Case law

Hernandez v. State

7 Md. App. 355 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 2, 1969

His statement that appellant and Sanders were similar in appearance to the men who robbed him was qualified by his testimony at the suppression hearing, and before the jury, that he could not make a positive identification … Vucci — arrested with appellant and also indicted for the robbery— testified under a grant of immunity that at approximately the time the robbery was committed, he was in a car with appellant and Sanders “in the vicinity”

Raymond International, Inc. v. Baltimore County

45 Md. App. 247 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 11, 1980

Whether the County’s motion raising preliminary objection was improperly granted on the issue of sovereign immunity? V. … The record extract, we think, clearly establishes that the major contract items in this contract were the preplaced aggregate contract amount of $115,000 and the removal of the fender systems amounting to $34,000 and totaling

Green v. State

8 Md. App. 352 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 12, 1969

To prove the legality of the arrest, the State showed through the testimony of a qualified narcotics investigator, Detective John Sewell, that on October 16, 1968 he received information from a known, police-paid informer … The trial judge held that the State’s evidence clearly satisfied this test. We agree. See McCray v. Illinois, 386 U. S. 300 ; Beck v. Ohio, 379 U. S. 89 ; Draper v. United States, 358 U. S. 307 ; Wells v.

Buchholtz v. Hill

178 Md. 280 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 5, 1940

Buchholtz, the appellant, attempted to qualify for the office in Cumberland upon a commission from Governor Herbert R. O’Conor and a bond in the amount of $5,000. The County Commissioners, however, appointed R. … established, there is no ground for the issuance of a mandamus.

Bell v. United States

521 F. Supp. 2d 456 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 11, 2007

. § 7609(b)(2)(B) qualifies that right with a requirement that the person seeking to quash the summons “shall mail by registered or certified mail a copy of the petition to the person summoned” within the 20-day period referred … “Jurisdiction over any suit against the Government requires a clear statement from the United States waiving sovereign immunity, together with a claim falling within the terms of the waiver.” United States v.

Beahm v. Erie Insurance Exch.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 30, 2024

The definition contemplated clearly two distinct situations. When the named insured is an individual, the person who signed the Subscriber Agreement is a subscriber. … The named insured was identified clearly on the declarations page as Starboard, a corporation. Beahm was not identified as a named insured.

Gillon v. BALTIMORE COUNTY, MD.

328 F. Supp. 2d 583 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 29, 2004

Notably, Gillon further testified that the people selected for the positions for which she applied were qualified, and that she did not disagree with the process implemented to fill those positions. Id. … That is, merely not being offered a desired employment posi *591 tion is far removed from the extreme and outrageous conduct required to establish a prima facie case.

Bricker v. Bricker

78 Md. App. 570 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 8, 1989

The conclusions that are drawn therefrom are not clearly erroneous, we must affirm. Rule 8-131(c). MEDICAL INSURANCE The parties had been granted a limited divorce on December 19,1985. … Simpson, 18 Md.App. at 628 , 308 A.2d 410 ; the amount had to be established based on the circumstances as of the date of the award, Benner v.

Rose & Crown, Ltd. v. Shaw Enterprises, Inc.

28 Md. App. 548 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 5, 1975

The Court’s emphasis was placed upon whether or not the tenant was misled by the acceptance: “In any event the landlords’ actions clearly established a no waiver policy. … clearly expressed, and obviously understood, intention to the contrary as in the case at bar.

Hawkins v. Rockville Printing & Graphics, Inc.

189 Md. App. 1 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 24, 2009

Hawkins asserted that “[he] clearly was a ‘qualified individual’ under the [MCHRA] and entitled to protection from disability discrimination and retaliation.... ” After a hearing on the motions on October 19, 2007, the circuit … RC cites to multiple cases that hold that a plaintiff who fails to apply for employment cannot establish a prima facie case for discrimination. 8 Ordinarily, a person would need to make an application for employment to establish

United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Comptroller of Treasury

69 Md. App. 458 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 9, 1986

As a result, the Tax Court ruled that UPS qualified for the interstate commerce exemption. … We agree and hold that the statute and relevant regulations clearly exempted UPS’s package vans from the assessment of sales and use taxes. A.

Barnes v. Greater Baltimore Medical Center, Inc.

210 Md. App. 457 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 21, 2013

They argued that there was no evidence establishing that if Dr. Rustía had sent Mr. Barnes to the main emergency room the first time he went to the hospital, Mr. … Barnes clearly suffered on January the 27th was proven, preventable.” The court concluded, *467 [Dr.

Fairchild Stratos Corp. v. Siegler Corp.

225 F. Supp. 135 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 18, 1963

At this time the schedule for progress payments was established and incorporated as a change notice into the contract. … The dies shown Hufford and the drawings furnished Hufford clearly indicated the necessity of such forming.

Hanna v. Hills

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 12, 2022

Qualified Immunity Defendants lastly contend that even if they had committed any of the alleged constitutional violations, they nonetheless enjoy qualified immunity requiring … Qualified immunity protects state actors from prosecution for violations of federal statutory or constitutional rights that had not been “clearly established” at the time of the alleged violations.

Foster v. Wiedefeld

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 30, 2024

The courts of Maryland have “adopted a two-part test to determine whether sovereign immunity applies in a specific case: (1) does the entity asserting sovereign immunity qualify, and (2) has the Legislature waived the … immunity[?]”

Pevia v. Moyer

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 31, 2022

In an exercise of this discretion, the Court considers only the second prong of the qualified immunity analysis: whether the constitutional right was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct. … They are entitled to qualified immunity.

Housing Authority v. Woodland

438 Md. 415 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 26, 2014

This Court clearly disagrees with that a doctor has to be a certified risk assessor to testify. … Dackman Co. only found the immunity provisions of the Lead Act invalid. 422 Md. 357 , 30 A.3d 854 (2011). We severed the remainder of the Lead Act that did not speak to potential immunity from the invalid portions.

Montgomery Investigative Services, Ltd. v. Horne

173 Md. App. 193 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 12, 2007

Baltimore Baseball Club, 250 Md. 482, 486 , 243 A.2d 533 (1968), Judge Singley had similarly stated for the Court of Appeals: *205 Communications arising out of the employer-employee relationship clearly enjoy a qualified … Gohari, 130 Md.App. 265, 274 , 745 A.2d 1134 (2000) (“Communications arising out of the employer-employee relationship clearly enjoy a qualified privilege.”); Shapiro v.

Lamone v. Capozzi

396 Md. 53 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 11, 2006

Early voting, instead, fundamentally changes the very principles established in the Constitution. … We reject the appellants’ argument and hold that Article I, § 3 clearly indicates that the inability to vote personally applies to “ab *91 sent” voters, not those who find the voting day to be inconvenient.

Brown v. Smart

69 Md. 320 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 14, 1888

If, however, a creditor, being a citizen of another State, invokes the aid of the insolvent laws, or voluntarily makes himself a party to the proceedings thereunder, he thereby abandons his extra-territorial immunity, and … Therefore, under the statute to which we have referred, the making the deed of assignment was clearly an act of insolvency, subjecting the debtor to adjudication, and such adjudication of the debtor as an insolvent, based