Case law

Petition of Mayor & City Council of Baltimore

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 2, 2025

Information about a donation made to another person or entity clearly constitutes “information about the finances of a person.” … Indeed, even the Compliance Board stated that “donations to a § 527 political organization might broadly qualify as ‘financial activity.’”

Clark Office v. MCM Capital Partners

249 Md. App. 307 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 29, 2021

Unjust enrichment first was established as an independent basis of liability in the common law in Restatement of Restitution (1937) (“First Restatement”). … (3) Restitution by the rule of this section may be qualified or denied if recovery would conflict with a system of priorities, established by other law, ordering claims against the third person

Mayor of Baltimore v. Polakoff

233 Md. 1 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Dec 11, 1963

* interpret Section 32 to mean that the Board must grant an exception unless it can demonstrate from the evidence before it that such action would not fall within the provisions, guides and standards of Section 35 (j), qualified … The Court said (at p. 638): “* * * when the legislative body of a municipality adopts a comprehensive zoning plan, exceptions should be allowed only in such cases as are clearly exceptions in fact to the purposes of the ordinance

Poe v. Philadelphia Casualty Co.

118 Md. 347 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 12, 1912

United Surety Company, these complainants were appointed receivers for said United Surety Company and duly qualified as such, and have since, on May 23, 1911, under the authority and direction of said Court, paid said judgment … The distinction which is decisive of this case is now firmly established, and is nowhere more clearly stated than in Amer. Emp. Liability Ins. Co. v. Fordyce, 36 S. W.

Herring v. State

198 Md. App. 60 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 31, 2011

A critical component of that principle, however, is the qualifying clause “because it must.” It is not with any sense of satisfaction that a court reverses on a technicality. … This appeal is not a case of outraged innocence qualifying for an act of grace. [Emphasis in original]. In sum, we find neither error nor abuse of discretion.

Changing Point, Inc. v. Maryland Health Resources Planning Commission

87 Md. App. 150 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · May 6, 1991

In 1983, the Legislature adopted a statute that immunized fire departments from civil liability for negligence. WSSC, 308 Md. at 557-58 , 520 A.2d 1319 . … Applying the new SHP would clearly give the SHP a retroactive effect. Even if the fourth rule in Janda controlled, Changing Point would not prevail.

Waine v. State

37 Md. App. 222 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Sep 9, 1977

The main concern of the police, therefore, would be to establish an accurate list to protect them from false claims. … that proof of one tends to establish the other, and (5) the identity of the person charged with the commission of a crime on trial.

Triantis v. Triantis

184 Md. App. 703 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 26, 2009

Triantis’s equitable interest in the Parcel qualifies her as a “concurrent owner” within the meaning of section 14-107(a). … To establish standing as a concurrent owner under the partition statute, an equitable interest holder, like Mrs.

Crise v. Maryland General Hospital, Inc.

212 Md. App. 492 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 27, 2013

Sherman, 234 Md. 179, 181 , 198 A.2d 71 (1964); and whether a defendant possesses qualified immunity, Artis v. Cyphers, 100 Md.App. 633 , 653-54 & n. 3, 642 A.2d 298 , aff'd, 336 Md. 561 , 649 A.2d 838 (1994). … Assoc., 54 Md.App. 685, 695 , 461 A.2d 7 (1983) (stating it is “axiomatic that a qualified medical expert can render an opinion as to whether a hospital did or did not comply with applicable standards of care ... permitting

Bonds v. MICHAEL LEAVITT

647 F. Supp. 2d 541 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 13, 2009

Congress sought to create a broad shield of protection in these three statutes that would immunize employees from any discrimination, retaliation, or arbitrary decisionmaking. … Finally, even if Defendants’ other acts were to qualify as adverse employment actions, for reasons stated in greater detail below, Dr.

Pulte Home Corp. v. Parex, Inc.

403 Md. 367 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 14, 2008

, the larger the judgment, the greater both the client’s burden and the lawyer’s impunity: “The [contrary] rule would seem to penalize a lawyer for his negligence when it costs his client a modest judgment but grant him immunity … That established their loss and liability and thus capped the value of their cross-claims.

Attorney Grievance Commission v. Stillwell

434 Md. 69 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Aug 22, 2013

Finally, although it is not clearly stated in the stipulated facts that Respondent knowingly and intentionally violated the firm’s ‘Outside Work’ policy by establishing TCR as a personal venture, his misuse of firm resources … In Garcia , the attorney, knowing that his client did not have the employment background and experience needed to qualify for a position as an alien worker, signed a letter, drafted by his co-conspirator, that falsely stated

Goldman v. Crowther

147 Md. 282 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 3, 1925

The danger inherent in any departure from these prin- *296 ciples is forcibly and clearly pointed out by Mr. Justice Holmes in Penn. Coal Co. v. Mahon, 260 U. … When this seemingly absolute protection is found to be qualified by the police power, the natural tendency of human nature is extend the qualification more and more until at last private property disappears.

Davis, III v. Parsons

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 31, 2022

Conclusion Defendants’ qualified immunity defense is unavailing because there exists a material dispute of fact regarding whether the conduct allegedly violative of Davis’s constitutional … Although it is true that qualified immunity is ordinarily determined at the summary judgment stage of litigation, see Wilson v.

Laser v. Wilson

58 Md. App. 434 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 10, 1984

To the extent that the inspector changed his mind regarding the interpretation of the illusory code, he was not offered or qualified as an expert in anything, let alone legal interpretation of county laws. … Clearly their conduct was not negligent as a matter of law. They were not required to put a leash or chain on Adam and hold him in one place by the lead.”

Casa De Md. v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland Sec.

284 F. Supp. 3d 758 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 5, 2018

See Obama suspends deportation for thousands of illegals, tells GOP to pass DREAM Act , Fox News (June 15, 2012), http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/15/obama-administration-to-offer-immunity-to-younger-immigrants.html … Congress did not intend to make immune from judicial review an agency action that reclassifies millions of illegal aliens in a way that imposes substantial costs on states that have relied on the protections conferred by

Harvey v. Marshall

389 Md. 243 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Oct 14, 2005

We therefore conclude that, although the language in Jessica G. is instructive as to the generally broad scope of § 5-1038(b), it aids *273 little ill terms of determining when that broad scope is qualified or narrowed by … established under § 10-108.7 of this subtitle; and (9) use established legal processes to enforce court orders to pay support. § 10 — 108(a). 21 .

Deal v. Kincaid, Jr.

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 4, 2021

City of Cincinnati, 414 F.3d 596, 600–01, 602–04 (6th Cir. 2005) (affirming denial of qualified immunity to officials who left a man in a police cruiser for six minutes after beating him, pinning his arms under his chest … immunity for any constitutional violation.

Ager v. Baltimore Transit Co.

213 Md. 414 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · May 30, 1957

We do not feel that it required the professional skill of a medical doctor to qualify a witness to testify that one, who is supposed to be in a faint and “squints” her eye when the eyelid is raised, is possibly feigning or … However, that case is clearly distinguishable from the immediate one. There, the basic question involved was the cause of the retroflexion and retroversion of the plaintiff’s uterus.

Edenbaum v. Schwarcz-Osztreicherne

165 Md. App. 233 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 28, 2005

Later, however, Colson qualified his answer, stating that he was talking about “cash flow” and not “profits.” … Thus, the “salary” she was to receive was clearly intended to compensate for her work in that capacity.