Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
28 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1995–2022 4 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Johnson v. Stategreen2 sentences2017That is, “we look to [the] plain text” of the rule, and, if “the words of the rule are plain and unambiguous, our inquiry ordinarily ceases and we need not venture outside the text of the rule.” Johnson v. State, 360 Md. 250, 264-65 , 757 A.2d 796 (2000) (citations omitted). 2017That is, “we look to [the] plain text” of the rule, and, if “the words of the rule are plain and unambiguous, our inquiry ordinarily ceases and we need not venture outside the text of the rule.” Johnson v. State, 360 Md. 250, 264-65 , 757 A.2d 796 (2000) (citations omitted). | 5 | 8 |
Adamson v. Correctional Medical Services, Inc.green2 sentences2010See Adamson, 359 Md. at 250-51 , 753 A.2d at 507-08 ; Marsheck, 358 Md. at 402-03 , 749 A.2d at 779 ; Huffman, 356 Md. at 628 , 741 A.2d at 1091 . 2010See Adamson, 359 Md. at 250-51 , 753 A.2d at 507-08 ; Marsheck, 358 Md. at 402-03 , 749 A.2d at 779 ; Huffman, 356 Md. at 628 , 741 A.2d at 1091 . | 4 | 4 |
Tierco Maryland, Inc. v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2022Tierco Maryland, Inc. v. Williams, 381 Md. 378, 396 , 849 A.2d 504, 515 (2004) (emphasis added) (quoting Bern–Shaw Ltd. [P’ship] v. Mayor of Baltimore, 377 Md. 277 , 297–98, 833 A.2d 502, 514 (2003)). 2022Tierco Maryland, Inc. v. Williams, 381 Md. 378, 396 , 849 A.2d 504, 515 (2004) (emphasis added) (quoting Bern–Shaw Ltd. [P’ship] v. Mayor of Baltimore, 377 Md. 277 , 297–98, 833 A.2d 502, 514 (2003)). | 2 | 2 |
General Motors Corp. v. Seaygreen2 sentences2022This Court has repeatedly stated that the Maryland Rules are “precise rubrics” that are to be “strictly followed.” E.g., General Motors Corp. v. Seay, 388 Md. 341, 344 (2005). 2022This Court has repeatedly stated that the Maryland Rules are “precise rubrics” that are to be “strictly followed.” E.g., General Motors Corp. v. Seay, 388 Md. 341, 344 (2005). | 2 | 2 |
Bern-Shaw Ltd. Partnership v. Mayor of Baltimoregreen2 sentences2022Tierco Maryland, Inc. v. Williams, 381 Md. 378, 396 , 849 A.2d 504, 515 (2004) (emphasis added) (quoting Bern–Shaw Ltd. [P’ship] v. Mayor of Baltimore, 377 Md. 277 , 297–98, 833 A.2d 502, 514 (2003)). 2022Tierco Maryland, Inc. v. Williams, 381 Md. 378, 396 , 849 A.2d 504, 515 (2004) (emphasis added) (quoting Bern–Shaw Ltd. [P’ship] v. Mayor of Baltimore, 377 Md. 277 , 297–98, 833 A.2d 502, 514 (2003)). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Harrellgreen2 sentences2007See State v. Harrell, 348 Md. 69, 80 , 702 A.2d 723, 723 (1997). 2007See State v. Harrell, 348 Md. 69, 80 , 702 A.2d 723, 723 (1997). | 2 | 2 |
Marsheck v. Board of Trusteesgreen2 sentences2002See Pickett v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 365 Md. 67, 78 , 775 A.2d 1218, 1224 (2001); Johnson v. State, 360 Md. 250, 265 , 757 A.2d 796, 804 (2000)(“If the words of. the rule are plain and unambiguous, our inquiry ordinarily ceases and we need not venture outside the text of the rule.”); Marsheck v. Bd. of Trustees of the Fire and Police Employees’ Retirement Sys. of Baltimore, 358 Md. 393, 402-03 , 749 A.2d 774, 779 (2000)(interpreting the Baltimore City Code and explaining that the Court need not look beyond the text when the words used are plain and unambiguous). 2002See Pickett v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 365 Md. 67, 78 , 775 A.2d 1218, 1224 (2001); Johnson v. State, 360 Md. 250, 265 , 757 A.2d 796, 804 (2000)(“If the words of. the rule are plain and unambiguous, our inquiry ordinarily ceases and we need not venture outside the text of the rule.”); Marsheck v. Bd. of Trustees of the Fire and Police Employees’ Retirement Sys. of Baltimore, 358 Md. 393, 402-03 , 749 A.2d 774, 779 (2000)(interpreting the Baltimore City Code and explaining that the Court need not look beyond the text when the words used are plain and unambiguous). | 1 | 5 |
Long v. Stategreen2 sentences2000As with statutes, we construe the words m the text of a rule in accordance with their plain meaning, Long, 343 Md. at 667 , 684 A.2d 445 ; In re Victor B., 336 Md. at 94, 646 A.2d 1012 , giving effect to the rule as a whole. 2000As with statutes, we construe the words m the text of a rule in accordance with their plain meaning, Long, 343 Md. at 667 , 684 A.2d 445 ; In re Victor B., 336 Md. at 94, 646 A.2d 1012 , giving effect to the rule as a whole. | 1 | 3 |
In re Victor B.green2 sentences2000As with statutes, we construe the words m the text of a rule in accordance with their plain meaning, Long, 343 Md. at 667 , 684 A.2d 445 ; In re Victor B., 336 Md. at 94, 646 A.2d 1012 , giving effect to the rule as a whole. 2000As with statutes, we construe the words m the text of a rule in accordance with their plain meaning, Long, 343 Md. at 667 , 684 A.2d 445 ; In re Victor B., 336 Md. at 94, 646 A.2d 1012 , giving effect to the rule as a whole. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Browngreen2 sentences2006See, e.g., Hutton v. State, 339 Md. 480 , 488 n. 6, 663 A.2d 1289 , 1292 n. 6 (1995) (noting that the petitioner asked for and was granted a continuing objection during trial); State v. Brown, 327 Md. 81, 84 , 607 A.2d 923, 924 (1992) (noting that the court explicitly granted a continuing objection); Wilson v. State, 87 Md.App. 659, 671-72 , 591 A.2d 524, 530 (1991) (setting forth the dialogue with the court in which the defendant was granted a continuing objection). 2006See, e.g., Hutton v. State, 339 Md. 480 , 488 n. 6, 663 A.2d 1289 , 1292 n. 6 (1995) (noting that the petitioner asked for and was granted a continuing objection during trial); State v. Brown, 327 Md. 81, 84 , 607 A.2d 923, 924 (1992) (noting that the court explicitly granted a continuing objection); Wilson v. State, 87 Md.App. 659, 671-72 , 591 A.2d 524, 530 (1991) (setting forth the dialogue with the court in which the defendant was granted a continuing objection). | 1 | 2 |
Germany v. Stategreen1 sentence2021Although it would have been preferable to omit the reference to “a defendant” from the heading as the trial court provided it to the jury, the trial court’s formulation was a better fit for this case than the Pattern Instructions’ article- less “defendant,” which could be interpreted as meaning “the defendant.” Going forward, we encourage trial courts in cases where the evidence generates a flight instruction, but where the defendant disputes that they were the person who fled, to refer to the pattern instruction simply as “Flight or Concealment” if the court wishes to provide the jury with a | 1 | 1 |
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukesgreen1 sentence2020Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 360 (2011); cf. Angeletti, 358 Md. at 782 (decided before Dukes and explaining that certification under Md. | 1 | 1 |
West v. Stategreen1 sentence2020Although we are not bound by Derr I, as that decision was vacated in its entirety by the Supreme Court, albeit on different grounds, see West v. State, 369 Md. 150, 157-58 (2002), we nonetheless find it persuasive, and, moreover, we interpret Williams as precluding such a “prosecutorial dodge.” 567 U.S. at 120 (Kagan, J., dissenting). 20 part (b) of the rule does not permit an expert to act as a conduit for such evidence, regardless of the text of the rule. | 1 | 1 |
Philip Morris Inc. v. Angelettigreen1 sentence2020Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 360 (2011); cf. Angeletti, 358 Md. at 782 (decided before Dukes and explaining that certification under Md. | 1 | 1 |
Atkins v. Stategreen2 sentences2014See generally Atkins v. State, 421 Md. 434, 451 , 26 A.3d 979, 988 (2011) (“[C]ounsel . . . did not incorrectly state the law or the State’s burden. . . . 2014See generally Atkins v. State, 421 Md. 434, 451 , 26 A.3d 979, 988 (2011) (“[C]ounsel . . . did not incorrectly state the law or the State’s burden. . . . | 1 | 1 |
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Gressgreen2 sentences2010As with statutes, when we construe a rule, “we must give effect to the entire rule, ‘neither adding, nor deleting, words in order to give it a meaning not otherwise evident by the words actually used.’ Our mission is to give the rule a reasonable interpretation in tune with logic and common sense.” In re Victor B., 336 Md. 85, 94 , 646 A.2d 1012 (1994) (citation omitted); see Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Gress, 378 Md. 667, 676 , 838 A.2d 362 (2003). 2010As with statutes, when we construe a rule, “we must give effect to the entire rule, ‘neither adding, nor deleting, words in order to give it a meaning not otherwise evident by the words actually used.’ Our mission is to give the rule a reasonable interpretation in tune with logic and common sense.” In re Victor B., 336 Md. 85, 94 , 646 A.2d 1012 (1994) (citation omitted); see Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. v. Gress, 378 Md. 667, 676 , 838 A.2d 362 (2003). | 1 | 1 |
Hutton v. Stategreen2 sentences2006See, e.g., Hutton v. State, 339 Md. 480 , 488 n. 6, 663 A.2d 1289 , 1292 n. 6 (1995) (noting that the petitioner asked for and was granted a continuing objection during trial); State v. Brown, 327 Md. 81, 84 , 607 A.2d 923, 924 (1992) (noting that the court explicitly granted a continuing objection); Wilson v. State, 87 Md.App. 659, 671-72 , 591 A.2d 524, 530 (1991) (setting forth the dialogue with the court in which the defendant was granted a continuing objection). 2006See, e.g., Hutton v. State, 339 Md. 480 , 488 n. 6, 663 A.2d 1289 , 1292 n. 6 (1995) (noting that the petitioner asked for and was granted a continuing objection during trial); State v. Brown, 327 Md. 81, 84 , 607 A.2d 923, 924 (1992) (noting that the court explicitly granted a continuing objection); Wilson v. State, 87 Md.App. 659, 671-72 , 591 A.2d 524, 530 (1991) (setting forth the dialogue with the court in which the defendant was granted a continuing objection). | 1 | 1 |
Wilson v. Stategreen2 sentences2006See, e.g., Hutton v. State, 339 Md. 480 , 488 n. 6, 663 A.2d 1289 , 1292 n. 6 (1995) (noting that the petitioner asked for and was granted a continuing objection during trial); State v. Brown, 327 Md. 81, 84 , 607 A.2d 923, 924 (1992) (noting that the court explicitly granted a continuing objection); Wilson v. State, 87 Md.App. 659, 671-72 , 591 A.2d 524, 530 (1991) (setting forth the dialogue with the court in which the defendant was granted a continuing objection). 2006See, e.g., Hutton v. State, 339 Md. 480 , 488 n. 6, 663 A.2d 1289 , 1292 n. 6 (1995) (noting that the petitioner asked for and was granted a continuing objection during trial); State v. Brown, 327 Md. 81, 84 , 607 A.2d 923, 924 (1992) (noting that the court explicitly granted a continuing objection); Wilson v. State, 87 Md.App. 659, 671-72 , 591 A.2d 524, 530 (1991) (setting forth the dialogue with the court in which the defendant was granted a continuing objection). | 1 | 1 |
Pickett v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.green2 sentences2002See Pickett v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 365 Md. 67, 78 , 775 A.2d 1218, 1224 (2001); Johnson v. State, 360 Md. 250, 265 , 757 A.2d 796, 804 (2000)(“If the words of. the rule are plain and unambiguous, our inquiry ordinarily ceases and we need not venture outside the text of the rule.”); Marsheck v. Bd. of Trustees of the Fire and Police Employees’ Retirement Sys. of Baltimore, 358 Md. 393, 402-03 , 749 A.2d 774, 779 (2000)(interpreting the Baltimore City Code and explaining that the Court need not look beyond the text when the words used are plain and unambiguous). 2002See Pickett v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 365 Md. 67, 78 , 775 A.2d 1218, 1224 (2001); Johnson v. State, 360 Md. 250, 265 , 757 A.2d 796, 804 (2000)(“If the words of. the rule are plain and unambiguous, our inquiry ordinarily ceases and we need not venture outside the text of the rule.”); Marsheck v. Bd. of Trustees of the Fire and Police Employees’ Retirement Sys. of Baltimore, 358 Md. 393, 402-03 , 749 A.2d 774, 779 (2000)(interpreting the Baltimore City Code and explaining that the Court need not look beyond the text when the words used are plain and unambiguous). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Huffman v. State
green
2 sentences2010See Adamson, 359 Md. at 250-51 , 753 A.2d at 507-08 ; Marsheck, 358 Md. at 402-03 , 749 A.2d at 779 ; Huffman, 356 Md. at 628 , 741 A.2d at 1091 . 2010See Adamson, 359 Md. at 250-51 , 753 A.2d at 507-08 ; Marsheck, 358 Md. at 402-03 , 749 A.2d at 779 ; Huffman, 356 Md. at 628 , 741 A.2d at 1091 . | 4 | 2000–2010 |
Williams v. State
green
2 sentences2021“We may also consider other persuasive sources beyond the text of the rule, particularly case law interpreting the rule in question.” Williams, 364 Md. at 171 n.13, 771 A.2d at 1088 n.13. 2021“We may also consider other persuasive sources beyond the text of the rule, particularly case law interpreting the rule in question.” Williams, 364 Md. at 171 n.13, 771 A.2d at 1088 n.13. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Ellsworth v. Sherne Lingerie, Inc.
green
2 sentences2013Ellsworth, 303 Md. at 603 , 495 A.2d 348 . 2013Ellsworth, 303 Md. at 603 , 495 A.2d 348 . | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Thompson v. State
green
2 sentences2011In somewhat of a twist, today, we visit Rule 4-215, not to construe or interpret the text of the rule so much, but rather to compare it to the text of its predecessor in order to determine what, if any, effect that language—absent from the current Rule—has on the continuing efficacy of our reasoning in Thompson v. State, 284 Md. 113 , 394 A.2d 1190 (1978). 2011In somewhat of a twist, today, we visit Rule 4-215, not to construe or interpret the text of the rule so much, but rather to compare it to the text of its predecessor in order to determine what, if any, effect that language—absent from the current Rule—has on the continuing efficacy of our reasoning in Thompson v. State, 284 Md. 113 , 394 A.2d 1190 (1978). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
In Re Charles K.
green
2 sentences2010In addition, “we construe the words in the text of a rule” so as to give “effect to the rule as a whole.” In re Charles K., 135 Md.App. at 97 , 761 A.2d 978 . 2010In addition, “we construe the words in the text of a rule” so as to give “effect to the rule as a whole.” In re Charles K., 135 Md.App. at 97 , 761 A.2d 978 . | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Walker
green
1 sentence2001Following the view of the Federal Advisory Committee and the U.S. Senate, we made clear in our endorsement of the Committee Note to Rule 5-803(b)(24) what we meant by “exceptional circumstances” — “new and presently unanticipated situations ....” 2 Id. at 325, 691 A.2d 1341 . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Greco v. State
green
2 sentences2000Greco v. State, 347 Md. 423, 428 , 701 A.2d 419 (1997). 2000Greco v. State, 347 Md. 423, 428 , 701 A.2d 419 (1997). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Richard A. Ash, on Behalf of Himself, and on Behalf of Bethelehem Steel Corporation v. Stewart S. Cort, and Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Nominal
green
1 sentence1995In Ash v. Cort, 512 F.2d 909 (3rd Cir.1975), a shareholder in Bethlehem Steel Corporation sought derivative damages in favor of the corporation against its directors as a result of certain allegedly illegal campaign contributions. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
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.