Case law

Kirsch v. Prince George's County

331 Md. 89 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 25, 1993

Bernalillo County Assessor, 472 U.S. 612 , 105 S.Ct. 2862 , 86 L.Ed.2d 487 (1985), a qualified Vietnam veteran and his wife who established residency in New Mexico in 1981 *101 applied for a tax exemption in 1983 under a … Such a result would be clearly impermissible.” Id. at 64 , 102 S.Ct. at 2315 , 72 L.Ed.2d at 680 . B.

Addison v. Lochearn Nursing Home, LLC

411 Md. 251 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 10, 2009

See Bowen, 410 Md. at 297 , 978 A.2d at 684-85 (stating that “claimed immunity from an adverse judgment would clearly be reviewable on appeal from a final judgment”); See also Bloch v. … which of its citizens qualify for this form of medical insurance and which services its program will provide.

Tarer

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 18, 2026

immunity. … - 15 2017), however, the Fourth Circuit specifically held that it is clearly established that “retaliating against an inmate who filed a prison grievance [is] unlawful

United Railways & Electric Co. v. Dean

117 Md. 686 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 27, 1912

. ■ The principles of law controlling this class of negligence case are well established by a number of decisions of this and other State Courts. … Under such circumstances, he was clearly competent and qualified to form an opinion, and to state the nature and effect of the injury. *704 There was clearly no error in the rulings in either of these exceptions.

McCree v. State

441 Md. 4 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 18, 2014

We decline to disregard this well-established rule. … Under the last antecedent rule, “a qualifying clause ordinarily is confined to the immediately preceding word or phrase[.]” Davis v.

Miles Laboratories, Inc. v. Doe

315 Md. 704 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 2, 1989

We think the applicable history clearly demonstrates that the Legislature intended that the original version of what is now § 18-402, as enacted in 1971 and as recodified in 1982, *714 apply solely to the disease of serum … Had the Legislature enacted the bill in this form it clearly would have included AIDS or any other as then unknown diseases that might be transmitted through blood.

Curtis v. State

4 Md. App. 499 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 2, 1968

But when this cause for disqualification, established by judicial decision, was removed by legislative enactment, the ground for the inquiry was no longer existent. … We construe Art. 51, § 8A according to the ordinary and natural import of its language, there being no different meaning clearly indicated by the context.

Perkins

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 31, 2026

In considering this question, the Maryland courts have identified a two-part test: “(1) whether the entity asserting immunity qualifies for the protection; and, if so, (2) whether the legislature has waived immunity either … She alleges no facts to support that she qualified for an FMLA benefit and merely asserts in conclusory fashion that Defendant interfered with the provision of an FMLA benefit. See id.

Drews v. State

224 Md. 186 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 18, 1961

There is no direct statement in the record that the Park is a place of public resort or amusement but we think the evidence clearly permitted the finding the trial court made that it is. … , notifies the Negro of the policy and orders him to leave the premises, the calling in of a peace officer to enforce the proprietor’s admitted right would amount to deprivation by the state of any rights, privileges or immunities

Uzzle v. State

152 Md. App. 548 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 2, 2003

These findings were not clearly erroneous, and the ruling based upon them was not in error. 2 *569 E. … This contention is clearly nothing more than a case of undifferentiated post-verdict angst. Gilliam v.

Doe v. DeWees

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 23, 2020

Qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which … that the relevant Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Robinson v. State

66 Md. App. 246 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 5, 1986

The physical circumstances of the shooting, buttressed by other surrounding circumstances, clearly established a prima facie case with respect to both convictions. … Only the state of mind on September 3, of course, qualifies as the ultimate “state of mind in issue.” Strict contemporaneity is not, however, absolutely required.

McPherson v. Baltimore Police Department

District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 14, 2020

Qualified Immunity According to the analysis above, Patton and Barlow are not entitled to qualified immunity, which is overcome where a plaintiff has pled facts showing “(1 … The relevant legal protections were, in fact, clearly established as of the time of Plaintiffs’ arrests.

State v. Ambrose

191 Md. 353 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 10, 1948

Section 94C provided that “The rights and interests of lessees” under leases already in force, “covering areas within the limits of natural beds or bars which may be established by the resurveys provided for by Section 94A … But any surrender of sovereign immunity must be made by the legislature, not by the courts.

Sargent v. BOARD OF EDUC., BALTO. CTY.

49 Md. App. 577 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 3, 1981

We, of course, are not at liberty to depart from that restrictive view, which was established by the Court of Appeals. … The Court stated that, "[i]t may be inferred that he was qualified to do his regular work with no unusual strain or risk, but that he was not qualified to do the work of the 'extra job’ under the extreme weather conditions

Douglas v. Friedel, Exec.

216 Md. 11 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 3, 1958

Friedel (Friedel) as executor, was admitted to probate on July 11, 1955; and Friedel duly qualified as such on that date. … We therefore conclude the action of the trial court was clearly justified and well within the exercise of its sound discretion. Order affirmed, with costs.

Ridgely v. State

75 Md. 510 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 16, 1892

This objection was sustained, and we think rightly sustained, for the testimony excluded was clearly hearsay and irrelevant. … under what circumstances evidence should he admitted or rejected when offered out of the proper order,” in the absence of any rule of Court upon the subject, is in the discretion of the trial Judge, “as the tribunal best qualified

In re Michael G.

107 Md. App. 257 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 30, 1995

The roles of the master and the chancellor in juvenile proceedings are well-established. Under CJP § 3-813 and Maryland Rule 911, a master for juvenile causes is expressly authorized to conduct hearings. … Under these circumstances, the statements clearly do not qualify as statements by a party-opponent.

Montague v. State

3 Md. App. 66 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 1, 1968

We find that the appellant’s flagrant disregard of the elementary principles of the Maryland traffic laws; operation of a motor vehicle without having qualified for an operator’s permit, which to us raises a prima facie presumption … Upon the record before us, we find that the trial judge’s finding was not clearly erroneous. Maryland Rule 1086. Judgment affirmed.

Roynon v. Janet's Cleaning Service

70 Md. App. 554 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 9, 1987

Upon analysis, however, we see that in reality the quoted language establishes but a single condition. … The injured workman’s suit against the buyer was dismissed on the basis that under Virginia’s Act the defendant was the plaintiff’s statutory employer and therefore immune from suit.