Case law

Gordon v. Posner

142 Md. App. 399 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 31, 2002

The *430 Court then proceeded to consider whether, as a matter of law, Eagan’s conduct barred his immunity defense. … It explained that Eagan’s guilty plea could not be used to establish the intentional killing required to abrogate parent-child immunity in the wrongful death case, because Eagan had disputed the nature of the killing in his

Huff v. United States Department of Army

508 F. Supp. 2d 459 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 13, 2007

The Army has filed a reply. 5 According to the Army, Plaintiffs complaint fails to establish a valid jurisdictional basis or waiver of sovereign immunity. … Discussion The Army contends that Huff has failed to establish a valid jurisdictional basis for his claims or an unequivocal waiver of sovereign immunity.

Schoberg v. Schwartzman

District Court, D. Maryland · Jun 11, 2025

Sept. 23, 2021), This rule allows for interlocutory appellate review of a denial of qualified immunity when the appeal is based on a “purely legal issue” such as “what law was clearly established,” but not when the appeal … was [not] ‘clearly established’ at the time of” the alleged violation.

Brownscombe v. Department of Campus Parking

203 F. Supp. 2d 479 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 28, 2002

In order to establish a *484 violation of the ADA, Brownscombe must show: (1) that he has a disability; (2) that he is otherwise qualified for the benefit in question; and (3) that he was excluded from the benefit due to … In order for Plaintiff to establish a violation of § 504, he must assert that: (1) he has a disability; (2) he is otherwise qualified; (3) he was excluded from participation in, was denied the benefits of, or was subjected

Weakland v. United States

287 F. Supp. 2d 611 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 22, 2003

The record, taken in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, clearly establishes that R.R. … Thus, the evidence establishes that R.R. Gregory is a statutory employer entitled to immunity by law from tort liability. IY. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, the motion of R.R.

Hepburn Ex Rel. Hepburn v. Athelas Institute, Inc.

324 F. Supp. 2d 752 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 1, 2004

The level of culpability necessary for § 1983 liability reduces the need to equitably distribute damages among tort-feasors; as evidenced by the fact that the qualified immunity and professional judgment standards either … In the qualified immunity context, the plaintiff’s actions are already accounted for in examining whether the officials acted reasonably under all of the available circumstances. Anderson v.

Maryland v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

352 F. Supp. 3d 435 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 24, 2018

Indeed, "[p]roof of a 'colorable' federal defense [ ] does not require the defendant to 'win his case before he can have it removed' nor even establish that the defense is 'clearly sustainable.' " *455 Ripley v. … "Proof of a 'colorable' federal defense [ ] does not require the defendant to 'win his case before he can have it removed' nor even establish that the defense is 'clearly sustainable.' " Ripley , 841 F.3d at 210 .

Callan v. State

156 Md. 459 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jan 17, 1929

It would clearly be not admissible in the trial -of the case to- allow evidence of the failure of the ninety-nine juries- to- indict. … This is. clearly an erroneous statement and you gentlemen must not be in any manner affected by it.”

Nathanson v. Tortoise Capital Advisors

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Aug 28, 2025

The district court dismissed all claims based on the State’s immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. Id. at 537. … Directors are immune from liability for acts taken in accordance with this standard. Corps. & Ass’ns § 2-405.1(e).

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

547 F. Supp. 2d 491 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 22, 2008

Professor Mazis’s testimony at the four-day hearing also clearly established that the qualified language is not understood by a substantial percentage of consumers. … Plaintiffs have also established that the qualified “Raised Without Antibiotics” claim leads to consumer confusion.

McCarthy v. Bd. of Comm'rs, Frederick Cnty.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 27, 2025

The summary judgment evidence clearly established that the John Hanson House was reconstructed to be incorporated into the Complex, sharing the same footprint and address. … She asserts that the performance of maintenance obligations arising from the lease, which was intended to serve the tenant (the OPD), does not qualify as a governmental function.

Victors v. Kronmiller

553 F. Supp. 2d 533 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 6, 2008

immunity. … An official in a personal-capacity action “may, depending on his position, be able to assert personal immunity defenses, such as objectively reasonable reliance on existing law,” including absolute and qualified immunity.

Linz v. Montgomery Cnty.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Nov 1, 2022

The defendant moved to dismiss based on qualified immunity under the Maryland Tort Claims Act (MTCA), Md. Code (1984, 2021 Repl. Vol.) §§ 12-101 through 12-110 of the State Government Article (SG). … The circuit court dismissed the claim against the employee based on qualified immunity, and then dismissed the claim against the State based on limitations.

Alvarez v. Montgomery County

963 F. Supp. 495 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 30, 1997

They argue further that even if they violated Mark Alvarez’s Fourth Amendment rights, they are entitled to qualified immumty because it was not clearly established at the time of the underlying events that an individual’s … At a minimum, the officers enjoyed qualified immunity in these circumstances. TV. Mark Alvarez’s claim for false imprisonment also fails.

United States v. Azrael

765 F. Supp. 1239 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 30, 1991

Likewise, the principle of sovereign immunity reflected in the Eleventh Amendment renders states immune from suits filed by private parties in federal court unless the state has waived its immunity. Hans v. … In that case, the Court held that sections 101(21) and 101(20)(D) constitute a Congressional waiver of the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity when a state otherwise qualifies as a responsible party under Section 107(a) of

Baltimore Lumber Co. v. Marcus

208 F. Supp. 852 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 19, 1962

who are required to qualify but (j0 not; an(j g0 ¿[0 not have an agent for service, seems the more reasonable. 6 Section 78 was clearly intended to increase the jurisdiction of the Maryland Courts at least over non-residents … The applicable rules are clearly stated by the Maryland Court of Appeals in Pressman v.

Hampel v. United States

706 F. Supp. 2d 629 · District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 15, 2010

The HCMCA establishes several requirements that must be met before certain medical malpractice actions may be filed. … The claim must be accompanied by a certificate of a qualified expert, which is to be filed with the Director within 90 days from the date of the complaint, and must attest “to departure from standards of care, and that the

Ramsey v. Prince George's County

18 Md. App. 385 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 11, 1973

Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 151 Md. 11 , 133 A. 888 (1926), and that when they are within the scope of their law enforcement function they are clearly acting in a discretionary capacity.” … Application of established principles of statutory construction force the conclusion that the new charter was not intended to become legally operative prior to the date it was to take effect and thus requires our rejection

Franklin v. Gupta

81 Md. App. 345 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jan 3, 1990

Terry Walman, who was associated with Johns Hopkins Hospital and was qualified as an expert in anesthesiology. Dr. … Hosp., 191 Md. 617 , 62 A.2d 574 (1948); Annotation, Immunity of Nongovernmental Charity From Liability for Damages in Tort, 25 A.L.R.2d 29 (1952), superseded, Tort Immunity of Nongovernmental Charities—Modern Status, 25

Schoonfield v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore

399 F. Supp. 1068 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 20, 1975

This Court, therefore, determines that the pleadings, affidavits, exhibits, transcripts and depositions filed by the defendants clearly establish that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact with respect to the … Moreover, he points out that the immunity accorded public officials in Maryland is only a qualified one, conditioned upon an absence of malice. See Carr v.