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.
8 Maryland opinions name it 3 courts 2000–2004 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 |
|---|---|---|
Ocean Plaza Joint Venture v. Crouse Construction Co.green2 sentences2004See Ocean Plaza, 62 Md.App. at 446 , 490 A.2d 252 . 2004See Ocean Plaza, 62 Md.App. at 446 , 490 A.2d 252 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hinesgreen2 sentences2004See also State v. Hines, 303 N.J.Super. 311 , 696 A.2d 780 (1997) (recognizing an equivalent doctrine under the guise of post traumatic stress disorder); Appeal in Maricopa County, 182 Ariz. 60 , 893 P.2d 60 (App.1994); and cf. People v. Colberg, 182 Misc.2d 798 , 701 N.Y.S.2d 608 (Co.Ct.1999), (recognizing syndrome with respect to killing of adult child by battered parent). 2004See also State v. Hines, 303 N.J.Super. 311 , 696 A.2d 780 (1997) (recognizing an equivalent doctrine under the guise of post traumatic stress disorder); Appeal in Maricopa County, 182 Ariz. 60 , 893 P.2d 60 (App.1994); and cf. People v. Colberg, 182 Misc.2d 798 , 701 N.Y.S.2d 608 (Co.Ct.1999), (recognizing syndrome with respect to killing of adult child by battered parent). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Jorngreen2 sentences2000See United States v. Jorn, supra, 400 U.S. at 485 [ 91 S.Ct. 547 ]. 2000See United States v. Jorn, supra, 400 U.S. at 485 [ 91 S.Ct. 547 ]. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re the Appeal in Maricopa County, Juvenile Action No. JV-506561
green
2 sentences2004See also State v. Hines, 303 N.J.Super. 311 , 696 A.2d 780 (1997) (recognizing an equivalent doctrine under the guise of post traumatic stress disorder); Appeal in Maricopa County, 182 Ariz. 60 , 893 P.2d 60 (App.1994); and cf. People v. Colberg, 182 Misc.2d 798 , 701 N.Y.S.2d 608 (Co.Ct.1999), (recognizing syndrome with respect to killing of adult child by battered parent). 2004See also State v. Hines, 303 N.J.Super. 311 , 696 A.2d 780 (1997) (recognizing an equivalent doctrine under the guise of post traumatic stress disorder); Appeal in Maricopa County, 182 Ariz. 60 , 893 P.2d 60 (App.1994); and cf. People v. Colberg, 182 Misc.2d 798 , 701 N.Y.S.2d 608 (Co.Ct.1999), (recognizing syndrome with respect to killing of adult child by battered parent). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
People v. Colberg
green
2 sentences2004See also State v. Hines, 303 N.J.Super. 311 , 696 A.2d 780 (1997) (recognizing an equivalent doctrine under the guise of post traumatic stress disorder); Appeal in Maricopa County, 182 Ariz. 60 , 893 P.2d 60 (App.1994); and cf. People v. Colberg, 182 Misc.2d 798 , 701 N.Y.S.2d 608 (Co.Ct.1999), (recognizing syndrome with respect to killing of adult child by battered parent). 2004See also State v. Hines, 303 N.J.Super. 311 , 696 A.2d 780 (1997) (recognizing an equivalent doctrine under the guise of post traumatic stress disorder); Appeal in Maricopa County, 182 Ariz. 60 , 893 P.2d 60 (App.1994); and cf. People v. Colberg, 182 Misc.2d 798 , 701 N.Y.S.2d 608 (Co.Ct.1999), (recognizing syndrome with respect to killing of adult child by battered parent). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
People v. Godbold
green
2 sentences2003Id. at 516 n. 3, 585 N.W.2d. at 17 n. 3. 2003Id. at 516 n. 3, 585 N.W.2d. at 17 n. 3. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Choi v. State
green
2 sentences2002In one of the cases pointing out that “ ‘Article 22 is generally “in pari materia ” with its federal counterpart,’ ” we immediately continued: “There appear to be ... two situations where the privilege under Article 22 has been viewed differently, and more broadly, than the privilege under the Fifth Amendment.” Choi v. State, 316 Md. 529 , 535 n. 3, 560 A.2d 1108 , 1111 n. 3 (1989). 2002In one of the cases pointing out that “ ‘Article 22 is generally “in pari materia ” with its federal counterpart,’ ” we immediately continued: “There appear to be ... two situations where the privilege under Article 22 has been viewed differently, and more broadly, than the privilege under the Fifth Amendment.” Choi v. State, 316 Md. 529 , 535 n. 3, 560 A.2d 1108 , 1111 n. 3 (1989). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Attorney Grievance Commission v. McIntire
green
2 sentences2002Finally, in the much older case of Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Mclntire, 286 Md. 87 , 405 A.2d 273 (1979), the respondent was charged with a violation of Maryland Disciplinary Rule 9-102, the equivalent rule of the time to the current Rule 16-607. 2002Finally, in the much older case of Attorney Grievance Comm’n v. Mclntire, 286 Md. 87 , 405 A.2d 273 (1979), the respondent was charged with a violation of Maryland Disciplinary Rule 9-102, the equivalent rule of the time to the current Rule 16-607. | 1 | 2002–2002 |
King v. State Roads Commission of the State Highway Administration
green
2 sentences2002King v. State Roads Commission, 298 Md. 80 , 84 , 467 A.2d 1032 (1983). 2002King v. State Roads Commission, 298 Md. 80 , 84 , 467 A.2d 1032 (1983). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Washington v. Federal Kemper Insurance
green
2 sentences2000This requirement of proof is the equivalent of the requirement we declined to impose on the insurer in Washington , characterizing the standard as “proving a negative.” Id. at 295 , 482 A.2d 503 . 2000This requirement of proof is the equivalent of the requirement we declined to impose on the insurer in Washington , characterizing the standard as “proving a negative.” Id. at 295 , 482 A.2d 503 . | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.