Case law

Triantis v. Triantis

408 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.

State v. Brown

464 Md. 237 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 24, 2019

Does an announced sentence that is anomalous in context qualify as an “evident mistake” that is subject to correction under Maryland Rule 4- 345(c)? 2. … Like its plain language, Maryland Rule 4-345(c)’s rulemaking history establishes that a mistake in the announcement of a sentence must be clear or obvious to qualify as “evident” under Maryland Rule 4-345(c).

Burley v. Baltimore Police Department

District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 22, 2019

Thus, defendants maintain that plaintiffs’ claims “are clearly time-barred.” ECF 29-2 at 6. … But, “the plaintiff must establish that the defendant committed the tort with some improper purpose or motive.

Baker v. Baltimore County, Md.

487 F. Supp. 461 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 26, 1980

The length of service required to qualify an individual for a pension is a material part of the retirement system, and is one of the material actuarial components necessary for the establishment and operation of a proper … That was the rule established in Harvey and that is the rule which we now apply.

Starr v. State

405 Md. 293 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 26, 2008

101(c)(2) and that the shotgun was not a dangerous weapon because “if it’s not listed in the statute the State has to show that it was intended to be included.... ” At no time did defense counsel assert that the shotgun qualified … Lyles, 308 Md. 129, 135 [ 517 A.2d 761 ] ... (1986), the Court of Appeals held clearly that a defendant is “required to state with particularity all reasons why his motion for judgment of acquittal should be granted.”...

Goldsborough v. Orem & Johnson

103 Md. 671 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 15, 1906

This was clearly not a libellous publication, and, therefore, this count will not be further considered. … Such charges, published under the circumstances detailed in the counts we are considering are clearly libellous in law.

McCready v. Standard Insurance

417 F. Supp. 2d 684 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 1, 2006

QAU examined all the information provided by McCready and determined that she did not qualify for long-term disability. … From those two determinations, the Court establishes the appropriate standard of review to apply. A.

Government Emp. Ins. Co. v. INS. COMM'R. OF MD.

40 Md. App. 201 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 18, 1978

According to an underwriting consultant for GEICO during the time relevant to this case, Alan was qualified as a permissible risk under GEICO's reunderwriting guidelines, subject to "a surcharge factor ... to make the base … When the factual predicate establishes clearly that his client erred, the lawyer may endeavor to explain away the error, but he cannot undo acts that his client has performed.

State v. Lundquist

262 Md. 534 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jun 14, 1971

then made the decisive assumption that a flag salute could be required of non-objecting students and reasoned that it would be an unwarranted obstruction of valid legislative judgment for the judiciary to grant exceptional immunity … The last report of the Selective Service officers indicated that at the time of the report more than 2,000,000 young men — otherwise qualified for the military service of their country — have refused *568 such service on

Polisher v. State

11 Md. App. 555 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Apr 2, 1971

We find that the evidence was sufficient in law to establish that White had “the guilty knowledge with respect to the Walsh vehicle prerequisite to a finding of an intent to defraud.” *584 We hold that the court was not clearly … so related to each other that proof of one tends to establish the other.

Transrisk Corp. v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber

839 F. Supp. 1162 · District Court, D. Maryland · Nov 5, 1992

Any number of options or services actually provided by a carrier can qualify as meeting a shipper’s distinct needs. … As the Commission stated, “[0]nce the parties (carrier and shipper) have clearly established that certain transportation is tó move under the contract carrier permit, the shipper is entitled to rely on the carrier lawfully

Parker v. State

129 Md. App. 360 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 7, 1999

After carefully reviewing the record, we cannot say that the trial judge was clearly erroneous in so finding. … Appellant does not argue that the trial court was clearly erroneous in its factual findings that Ms.

Birdsong Tractor & Supply, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.

332 F. Supp. 2d 890 · District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 23, 2004

It is well-established that federal antitrust law does not completely preempt state antitrust statutes, California v. … Microsoft also contends that federal jurisdiction exists because diversity jurisdiction has been established. It is undisputed that plaintiff and Microsoft are completely diverse.

Wiggins v. Corcoran

164 F. Supp. 2d 538 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 19, 2001

[qualifies] as a decision ‘involving an unreasonable application ... of clearly established Federal law.’” Id. at 407-08 , 120 S.Ct. 1495 . … The Maryland courts’ decisions that counsel was not ineffective involved an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

CR-RSC Tower I, LLC v. RSC Tower I, LLC

202 Md. App. 307 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 26, 2011

Nevertheless, the Second Restatement also recognizes that a person who does not qualify as an intended beneficiary under subsection (1)(a) or (b) may qualify “if the beneficiary would be reasonable in relying on the promise … Appellants have failed to establish reversible error. D.

Kohler v. State

203 Md. App. 110 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Feb 2, 2012

But clearly he is a knowing and willing participant in the distribution of marijuana. … And clearly they have, they have a meeting of the minds, although people in between to help them through that to engage in the distribution of marijuana. .

Payne v. McDonald's Corp.

957 F. Supp. 749 · District Court, D. Maryland · Feb 13, 1997

It is well established that a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), F.R.Civ. … If the potential buyer is found to be qualified, McDonald's will offer that buyer a new full-term franchise.

McCall v. State

9 Md. App. 191 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 19, 1970

State, 242 Md. 424, 428 , that this was no longer the rule and that the voluntary nature of defendant’s plea must be clearly established prior to a court’s accepting a guilty plea. … DONALD LARRY McCALL: Yes, sir. *208 THE COURT: Has anybody made any promise of a lesser sentence or probation or reward or immunity or anything else in order to induce you to plead nolo contendere ?

United Overseas Bank v. Veneers, Inc.

375 F. Supp. 596 · District Court, D. Maryland · May 9, 1974

It contends that under the U.C.C. it does have title to the instrument and is a holder in due course immune from the defenses Veneers could assert against Madera. … This case involved a promissory note (which was apparently negotiable) which was endorsed after it was due (thus the endorsee could not qualify as a holder in due course).

Roberts v. State

53 Md. App. 257 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 7, 1982

The trial court conducted a preliminary hearing, out of the presence of the jury, to permit the introduction of evidence to establish a proper foundation for the testimony. … The witness further testified that he had previously qualified as an expert on the training and handling of bloodhounds in the Charles County Circuit Court. Lt.