hard and fast rule in Maryland

2015As the name of the doctrine suggests, public official immunity protects public officials from liability under certain circumstances in order to ensure that they are free to make decisions in the exercise of judgment “in the absence of a hard and fast rule.” James v. Prince George’s Cnty., 288 Md. 315, 326 , 418 A.2d 1173 (1980) (citation omitted).

2015As the name of the doctrine suggests, public official immunity protects public officials from liability under certain circumstances in order to ensure that they are free to make decisions in the exercise of judgment “in the absence of a hard and fast rule.” James v. Prince George’s Cnty., 288 Md. 315, 326 , 418 A.2d 1173 (1980) (citation omitted).

2007Gunning v. State, 347 Md. 332, 351 , 701 A.2d 374 (1997) (A “judge’s unyielding adherence to [a] predetermined position amounts to a ... failure to properly exercise discretion.”); Maus v. State, 311 Md. 85, 108 , 532 A.2d 1066 (1987) (“When a court must *503 exercise discretion, failure to do so is error, and ordinarily requires reversal.”); Colter v. State, 297 Md. 423, 428 , 466 A.2d 1286 (1983) (trial judge committed reversible error when he “applied a hard and fast rule[ ] of not granting a continuance”); Taliaferro, supra, 295 Md. at 390 , 456 A.2d 29 (“The exercise of discretion contemp

2007Gunning v. State, 347 Md. 332, 351 , 701 A.2d 374 (1997) (A “judge’s unyielding adherence to [a] predetermined position amounts to a ... failure to properly exercise discretion.”); Maus v. State, 311 Md. 85, 108 , 532 A.2d 1066 (1987) (“When a court must *503 exercise discretion, failure to do so is error, and ordinarily requires reversal.”); Colter v. State, 297 Md. 423, 428 , 466 A.2d 1286 (1983) (trial judge committed reversible error when he “applied a hard and fast rule[ ] of not granting a continuance”); Taliaferro, supra, 295 Md. at 390 , 456 A.2d 29 (“The exercise of discretion contemp

2012That discretion will naturally be affected by the character and location of the property and other circumstances peculiar to the case, so that it is impossible to lay down a hard and fast rule[.] Jackson, 249 Md. at 16-17 , 238 A.2d at 87 (quoting Webster, 176 Md. at 254-55 , 4 A.2d at 438 ); see Waters, 165 Md. at 75 , 166 A. at 432-33 .

2012That discretion will naturally be affected by the character and location of the property and other circumstances peculiar to the case, so that it is impossible to lay down a hard and fast rule[.] Jackson, 249 Md. at 16-17 , 238 A.2d at 87 (quoting Webster, 176 Md. at 254-55 , 4 A.2d at 438 ); see Waters, 165 Md. at 75 , 166 A. at 432-33 .

2007Gunning v. State, 347 Md. 332, 351 , 701 A.2d 374 (1997) (A “judge’s unyielding adherence to [a] predetermined position amounts to a ... failure to properly exercise discretion.”); Maus v. State, 311 Md. 85, 108 , 532 A.2d 1066 (1987) (“When a court must *503 exercise discretion, failure to do so is error, and ordinarily requires reversal.”); Colter v. State, 297 Md. 423, 428 , 466 A.2d 1286 (1983) (trial judge committed reversible error when he “applied a hard and fast rule[ ] of not granting a continuance”); Taliaferro, supra, 295 Md. at 390 , 456 A.2d 29 (“The exercise of discretion contemp

2007Gunning v. State, 347 Md. 332, 351 , 701 A.2d 374 (1997) (A “judge’s unyielding adherence to [a] predetermined position amounts to a ... failure to properly exercise discretion.”); Maus v. State, 311 Md. 85, 108 , 532 A.2d 1066 (1987) (“When a court must *503 exercise discretion, failure to do so is error, and ordinarily requires reversal.”); Colter v. State, 297 Md. 423, 428 , 466 A.2d 1286 (1983) (trial judge committed reversible error when he “applied a hard and fast rule[ ] of not granting a continuance”); Taliaferro, supra, 295 Md. at 390 , 456 A.2d 29 (“The exercise of discretion contemp

1998Tracey, 328 Md. at 393 , 614 A.2d 590 .

1998Tracey, 328 Md. at 393 , 614 A.2d 590 .

1971This rule has been enunciated both with regard to sales of the land in question, Baltimore City v. Schreiber, supra, and also to comparable sales in the neighborhood, *210 Lustine v. State Roads Comm., 217 Md. 274 , 142 A. 2d 566 (1958), but nowhere have we established a hard and fast standard either for admission or exclusion of such evidence.” Id. at 373-74 .

1971This rule has been enunciated both with regard to sales of the land in question, Baltimore City v. Schreiber, supra, and also to comparable sales in the neighborhood, *210 Lustine v. State Roads Comm., 217 Md. 274 , 142 A. 2d 566 (1958), but nowhere have we established a hard and fast standard either for admission or exclusion of such evidence.” Id. at 373-74 .

2022It is “not the province of appellate courts to try to set down a hard and fast rule when, typically, the trial court is in a better position to know what means will accomplish the end of accommodating all interests.” Id. (cleaned up); see also Graystone Nash, 25 F.3d at 192-94 (emphasizing “the circumstances of the particular litigation,” and, therefore, that an “appropriate remedy is within the discretion of the trial court”); Robert Heidt, The Conjurer’s Circle-The Fifth Amendment Privilege in Civil Cases, 91 Yale L.J. 1062 , 1131-32 (1982) (“When previously invoking defendants … indicate be

2020The Court did not disavow its statement in Sawyer that “courts tend to hold that” such conduct “in itself is sufficient to indicate that the motive was a purely personal one,” id. (quoting Sawyer, 322 Md. at 257 ), but reaffirmed that “[t]his language does not establish a hard-and-fast rule,” id. at 312 .

2020The Court did not disavow its statement in Sawyer that “courts tend to hold that” such conduct “in itself is sufficient to indicate that the motive was a purely personal one,” id. (quoting Sawyer, 322 Md. at 257 ), but reaffirmed that “[t]his language does not establish a hard-and-fast rule,” id. at 312 .

2018Id. at 598-99 , 993 A.2d at 672 .

2018Id. at 598-99 , 993 A.2d at 672 .

2015The doctrine protects against errors in judgment that might expose an official to suit, and “is intended to be a defense against claims that a ‘better choice’ could have been made by an official.” Lee v. Cline, 384 Md. 245, 261 , 863 A.2d 297 (2004).

2015The doctrine protects against errors in judgment that might expose an official to suit, and “is intended to be a defense against claims that a ‘better choice’ could have been made by an official.” Lee v. Cline, 384 Md. 245, 261 , 863 A.2d 297 (2004).

2012That discretion will naturally be affected by the character and location of the property and other circumstances peculiar to the case, so that it is impossible to lay down a hard and fast rule[.] Jackson, 249 Md. at 16-17 , 238 A.2d at 87 (quoting Webster, 176 Md. at 254-55 , 4 A.2d at 438 ); see Waters, 165 Md. at 75 , 166 A. at 432-33 .

2012That discretion will naturally be affected by the character and location of the property and other circumstances peculiar to the case, so that it is impossible to lay down a hard and fast rule[.] Jackson, 249 Md. at 16-17 , 238 A.2d at 87 (quoting Webster, 176 Md. at 254-55 , 4 A.2d at 438 ); see Waters, 165 Md. at 75 , 166 A. at 432-33 .

2012Id. [31] Analyzing the as-applied challenge first is, apparently, not a hard and fast rule.

2010Although as a general rule, Brady issues crystalize after the conclusion of trial, and indeed, often in the context of collateral attacks on criminal verdicts, see, e.g., Harris v. State, 407 Md. 503, 506 , 966 A.2d 925, 926-27 (2009) (post conviction proceeding); Williams, 392 Md. at 202 , 896 A.2d at 977 (same); Grandison, 390 Md. 412 , 889 A.2d 366 (fifth appeal from conviction); State v. Thomas, 325 Md. 160 , 599 A.2d 1171 (1992) (post conviction proceeding); Bowers v. State, 320 Md. 416 , 578 A.2d 734 (1990) (same), we hasten to add that this is not a hard- and-fast requirement.

2010Although as a general rule, Brady issues crystalize after the conclusion of trial, and indeed, often in the context of collateral attacks on criminal verdicts, see, e.g., Harris v. State, 407 Md. 503, 506 , 966 A.2d 925, 926-27 (2009) (post conviction proceeding); Williams, 392 Md. at 202 , 896 A.2d at 977 (same); Grandison, 390 Md. 412 , 889 A.2d 366 (fifth appeal from conviction); State v. Thomas, 325 Md. 160 , 599 A.2d 1171 (1992) (post conviction proceeding); Bowers v. State, 320 Md. 416 , 578 A.2d 734 (1990) (same), we hasten to add that this is not a hard- and-fast requirement.

2010Although as a general rule, Brady issues crystalize after the conclusion of trial, and indeed, often in the context of collateral attacks on criminal verdicts, see, e.g., Harris v. State, 407 Md. 503, 506 , 966 A.2d 925, 926-27 (2009) (post conviction proceeding); Williams, 392 Md. at 202 , 896 A.2d at 977 (same); Grandison, 390 Md. 412 , 889 A.2d 366 (fifth appeal from conviction); State v. Thomas, 325 Md. 160 , 599 A.2d 1171 (1992) (post conviction proceeding); Bowers v. State, 320 Md. 416 , 578 A.2d 734 (1990) (same), we hasten to add that this is not a hard- and-fast requirement.

2010Although as a general rule, Brady issues crystalize after the conclusion of trial, and indeed, often in the context of collateral attacks on criminal verdicts, see, e.g., Harris v. State, 407 Md. 503, 506 , 966 A.2d 925, 926-27 (2009) (post conviction proceeding); Williams, 392 Md. at 202 , 896 A.2d at 977 (same); Grandison, 390 Md. 412 , 889 A.2d 366 (fifth appeal from conviction); State v. Thomas, 325 Md. 160 , 599 A.2d 1171 (1992) (post conviction proceeding); Bowers v. State, 320 Md. 416 , 578 A.2d 734 (1990) (same), we hasten to add that this is not a hard- and-fast requirement.

2010Although as a general rule, Brady issues crystalize after the conclusion of trial, and indeed, often in the context of collateral attacks on criminal verdicts, see, e.g., Harris v. State, 407 Md. 503, 506 , 966 A.2d 925, 926-27 (2009) (post conviction proceeding); Williams, 392 Md. at 202 , 896 A.2d at 977 (same); Grandison, 390 Md. 412 , 889 A.2d 366 (fifth appeal from conviction); State v. Thomas, 325 Md. 160 , 599 A.2d 1171 (1992) (post conviction proceeding); Bowers v. State, 320 Md. 416 , 578 A.2d 734 (1990) (same), we hasten to add that this is not a hard- and-fast requirement.

2010Although as a general rule, Brady issues crystalize after the conclusion of trial, and indeed, often in the context of collateral attacks on criminal verdicts, see, e.g., Harris v. State, 407 Md. 503, 506 , 966 A.2d 925, 926-27 (2009) (post conviction proceeding); Williams, 392 Md. at 202 , 896 A.2d at 977 (same); Grandison, 390 Md. 412 , 889 A.2d 366 (fifth appeal from conviction); State v. Thomas, 325 Md. 160 , 599 A.2d 1171 (1992) (post conviction proceeding); Bowers v. State, 320 Md. 416 , 578 A.2d 734 (1990) (same), we hasten to add that this is not a hard- and-fast requirement.

2010See, e.g., Diallo v. State, 413 Md. 678 , 994 A.2d 820 (2010) (issue raised by pre-trial motion, and addressed in direct appeal); Ware v. State, 348 Md. 19 , 702 A.2d 699 (1997) (direct appeal in capital case).

2010See, e.g., Diallo v. State, 413 Md. 678 , 994 A.2d 820 (2010) (issue raised by pre-trial motion, and addressed in direct appeal); Ware v. State, 348 Md. 19 , 702 A.2d 699 (1997) (direct appeal in capital case).