Case law

Lyles v. State

10 Md. App. 265 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 5, 1970

He contends that the judgment of the lower court as to each conviction was clearly erroneous and must be set aside. … this allegation was not attacked below nor is it questioned on appeal, but in any event to have the power to arrest as a police officer appellant would either have to have been ap *270 pointed; by the Governor and have qualified

Christian v. State

65 Md. App. 303 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 26, 1986

He avers that the State failed to establish a sufficient foundation to qualify the owner to express such an opinion. … Clearly, the intent to break and enter is different from an intent to destroy, injure, deface or molest the property of another. C.

Brownlee v. Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co.

456 Md. 579 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 18, 2017

from liability on charitable immunity grounds, unless and until Liberty Mutual indemnified it as responsible for Appellants’ injuries and damages. … The Supreme Court of Georgia held that lead present in paint “unambiguously qualifies as a pollutant and that the plain language of the policy’s pollution exclusion clause” removed plaintiffs claims against her landlord from

Johnson v. Md. Dep't of Labor

386 F. Supp. 3d 608 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 29, 2019

The ADA prohibits discrimination and retaliation against qualified individuals on the basis of disability. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 12112 , 12203(a) (2006). … In any event, the facts here do not establish conclusively that Plaintiff failed to cooperate. He clearly did not wholly fail to cooperate with the EEOC.

Cross v. State Roads Commission of the State Highway Administration

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 24, 2024

32 expansion is complete, and Parcel 139 has been reduced in size by 1.386 acres and has lost ingress and egress to Maryland Route 32, and thus is landlocked; in addition, the remaining 2.01-acre lot no longer qualifies … insufficient or frivolous on its face,’ and would run contrary to the Fourth Circuit’s well-established ‘policy to liberally allow amendment in keeping with the spirit of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a).””

Econolo v. Div. of Reimbursement

137 Md. App. 639 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 2, 2001

The motion to dismiss was based on the ground that the Eleventh Amendment precluded the action, and with respect to the 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims, on the ground that the defendants enjoyed qualified immunity. … The court concluded that, because the law did not clearly proscribe the actions of the defendants, the defense of qualified immunity barred the claims. Id. In Fetterusso v.

Mona Electric Co. v. Shelton

377 Md. 320 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 9, 2003

That is clearly not the case with workers’ compensation claims. They do require Commission action, in the form of an award. … Had such an award been entered, at any time during the existence of Shelton’s temporary disability, his present claim clearly would be barred.

Mayor of Annapolis v. Anne Arundel County

271 Md. 265 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 18, 1974

Their material was submitted to a “jury” of qualified architects and architectural historians and Mt. … “The record clearly indicates that the extension of the hearing was to accommodate the County.

Carroll v. Konits

400 Md. 167 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 27, 2007

Konits argues that the Director did not have the discretion to grant Carroll an extension of time because it was not filed within the 180-day period and good cause was not established. … This language, requiring a specific statement of causal connection, was clearly intended to be another way (the first being the Certificate itself) to substantiate the merit of the claim being filed.

Duvall v. Hambleton & Co.

98 Md. 12 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 5, 1903

established, before they will lend their aid to enforce it.” … and does it in the language of .this Court, which has been quoted, “clearly and explicitly” establish such an agreement ?

Lucero v. Early

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 25, 2019

indifferent because Lucero’s rights were not clearly established. … Second, the City conflates deliberate indifference under Monell with the need for a constitutional right to be clearly established to overcome qualified immunity.

Causey v. Balog

929 F. Supp. 900 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 17, 1996

To establish his prima facie case for failure to promote, Causey must show that: (1) he is a member of a protected group; (2) he sought the position in question; (3) he was qualified; and (4) he was rejected under circumstances … Causey must show “actual malice” in order to overcome this qualified privilege.

G & M Oil Co. v. Glenfed Financial Corp.

782 F. Supp. 1078 · District Court, D. Maryland · Dec 21, 1989

The applicable standards for analyzing a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56 are well-established. … unable to clearly address these theories in the motion for summary judgment.

Smith v. DCA Food Industries, Inc.

269 F. Supp. 863 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 5, 1967

DCA, the Local, the Union, and the National Bank of Washington (Trustee), a District of Columbia corporation qualified to do business in Maryland and the trustee under the pension fund, established by the collective bargaining … The views expressed by the Supreme Court in Humphrey clearly establish that the action herein involves rights and obligations which may be litigated by the plaintiff-employees under the aegis of section 301.

Kerby v. Mortgage Funding Corp.

992 F. Supp. 787 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 8, 1998

Dalm, 494 U.S. 596, 608 , 110 S.Ct. 1361, 1368 , 108 L.Ed.2d 548 (1990) (“Under settled principles of sovereign immunity, ‘the United States, as sovereign, is immune from suit, save as it consents to be sued ... and the terms … It manifestly cannot be said, however, that under the circumstances “it would have been unnecessary for Congress to amend the statute” to clearly establish the permissiveness of a recoupment defense.

H & R BLOCK, INC. v. Testerman

275 Md. 36 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 25, 1975

Upon entering the establishment, they met Joseph B. Dunn (Dunn), the operator of that particular franchise location, and now the other appellant in this appeal. … Thus, actual malice was established in both cases; the *46 conduct in each instance was marked by an evil motive or intent.

(1998)

83 Op. Att'y Gen. 180 · Maryland Attorney General Reports · Nov 9, 1998

For example, the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission ("WSSC") was held to be a State agency for purposes of applying the legal doctrine of sovereign immunity in Katz v. … General Assembly to strike, reduce, or qualify these appropriations. 68 Opinions of the Attorney General 86, 94-95 (1983) (emphasis added).

Heyda v. Heyda

94 Md. App. 91 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 27, 1992

Co., 83 Md.App. 524 , 575 A.2d 795 (1990), [t]he cardinal rule in the construction and interpretation of contracts is that effect must be given to the intention of the parties, unless it is inconsistent with some established … The record clearly reflects that the parties agreed that the numerator of the above fraction would be 246.466 months.

Frasher v. State

8 Md. App. 439 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 14, 1970

The evidence was submitted to an analytical chemist with the Internal Revenue Service, qualified as an expert in the field of narcotics. … “The immunity which had previously existed had at that time come to an end.” In Schiff v. People, 141 P. 2d 892 (Colorado 1943), the defendant was convicted of the larceny of copper wire.

Aquino v. Hott

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 27, 2025

immunity. … Qualified Immunity As to Defendant Hott, his qualified immunity defense is unavailing at this stage of the litigation, because Plaintiff has alleged facts suggesting