unquestioned rule (Maryland) · Go Syfert
← Maryland issues

unquestioned rule in Maryland

9 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1946–2024 1 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 (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Corens v. Stategreen
md · 1946 · cited in 3 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1967–2007
2 sentences

2007Moreover, “[i]t is an unquestioned rule that photographs may be introduced in evidence, either in a civil or criminal proceeding, to illustrate the description of a person, place, or object so as to explain or apply the evidence.” Corens v. State, 185 Md. 561, 570 , 45 A.2d 340 (1946).

2007Moreover, “[i]t is an unquestioned rule that photographs may be introduced in evidence, either in a civil or criminal proceeding, to illustrate the description of a person, place, or object so as to explain or apply the evidence.” Corens v. State, 185 Md. 561, 570 , 45 A.2d 340 (1946).

13
Cook v. Boehlgreen
md · 1947 · cited in 2 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1975–2024
2 sentences

2024“It is an unquestioned rule that when a trustee in a court of equity finds it necessary to obtain legal assistance in the management of the trust estate, the court will allow him such reasonable fees as he may be required to pay in properly taking the advice and procuring the direction of counsel.” Cook v. Boehl, 188 Md. 581, 589 (1947); see Sokol v. Nattans, 26 Md.

1975In Cook v. Boehl, 188 Md. 581, 589 , 53 A. 2d 555 (1947), the Court of Appeals said: “It is an unquestioned rule that when a trustee in a court of equity finds it necessary to obtain legal assistance in the management of the trust estate, the court will allow him such reasonable fees as he may be required to pay in properly taking the advice and procuring the direction of counsel.” The same general proposition was stated in Taylor v. Denny, 118 Md. 124, 132 , 84 A. 369 (1912): “... [T]he right of a trustee to employ counsel and pay him out of the trust fund is thoroughly established, when the

12
Sokol v. Nattansgreen
mdctspecapp · 1975 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 2024–2024
1 sentence

2024“It is an unquestioned rule that when a trustee in a court of equity finds it necessary to obtain legal assistance in the management of the trust estate, the court will allow him such reasonable fees as he may be required to pay in properly taking the advice and procuring the direction of counsel.” Cook v. Boehl, 188 Md. 581, 589 (1947); see Sokol v. Nattans, 26 Md.

11
Sollers v. Mercantile-Safe Deposit & Trust Co.green
md · 1971 · cited in 1 Maryland opinions naming this issue, 1975–1975
2 sentences

1975See also Sollers v. Mercantile-Safe Deposit and Trust Company, 262 Md. 606, 611 , 278 A. 2d 581 (1971).

1975See also Sollers v. Mercantile-Safe Deposit and Trust Company, 262 Md. 606, 611 , 278 A. 2d 581 (1971).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (7)

CaseCitedYears
Snowden v. State green
md · 1919
2 sentences

1967Snowden v. State, 133 Md. 624, 631 , 106 A. 5 .

1967Snowden v. State, 133 Md. 624, 631 , 106 A. 5 .

21946–1967
State v. Tolley green
nc · 1976
2 sentences

1986The Supreme Court of North Carolina, in State v. Tolley, 290 N.C. 349, 368-369 , 226 S.E.2d 353 (1976), set forth this principle as follows: "Whatever the basis for his decision, however, the unquestioned rule is that when the trial judge, in jury cases, contemplates the necessity of employing unusual visible security measures such as shackles, he should state for the record, out of the presence of the jury, the particular reasons therefor and give counsel an opportunity to voice objections and persuade the court that such measures are unnecessary.

1986The Supreme Court of North Carolina, in State v. Tolley, 290 N.C. 349, 368-369 , 226 S.E.2d 353 (1976), set forth this principle as follows: "Whatever the basis for his decision, however, the unquestioned rule is that when the trial judge, in jury cases, contemplates the necessity of employing unusual visible security measures such as shackles, he should state for the record, out of the presence of the jury, the particular reasons therefor and give counsel an opportunity to voice objections and persuade the court that such measures are unnecessary.

11986–1986
Finberg v. Robert neutral
conn · 1912
1 sentence

1975In Cook v. Boehl, 188 Md. 581, 589 , 53 A. 2d 555 (1947), the Court of Appeals said: “It is an unquestioned rule that when a trustee in a court of equity finds it necessary to obtain legal assistance in the management of the trust estate, the court will allow him such reasonable fees as he may be required to pay in properly taking the advice and procuring the direction of counsel.” The same general proposition was stated in Taylor v. Denny, 118 Md. 124, 132 , 84 A. 369 (1912): “... [T]he right of a trustee to employ counsel and pay him out of the trust fund is thoroughly established, when the

11975–1975
Knapp v. Knapp green
md · 1926
2 sentences

1975In Cook v. Boehl, 188 Md. 581, 589 , 53 A. 2d 555 (1947), the Court of Appeals said: “It is an unquestioned rule that when a trustee in a court of equity finds it necessary to obtain legal assistance in the management of the trust estate, the court will allow him such reasonable fees as he may be required to pay in properly taking the advice and procuring the direction of counsel.” The same general proposition was stated in Taylor v. Denny, 118 Md. 124, 132 , 84 A. 369 (1912): “... [T]he right of a trustee to employ counsel and pay him out of the trust fund is thoroughly established, when the

1975In Cook v. Boehl, 188 Md. 581, 589 , 53 A. 2d 555 (1947), the Court of Appeals said: “It is an unquestioned rule that when a trustee in a court of equity finds it necessary to obtain legal assistance in the management of the trust estate, the court will allow him such reasonable fees as he may be required to pay in properly taking the advice and procuring the direction of counsel.” The same general proposition was stated in Taylor v. Denny, 118 Md. 124, 132 , 84 A. 369 (1912): “... [T]he right of a trustee to employ counsel and pay him out of the trust fund is thoroughly established, when the

11975–1975
Taylor v. Denney green
md · 1912
1 sentence

1975In Cook v. Boehl, 188 Md. 581, 589 , 53 A. 2d 555 (1947), the Court of Appeals said: “It is an unquestioned rule that when a trustee in a court of equity finds it necessary to obtain legal assistance in the management of the trust estate, the court will allow him such reasonable fees as he may be required to pay in properly taking the advice and procuring the direction of counsel.” The same general proposition was stated in Taylor v. Denny, 118 Md. 124, 132 , 84 A. 369 (1912): “... [T]he right of a trustee to employ counsel and pay him out of the trust fund is thoroughly established, when the

11975–1975
Kiessenbeck v. Kiessenbeck green
or · 1933
2 sentences

1949R. 28; Kiessenbeck v. Kiessenbeck, 145 Or. 82 , 26 P. 2d 58, 60 . *176 It is an unquestioned principle that a court of equity will refuse aid to a complainant who has acted fraudulently or gained an advantage by deceit or unfair means.

1949R. 28; Kiessenbeck v. Kiessenbeck, 145 Or. 82 , 26 P. 2d 58, 60 . *176 It is an unquestioned principle that a court of equity will refuse aid to a complainant who has acted fraudulently or gained an advantage by deceit or unfair means.

11949–1949
Laroque v. Candolle neutral
mdch · 1852
1 sentence

1947Laroque v. Candolle, 4 Md.

11947–1947

Where else courts name it

CT 116 (1893–2026) CA 14 (1896–2013) IA 11 (1916–2026) MD 9 (1946–2024) GA 7 (1936–1997) IL 6 (1909–1989) WI 5 (1888–1929) KS 4 (1919–2010) NE 4 (1933–1945) PA 4 (1921–1981) MO 4 (1885–1985) NC 4 (1970–1992) MI 4 (1901–1978) NY 4 (1888–1980) AZ 4 (1915–1939) KY 3 (1931–2006) ME 3 (1905–2014) HI 3 (1992–2007) MN 3 (1929–1940) WA 2 (1911–1993) OR 2 (1923–1976) NJ 2 (1880–1976) VA 2 (1933–1986) PR 2 (1934–1940) CO 2 (1934–2005) MA 2 (1861–2001) TX 2 (1880–1932) OK 2 (1935–1935) LA 2 (1961–1963) FL 2 (1954–1955)

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