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.
6 Maryland opinions name it 2 courts 1915–2005 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Williamsgreen1 sentence2005Roary, however, urges this Court to adopt the position taken by a number of other state courts which do not permit assault to be an underlying felony in a felony-murder conviction. 13 The position is commonly referred to as either the “merger” doctrine or the “collateral-felony” doctrine. 14 See Missouri v. Williams, 24 S.W.3d 101, 114-15 (Mo.Ct.App. 2000). | 1 | 1 |
Doe v. Maskellgreen2 sentences1997Mas-kell, 342 Md. at 690, 679 A.2d 1087 . 1997Mas-kell, 342 Md. at 690, 679 A.2d 1087 . | 1 | 1 |
Kidwell v. Bay Shore Development Corp.green1 sentence1982As stated in Baer v. Board of County Commissioners, 255 Md. 163, 168 (1969), "[o]nto the civil law rule our decisions have engrafted a 'reasonableness of úse’ test, where a balance of benefit and harm is struck in hardship cases, to make sure that the owner of the servient estate is not unreasonably denied use of his property.” In Kidwell v. Bay Shore Development Corp., 232 Md. 577, 584 (1963), the Court characterized this "test” as follows: "The application of this [reasonableness of use] doctrine does not change the adopted [civil law] rule of law, but provides mitigation from harsh results | 1 | 1 |
Baer v. Board of County Commissionersgreen1 sentence1982As stated in Baer v. Board of County Commissioners, 255 Md. 163, 168 (1969), "[o]nto the civil law rule our decisions have engrafted a 'reasonableness of úse’ test, where a balance of benefit and harm is struck in hardship cases, to make sure that the owner of the servient estate is not unreasonably denied use of his property.” In Kidwell v. Bay Shore Development Corp., 232 Md. 577, 584 (1963), the Court characterized this "test” as follows: "The application of this [reasonableness of use] doctrine does not change the adopted [civil law] rule of law, but provides mitigation from harsh results | 1 | 1 |
Brennan v. Stategreen1 sentence1973See Brennan v. State, 151 Md 265, 134 A. 148 ; Thomas v. State, 186 Md. 446 , 47 A. 2d 43 ; Brady v. State, 226 Md. 422 , 174 A. 2d 167 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Maryland. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Doe v. Archdiocese of Washington
green
2 sentences2003Id. at 177 , 689 A.2d 634 . 2003Id. at 177 , 689 A.2d 634 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Whitman v. Forney
green
1 sentence1982Maryland has long (and consistently) followed the "civil law” rule; however, beginning at least in 1943 with Whitman v. Forney, supra, and possibly earlier (see Neubauer v. Overlea Realty Co., 142 Md. 87 (1923), and cases cited therein), the Court of Appeals attempted to ameliorate some of the harshness of that rule by adopting a qualification to it. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Neubauer v. Overlea Realty Co.
neutral
1 sentence1982Maryland has long (and consistently) followed the "civil law” rule; however, beginning at least in 1943 with Whitman v. Forney, supra, and possibly earlier (see Neubauer v. Overlea Realty Co., 142 Md. 87 (1923), and cases cited therein), the Court of Appeals attempted to ameliorate some of the harshness of that rule by adopting a qualification to it. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Thomas v. State
green
2 sentences1973See Brennan v. State, 151 Md 265, 134 A. 148 ; Thomas v. State, 186 Md. 446 , 47 A. 2d 43 ; Brady v. State, 226 Md. 422 , 174 A. 2d 167 . 1973See Brennan v. State, 151 Md 265, 134 A. 148 ; Thomas v. State, 186 Md. 446 , 47 A. 2d 43 ; Brady v. State, 226 Md. 422 , 174 A. 2d 167 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Brady v. State
green
2 sentences1973See Brennan v. State, 151 Md 265, 134 A. 148 ; Thomas v. State, 186 Md. 446 , 47 A. 2d 43 ; Brady v. State, 226 Md. 422 , 174 A. 2d 167 . 1973See Brennan v. State, 151 Md 265, 134 A. 148 ; Thomas v. State, 186 Md. 446 , 47 A. 2d 43 ; Brady v. State, 226 Md. 422 , 174 A. 2d 167 . | 1 | 1973–1973 |
Vonglahn v. . Derosset
neutral
1 sentence1915But the force of these decisions as an authority for the doctrine, was completely nullified in the case of Von Glahn v. DeRosset, 81 N.C. 467 , which while it did not in terms overrule the prior decisions, held that those cases had been decided by the application of strict legal principles, but that the harshness of the doctrine would be entirely overcome by the application of equitable principles, which were applied in the case then before the Court. | 1 | 1915–1915 |
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.