 |
|
 |
|
|
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. Roberts, No. 35, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An attorney was disbarred after it was determined that he violated Md. R. Prof. Conduct 1.3, 1.15(a) and (b), and 8.4(c) and (d), Md. R. 16-609, and Md. Code Ann., Bus. Occ. & Prof. § 10-306 by delaying payment of settlement proceeds to a client and medical providers and using the money, instead, for his own personal needs.
|
|||||
| Kilmon v. State, No. 91, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in entering judgments of conviction in each of two cases where defendants were found guilty of reckless endangerment in violation of Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 3-204(a)(1) for intentionally ingesting cocaine while pregnant; legislature did not show an intent to have that statute apply to prenatal ingestion by a pregnant woman.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, No. 128, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner received ineffective assistance of counsel when his attorney disclosed the nature of his advice to petitioner and his opinion regarding the application of the Fifth Amendment; therefore, petitioner's conviction for contempt pursuant to Md. R. 15-203 was reversed in a post-conviction proceeding.
|
|||||
| Williams v. State, No. 121, September Term, 2004,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 3, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in denying defendant's motion for a new trial; since juror did not disclose that a member of her family was employed as a secretary in the prosecutor's office that was prosecuting the defendant, and the record did not show whether the non-disclosure was intentional or inadvertent, defendant was entitled to a new trial.
|
|||||
| Chi. Title Ins. Co. v. Allfirst Bank, No. 80, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An action for negligence, for only economic damages, was maintainable by a non-customer drawer against a depositary bank where there was no violation of the provisions of the Uniform Commercial Code and where duty was established by a sufficient intimate nexus between the depositary bank and the non-customer, through privity or its equivalent.
|
|||||
| Garrett v. State, No. 9, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attempted first-degree murder convictions were reversed where jury was instructed on transferred intent; precedent provided that if defendant intended to kill specific victim and instead wounded unintended victim without killing either, defendant could only be convicted of attempted murder of intended victim and transferred intent did not apply.
|
|||||
| Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Christensen, No. 68, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 4, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting summary judgment to cigarette manufacturers as to claims by respondent for wrongful death and survival in relation to her husband's death because the decedent's participation in an prior class action suit against the cigarette manufacturers tolled the statute of limitations for the wife's claims.
|
|||||
| Abrams v. Lamone, No. 142, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lamone v. Capozzi, No. 143, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, August 25, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
