 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Mayor & City Council v. Neighborhood Rentals, Inc., No. 1585, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the plain meaning of a city's business urban renewal plan and its legislative history set forth no fixed termination date, the city's zoning board had properly denied a use permit application submitted since rent-to-own stores, which was the use sought, were prohibited under the plan.
|
|||||
| Thomas v. DOL, Licensing & Regulation, No. 1475, SEPTEMBER TERM, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. § 8-909, bus drivers employed by local school districts were employed by educational institutions under unemployment compensation law and, therefore, ineligible for benefits between academic terms when they had a reasonable assurance of continued employment for the next academic year or term.
|
|||||
| Dep't of Hous. & Cmty. Dev. v. Hoffman, No. 1785, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in overturning administrative decision that upheld terminated employee's discharge from state housing department's employment; before trial court, he raised only the issue of the timeliness of his termination and substantial evidence showed that the termination was timely under Md. Code Ann., State Pers. & Pens. § 11-106(b).
|
|||||
| Obomighie v. State, No. 1672, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of defendant's postconviction petition was affirmed as defendant was not on probation when hearing on petition was held and trial court lacked jurisdiction under Maryland Uniform Postconviction Procedure Act, Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 7-101 et seq. (2001), to grant relief to those who were not in custody, on probation, or on parole.
|
|||||
| Reiger v. State, No. 0766, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 22, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant, pursuant to Md. R. 4-323(c), waived his objection that trial court, by considering action parole board might later take, relied on impermissible criteria in sentencing him because he failed to assert it at sentencing; in any event, no error occurred as court could consider parole eligibility and good conduct credits in imposing sentence.
|
|||||
| Doe Mt. Enters. v. Jaffe, No. 2199, September Term, 2004,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly granted summary judgment to the mortgagees in a suit brought by the mortgagor alleging contract and tort claims because the mortgagees were entitled to a judgment as a matter of law since no disputed fact existed as to the loan agreements and any claimed fraud was known to the mortgagee prior to signing.
|
|||||
| Hildebrant v. Educ. Testing Serv., No. 221, September Term 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was improperly granted to a testing service on a candidate's breach of contract claim because factual issues existed as to whether a test administrator's report accusing the candidate of misconduct was false, in which case the service's imputed knowledge of its falsity sufficed to show its bad faith in cancelling her test scores.
|
|||||
| Manian v. County Council for Montgomery County, No. 1305, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Contrary to the argument of the neighbors, the County Council for Montgomery County did not err under Montgomery County, Md., Code § 59-D-1.61(b) by not specifically addressing the neighbor's calculations as to the developer's open space in the development plan amendment. This was for the planning board to consider at the site plan stage.
|
|||||
| Quillens v. Parker, No. 1592, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Owners' appeal of judgment permitting individual and couple to foreclose right of redemption was premature, as appeal was taken after order fixed redemption amount, but before foreclosures of rights of redemption; but, appeals involving city foreclosing on right of redemption were affirmed since they were from properly-entered final judgments.
|
|||||
| Wells Fargo Bank Minn., N.A. v. Diamond Point Plaza L.P., No. 1663, September Term, 2005,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, September 29, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred by granting summary judgment to a tenant with regard to a lease restriction that prohibited another location within seven miles of the leased location since the lease was ambiguous as to whether the leased location was to be open for business for such restriction to have been enforced; therefore, genuine issues of fact existed.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
