 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Muhammad v. State, No. 0986, September Term, 2006,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 5, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Murder convictions were affirmed because the court did not violate defendant's rights under the Sixth Amendment or Md. Const. Decl. Rights art. 21 or violate Md. R. 4-215 by finding that defendant was competent and allowing him to represent himself, and did not err by refusing to relocate the trial under Md. Const. art. IV, § 8 and Md. R. 4-254.
|
|||||
| Bland v. Hammond, No. 1843, September Term, 2006,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of appellant's motion to vacate dismissal of her tort action was proper because, although appellant's lawyer committed legal malpractice relating to her case, leading to dismissal, this did not rise to the level of fraud required to vacate judgment under Md. R. 2-535. Lawyer's conduct after dismissal was fraud, but not extrinsic fraud.
|
|||||
| In re Solomon, Misc. No. 3, September Term, 2007,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Smith v. Howard County, No. 1367, September Term, 2006,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 6, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When an employer sought review, under Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. § 9-745, of occupational disease benefits granted when its response to a claim was untimely, the administrative ruling did not shift the burden of proof to the employer because the Workers' Compensation Commission had not deduced permissible inferences from any conflicting facts.
|
|||||
| Hatcher v. State, No. 1055, September Term, 2006,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of motion to suppress was upheld as search of defendant incident to arrest was lawful; it was reasonable for officers to infer driver and passengers, one of whom was defendant, were in possession of confirmed stolen vehicle based on inference of common enterprise among then, as driver was unlikely to admit innocent person to stolen vehicle.
|
|||||
| Hayward v. Dep't of Human Res., No. 1962, September Term, 2006, No. 1963, September Term, 2006,
COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Writ of mandamus should have been issued requiring Department of Human Resources for Baltimore City's Department of Social Services to hold "conference" under Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 5-706.1, to review records relating to investigations of abuse found "unsubstantiated," as appellants, aide and teacher, were entitled to opportunity to clear names.
|
|||||
| Hudson v. Hous. Auth. , No. 24, September Term, 2007,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a breach of lease suit, a trial court's allowance of limited discovery, despite Md. R. 3-711 (2006), was not an immediately appealable order under the common law collateral order doctrine because (1) it did not resolve an issue completely separate from the merits, and (2) it was not effectively unreviewable upon an appeal of a final judgment.
|
|||||
| WFS Fin., Inc. v. Mayor of Baltimore, No. 12, September Term, 2007,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND, November 7, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in ruling the city could require lienholder to pay towing and storage fees as a condition precedent to releasing, pursuant to Md. Code Ann., Crim. Proc. § 12-501, to lienholder for sale the vehicle the city was trying to forfeit; those costs did not have to be paid until after balance due lienholder was paid from proceeds of sale.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
