (2) whether such right was “clearly established” as of the time of the alleged violation. … It is also fair argument that Lundregan’s right to be free from discrimination based on her disability was at all relevant times clearly established. In Corey v.

DeShazor v. Barb

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 8, 2020

Qualified Immunity Finally, Defendants make the blanket assertion that they are all entitled to summary judgment on qualified immunity grounds. … Qualified immunity is a defense that shields government officials from liability “unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established