9 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1975–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Adams v. Manowngreen2 sentences2011Where the order involves an interpretation and application of Maryland statutory and case law, we must determine whether the lower court’s conclusions are ‘legally correct’ under a de novo standard of review.” Powell v. Breslin, 195 Md.App. 340 (2010), cert. granted, 418 Md. 190 , 13 A.3d 798 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted). *398 The standard of review that governs appellate review of the denial of a motion for judgment after trial was explained by the Court of Appeals in Adams v. Manown, 328 Md. 463, 472, n. 4 , 615 A.2d 611 (1992): Given that a circuit court has the discre 2011Where the order involves an interpretation and application of Maryland statutory and case law, we must determine whether the lower court’s conclusions are ‘legally correct’ under a de novo standard of review.” Powell v. Breslin, 195 Md.App. 340 (2010), cert. granted, 418 Md. 190 , 13 A.3d 798 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted). *398 The standard of review that governs appellate review of the denial of a motion for judgment after trial was explained by the Court of Appeals in Adams v. Manown, 328 Md. 463, 472, n. 4 , 615 A.2d 611 (1992): Given that a circuit court has the discre | 1 | 2 |
Sterling v. Reechergreen2 sentences2000See Sterling, 176 Md. at 569 , 6 A.2d at 238 (acknowledging the difficulty of this mode of analysis). 2000See Sterling, 176 Md. at 569 , 6 A.2d at 238 (acknowledging the difficulty of this mode of analysis). | 1 | 1 |
Metropolitan Mortgage Fund, Inc. v. Basilikogreen2 sentences1992Given that a circuit court has the discretion to deny a motion for summary judgment, even though the record on summary judgment would support grant of the motion at that time, see Metropolitan Mortgage Fund, Inc. v. Basiliko, 288 Md. 25, 28 , 415 A.2d 582, 583 (1980), the correct mode of analysis here is to determine whether the party moving for judgment at the conclusion of trial is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the record as it stands at that time. 1992Given that a circuit court has the discretion to deny a motion for summary judgment, even though the record on summary judgment would support grant of the motion at that time, see Metropolitan Mortgage Fund, Inc. v. Basiliko, 288 Md. 25, 28 , 415 A.2d 582, 583 (1980), the correct mode of analysis here is to determine whether the party moving for judgment at the conclusion of trial is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the record as it stands at that time. | 1 | 1 |
Kelly v. Stategreen2 sentences1980Conduct refers to "a mode or standard of personal behavior especially as based on moral principles,” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1961), or "[t]he way a person acts; behavior,” The American Heritage Dictionary (1969); accord, Kelly v. State, 151 Md. 87, 100 , 133 A. 899 (1926). 1980Conduct refers to "a mode or standard of personal behavior especially as based on moral principles,” Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (1961), or "[t]he way a person acts; behavior,” The American Heritage Dictionary (1969); accord, Kelly v. State, 151 Md. 87, 100 , 133 A. 899 (1926). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Brown v. Legal Foundation of Washington
green
2 sentences2018Koontz , 570 U.S. at 614 , 133 S.Ct. at 2600 (citing Brown v. Legal Foundation of Wash. , 538 U.S. 216 , 235, 123 S.Ct. 1406 , 1419, 155 L.Ed.2d 376 (2003) ) (emphasis added and internal quotation marks omitted). 2018Koontz , 570 U.S. at 614 , 133 S.Ct. at 2600 (citing Brown v. Legal Foundation of Wash. , 538 U.S. 216 , 235, 123 S.Ct. 1406 , 1419, 155 L.Ed.2d 376 (2003) ) (emphasis added and internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist.
green
2 sentences2018Koontz , 570 U.S. at 614 , 133 S.Ct. at 2600 (citing Brown v. Legal Foundation of Wash. , 538 U.S. 216 , 235, 123 S.Ct. 1406 , 1419, 155 L.Ed.2d 376 (2003) ) (emphasis added and internal quotation marks omitted). 2018Koontz , 570 U.S. at 614 , 133 S.Ct. at 2600 (citing Brown v. Legal Foundation of Wash. , 538 U.S. 216 , 235, 123 S.Ct. 1406 , 1419, 155 L.Ed.2d 376 (2003) ) (emphasis added and internal quotation marks omitted). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Cure v. State
green
1 sentence2011Where the order involves an interpretation and application of Maryland statutory and case law, we must determine whether the lower court’s conclusions are ‘legally correct’ under a de novo standard of review.” Powell v. Breslin, 195 Md.App. 340 (2010), cert. granted, 418 Md. 190 , 13 A.3d 798 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted). *398 The standard of review that governs appellate review of the denial of a motion for judgment after trial was explained by the Court of Appeals in Adams v. Manown, 328 Md. 463, 472, n. 4 , 615 A.2d 611 (1992): Given that a circuit court has the discre | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye, Inc. v. City of Hialeah
green
2 sentences2011In undertaking this mode of analysis, the Court noted that “[r]elevant evidence includes ... the historical background of the decision under challenge, the specific series of events leading to the ... official policy in question, and the legislative or administrative history, including contemporaneous statements made by members of the decisionmaking body.” Id. 2011In undertaking this mode of analysis, the Court noted that "[r]elevant evidence includes . . . the historical background of the decision under challenge, the specific series of events leading to the . . . official policy in question, and the legislative or administrative history, including contemporaneous statements made by members of the decisionmaking body." Id. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Arundel v. Whaley
green
1 sentence2011Where the order involves an interpretation and application of Maryland statutory and case law, we must determine whether the lower court’s conclusions are ‘legally correct’ under a de novo standard of review.” Powell v. Breslin, 195 Md.App. 340 (2010), cert. granted, 418 Md. 190 , 13 A.3d 798 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted). *398 The standard of review that governs appellate review of the denial of a motion for judgment after trial was explained by the Court of Appeals in Adams v. Manown, 328 Md. 463, 472, n. 4 , 615 A.2d 611 (1992): Given that a circuit court has the discre | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Powell v. Breslin
green
1 sentence2011Where the order involves an interpretation and application of Maryland statutory and case law, we must determine whether the lower court’s conclusions are ‘legally correct’ under a de novo standard of review.” Powell v. Breslin, 195 Md.App. 340 (2010), cert. granted, 418 Md. 190 , 13 A.3d 798 (2011) (internal quotations and citations omitted). *398 The standard of review that governs appellate review of the denial of a motion for judgment after trial was explained by the Court of Appeals in Adams v. Manown, 328 Md. 463, 472, n. 4 , 615 A.2d 611 (1992): Given that a circuit court has the discre | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Bailey v. State
green
2 sentences1997The Circuit Court for Talbot County did not consider comparative disparity because, it said, “controlling Maryland law rejects this mode of analysis,” in reliance on Bailey v. State, 63 Md.App. 594 , 493 A.2d 396 , cert. denied, 304 Md. 296 , 498 A.2d 1183 (1985). 1997The Circuit Court for Talbot County did not consider comparative disparity because, it said, “controlling Maryland law rejects this mode of analysis,” in reliance on Bailey v. State, 63 Md.App. 594 , 493 A.2d 396 , cert. denied, 304 Md. 296 , 498 A.2d 1183 (1985). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Whiteley v. Schoenlein
green
2 sentences1975Further explication was given to the rule in Whiteley v. Schoenlein, 183 Md. 590 , 39 A. 2d 692 (1944), where the Court stated at 595: “. . . it is not necessary to state minutely all the circumstances which may conduce to prove the general charge. 1975Further explication was given to the rule in Whiteley v. Schoenlein, 183 Md. 590 , 39 A. 2d 692 (1944), where the Court stated at 595: “. . . it is not necessary to state minutely all the circumstances which may conduce to prove the general charge. | 1 | 1975–1975 |
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.