Case law

National Board for Certification in Occupational Therapy, Inc. v. American Occupational Therapy Ass'n

24 F. Supp. 2d 494 · District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 30, 1998

Consequently, AOTA’s attempt to freeze the definition of “duly qualified” is misguided. … This action, however, is immune from antitrust liability, pursuant to Eastern R.R. Presidents Conference v.

Rose v. Baltimore County Maryland

District Court, D. Maryland · Aug 23, 2024

“[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at the time.’” … Radomski’s allegedly violated right was “clearly established” at the time Officer Defendants shot him do not militate in favor of the outcome they seek at this time; a finding as to qualified immunity is premature.

W. C. & A. N. Miller Development Co. v. Honaker

40 Md. App. 185 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 17, 1978

Appellant pleaded the general issue and raised the defense of immunity under Art. 101, § 15 of the Maryland Workmen’s Compensation law. … The evidence clearly shows appellant to be a builder of residential homes and as far as the DeJanikuses are concerned, a house built to the customer’s specifications.

Davis v. Pavlik, Jr

District Court, D. Maryland · Sep 7, 2022

Second, Officer Estime also argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity “as to plaintiff’s constitutional claim for excessive force under Section 1983,” because there is no clearly established law prohibiting his … Plaintiff also argues that Officer Estime is not entitled to qualified immunity, because his actions violated a clearly established right. Id. at 20-27.

Fritszche v. Maryland State Board of Elections

397 Md. 331 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 12, 2007

Nothing has been presented that establishes a link between the Board’s processing of the absentee ballots and the delay in absentee ballot returns. … CITIZENSHIP; PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES; DUE PROCESS; EQUAL PROTECTION; APPOINTMENT OF REPRESENTATION; DISQUALIFICATION OF OFFICERS; PUBLIC DEBT; ENFORCEMENT "Section 1.

Shipley v. State

220 Md. 463 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Sep 9, 2001

This rule is apparently an extension of the rule under which an owner may testify to the value of his property, without his having to be qualified as an expert. See Bresnan v. Weaver, 151 Md. 375 , 135 A. 584 . … The trial court’s decision on the facts could be overturned by this Court only if clearly erroneous. Maryland Rule 741 c; Jenkins v. State, 215 Md. 70 , 137 A. 2d 115 ; Kier v. State, 216 Md. 513 , 140 A. 2d 896 .

Skinner v. Gaither

87 Md. 330 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Mar 3, 1898

Skinner, after duly qualifying as guardian of these children, received from the Mutual Life Insurance Company of New York, on the 3rd of March, 1883, the sum $9,902.20—the net proceeds of a policy of insurance for $10,000 … We can perceive no ground upon which these appellants can be denied the right to participate in the distribution of these assets and we regard their right so to participate as clearly established.

Brooks v. McKimmie

District Court, D. Maryland · Apr 4, 2025

Qualified Immunity The defense of qualified immunity shields public officials from civil liability unless they violated a “statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established … To defeat qualified immunity, the record must show that (1) McKimmie violated Brooks’s constitutional right and (2) that right was “clearly established” when the violation occurred. Id.

Mayor & City Cncl. of Balt. v. Wallace

Court of Appeals of Maryland · Jul 17, 2025

Pointing to section 5-1101 of the Natural Resources Article, the City emphasizes that the Recreational Use Statute broadly defines “Land” to include “paths” and “trails,” which it claims, clearly encompasses the promenade … The Appellate Court relied on the principle established in Haley that the use of a public facility, not its location, is paramount to the analysis. Id. at 410.

O'MEARA v. Waters

464 F. Supp. 2d 474 · District Court, D. Maryland · Oct 4, 2006

Once service has been contested, the plaintiff bears the burden of establishing the validity of service pursuant to Rule 4. See Norlock v. City of Garland, 768 F.2d 654, 656 (5th Cir.1985). … It is well established that under ordinary circumstances, the availability of a refund suit constitutes such an adequate, alternative remedy.

Davis

District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 19, 2026

“Qualified immunity protects government officials from civil damages in a § 1983 action insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … To overcome an assertion of qualified immunity from a § 1983 claim, a plaintiff must show that (1) the government official violated a federally protected right of the plaintiff; and (2) that right was clearly established

Trim v. YMCA

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jul 25, 2017

Vol.), § 13-517 of the Education Article establishes a public access program for AEDs in this State. … Did the circuit court err in determining that the YMCA and its employees were immune from civil liability under § 13-517 of the Education Article? 3.

Maryland Attorney General Opinion 97 OAG 019

Maryland Attorney General Reports · May 31, 2012

The legal entity has also registered or qualified to conduct business in Maryland. See Md. Code Ann., Corps. & Ass’ns §§ 7-202, 7-203 (2011 Supp.). … While the Court of Appeals has yet to decide whether the operation of a housing project, as opposed to its construction, qualifies as a governmental activity for purposes of immunity under the LGTCA, see Jackson, 289 Md.

Independent Newspapers, Inc. v. Brodie

407 Md. 415 · Court of Appeals of Maryland · Feb 27, 2009

Kolodner, 233 Md. 512, 522 , 197 A.2d 245, 250 (1964)(“An absolute privilege is distinguished from a qualified privilege in that the former provides immunity regardless of the purpose or motive of the defendant, or the reasonableness … I fear that the majority decision invites the lower courts to apply, on an ad hoc basis, a “superlaw” of Internet defamation that can trump the well-established defamation law.

J.C. Snavely & Sons, Inc. v. Wheeler

74 Md. App. 428 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Mar 4, 1988

The fact that S.A.S. advertised in Washingtonian Magazine establishes nothing more than mere solicitation. … The evidence produced at the show cause hearing established that appellant was a foreign corporation, based in Pennsylvania, and was neither qualified nor registered to do business in the State of Maryland.

Watts v. Prince George's Cnty.

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Oct 29, 2025

Employment Practices Act and PGCC § 2-222 directly waived sovereign immunity. … If the language of the statute is unambiguous and clearly consistent with the statute’s apparent purpose, our inquiry as to legislative intent ends ordinarily and we apply the statute as written, without

Brooks v. Jenkins

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Dec 16, 2014

Vol.), § 12- 104(b) of the State Government Article (“SG”); see also CJ § 5-522(a) (establishing between the two sections the State’s immunity from suit for a state employee who has acted within the scope of employment … No cases we have found, however, offer any deeper insight on what range of motives might qualify as being “like” fraud or malice.

Robertson v. Maryland State Department of Personnel

481 F. Supp. 108 · District Court, D. Maryland · Mar 3, 1978

Clearly, plaintiff was not eligible for or qualified for the position of superintendent or assistant superintendent at any of the institutions involved. This Court so ruled at the close of the plaintiff’s case. … Lockyear, the most professionally qualified for the position.

Bugg v. Maryland Transportation Authority

31 Md. App. 622 · Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · Jun 7, 1976

That the Buggs, for whatever reason, did not then establish, as they later did, that the 1958 deed was incorrect does not deny them due process; they were merely denied the result they desired. … Reformation of Instruments § 93a (1952). *632 We hold that the Commission had an absolute right to rely upon the public records which, after the Buggs-McKeever suit in 1962, clearly showed that the Buggs were not a party

Jackson v. the Martin Company

180 F. Supp. 475 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jan 29, 1960

Some tests are well established. … In either case, a state court is qualified to construe the indictment and the relevant statutes.