 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Atty. Griev. Comm'n v. Guberman, MISC. DOCKET (SUBTITLE AG) No. 73, September Term, 2004,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Commission's recommendation was adopted, and attorney was disbarred for violating Md. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(c) and (d) as he falsely represented to supervisor and other members of firm that he had filed appeal in case, he filed appellate pleadings in firm's files containing what appeared to be court file receipts, and he gave status reports on case.
|
|||||
| Bd. of Educ. v. Heister, No. 56, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in reversing a decision by the Maryland Board of Education which found that a salary forfeiture clause in teacher contracts was an enforceable liquidated damages clause, as the forfeiture clause reasonably compensated school systems for damages incurred when teachers resigned shortly before the start of a school year.
|
|||||
| Butler v. State, No. 83, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where jury in criminal case had been deadlocked, judge's statement that juror who, according to note did not trust police no matter circumstance, was violating his or her oath deprived defendants of fair trial under U.S. Const. amend. VI and Md. Const. Decl. Rights art. 21. Judge commented on one juror's position and intended to influence juror.
|
|||||
| Chmurny v. State, No. 77, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant committed suicide after the return of guilty verdicts but before sentencing, defense counsel's appeal from the denial of his motion to dismiss the verdicts was dismissed under Md. R. 8-602(a)(1) because he had no authority to note an appeal on behalf of a dead client.
|
|||||
| Farragut Vill. Condo. Ass'n v. Bowling, No. 0808, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the condominium association filed an appeal of the order of default before the issue of damages was adjudicated and made part of the final judgment pursuant to Md. R. 2-613(e), the appeal was from an interlocutory order and was not ripe for appellate review.
|
|||||
| Garfink v. Cloisters at Charles, Inc., No. 79, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was reversed and remanded as a condominium owner could repair an inherent construction defect as an easement was valid, applied to the condominium, and was in harmony, under the circumstances presented, with the condominium's bylaw provision that permitted breach of the exterior walls for repair and maintenance without prior approval.
|
|||||
| Wells v. Wells, No. 845, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 13, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: On the issues of custody, visitation, support, and use and possession of the family home, the trial court should not have granted a default to the husband under Md. R. 2-613, as the child had an indefeasible right to have his best interests considered at a full evidentiary hearing.
|
|||||
| Atty. Griev. Comm'n v. Lanocha, Misc. Docket AG No. 16, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney clearly violated Md. R. Prof. Conduct 1.8(c) by drafting will that bequeathed substantial gift to attorney's daughter, client was not a relative, and independent counsel was not consulted; violation of Md. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(d) could be found where attorney violated another rule of professional conduct; sanction of reprimand was imposed.
|
|||||
| State v. Williams, No. 97, September Term, 2003,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, April 14, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Brady and Md. R. 4-264(g) were held to extend beyond an individual prosecutor, encompassing exculpatory or mitigating information known to any prosecutor in the office. Thus, despite the prosecutor in defendant's murder trial not knowing that a key witness was a long-time police informant, defendant's conviction was tainted by the non-disclosure.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| Copyright© 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
