 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cattail Assocs. v. Sass, No. 849, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in granting sellers' motion for judgment as to a purchaser's action for specific performance of a contract for the sale of real estate, as the contract did not violate the rule against perpetuities because a savings clause provided that title would vest prior to the death of the last surviving seller, plus 21 years.
|
|||||
| Green v. Carr Lowery Glass Co., No. 0990, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly granted summary judgment to an employer as to an employee's appeal of the denial of a worker's compensation claim, as the worker did not establish the degree of hearing loss required by Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. § 9-650, and other Workers' Compensation Act sections did not entitle the worker to costs for hearing aids.
|
|||||
| Powell v. State, No. 129, September Term, 2005, No. 130, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioners' convictions were affirmed, as Md. R. 4-246(b) did not require the trial courts to make explicit findings that petitioners knowingly and voluntarily waived their rights to jury trials, and the trial courts impliedly determined that the waivers were knowing and voluntary following colloquies with the petitioners.
|
|||||
| 1000 Friends of Md. v. Ehrlich, No. 1245, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The Maryland Board of Public Works could not be required by mandamus to issue findings of fact supporting its approval of a highway project under the extraordinary circumstances exception to the Smart Growth legislation, 1997 Md. Laws 759, because the Board's action was quasi-legislative, not quasi-judicial, and no findings of fact were required.
|
|||||
| Forensic Advisors, Inc. v. Matrixx Initiatives, Inc., No. 2621, September Term, 2004,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellants, nonparties that published an Internet financial newsletter, were not entitled to quash a subpoena on the ground that it called for the production of a few documents that were entitled to protection. The newsletter, however, satisfied the definition of "news media" under Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 9-112(a)(9).
|
|||||
| Touzeau v. Deffinbaugh, No. 126, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly denied a mother's motion for a continuance, pursuant to Md. R. 2-508, in a contested custody proceeding where the mother failed to exercise due diligence in obtaining counsel by waiting only five days before the hearing to contact an attorney.
|
|||||
| Bowser v. Resh, No. 1378, September Term 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a personal injury action based on a car accident, a driver's counterclaim for contribution or indemnity against a husband was improperly dismissed based on the driver's release of a bodily injury claim because the husband and his wife did not assert release as a defense in their answer to the counterclaim as required by Md. R. 2-323(g)(12).
|
|||||
| Corapcioglu v. Roosevelt, No. 1313, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A mother's judgment for fees and costs expended in obtaining the return of her son from Turkey, after the child was abducted by the father, was non-discharageable under 11 U.S.C.S. § 523(a)(5) as being in the nature of child support, therefore, the proceeding was excepted from the father's bankruptcy stay under 11 U.S.C.S. § 362(b)(2).
|
|||||
| Montgomery Mut. Ins. Co. v. Chesson, No. 1270, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 20, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where employees' sought workers' compensation benefits due to exposure to toxic mold, trial court did not err in finding expert's medical testimony admissible under Md. R. 5-702. Practices used by expert, use of visual contrast tests, cholesterol drug, blood tests, and medical examinations, had garnered acceptance among peers in expert's field.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
