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.
10 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2007 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 |
|---|---|---|
Consumer Protection Division Office of the Attorney General v. Consumer Publishing Co.green2 sentences2001As we pointed out in Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 743 , 501 A.2d 48, 54 (1985), the McKinney doctrine had never been applied to governing bodies or constitutional officers in the Executive Branch of the State Government, and, in that case, we declined to apply it to the Consumer Protection Division of the Attorney General’s Office, notwithstanding the lack of any specific statutory authority for the Division to appeal from a reversal or modification of its decision by a trial court. 2001As we pointed out in Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 743 , 501 A.2d 48, 54 (1985), the McKinney doctrine had never been applied to governing bodies or constitutional officers in the Executive Branch of the State Government, and, in that case, we declined to apply it to the Consumer Protection Division of the Attorney General’s Office, notwithstanding the lack of any specific statutory authority for the Division to appeal from a reversal or modification of its decision by a trial court. | 4 | 6 |
Board of License Commissioners v. Haberlinred2 sentences2001In Board v. Haberlin, 320 Md. 399, 404 , 578 A.2d 215, 217 (1990), involving an appeal by a county liquor license board from the reversal of its decision to grant an application for the transfer of a beer and wine license, we questioned whether cases strictly applying the McKinney doctrine “remain viable in light of our recent cases,” although, because there was another party to the appeal with clear standing, we did not need to decide that issue. 2001In Board v. Haberlin, 320 Md. 399, 404 , 578 A.2d 215, 217 (1990), involving an appeal by a county liquor license board from the reversal of its decision to grant an application for the transfer of a beer and wine license, we questioned whether cases strictly applying the McKinney doctrine “remain viable in light of our recent cases,” although, because there was another party to the appeal with clear standing, we did not need to decide that issue. | 2 | 2 |
Maryland Real Estate Commission v. Johnsongreen2 sentences1996Since adopting these criteria, we have found the McKinney doctrine inapplicable to such agencies as the Maryland Racing Commission, see Maryland Racing Com’n v. Castrenze, 335 Md. 284, 295 , 643 A.2d 412, 417 (1994); the Real Estate Commission, see Maryland Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); and the Department of Human Resources, see Maryland Department of Human Resources v. Bo Peep Day Nursery, 317 Md. 573, 585-86 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020-21 (1989), cert. denied, Cassilly v. Maryland Dep’t of Human Resources, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 1996Since adopting these criteria, we have found the McKinney doctrine inapplicable to such agencies as the Maryland Racing Commission, see Maryland Racing Com’n v. Castrenze, 335 Md. 284, 295 , 643 A.2d 412, 417 (1994); the Real Estate Commission, see Maryland Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); and the Department of Human Resources, see Maryland Department of Human Resources v. Bo Peep Day Nursery, 317 Md. 573, 585-86 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020-21 (1989), cert. denied, Cassilly v. Maryland Dep’t of Human Resources, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 | 2 | 2 |
Maryland Department of Human Resources v. Bo Peep Day Nurserygreen2 sentences1996Since adopting these criteria, we have found the McKinney doctrine inapplicable to such agencies as the Maryland Racing Commission, see Maryland Racing Com’n v. Castrenze, 335 Md. 284, 295 , 643 A.2d 412, 417 (1994); the Real Estate Commission, see Maryland Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); and the Department of Human Resources, see Maryland Department of Human Resources v. Bo Peep Day Nursery, 317 Md. 573, 585-86 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020-21 (1989), cert. denied, Cassilly v. Maryland Dep’t of Human Resources, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 1996Since adopting these criteria, we have found the McKinney doctrine inapplicable to such agencies as the Maryland Racing Commission, see Maryland Racing Com’n v. Castrenze, 335 Md. 284, 295 , 643 A.2d 412, 417 (1994); the Real Estate Commission, see Maryland Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); and the Department of Human Resources, see Maryland Department of Human Resources v. Bo Peep Day Nursery, 317 Md. 573, 585-86 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020-21 (1989), cert. denied, Cassilly v. Maryland Dep’t of Human Resources, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 | 2 | 2 |
Maryland Racing Commission v. Castrenzegreen2 sentences2001After iterating that the McKinney doctrine “does not apply to all agencies or to all adjudicative administrative proceedings,” we confirmed again that “under the general *318 statutory authorizations for appeal, agencies are entitled to appeal from adverse circuit court judgments where the functions of the agencies ‘are so identified with the execution of some definite public policy as the representative of the State, that their participation in litigation affecting their decisions is regarded by the Legislature as essential to the adequate protection of the State’s interests.’ ” Id. at 294, 6 2001After iterating that the McKinney doctrine “does not apply to all agencies or to all adjudicative administrative proceedings,” we confirmed again that “under the general *318 statutory authorizations for appeal, agencies are entitled to appeal from adverse circuit court judgments where the functions of the agencies ‘are so identified with the execution of some definite public policy as the representative of the State, that their participation in litigation affecting their decisions is regarded by the Legislature as essential to the adequate protection of the State’s interests.’ ” Id. at 294, 6 | 1 | 2 |
County Comm'rs of Carroll Co. v. Grossgreen2 sentences1994See Board v. Haberlin, 320 Md. 399, 404 , 578 A.2d 215, 217 (1990); Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); Department v. Bo Peep, 317 Md. 573, 584-585 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020 (1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 (1990); Motor Vehicle Admin. v. Lindsay, 309 Md. 557, 561 , 525 A.2d 1051, 1053 (1987); Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 742-746 , 501 A.2d 48, 54 (1985); County Comm’rs of Carroll Co. v. Gross, 301 Md. 473, 477-481 , 483 A.2d 755, 757-759 (1984). 1994See Board v. Haberlin, 320 Md. 399, 404 , 578 A.2d 215, 217 (1990); Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); Department v. Bo Peep, 317 Md. 573, 584-585 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020 (1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 (1990); Motor Vehicle Admin. v. Lindsay, 309 Md. 557, 561 , 525 A.2d 1051, 1053 (1987); Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 742-746 , 501 A.2d 48, 54 (1985); County Comm’rs of Carroll Co. v. Gross, 301 Md. 473, 477-481 , 483 A.2d 755, 757-759 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
Motor Vehicle Admin. v. Lindsaygreen2 sentences1994See Board v. Haberlin, 320 Md. 399, 404 , 578 A.2d 215, 217 (1990); Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); Department v. Bo Peep, 317 Md. 573, 584-585 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020 (1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 (1990); Motor Vehicle Admin. v. Lindsay, 309 Md. 557, 561 , 525 A.2d 1051, 1053 (1987); Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 742-746 , 501 A.2d 48, 54 (1985); County Comm’rs of Carroll Co. v. Gross, 301 Md. 473, 477-481 , 483 A.2d 755, 757-759 (1984). 1994See Board v. Haberlin, 320 Md. 399, 404 , 578 A.2d 215, 217 (1990); Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); Department v. Bo Peep, 317 Md. 573, 584-585 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020 (1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 (1990); Motor Vehicle Admin. v. Lindsay, 309 Md. 557, 561 , 525 A.2d 1051, 1053 (1987); Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 742-746 , 501 A.2d 48, 54 (1985); County Comm’rs of Carroll Co. v. Gross, 301 Md. 473, 477-481 , 483 A.2d 755, 757-759 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Board of Zoning Appeals v. McKinney
green
2 sentences1993II Sunrise has moved to dismiss the “appeal,” ie., certiorari review, by invoking the McKinney doctrine (Board of Zoning Appeals v. McKinney, 174 Md. 551 , 199 A. 540 (1938)). 1993II Sunrise has moved to dismiss the “appeal,” ie., certiorari review, by invoking the McKinney doctrine (Board of Zoning Appeals v. McKinney, 174 Md. 551 , 199 A. 540 (1938)). | 3 | 1985–1993 |
Board of Liquor License Commissioners v. Hollywood Productions, Inc.
green
2 sentences1998The Court noted that “the functions of certain agencies are so aligned with interpreting and enforcing the State’s policies that the rationale of the McKinney doctrine simply does not apply.” Id. at 8, 684 A.2d 837 (citing Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 746 , 501 A.2d 48, 56 (1985)) (emphasis ours). 1998The Court noted that “the functions of certain agencies are so aligned with interpreting and enforcing the State’s policies that the rationale of the McKinney doctrine simply does not apply.” Id. at 8, 684 A.2d 837 (citing Consumer Protection v. Consumer Pub., 304 Md. 731, 746 , 501 A.2d 48, 56 (1985)) (emphasis ours). | 2 | 1998–2001 |
Schultze v. Montgomery County Planning Board
green
2 sentences2007Schultze, 230 Md. at 81-82 , 185 A.2d 502 . 2007Schultze, 230 Md. at 81-82 , 185 A.2d 502 . | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Lownsbury v. VanBuren
green
2 sentences2002In other words, even where an on-call' ' physician is contractually obligated to perform the services at issue, the physician-patient relationship cannot ' be established unless it appears that the physician was actively involved in caring for the patient.' 94 Ohio St.3d at 240 , 762 N.E.2d at 361-62 . 2002In other words, even where an on-call' ' physician is contractually obligated to perform the services at issue, the physician-patient relationship cannot ' be established unless it appears that the physician was actively involved in caring for the patient.' 94 Ohio St.3d at 240 , 762 N.E.2d at 361-62 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Board of Liquor License Commissioners v. Leone
red
2 sentences2001That approach was followed as well in Board of Liquor v. Hollywood, 344 Md. 2 , 684 A.2d 837 (1996), where we overruled Liquor License Board v. Leone, 249 Md. 263 , 239 A.2d 82 (1968) (holding that a county liquor license board had no standing to appeal the reversal of its decision) and found standing to appeal. 2001That approach was followed as well in Board of Liquor v. Hollywood, 344 Md. 2 , 684 A.2d 837 (1996), where we overruled Liquor License Board v. Leone, 249 Md. 263 , 239 A.2d 82 (1968) (holding that a county liquor license board had no standing to appeal the reversal of its decision) and found standing to appeal. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Howard County v. Mangione
neutral
2 sentences2001Relying largely on Zoning Appeals Board v. McKinney, supra, and Howard County v. Mangione, 47 Md.App. 350 , 423 A.2d 263 (1980), HRM moved to strike the Commission as a party on the ground that it had no standing to be a party to the review of one of its “quasi judicial decisions.” The Commission responded that the McKinney doctrine had been limited to agencies exercising only quasi-judicial functions, which was not the case with the Commission, and that, in any event, McKinney and Mangione merely precluded an agency from appealing a judgment of the Circuit Court reversing its decision, not fr 2001Relying largely on Zoning Appeals Board v. McKinney, supra, and Howard County v. Mangione, 47 Md.App. 350 , 423 A.2d 263 (1980), HRM moved to strike the Commission as a party on the ground that it had no standing to be a party to the review of one of its “quasi judicial decisions.” The Commission responded that the McKinney doctrine had been limited to agencies exercising only quasi-judicial functions, which was not the case with the Commission, and that, in any event, McKinney and Mangione merely precluded an agency from appealing a judgment of the Circuit Court reversing its decision, not fr | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Cassilly v. Maryland Department of Human Resources
green
2 sentences1996Since adopting these criteria, we have found the McKinney doctrine inapplicable to such agencies as the Maryland Racing Commission, see Maryland Racing Com’n v. Castrenze, 335 Md. 284, 295 , 643 A.2d 412, 417 (1994); the Real Estate Commission, see Maryland Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); and the Department of Human Resources, see Maryland Department of Human Resources v. Bo Peep Day Nursery, 317 Md. 573, 585-86 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020-21 (1989), cert. denied, Cassilly v. Maryland Dep’t of Human Resources, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 1996Since adopting these criteria, we have found the McKinney doctrine inapplicable to such agencies as the Maryland Racing Commission, see Maryland Racing Com’n v. Castrenze, 335 Md. 284, 295 , 643 A.2d 412, 417 (1994); the Real Estate Commission, see Maryland Real Estate Comm’n v. Johnson, 320 Md. 91, 97 , 576 A.2d 760, 763 (1990); and the Department of Human Resources, see Maryland Department of Human Resources v. Bo Peep Day Nursery, 317 Md. 573, 585-86 , 565 A.2d 1015, 1020-21 (1989), cert. denied, Cassilly v. Maryland Dep’t of Human Resources, 494 U.S. 1067 , 110 S.Ct. 1784 , 108 L.Ed.2d 786 | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Steuart Petroleum Co. v. Board of County Commissioners
green
2 sentences1993Mary's County, 276 Md. 435 , 347 A.2d 854 (1975). [5] In Consumer Protection Div. v. Consumer Publishing Co., 304 Md. 731 , 501 A.2d 48 (1985), we had occasion to review the McKinney doctrine and to place it in perspective in Maryland administrative law. 1993Mary's County, 276 Md. 435 , 347 A.2d 854 (1975). [5] In Consumer Protection Div. v. Consumer Publishing Co., 304 Md. 731 , 501 A.2d 48 (1985), we had occasion to review the McKinney doctrine and to place it in perspective in Maryland administrative law. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Lynx, Inc. v. Ordnance Products, Inc.
green
2 sentences1976The duties of an appellate court, when reviewing a motion for summary judgment, are extensively discussed in Lynx, Inc. v. Ordinance Products, Inc., 273 Md. 1 , 327 A. 2d 502 (1974): “In reviewing the propriety of the grant of a summary judgment we are concerned primarily with deciding whether a factual issue which was material to the resolution of the controversy existed and whether the trial judge was legally correct.... 1976The duties of an appellate court, when reviewing a motion for summary judgment, are extensively discussed in Lynx, Inc. v. Ordinance Products, Inc., 273 Md. 1 , 327 A. 2d 502 (1974): “In reviewing the propriety of the grant of a summary judgment we are concerned primarily with deciding whether a factual issue which was material to the resolution of the controversy existed and whether the trial judge was legally correct.... | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.