Case law

State v. Jenkins

178 Md. App. 156 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 6, 2008

Thus, while the “clearly erroneous” test demands some legally sufficient evidence for each and every element to be proved-to wit, that a prima facie case be established— Illinois v. … The Cl’s cooperation with the police was presumably in exchange for some sort of immunity, protection, or other favorable treatment.

Avey v. State

9 Md. App. 227 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 31, 1970

of such qualified electors . . . .’ … No principle of constitutional construction is better established than that a court will not pass upon such question unless it is clearly presented by the record.

Goff v. State

387 Md. 327 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 6, 2005

be held to be clearly erroneous.’ ” Solomon v. … The shower insert is clearly a fixture. Under the common law, fixtures are treated as part of the realty.

Hennegan v. Geartner

186 Md. 551 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 17, 1946

He is a duly registered and qualified voter in Baltimore City and is registered as a Republican. … For 34 years, therefore, it has been a part of the established election law of the State.

State v. Coblentz

169 Md. 159 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 12, 1935

company was thus known to be insolvent, it has been judicially determined that the defendant did not know of the loss of values alleged; yet the second indictment, on the charge of issuing false statements, is brought to establish … But there was clearly no disqualification. In the first of the appellee's cases to be tried and to be brought before this court, ( Coblentz v.

Frye

District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 28, 2025

Although Frye clearly objects to Hayes’ professional conduct, this does not permit Frye to recover damages against Hayes in this federal action. … “[A] court may take judicial notice of a document filed in another court not for the truth of the matters asserted in the other litigation, but rather to establish the fact of such litigation and related filings.”

Souffie v. State

50 Md. App. 547 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 11, 1982

We did so to establish clearly the doctrine of merger to be applied in this jurisdiction. We think it has now been clearly established and point out that we shall be more inclined to invoke Md. … Since the witness was testifying to highly inculpating disclosures appellant had made to him, the intimacy of their relationship was clearly relevant to establish the credibility of his testimony.

Franklin v. Mazda Motor Corp.

704 F. Supp. 1325 · District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 2, 1989

As the Supreme Court has noted: Our cases have clearly established that “[a] person has no property, no vested interest, in any rule of the common law.” … Because it is “clearly established that ‘a person has no property, no vested interest, in any rule of the common law ... ”’ Duke Power 438 U.S. at 88 n. 32, 98 S.Ct. at 2638 n. 32, the $350,000 cap on noneconomic damages

Smoot v. Rea

19 Md. 398 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 23, 1863

, (even if a verbal authority in such case would suffice,) must be held as revoked or qualified by the terms of the letters themselves. … We are clearly of opinion that he cannot claim to be protected as a bona fide purchaser without notice.

Williams v. Long

585 F. Supp. 2d 679 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 7, 2008

The exhibit also clearly indicates that the source of the information is August-November 1997 data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation. ... … Clearly the exhibits are hearsay, for they are proffered for the truth of their substantive content. See Fed.R.Evid. 801(c).

Thrift v. Towers

127 Md. 54 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Nov 11, 1915

Towers, was appointed on May the 4th, 1914, a member of the Public Service Commission of Maryland for the term of six years, and on the same day qualified and entered immediately upon the discharge of his duties as such commissioner … The ground of the attack must be plainly and clearly established.

Garland v. State

29 Md. App. 27 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 26, 1975

Wilbur) but was rather a clearly communicated and precisely literal statement to the effect that even proven murder is assumed to be only in the second degree until the State raises it to first degree, no harm would be done … In connection with manslaughter, there may be a homicide which would otherwise be murder, which is reduced to manslaughter by circumstances in mitigation or alleviation, as we call it; and this is where it is established

Harford County People's Counsel v. BEL AIR REALTY ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

148 Md. App. 244 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 2, 2002

Nevertheless, being careful never to express ourselves more clearly than we are able to think, we will rehearse those facts which may be pertinent to our discussion. … Relying on an interpretation by the Illinois Department of Transportation to the effect that structures counted in establishing an “urban district” should include only those that have direct access to the highway, the homes

Baltimore City Police Department v. State

158 Md. App. 274 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 2, 2004

Personnel records are included among those documentary materials that qualify as public records under the Act. Yet, personnel records are exempt from disclosure under SG § 10-616 of the Act. … IAD records of the sort at issue here, though made confidential as personnel records by the PIA, are not immune from disclosure to a defendant in a criminal trial. In Robinson v.

Brown v. Baltimore County Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 6, 2025

Governmental immunity, 2. Qualified immunity, 3. … Rule 8(b) is that a defendant’s pleading should apprise the opponent of those allegations in the complaint that stand admitted and will not be in issue at trial and those that are contested and will require proof to be established

Noble v. Director, Patuxent Institution

32 Md. App. 192 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 30, 1976

A psychologist from Patuxent Institute was qualified as an expert and expressed his opinion that appellant was a defective delinquent within the meaning of Md. Code, Art. 31B, § 5. … After stating that one of the most firmly established principles enunciated by that Court is that an expert witness must predicate his opinion on premises of fact, Judge Prescott, in State, Use of Stickley v.

Brigham v. Corcoran

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 1, 2021

immunity. … 2 In light of this ruling, the court need not address Defendants’ qualified immunity argument.

Cities Service Co. v. Governor

290 Md. 553 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 17, 1981

Most retail mass merchandisers are ineligible under both qualifying dates. … Moreover, the Legislature in 1979 clearly intended to confer a benefit upon the only mass merchandiser which, at that time, was owned by a producer or refiner of petroleum products.

Concrete General, Inc. v. Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission

779 F. Supp. 370 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 25, 1991

Nevertheless, as the next section discusses, even assuming that Plaintiffs could clearly prove a factual predicate to establish past discrimination, the MPP is not sufficiently tailored to achieve that purpose, and thus the … The Court finds it significant that the MPP establishes no definitive criteria by which WSSC is to judge whether the program need continue.

Fred Menke's Car Store, Inc. v. Volvo North America Corp.

698 F. Supp. 1287 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 15, 1987

If plaintiffs are unable to establish a triable issue of material fact as to whether the VTA is voidable or whether defendant breached the VTA, the VTA, by its explicit terms, clearly bars all of plaintiffs’ other claims … Plaintiffs advance two main arguments in support of their claim that Volvo breached the VTA: (1) that under the VTA, Volvo was bound to approve any qualified applicant, and Hellmuth was a qualified applicant; and (2) that