Cases

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Eugenna Aileen Taylor appeals the district court’s orders dismissing her complaint and denying her motions for sanctions and to amend the judgment. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

WILKINSON, Circuit Judge: A Baltimore City ordinance requires pregnancy clinics that do not offer or refer for abortions to disclose that fact through signs posted in their waiting rooms. The district court held that the law, as applied to appellee, the Greater Baltimore Center for Pregnancy Concerns, Inc., violates the First Amendment’s Free Speech Clause.

MEMORANDUM GRIMM, United States Magistrate Judge. By Order dated April 15, 1997, the Honorable William M. Nickerson referred to the undersigned all discovery disputes in connection with the above-captioned case. Presently pending before me is the University of Maryland Medical System’s (“UMMS”) motion to compel deposition testimony and request for sanctions. Paper No. 38. For the reasons stated

MEMORANDUM OPINION DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, United States District Judge Presently pending and ready for resolution in this civil rights action are: (1) motions to dismiss filed by Defendants Uni-versify of Maryland University College (“UMUC”), the Office of Financial Aid at UMUC (the “Financial Aid Office”), Javier Miyares, Julie Lindenmeier, Clairbourne Patty, Terrence Cooper, and Lynette O’Leary (collectiv

THEODORE D. CHUANG, United States District Judge *640Plaintiffs Estate of Arturo Giron Alvarez and 773 other Guatemalan nationals have filed a civil action against the Johns Hopkins University and four affiliated entities, the Rockefeller Foundation, and Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants subjected them or their family members to medical expe

HOTTEN, J. Appellant, Donald Dobkin (“Mr.Dobkin”), filed a complaint in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City against appellee, the University of Baltimore School of Law (“U.B.”), alleging that U.B. failed to hire him as an immigration law professor when he was fifty-six years of age, due to age discrimination,1 in violation of the Md.Code (1984, 2009 RepLVol., 2012 Supp.), § 20-606(a) of the State

875 A.2d 703 (2005) 387 Md. 353 MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al. v. Keith A. BRADFORD, et al. No. 85, September Term, 2004. Court of Appeals of Maryland. June 9, 2005. *705 Elizabeth Kameen, Asst. Atty. Gen. (J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Atty. Gen. of MD, Valerie V. Cloutier and Elliott L. Schoen, Asst.

909 A.2d 235 (2006) 395 Md. 16 MARYLAND OVERPAK CORPORATION v. MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE. No. 76, September Term, 2005. Court of Appeals of Maryland. October 16, 2006. *237 John C. Murphy, Baltimore, MD, for appellant. Sandra R. Gutman, Chief Sol. (Ralph S. Tyler, III, City Sol., and Adam

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 19-2222 CASA DE MARYLAND, INC.; ANGEL AGUILUZ; MONICA CAMACHO PEREZ, Plaintiffs – Appellees, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, in his official capacity as President of the United States; CHAD WOLF, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of Homeland Security; U.S. DEPARTMENT O

Jamaiya Oglesby v. Baltimore School Associates, et al., No. 26, September Term, 2022 LEAD-BASED PAINT – EXPERT OPINION TESTIMONY – SOURCE CAUSATION – IQ LOSS – SUMMARY JUDGMENT – Supreme Court of Maryland* held that trial court abused its discretion by excluding testimony of plaintiff’s causation expert witness in lead-based paint case. In ruling on motion to preclude and making determinations as to whether expert’s opinion had sufficient factual basis, trial court resolved genuine disputes of

ON REHEARING EN BANC PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-1495 LEADERS OF A BEAUTIFUL STRUGGLE; ERRICKA BRIDGEFORD; KEVIN JAMES, Plaintiffs – Appellants, v. BALTIMORE POLICE DEPARTMENT; MICHAEL S. HARRISON, in his official capacity as Baltimore Police Commissioner,

Hotten, J. We consider whether a party asserting the absolute quasi-judicial privilege and the deliberative process (executive) privilege may properly appeal three orders from the circuit court prior to a final judgment, and whether those privileges prevent the admissibility of certain discovery. Respondents, Dr. Mark Geier (“Dr. Geier”), David Geier (“Mr. Geier”) and Anne Geier

ARTHUR, J. During a disciplinary proceeding against appellee Mark Geier, M.D., the Maryland Board of Physicians publicly disclosed confidential medical information concerning Dr. Geier, *119his wife Anne, and their son David. David Geier was the subject of a separate disciplinary proceeding at the time of the disclosures.

MEMORANDUM OPINION DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, District Judge. Presently pending and ready for review in this civil rights case are several motions to dismiss filed by Defendants College of Southern Maryland and its affiliated Defendants, Calvert County Local Government, Charles County Local Government, and the State of Maryland. (ECF Nos. 15, 21, and 26). The relevant issues have been briefed, and the court now

Case: 19-2211 Document: 104 Page: 1 Filed: 06/15/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ BRUCE R. TAYLOR, Claimant-Appellant v. DENIS MCDONOUGH, SECRETARY OF VETER- ANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee ______________________ 2019-2211 ______________________ A

959 F.Supp. 714 (1997) Thomas PALOTAI, Plaintiff, v. UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND COLLEGE PARK, Defendant. Civil Action No. DKC 96-3537. United States District Court, D. Maryland. April 8, 1997. *715 Philip B. Zipin, Gagliardo & Zipin, Silver Spring, MD, for Thomas Palotai. Thomas Faulk, Office of the Asst. Atty. Gen., Balti

MEMORANDUM OPINION LEONIE M. BRINKEMA, District Judge. Before the Court is claimant Baltimore Museum of Art’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. For the reasons stated in open court and in this Memorandum Opinion, the motion will be granted, and claimant Marcia Fuqua’s Claim to Property and Cross-Claim will be dismissed. I. BACKGROUND The subject of this

ORDER PER CURIAM. The petition for writ of certiorari in the above entitled case having been granted and argued, it is this 8th day of January, 2001 ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that the writ of certiorari be, and it is hereby, dismissed with costs, the petition having been improvidently granted.

Case: 19-2211 Document: 104 Page: 1 Filed: 06/15/2023 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ BRUCE R. TAYLOR, Claimant-Appellant v. DENIS MCDONOUGH, SECRETARY OF VETER- ANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee ______________________ 2019-2211 ______________________ A

OPINION J. FREDERICK MOTZ, District Judge. Plaintiffs, the United States (“Department of Justice” or “DOJ”) and the Baltimore City Substance Abuse Directorate (“BCSAD”), bring related actions against Defendant, City of Baltimore (“the City”). In both cases it is alleged' that the City of Baltimore Zoning Code discriminates against individuals receiving treatment in residential substance abuse trea