Case law

Salvagno v. Frew

158 Md. App. 315 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 3, 2004

Expert medical testimony is not required to establish the “scope” or the “breach of the physician’s duty,” but it is required to establish the “nature of the risks inherent in a particular treatment, the probabilities of … Leahy, 326 Md. 160, 166 , 604 A.2d 73 (1992), the Court, in considering whether an “award” is divisible between liability and damages for the purpose of rejecting an award, said that “the arbitration award on the merits is clearly

Rouse-Fairwood Development Ltd. Partnership v. Supervisor of Assessments for Prince George's County

138 Md. App. 589 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 31, 2001

Regarding nonresidential uses, Lockard listed the commercial establishments permitted as a matter of right under M-X-C, but not under R-R zoning. … The principles that govern judicial review of an administrative agency’s decision, as well as statutory construction, are well established.

Chesapeake Publishing Corp. v. Williams

339 Md. 285 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 24, 1995

In Maryland, there exists a qualified privilege to report on legal proceedings, even if the story contains defamatory material, as long as the account is fair and substantially accurate. … We believe that the publication, if taken as a whole, is a fair and substantially accurate account of what has clearly been a protracted and complex court proceeding.

Heinlein v. Stefan

134 Md. App. 356 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 29, 2000

The analytic framework for examining such a question in Maryland was established by Judge Raker in Davis v. Davis, 335 Md. 699 , 646 A.2d 365 (1994). … The adverbial qualifier is nestled snugly within the second pre-condition and is fenced off from the third precondition by a semi-colon.

R. E. Duvall Co. v. Washington, B. & A. Electric R. Co.

51 F.2d 566 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 21, 1931

It may also be conceded that the mere fact that a granting clause includes a specific description of existing property does not necessarily limit or qualify subsequent general provisions of a broader scope. … The rules established for the interpretation of written instruments do not justify the detachment of general words from accompanying expressions of an explanatory character, and often times, as in this case, a broad phrase

St. Luke Evangelical Lutheran Church, Inc. v. Smith

74 Md. App. 353 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 24, 1988

Rule 2-512(h) clearly limits each party to a maximum of four initial peremptory challenges. … To accept such reasoning would in effect re-establish the doctrine advanced by the plurality opinion in Rosenbloom v.

Dejarnette v. State

478 Md. 148 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 25, 2022

requirements” because “test results produced by a qualified person using certified equipment in a timely manner are prima facie reliable.” … Dejarnette argues that, to the extent that the circuit court made such a finding, the finding was clearly erroneous.

Aeropesca Ltd. v. Butler Aviation International, Inc.

44 Md. App. 610 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 6, 1980

Plough, Inc., 228 Md. 484, 486 , 180 A.2d 478, 480 (1962) states that: “Whether a foreign corporation may maintain a suit without qualifying- or registering clearly depends upon whether it is ‘doing business’ as defined in … We cannot say that Judge Thieme was clearly erroneous. Md. Rule 1086.

Graham v. Miles

284 F. 878 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 21, 1922

Graham, is a judge of the Court of Claims having, after due appointment and confirmation, qualified as such on September 1, 1919. … Whether it would or would not have been willing to tax the minority, if the majority were immune, nobody knows, perhaps not even the members of that Congress, for upon that question they never were called upon to make up

Thomas

District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 21, 2026

Ultimately, the Chief of Police granted her some relief, although the Amended Complaint does not clearly set out the specific changes that were made to the PSHQ Room. … However, the complaint must allege sufficient facts to establish those elements.” Walters v. McMahen, 684 F.3d 435, 439 (4th Cir. 2012) (citation omitted).

Braxton v. State

123 Md. App. 599 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 6, 1998

It reasoned that a qualified immunity defense adequately protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law,” id. at 341 , 106 S.Ct. 1092 , and it gives “ample room for mistaken judgments.” … competence could disagree on this issue, immunity should be recognized.”

Stevenson v. Branch Banking & Trust Corp.

159 Md. App. 620 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 17, 2004

Rejecting the bank’s argument that “other cash based benefits” clearly excludes earnings from the exercise of stock options, the court acknowledged that the phrase “other cash based benefits” is “qualified by[,] as is the … Clearly, the tax treatment of these earnings does not definitively establish that they constituted “annual cash compensation ... received from Maryland Federal or [BB & T].”

Riley v. Venice Beach Citizens Ass'n

487 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Apr 19, 2024

It also found that the circuit court’s denial of Bay Pride’s Large Section claim was not clearly erroneous. … As explained, in my view, the prior grant of summary judgment was not qualified under Maryland Rule 2-501(g).

Maryland Attorney General Opinion 108OAG3

Maryland Attorney General Reports · Mar 14, 2023

If the text is “unambiguous and clearly consistent with the statute’s apparent purpose,” we generally end our inquiry into legislative intent and apply the statute as written. Id. … In fact, the General Assembly was presented with a suggested amendment that would have clearly implicated—and restricted— food preparation but failed to take any action on that measure.

Wireless One v. Mayor & Cty. Cncl. of Balt.

465 Md. 588 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 23, 2019

It clearly was not. … The plain language of the exemption in RP § 12-201(e)(2)(iii) is unambiguous and clearly precludes Wireless One from qualifying as a “displaced person.” We begin by examining the language of the exemption.

Edwards v. First National Bank

122 Md. App. 96 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 24, 1998

In that case, the Court addressed, inter alia, the scope of the private remedy established by Env. § 4-409(a). … The Bank urges us to construe Env. § 4-401(i)(2)(i)(2) broadly, as a general grant of immunity from suit in favor of commercial lenders.

Volos, Ltd. v. Sotera

264 Md. 155 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 15, 1972

A motion was duly made and seconded to reject the proposed qualified stock option plan. Mr. … The general rule is well established in this state that a wrongfully discharged employee is entitled to recover damages to the extent of the stipulated salary for the stipulated period, less the amount he actually earned

De Patricio v. Towson University

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 19, 2024

Plaintiff counters that Counts I] and □□ are not barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity due to an express congressional abrogation of sovereign immunity, ECF 39, at 2; and that Plaintiff has established … Therefore, Defendant bears the burden of establishing that Congress has not abrogated State immunity, and that Maryland has not waived its immunity suit. 2.

Jay v. Michael

82 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 15, 1895

But this clause is again qualified and limited by adding “ and which said farm or parcel of land is particularly described in a deed from Priscilla Presbury” and others. … The Court was clearly right in refusing to permit the plot with accompanying description to be put in evidence.

Cornell v. Council of Unit Owners Hawaiian Village Condominiums, Inc.

983 F. Supp. 640 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 5, 1997

Charpentier, 937 F.2d at 864 (permitting immunity defense to be raised in pretrial brief). … Plaintiffs evidence fails to establish that the exculpatory clause at issue was not reasonably knowable to him at the closing.