list factors in Maryland

30 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2025 9 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Maryland courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (12)

Case	Followed	Cited
Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Blattgreen md · 2019 · cited in 7 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2020–2025 2 sentences 2025See Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Blatt, 463 Md. 679 , 707 n.19 (2019) (listing aggravating and mitigating factors). 2022See Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Blatt, 463 Md. 679 , 707-08 n.19 (2019) (listing aggravating and mitigating factors).	7	7
State v. Matthewsgreen md · 2022 · cited in 2 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023 2 sentences 2023Although the list of factors has been described as not being “exhaustive[,]” State v. Matthews, 479 Md. 278, 314 , 277 A.3d 991 , 1012 (2022) (citations omitted), Maryland Rule 5-702(1) provides that, in assessing the admissibility of expert testimony, a trial “court shall - 10 - determine[] whether the witness is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education[.]” In this case, the circuit court did not do that. 2023Although the list of factors has been described as not being “exhaustive[,]” State v. Matthews, 479 Md. 278, 314 , 277 A.3d 991 , 1012 (2022) (citations omitted), Maryland Rule 5-702(1) provides that, in assessing the admissibility of expert testimony, a trial “court shall - 10 - determine[] whether the witness is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education[.]” In this case, the circuit court did not do that.	1	2
State v. Hendersongreen nj · 2011 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 1 sentence 2019Based on these recommendations, the court delineated a list of factors that trial courts may consider when assessing suggestiveness and reliability. 16 Id. at 920-21. *85 In addition, the court revised the Manson framework. 17 246 The case at bar is not this Court's first opportunity to review Maryland's Manson - Jones framework in light of the **86 New Jersey Supreme Court's decision in Henderson .	1	1
Smiley v. Stategreen md · 2015 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 2 sentences 2019See Smiley , 442 Md. at 184 , 111 A.3d at 52 . 2019See Smiley , 442 Md. at 184 , 111 A.3d at 52 .	1	1
Attorney Grievance Commission v. Woolerygreen md · 2017 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018 2 sentences 2018See Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Woolery , 456 Md. 483 , 499 n. 10, 175 A.3d 129 (2017) (listing aggravating and mitigating factors). 2018See Attorney Grievance Comm'n v. Woolery , 456 Md. 483 , 499 n. 10, 175 A.3d 129 (2017) (listing aggravating and mitigating factors).	1	1
Ross v. Hoffmangreen md · 1977 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 2 sentences 2005Hoffman, supra, 280 Md. at 191, 372 A.2d 582 ; Sider, supra, 334 Md. at 532 , 639 A.2d 1076 (noting that circuit courts should consider the factors set forth as well as “any other relevant factors” in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist); S.F., supra, 132 Md.App. at 113 , 751 A.2d 9 (noting that the list of factors in Sider was “non-exhaustive”). 2005Hoffman, supra, 280 Md. at 191, 372 A.2d 582 ; Sider, supra, 334 Md. at 532 , 639 A.2d 1076 (noting that circuit courts should consider the factors set forth as well as “any other relevant factors” in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist); S.F., supra, 132 Md.App. at 113 , 751 A.2d 9 (noting that the list of factors in Sider was “non-exhaustive”).	1	1
United States v. Julio Antonio Duran, (Two Cases)green ca9 · 1993 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 1 sentence 1998See Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 114 , 97 S.Ct. 2243, 2253 , 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977); United States v. Duran, 4 F.3d 800, 803 (9th Cir.1993), cert. and reliability are considered separately.	1	1
Hild v. Hildgreen md · 2001 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 2 sentences 1998In Hild v. Hild, 221 Md. 349, 357 , 157 A.2d 442, 446 (1960), this Court provided a list of factors that courts may consider when applying the best interests standard to a custody case: “[T]he fitness of the persons seeking custody, the adaptability of the prospective custodian to the task, the age, sex and health of the child, the physical, spiritual and moral well-being of the child, the environment and surroundings in which the child will be reared, the influences likely to be exerted on the child, and, if he or she is old enough to make a rational choice, the preference of the child. 1998In Hild v. Hild, 221 Md. 349, 357 , 157 A.2d 442, 446 (1960), this Court provided a list of factors that courts may consider when applying the best interests standard to a custody case: “[T]he fitness of the persons seeking custody, the adaptability of the prospective custodian to the task, the age, sex and health of the child, the physical, spiritual and moral well-being of the child, the environment and surroundings in which the child will be reared, the influences likely to be exerted on the child, and, if he or she is old enough to make a rational choice, the preference of the child.	1	1
Manson v. Brathwaitegreen scotus · 1977 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 2 sentences 1998See Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 114 , 97 S.Ct. 2243, 2253 , 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977); United States v. Duran, 4 F.3d 800, 803 (9th Cir.1993), cert. and reliability are considered separately. 1998See Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98, 114 , 97 S.Ct. 2243, 2253 , 53 L.Ed.2d 140 (1977); United States v. Duran, 4 F.3d 800, 803 (9th Cir.1993), cert. and reliability are considered separately.	1	1
Allen v. Illinoisgreen scotus · 1986 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1998–1998 2 sentences 1998See also Allen v. Illinois, 478 U.S. at 369 , 106 S.Ct. at 2992 ; United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. at 278 , 116 S.Ct. at 2142 ; Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 493 . 1998See also Allen v. Illinois, 478 U.S. at 369 , 106 S.Ct. at 2992 ; United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. at 278 , 116 S.Ct. at 2142 ; Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 493 .	1	1
In Re Manvillegreen dc · 1985 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997 2 sentences 1997While agreeing with this Court that there is no litmus test to determine whether an applicant possesses good moral character, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, in In re Manville, 494 A.2d 1289, 1296-97 (D.C.1985) (Manville I), identified a list of factors the court found instructive in assessment of the moral fitness of applicant “whose backgrounds are tainted by criminal convictions.” Those factors, intended to be illustrative and not exhaustive, read: 1. 1997While agreeing with this Court that there is no litmus test to determine whether an applicant possesses good moral character, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, in In re Manville, 494 A.2d 1289, 1296-97 (D.C. 1985) ( Manville I ), identified a list of factors the court found instructive in assessment of the moral fitness of applicant "whose backgrounds are tainted by criminal convictions." Those factors, intended to be illustrative and not exhaustive, read: 1.	1	1
Spease and Ross v. Stategreen md · 1975 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981 1 sentence 1981These include: "(1) the nature and scope of the crime being investigated; (2) the sophistication of those under suspicion and their efforts to avoid surveillance through such devices as coded conversations; (3) the location and operation of the subject telephone; (4) government expectation of the contents of the call; (5) the extent of judicial supervision; (6) the duration of the wiretap; (7) the purpose of the *42 wiretap; (8) the length of the calls monitored; (9) the existence of a pattern of pertinent calls, which the monitoring agents could discern so as to eliminate the interception of	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (16)

Case	Cited	Years
Cooksey v. State green md · 2000 2 sentences 2022In making this determination, it outlined a list of factors to 12 See supra note 8. 13 In Cooksey, this Court rejected the State’s suggestion of resolving issues posed by facially duplicitous pleadings by requiring the State to elect between incidents at the end of trial or giving the jury a special unanimity instruction. 359 Md. at 26–27, 752 A.2d at 619–20. 2022In making this determination, it outlined a list of factors to 12 See supra note 8. 13 In Cooksey, this Court rejected the State’s suggestion of resolving issues posed by facially duplicitous pleadings by requiring the State to elect between incidents at the end of trial or giving the jury a special unanimity instruction. 359 Md. at 26–27, 752 A.2d at 619–20.	2	2022–2022
Montgomery County Department of Social Services v. Sanders green mdctspecapp · 1978 2 sentences 2019Although courts are not limited to a list of factors in applying the best interest standard in each individual case, the cases of the Court of Appeals and of this Court, beginning with Montgomery County Department of Social Services v. Sanders, 38 Md. 2007App. 406, 420 , 381 A.2d 1154 (1977), the Court set forth a list of factors that a trial court should consider in making a custody determination, but cautioned against weighing any one factor “to the exclusion of all others.” The Sanders Court said: The criteria for judicial determination [of child custody] includes, but is not limited to, 1) fitness of the parents; 2) character and reputation of the parties; 3) desire of the natural parents and agreements between the parties; 4) potentiality of maintaining natural family relations; 5) preference of the child; 6) material opportunities affecti	2	2007–2019
State v. Hepple green md · 1977 2 sentences 2018Booze , 334 Md. at 76 , 637 A.2d at 1220 (citing State v. Hepple , 279 Md. at 271 , 368 A.2d at 449 ). 2018Booze , 334 Md. at 76 , 637 A.2d at 1220 (citing State v. Hepple , 279 Md. at 271 , 368 A.2d at 449 ).	2	2018–2018
State v. Booze green md · 1994 2 sentences 2018Booze , 334 Md. at 76 , 637 A.2d at 1220 (citing State v. Hepple , 279 Md. at 271 , 368 A.2d at 449 ). 2018Booze , 334 Md. at 76 , 637 A.2d at 1220 (citing State v. Hepple , 279 Md. at 271 , 368 A.2d at 449 ).	2	2018–2018
Ferris v. State green md · 1999 2 sentences 2003Id. at 377 , 735 A.2d at 502 . 2002After reminding us that in “making this determination, a court must apply the totality-of-the circumstances approach, with no single factor dictating whether a seizure has occurred,” 355 Md. at 376, 735 A.2d 491 , Judge Raker provided a list of factors that bear on the determination.	2	2002–2003
Montgomery County Department of Health & Human Services v. P.F. green mdctspecapp · 2001 1 sentence 2022CP § 11-304(e)(2); P.F., 137 Md.	1	2022–2022
Taylor v. Taylor green md · 1986 1 sentence 2019App. 406 (1977) and Taylor v. Taylor, 306 Md. 290 (1986), have set forth a non-exhaustive delineation of factors that a court must consider when making custody determinations, which have been consolidated in Fader’s Maryland Family Law, a veritable compendium of domestic relations law: (1) The fitness of the parents; (2) The character and reputation of the parties; (3) The requests of each parent and the sincerity of the requests; (4) Any agreements between the parties; (5) Willingness of the parents to share custody; (6) Each parent’s ability to maintain the child’s relationships with the oth	1	2019–2019
Wolfe v. Turner green md · 1973 2 sentences 2006The list of factors to be considered set out in Wolfe v. Turner, 267 Md. 646, 653 , 299 A.2d 106 (1973), seems to embrace both 1) the work of the attorney per se and also 2) the decision of the client to engage an attorney for certain tasks. 2006The list of factors to be considered set out in Wolfe v. Turner, 267 Md. 646, 653 , 299 A.2d 106 (1973), seems to embrace both 1) the work of the attorney per se and also 2) the decision of the client to engage an attorney for certain tasks.	1	2006–2006
Sf v. Md green mdctspecapp · 2000 2 sentences 2005Hoffman, supra, 280 Md. at 191, 372 A.2d 582 ; Sider, supra, 334 Md. at 532 , 639 A.2d 1076 (noting that circuit courts should consider the factors set forth as well as “any other relevant factors” in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist); S.F., supra, 132 Md.App. at 113 , 751 A.2d 9 (noting that the list of factors in Sider was “non-exhaustive”). 2005Hoffman, supra, 280 Md. at 191, 372 A.2d 582 ; Sider, supra, 334 Md. at 532 , 639 A.2d 1076 (noting that circuit courts should consider the factors set forth as well as “any other relevant factors” in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist); S.F., supra, 132 Md.App. at 113 , 751 A.2d 9 (noting that the list of factors in Sider was “non-exhaustive”).	1	2005–2005
Sider v. Sider green md · 1994 2 sentences 2005Hoffman, supra, 280 Md. at 191, 372 A.2d 582 ; Sider, supra, 334 Md. at 532 , 639 A.2d 1076 (noting that circuit courts should consider the factors set forth as well as “any other relevant factors” in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist); S.F., supra, 132 Md.App. at 113 , 751 A.2d 9 (noting that the list of factors in Sider was “non-exhaustive”). 2005Hoffman, supra, 280 Md. at 191, 372 A.2d 582 ; Sider, supra, 334 Md. at 532 , 639 A.2d 1076 (noting that circuit courts should consider the factors set forth as well as “any other relevant factors” in determining whether exceptional circumstances exist); S.F., supra, 132 Md.App. at 113 , 751 A.2d 9 (noting that the list of factors in Sider was “non-exhaustive”).	1	2005–2005
Alexander & Alexander, Inc. v. B. Dixon Evander & Associates, Inc. green mdctspecapp · 1991 2 sentences 2000Dixon Evander & Associates, Inc., 88 Md.App. 672, 715-16 , 596 A.2d 687 (where, prior to the Bowden decision, this Court set forth a list of factors, similar to the list in Bowden , to consider in determining whether an award of punitive damages is excessive), cert. denied, 323 Md. 1 , 590 A.2d 158 (1991), 323 Md. 2 (1991), and 326 Md. 435 , 605 A.2d 137 (1992). 2000Dixon Evander & Associates, Inc., 88 Md.App. 672, 715-16 , 596 A.2d 687 (where, prior to the Bowden decision, this Court set forth a list of factors, similar to the list in Bowden , to consider in determining whether an award of punitive damages is excessive), cert. denied, 323 Md. 1 , 590 A.2d 158 (1991), 323 Md. 2 (1991), and 326 Md. 435 , 605 A.2d 137 (1992).	1	2000–2000
Hudson v. United States green scotus · 1997 1 sentence 1998See also Allen v. Illinois, 478 U.S. at 369 , 106 S.Ct. at 2992 ; United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. at 278 , 116 S.Ct. at 2142 ; Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 493 .	1	1998–1998
United States v. Ursery green scotus · 1996 2 sentences 1998See also Allen v. Illinois, 478 U.S. at 369 , 106 S.Ct. at 2992 ; United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. at 278 , 116 S.Ct. at 2142 ; Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 493 . 1998See also Allen v. Illinois, 478 U.S. at 369 , 106 S.Ct. at 2992 ; United States v. Ursery, 518 U.S. at 278 , 116 S.Ct. at 2142 ; Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. at-, 118 S.Ct. at 493 .	1	1998–1998
Neil v. Biggers green scotus · 1972 2 sentences 1998Some courts have adopted a list of factors enunciated by the Supreme Court in Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199 , 93 S.Ct. 375, 382 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972), to consider in determining the reliability of identification evidence when due process challenges are at issue: 2 (1) the ability of the witness to hear the assailant speak, (2) the witness’s degree of attention, (3) the accuracy of any prior identifications the witness made, (4) the period of time between the incident and the identification, and (5) how certain the witness was in making the identification. 1998Some courts have adopted a list of factors enunciated by the Supreme Court in Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188, 199 , 93 S.Ct. 375, 382 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972), to consider in determining the reliability of identification evidence when due process challenges are at issue: 2 (1) the ability of the witness to hear the assailant speak, (2) the witness’s degree of attention, (3) the accuracy of any prior identifications the witness made, (4) the period of time between the incident and the identification, and (5) how certain the witness was in making the identification.	1	1998–1998
State v. Mulkey green md · 1989 2 sentences 1994The Mulkey Court set forth a list of factors for trial judges to scrutinize when evaluating the time requirement imposed by Rule 4-202 in the context of a “sexual offense case involving a child victim,” including, but not limited to: “1) the nature of the offense; 2) the age and maturity of the child; 3) the victim’s ability to recall specific dates; and, 4) the State’s good faith efforts and ability to determine reasonable dates.” Mulkey, 316 Md. at 488 , 560 A.2d 24 . 1994The Mulkey Court set forth a list of factors for trial judges to scrutinize when evaluating the time requirement imposed by Rule 4-202 in the context of a “sexual offense case involving a child victim,” including, but not limited to: “1) the nature of the offense; 2) the age and maturity of the child; 3) the victim’s ability to recall specific dates; and, 4) the State’s good faith efforts and ability to determine reasonable dates.” Mulkey, 316 Md. at 488 , 560 A.2d 24 .	1	1994–1994
Space Aero Products Co. v. R. E. Darling Co. green md · 1965 1 sentence 1991The court also adopted the Restatement’s list of factors to be used in determining whether particular information qualifies as a trade secret: ‘(1) the extent to which the information is known outside of his business; (2) the extent to which it is known by employees and others involved in his business; (3) the extent of measures taken by him to guard the secrecy of the information; (4) the value of the information to him and to his competitors; (5) the amount of effort or money expended by him in developing the information; (6) the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properl	1	1991–1991

Where else courts name it

TX 255 (1933–2025) TN 143 (1997–2026) CA 133 (1975–2026) IL 104 (1978–2026) OH 104 (1975–2026) MI 68 (1983–2026) PA 67 (1959–2026) MS 55 (1986–2025) LA 43 (1978–2026) WA 37 (1986–2024) UT 32 (1987–2025) OR 31 (1905–2025) MN 30 (1978–2025) MD 30 (1981–2025) IN 30 (1979–2026) WI 29 (1999–2023) CO 27 (1977–2026) NY 26 (1969–2025) AL 26 (1976–2025) KS 25 (1989–2025) FL 23 (1977–2025) MA 22 (1980–2020) ID 22 (1985–2026) IA 21 (1992–2026) NJ 20 (1983–2025) SC 16 (2008–2022) NV 16 (2009–2020) DC 16 (1980–2017) KY 15 (1968–2026) ME 15 (2004–2026) SD 15 (1990–2026) MO 14 (1975–2025) NC 14 (1984–2017) AK 13 (1972–2020) OK 13 (1986–2023) WY 12 (1989–2025) NE 12 (1999–2024) AZ 12 (1986–2025) WV 11 (1994–2024) MT 11 (1994–2010) CT 11 (1996–2025) AR 10 (1993–2015) NM 10 (1983–2024) VA 10 (1990–2017) ND 9 (1981–2021) GA 9 (1985–2024) RI 9 (1992–2023) VT 8 (1984–2016) NH 6 (2019–2023) DE 5 (1987–2025) VI 3 (2009–2025) HI 2 (2003–2014)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check