Case law

Matthews

District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 31, 2025

Qualified immunity Finally, Defendants argue that the Individual Defendants sued in their personal capacities are entitled to qualified immunity. … otherwise proceed, this Court will deny the motion to dismiss on qualified immunity grounds.

Yuxing v. Ameri-Asia, LLC

District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 28, 2024

, since the proposed amendments would have also been dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) on sovereign immunity grounds). … 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),” Galustian, 591 F.3d at 729; see also Coral v.

Maryland Attorney General Opinion 99OAG225

Maryland Attorney General Reports · Dec 19, 2014

As we see it, all three of these districts qualify as special benefit taxing districts, as opposed to general taxing districts, and all three operate in a largely similar fashion. … Nor do the provisions of the Tax-Property Article specified in paragraph (h)(1) clearly encompass special benefit district taxes.

Conkwright v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.

739 F. Supp. 1006 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 30, 1990

Finally, Conkwright fails to demonstrate any evidence which may establish pretext. … The violation of public policy that Conkwright seeks to remedy through his abusive discharge claim is clearly protected both by federal and state law. Conkwright concedes this in his opposition.

Coates v. Southern Maryland Electric Cooperative, Inc.

354 Md. 499 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 16, 1999

It was established that the plaintiff was sitting on *511 the “lazy board,” which extended about two-and-a-half feet beyond the hub of the left rear wheel. … We do not wish, or intend, to establish a law that provides an absolute immunity for utility companies and gives them no incentive to use due care in the placement of their poles.

Briscoe v. Prince George's County Health Department

323 Md. 439 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 20, 1991

Because the nurses are qualified to perform patient care services, the State legitimately may value their services more highly. … As the plaintiffs are no longer the prevailing party, there clearly is no basis for an award of attorney fees. In this connection, see also Talley v.

Rivera v. Howard County Public Schools

District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 3, 2021

cannot be subject to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (“§ 1983”) because “this [c]ourt has consistently held that county boards of education in Maryland, such as the Board here, are state agencies and therefore protected by immunity … established in Iqbal and Twombly applies[.]’”

Fox v. Statebridge Company, LLC

District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 10, 2023

, since the proposed amendments would have also been dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) on sovereign immunity grounds). … 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),” Galustian, 591 F.3d at 729.

Criscione v. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission

District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 6, 2020

And the waiver must be established by the statute itself. See Lane v. … Pena, 518 U.S. 187, 192 (1996) (“A statute’s legislative history cannot supply a waiver that does not appear clearly in any statutory text: ‘the “unequivocal expression” of elimination of sovereign immunity that we insist

Hobby v. Burson

222 Md. App. 1 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 27, 2015

To qualify as a reasonable effort under 24 C.F.R. §203.604, the mortgagee must send at least one letter to the mortgagor and make one trip to the mortgaged property. … As the trial court properly found, this clearly established that Freedom made a 7 We note that the Field Contact Sheet is accompanied by photographs of the mortgaged property, taken by Freedom’s representative

Shenk v. Humane Society of Carroll Co., Inc.

District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 27, 2022

Section 5-301(d)(26) is clearly the correct provision. … However, C.J. § 5-507 “is merely a codification of existing common law public official immunity, and common law qualified immunity has no application in tort actions based upon alleged violations of state constitutional

Housing Opportunities Comm'n v. Adebayo

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 28, 2023

By contrast, “[t]here are cases holding that where a private graveyard [e.g., a family graveyard] is established and clearly marked out, and markers maintained, an implied reservation or easement is created.” … Despite the late-Victorian verbosity of the 1888 statute, the literal terms of the opening clause clearly establish that the entity that is required to act is “the court.”

Williams v. Dandridge

297 F. Supp. 450 · District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 25, 1969

This amendment added first cousins, nephews and nieces to the qualifying-group. 12 . … The 1967 Amendments, P.L. 90-248, 81 Stat. 821 , inter alia, established a work incentive program for recipients, provided for the employment of qualified recipients in administering the- program and provided means for locating

Keirsey v. State

106 Md. App. 551 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 1, 1995

The reliability of RFLP test results has been established. … each phase of the test was in proper working order, and (2) the persons operating the equipment at every stage in the process were qualified to do so.

Schnepfe v. Schnepfe

124 Md. 330 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 5, 1914

Schnepfe qualified as executor; (8) that many questions must arise in the administration of the estate which required the construction of the will; (9) states various questions which she alleges must arise; (10) that her … decree was reversed, and after giving other reasons for the reversal the Court said: “The appellee’s counsel contend, however, that the decree is in effect the specific enforcement of the ante-nuptial contract, and therefore clearly

Creswell v. Baltimore Aviation Service, Inc.

257 Md. 712 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 6, 1970

But this analogy is not applicable to situations like the one before us, where the governing application is only to change one existing use, established under a comprehensive zoning plan, to another existing, established … It might not have been error to have zoned the subject property R. 40 but clearly it was not error to have zoned it R. 20.

Rueda v. Yellen

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 7, 2022

By then, her son had turned 17, and so is no longer a qualifying child. Id. … Forst, 4 F.3d 244, 250 (4th Cir. 1993), “[t]his principle only applies . . . if all facts necessary to the affirmative defense ‘clearly appear[ ] on the face of the complaint.’”

Swam v. Upper Chesapeake Medical Center, Inc.

397 Md. 528 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 16, 2007

The Swams subsequently filed a Certificate of Qualified Expert and report from Stephen Goldberg, M.D., in accordance with § 3-2A-04(b). Dr. … Leiman, 52 Md. 708, 718 (1880) (observing that the running of a statute of limitations may be suspended if there is a “certain and well-defined exception clearly established by judicial authority”).

Jones v. State

11 Md. App. 468 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 29, 1971

App. 705; and the judgment of the lower court will not be set aside unless clearly erroneous. Maryland Rule 1086. … The rule is well established that the widest discretion has been given trial courts in the conduct of trials and this discretion should not be disturbed unless it is clearly abused. Plank v.

Newman v. Warden JCI

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 11, 2023

has failed to allege sufficient facts to show, and the record does not support the conclusion, that Defendants violated his Eighth Amendment rights; and (5) Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … In effect, the Eleventh Amendment bars suits for damages against a state in federal court unless the state has waived sovereign immunity or Congress has abrogated its immunity.