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.
9 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2026 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Owens v. Stategreen2 sentences2013The court, purporting to apply the harmless error test enunciated in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), with a focus on factors it had previously recognized in Owens v. State, 161 Md.App. 91, 111 , 867 A.2d 334, 345-46 (2005) (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1438 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674, 686-87 (1986)), opined: “Whether such an error is harmless in a particular case depends upon a host of factors, all readily accessible to reviewing courts. 2013The court, purporting to apply the harmless error test enunciated in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), with a focus on factors it had previously recognized in Owens v. State, 161 Md.App. 91, 111 , 867 A.2d 334, 345-46 (2005) (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1438 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674, 686-87 (1986)), opined: “Whether such an error is harmless in a particular case depends upon a host of factors, all readily accessible to reviewing courts. | 1 | 1 |
Delaware v. Van Arsdallgreen2 sentences2013The court, purporting to apply the harmless error test enunciated in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), with a focus on factors it had previously recognized in Owens v. State, 161 Md.App. 91, 111 , 867 A.2d 334, 345-46 (2005) (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1438 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674, 686-87 (1986)), opined: “Whether such an error is harmless in a particular case depends upon a host of factors, all readily accessible to reviewing courts. 2013The court, purporting to apply the harmless error test enunciated in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), with a focus on factors it had previously recognized in Owens v. State, 161 Md.App. 91, 111 , 867 A.2d 334, 345-46 (2005) (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1438 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674, 686-87 (1986)), opined: “Whether such an error is harmless in a particular case depends upon a host of factors, all readily accessible to reviewing courts. | 1 | 1 |
Dionas v. Stategreen2 sentences2013These factors include the importance of the witness’ testimony in the prosecution’s case, whether the testimony was cumulative, the presence or absence of evidence corroborating or contradicting the testimony of the witness on material points, the extent of cross-examination otherwise permitted, and, of course, the overall strength of the prosecution’s case.” Dionas, 199 Md.App. at 510 , 23 A.3d at 292-93 (internal citations omitted). 2013These factors include the importance of the witness’ testimony in the prosecution’s case, whether the testimony was cumulative, the presence or absence of evidence corroborating or contradicting the testimony of the witness on material points, the extent of cross-examination otherwise permitted, and, of course, the overall strength of the prosecution’s case.” Dionas, 199 Md.App. at 510 , 23 A.3d at 292-93 (internal citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Rusnack v. Giant Food, Inc.green2 sentences1998These include: *254 Sawyer, 322 Md. at 256 , 587 A.2d 467 (quoting Noppenberger, 171 Md. at 390-91 , 189 A. 434 (quoting Restatement of Agency § 229 (1933))); see Rusnack v. Giant Food, Inc., 26 Md.App. 250, 262-63 , 337 A.2d 445 (1975); Prosser and Keeton, supra, § 70; Restatement (Second) Agency §§ 228, 229 (1958). *253 “ ‘(a) whether or not the act is one commonly done by such servants; (b) the time, place and purpose of the act; (c) the previous relations between the master and the servant; (d) the extent to which the business of the master is apportioned between different servants; (e) wh 1998These include: *254 Sawyer, 322 Md. at 256 , 587 A.2d 467 (quoting Noppenberger, 171 Md. at 390-91 , 189 A. 434 (quoting Restatement of Agency § 229 (1933))); see Rusnack v. Giant Food, Inc., 26 Md.App. 250, 262-63 , 337 A.2d 445 (1975); Prosser and Keeton, supra, § 70; Restatement (Second) Agency §§ 228, 229 (1958). *253 “ ‘(a) whether or not the act is one commonly done by such servants; (b) the time, place and purpose of the act; (c) the previous relations between the master and the servant; (d) the extent to which the business of the master is apportioned between different servants; (e) wh | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified School District
green
2 sentences1982As the majority of this Court stated in Hunter (id. at 485, quoting Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified School District, supra, 131 Cal. Rptr. at 861 ): *84 "`Substantial professional authority attests that the achievement of literacy in the schools, or its failure, is influenced by a host of factors which affect the pupil subjectively, from outside the formal teaching process, and beyond the control of its ministers. 1982As the majority of this Court stated in Hunter (id. at 485, quoting Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified School District, supra, 131 Cal.Rptr. at 861 ): " 'Substantial professional authority attests that the achievement of literacy in the schools, or its failure, is influenced by a host of factors which affect the pupil subjectively, from outside the formal teaching process, and beyond the control of its ministers. | 3 | 1981–2018 |
Hof v. State
green
1 sentence2026Id. at 600 (citing MPJI-Cr 3:18 at 65-66). | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Hunter v. BD. OF EDUC., MONT. CNTY.
green
2 sentences2018This reasoning is consistent with Hunter , which recognized that academic achievement " 'is influenced by a host of factors which affect the pupil subjectively, from outside the formal teaching process[.]' " Hunter v. Bd. of Educ. of Montgomery Cnty. , 292 Md. at 485 , 439 A.2d 582 (quoting Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified Sch. 2018This reasoning is consistent with Hunter , which recognized that academic achievement " 'is influenced by a host of factors which affect the pupil subjectively, from outside the formal teaching process[.]' " Hunter v. Bd. of Educ. of Montgomery Cnty. , 292 Md. at 485 , 439 A.2d 582 (quoting Peter W. v. San Francisco Unified Sch. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Dorsey v. State
green
2 sentences2013The court, purporting to apply the harmless error test enunciated in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), with a focus on factors it had previously recognized in Owens v. State, 161 Md.App. 91, 111 , 867 A.2d 334, 345-46 (2005) (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1438 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674, 686-87 (1986)), opined: “Whether such an error is harmless in a particular case depends upon a host of factors, all readily accessible to reviewing courts. 2013The court, purporting to apply the harmless error test enunciated in Dorsey v. State, 276 Md. 638 , 350 A.2d 665 (1976), with a focus on factors it had previously recognized in Owens v. State, 161 Md.App. 91, 111 , 867 A.2d 334, 345-46 (2005) (quoting Delaware v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673, 684 , 106 S.Ct. 1431, 1438 , 89 L.Ed.2d 674, 686-87 (1986)), opined: “Whether such an error is harmless in a particular case depends upon a host of factors, all readily accessible to reviewing courts. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Friolo v. Frankel
green
2 sentences2011Friolo II, 403 Md. at 453-54 , 942 A.2d 1242 (internal quotation marks, alterations, and citations omitted). 2011Friolo II, 403 Md. at 453-54 , 942 A.2d 1242 (internal quotation marks, alterations, and citations omitted). | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Hensley v. Eckerhart
green
2 sentences2008An increase or decrease in fee adjustments can then be made, based on consideration of a host of factors. 8 Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434 , 103 S.Ct. at 1940 , 76 L.Ed.2d at 51 . 2008An increase or decrease in fee adjustments can then be made, based on consideration of a host of factors. 8 Hensley, 461 U.S. at 434 , 103 S.Ct. at 1940 , 76 L.Ed.2d at 51 . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Baker v. Monroe Township
green
2 sentences2005In a case factually similar to the one at bar, Baker v. Monroe Township, 50 F.3d 1186 (3d Cir.1995), an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that the detention at issue was also a de facto arrest. 2005In a case factually similar to the one at bar, Baker v. Monroe Township, 50 F.3d 1186 (3d Cir.1995), an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000), the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that the detention at issue was also a de facto arrest. | 1 | 2005–2005 |
Sawyer v. Humphries
green
2 sentences1998These include: *254 Sawyer, 322 Md. at 256 , 587 A.2d 467 (quoting Noppenberger, 171 Md. at 390-91 , 189 A. 434 (quoting Restatement of Agency § 229 (1933))); see Rusnack v. Giant Food, Inc., 26 Md.App. 250, 262-63 , 337 A.2d 445 (1975); Prosser and Keeton, supra, § 70; Restatement (Second) Agency §§ 228, 229 (1958). *253 “ ‘(a) whether or not the act is one commonly done by such servants; (b) the time, place and purpose of the act; (c) the previous relations between the master and the servant; (d) the extent to which the business of the master is apportioned between different servants; (e) wh 1998These include: *254 Sawyer, 322 Md. at 256 , 587 A.2d 467 (quoting Noppenberger, 171 Md. at 390-91 , 189 A. 434 (quoting Restatement of Agency § 229 (1933))); see Rusnack v. Giant Food, Inc., 26 Md.App. 250, 262-63 , 337 A.2d 445 (1975); Prosser and Keeton, supra, § 70; Restatement (Second) Agency §§ 228, 229 (1958). *253 “ ‘(a) whether or not the act is one commonly done by such servants; (b) the time, place and purpose of the act; (c) the previous relations between the master and the servant; (d) the extent to which the business of the master is apportioned between different servants; (e) wh | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Noppenberger
green
2 sentences1998These include: *254 Sawyer, 322 Md. at 256 , 587 A.2d 467 (quoting Noppenberger, 171 Md. at 390-91 , 189 A. 434 (quoting Restatement of Agency § 229 (1933))); see Rusnack v. Giant Food, Inc., 26 Md.App. 250, 262-63 , 337 A.2d 445 (1975); Prosser and Keeton, supra, § 70; Restatement (Second) Agency §§ 228, 229 (1958). *253 “ ‘(a) whether or not the act is one commonly done by such servants; (b) the time, place and purpose of the act; (c) the previous relations between the master and the servant; (d) the extent to which the business of the master is apportioned between different servants; (e) wh 1998These include: *254 Sawyer, 322 Md. at 256 , 587 A.2d 467 (quoting Noppenberger, 171 Md. at 390-91 , 189 A. 434 (quoting Restatement of Agency § 229 (1933))); see Rusnack v. Giant Food, Inc., 26 Md.App. 250, 262-63 , 337 A.2d 445 (1975); Prosser and Keeton, supra, § 70; Restatement (Second) Agency §§ 228, 229 (1958). *253 “ ‘(a) whether or not the act is one commonly done by such servants; (b) the time, place and purpose of the act; (c) the previous relations between the master and the servant; (d) the extent to which the business of the master is apportioned between different servants; (e) wh | 1 | 1998–1998 |
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.