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.
11 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1911–2017 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Conner v. Stategreen2 sentences2012Rule 8-131(a) (“Ordinarily, the appellate court will not decide any other issue unless it plainly appears by the record to have been raised in or decided by the trial court.”); Conner v. State, 34 Md.App. 124, 135 , 366 A.2d 385 (1976) (“A failure to object [to a prosecutor’s statements during closing arguments] and to request the Court’s correction is a waiver of the contention for appellate review.”). 2012Rule 8-131(a) (“Ordinarily, the appellate court will not decide any other issue unless it plainly appears by the record to have been raised in or decided by the trial court.”); Conner v. State, 34 Md.App. 124, 135 , 366 A.2d 385 (1976) (“A failure to object [to a prosecutor’s statements during closing arguments] and to request the Court’s correction is a waiver of the contention for appellate review.”). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Austin v. State
green
2 sentences2002The interpreting and molding of the law is as weighty a consideration in *438 appellate councils as is the correction of error in individual cases. 90 Md.App. at 271 , 600 A.2d 1142 (emphasis supplied). 2002The interpreting and molding of the law is as weighty a consideration in *438 appellate councils as is the correction of error in individual cases. 90 Md.App. at 271 , 600 A.2d 1142 (emphasis supplied). | 4 | 2001–2017 |
Wilde v. Swanson
green
2 sentences2003The Court of Appeals rejected the motel owner’s argument that the dismissal of the claims against him should not have been certified for immediate appeal. *382 According to the Wilde Court, (1) the claims against the motel owner and the assailants “arose out of the same transaction or occurrence;” (2) on the issues of liability and compensatory damages, the litigation would involve a substantial amount of “common proof;” and (3) if the circuit court’s ruling on venue turned out to be erroneous, the correction of that error after the trial of the victim’s case against the assailants would (in a 2003The Court of Appeals rejected the motel owner’s argument that the dismissal of the claims against him should not have been certified for immediate appeal. *382 According to the Wilde Court, (1) the claims against the motel owner and the assailants “arose out of the same transaction or occurrence;” (2) on the issues of liability and compensatory damages, the litigation would involve a substantial amount of “common proof;” and (3) if the circuit court’s ruling on venue turned out to be erroneous, the correction of that error after the trial of the victim’s case against the assailants would (in a | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Burch v. State
green
2 sentences1997Rather than being arbitrary and capricious, the majority asserts, that remedy simply effectuates the clear intent and determination of the jury. 346 Md. at 286-287 , 696 A.2d at 460 . 1997Rather than being arbitrary and capricious, the majority asserts, that remedy simply effectuates the clear intent and determination of the jury. 346 Md. at 286-287 , 696 A.2d at 460 . | 1 | 1997–1997 |
State v. Evans
green
2 sentences1992Indeed, in Evans v. State, 28 Md.App. 640, 650-651 , 349 A.2d 300 (1975), aff'd State v. Evans, 278 Md. 197 , 362 A.2d 629 (1976), we expressly referred to this consideration as the thing that motivated us to notice the “plain error” in that case: “[W]e exercise our discretion in noticing this particular 'plain error’ because of the legion of cases already beginning to surface in the wake of Mullaney v. Wilbur, and *272 because of the inevitably greater legions yet to follow. 1992Indeed, in Evans v. State, 28 Md.App. 640, 650-651 , 349 A.2d 300 (1975), aff'd State v. Evans, 278 Md. 197 , 362 A.2d 629 (1976), we expressly referred to this consideration as the thing that motivated us to notice the “plain error” in that case: “[W]e exercise our discretion in noticing this particular 'plain error’ because of the legion of cases already beginning to surface in the wake of Mullaney v. Wilbur, and *272 because of the inevitably greater legions yet to follow. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Evans v. State
green
2 sentences1992Indeed, in Evans v. State, 28 Md.App. 640, 650-651 , 349 A.2d 300 (1975), aff'd State v. Evans, 278 Md. 197 , 362 A.2d 629 (1976), we expressly referred to this consideration as the thing that motivated us to notice the “plain error” in that case: “[W]e exercise our discretion in noticing this particular 'plain error’ because of the legion of cases already beginning to surface in the wake of Mullaney v. Wilbur, and *272 because of the inevitably greater legions yet to follow. 1992Indeed, in Evans v. State, 28 Md.App. 640, 650-651 , 349 A.2d 300 (1975), aff'd State v. Evans, 278 Md. 197 , 362 A.2d 629 (1976), we expressly referred to this consideration as the thing that motivated us to notice the “plain error” in that case: “[W]e exercise our discretion in noticing this particular 'plain error’ because of the legion of cases already beginning to surface in the wake of Mullaney v. Wilbur, and *272 because of the inevitably greater legions yet to follow. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
Dowd v. United States Ex Rel. Cook
green
2 sentences1976Dowd v. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 210 ." Id. 352 U.S. at 361-62 . 1976Dowd v. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 210 ." Id. 352 U.S. at 361-62 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Pollard v. United States
green
2 sentences1976Dowd v. Cook, 340 U. S. 206, 210 .” Id. 352 U. S. at 361-62 . 1976Dowd v. Cook, 340 U.S. 206, 210 ." Id. 352 U.S. at 361-62 . | 1 | 1976–1976 |
Montgomery v. Williamson
green
1 sentence1911It was there contended that the Orphans’ Court had no power to modify its order, and in reply to that contention Judge Breht, after quoting from Montgomery v. Williamson, supra, “whether the order of ratification was obtained by deceit or imposition is quite immaterial; if by honest mistake, the power of revocation and correction equally exists, provided the application for its exercise be made within reasonable time and under proper circumstances,” said: “In the present case a reasonable time for the correction of the error is before the estate has been finally .closed; especially if, as here | 1 | 1911–1911 |
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.