Case law

Frank v. England

313 F. Supp. 2d 532 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 7, 2004

As such, the Court finds that the evidence clearly demonstrates that Plaintiff did not pursue administrative remedies against the Navy. … Prima Facie Case In order to establish a prima facie case of discrimination, Plaintiff must demonstrate that: (1) he is a member of a protected class; (2) he was qualified for his job and his job performance was satisfactory

Hardy v. State

301 Md. 124 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 22, 1984

Section 5.01(2) of the Code lists seven different actions as potential “substantial steps” that can qualify as attempts. … Clearly, applying trial presumptions to determine jurisdiction defeats this purpose.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Guida

391 Md. 33 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 7, 2006

As to Rule 8.4(d), such conduct is clearly prejudicial to the administration of justice. … Judge Plitt said that the uncontradicted medical evidence established mitigation. If it was established, it had to be by a preponderance as to the entire case. Otherwise, he would have said it had not been established.

Mayor C.C. of Balto. v. Park Corp.

126 Md. 358 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 23, 1915

The witness had fully qualified as an expert, and had testified that he was familiar with some contracts for drainage in the area drained by the Callaway sewer. … This evidence was clearly inadmissible. The issue before the Court was not the cost of doing something else, but. the proper compensation for the connection which the City was condemning.

Rock v. State

6 Md. App. 618 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 25, 1969

The testimony of Buckley establishes that the appellant was taken into custody at the time the warrant was served. But it does not demonstrate that the procedural safeguards were fully used. … The appellant was not “clearly informed that he has the right to consult with a lawyer and to have the lawyer with him during interrogation.” 4 384 U. S. 471 . Duckett v. State, 3 Md. App. 563 .

In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Duces Tecum, August 1986

658 F. Supp. 474 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 20, 1987

Despite subsequent conversations with the government’s attorneys, Doe’s attorney was unable to reach an agreement with them regarding the requested proffer of immunity. … In the case at bar, if Richard Doe were to produce the records of B Corporation and A Corporation, he would clearly link himself to the corporations.

Johnson v. Runyon

928 F. Supp. 575 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 31, 1996

Johnson clearly has satisfied the first two elements. The dispute here, however, centers around causation, the third element of the prima facie case. … Johnson does not allege that she was better qualified than Knott.

Batts v. Lee

949 F. Supp. 1229 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 22, 1996

claim, plaintiff must establish that officials acted with deliberate indifference); Huang v. … Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. (Paper No. 10 at 4-12). . See Roseboro v.

Lowden v. Bosley

395 Md. 58 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 17, 2006

In Pinehaven, the Supreme Court of Idaho examined whether restrictive covenants established for a planned community of single family homes prohibited the short-term rental of the homes. … The new zoning regulations were adopted in August 2003 when Garrett County redefined and regulated homes which qualified as "transient vacation rental units” (TVRU).

Lancaster v. State

7 Md. App. 602 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 9, 1969

S. 413 establishes the following test for obscenity: “Three elements must coalesce; it must be established that: 1) - The dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to a prurient interest in sex. a) where the … Viewed against such a background, we believe the film qualifies as “hard core pornography,” within the definí *611 tion of that term set forth in Donnenberg.

Mitchell v. State of Maryland

178 Md. 579 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 13, 1940

It will thus be seen that the intent and purpose of the law, as clearly expresed by the statute, is to give to the accused and the State, in all criminal cases in which the right of peremptory challenge is not allowed, and … The appellant was furnished with a list of twenty qualified petit jurors, from which he exercised his right to strike.

Payne v. Payne

132 Md. App. 432 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 5, 2000

Clearly, some periods of time in the life of a child are more costly for a parent than others. … As appellee only had physical custody of the child for 88 nights, he fell well short of the 128 overnights required by statute to qualify for calculation of support on a shared custody basis.

Johnson v. Mayor & Council of Baltimore

233 Md. App. 43 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 1, 2017

It will not set aside the judgment of the trial court on the evidence unless clearly erroneous[.]” … And equally clearly, the Baltimore Police Department is not an agent or instrumentality of the City.

Middleton v. State

67 Md. App. 159 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 7, 1986

That testimony showed that: nine counties had not been presented with qualifying cases, of which two had no policy; of the seven that did, the policy in six was to automatically file in a qualified case and the other to proceed … Where, as here, the fact of the prior convictions is not disputed and the evidence presented to prove them is clearly sufficient, no issue of the burden of proof is presented. V. Relying on Williamson v.

Sanderson Farms, Inc. v. Tyson Foods, Inc.

549 F. Supp. 2d 708 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 15, 2008

In addition, consumers appear deceived with regard to the “qualified” claim, and Professor Mazis concludes that many consumers appear to separate the “qualified” claim into two concepts: (1) Tyson’s chicken has no antibiotics … Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint clearly states a claim upon which relief can be granted with respect to the unqualified claim “Raised Without Antibiotics.”

Alcoholic BeveragesConstitutional Law – Whether Non-Durational Residency Requirements for Alcoholic Beverages Licensees in Harford County are Permissible Under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution

Maryland Attorney General Reports · May 11, 2021

Because Chapter 462 has already been enacted, we need not consider in this opinion whether it was “clearly unconstitutional” under that standard. … It 11 The Supreme Court did not fully explain how the test it established in Thomas for alcoholic beverage regulations differs from the standard dormant Commerce Clause analysis.

Dillon v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission

382 F. Supp. 2d 777 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 18, 2005

In other words, if there clearly exist factual issues “that properly can be resolved only by a finder of fact because they may reasonably be resolved in favor of either party,” then summary judgment is inappropriate. … Here, it remains disputed whether Plaintiff qualified for leave under the FMLA.

Keyes v. State

236 Md. 74 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 23, 1964

It was within the province of the trial court to make this determination and we cannot say that it was clearly erroneous in so doing. … We cannot say that said finding was clearly erroneous. The judgment will therefore be affirmed. Judgment affirmed.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Greater Baltimore Medical Center, Inc.

769 F. Supp. 2d 843 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 21, 2011

Because the EEOC cannot establish that Mr. … If the EEOC had been able to establish that Mr. Turner was a qualified individual, this Court would have addressed issues including whether Mr.

Logan v. United States

851 F. Supp. 704 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 9, 1994

Congress enacted this statutory scheme to immunize federal employees from liability for tortious acts caused by them while acting in the scope of their employment. See U.S. v. … Clearly more than two years have passed since December 12, 1990, when Plaintiff was injured.