Cases

PER CURIAM: This case arises out of a tragic incident in which Edward Wilcox and Patricia Alvord, who were riding together on a motorcycle, were struck and killed by a car driven by appellant, Eduardo Alvarez. The State of *685 Florida charged appellant

399 A.2d 535 (1977) ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, a corporation of the State of Pennsylvania, and Exxon Corporation, a corporation of the State of New Jersey, Plaintiffs, v. Sherman W. TRIBBITT, Governor of the State of Delaware, Richard R. Wier, Attorney General of the State of Delaware, John D. Daniello, Secretary of the Department of Community Affairs and Economic Development, Frances M. West, Director of the Division of Consumer Affairs of the

HARRELL, J. This case presents the novel question of whether a petition seeking to bring a municipal annexation resolution to referendum may be circulated and signed by members of the relevant electorate before final enactment of the targeted resolution. Depending on the answer to that question, there may lurk an additional related query: may the petition be circulated before the commencement of the public hearing on the resolut

42 A.3d 637 (2012) 204 Md. App. 578 TOWN OF OXFORD, et al. v. Constantine KOSTE. No. 2355, September Term, 2010. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. April 26, 2012. Brynja M. Booth (David R. Thompson, Cowdrey Thompson, on the brief), Easton, MD, for Appellant. Michael G. Rust (Armistead, Griswold, Lee & Rust, PA, on the brief), E

To His Excellency Pierre S. du Pont Governor of Delaware: Reference is made to your letter, dated December 15, 1978, requesting the opinions of the Justices of the Supreme Court of Delaware, under 10 Del.C. § 141,1 upon the following questions: “1. With reference to Article III, Section 18: “a. Does the term ‘final adjourn

276 Md. 435 (1975) 347 A.2d 854 STEUART PETROLEUM COMPANY ET AL. v. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. MARY'S COUNTY ET AL. [No. 41, September Term, 1975.] Court of Appeals of Maryland. Decided December 3, 1975. The cause was argued before MURPHY, C.J., and SINGLEY, SMITH, DIGGES, LEVINE, ELDRIDGE and O'DONNELL, JJ. Emanuel H. Hor

The decision of the court was delivered by Nuss, C.J.: Shelbert Smith appeals the district court's denial of his motion to file a late appeal. Smith argues the court arbitrarily disregarded undisputed testimony that he told his trial counsel he wanted to appeal-evidence that would help him meet an exception to the rule requiring timely appeal. See

State of Maryland v. Artiis Ricardo Williams No. 802, Sept. Term 2021 Opinion by Leahy, J. Criminal Law > Criminal Law Article Section 3-210, Assault by Inmate—Sentencing > “Consecutive Sentence” Requirement > Plain Language The Maryland General Assembly’s use of the word shall in Maryland Code (2002, 2021 Repl. Vol.), Criminal Law Article (“CR”), § 3-210(b) confirms that the statute’s requirements for imposing a consecutive sentence are mandatory. Criminal Law > Criminal Law Article Section

735 A.2d 378 (1999) PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY COMPANY, Appellant Below, Appellant, v. Nicholas A. DiPASQUALE, Secretary of the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, and Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control and Delaware Environmental Appeals Board and Tunnell Companies, L.P., Appellees Below, Appellees. No. 543, 1998. Supreme Court of Delaware.

Gary Alan Glass v. Anne Arundel County, Maryland, et al. No. 20, September Term 2016 Public Information Act – Custodian of Records. When a government agency stores records with another entity – for example, when it stores digital records such as emails with another government agency – but retains control (albeit not physical custody) of those records, the agency remains responsible for responding to requests for access to those records under the Public Information Act (“PIA”). The agency’s cus

IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE DBMP LLC; JOHNSON & JOHNSON; ) PECOS RIVER TALC, LLC; RED RIVER ) TALC, LLC; J-M MANUFACTURING CO., ) INC.; THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY; ) ROHM AND HAAS COMPANY; and UNION ) CARBIDE CORPORATION, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v.

GEE, Circuit Judge: Appellant Charles A. NeSmith was employed as a civilian technician in the Geór *198 gia Air National Guard. He was also a military member of the 202nd Electronics Installation Squadron of the Guard. On October 15, 1976, NeSmith was d

495 F.Supp. 782 (1980) Gus HALL et al., Plaintiffs, v. Richard H. AUSTIN et al., Defendants. Civ. A. No. 80-72275. United States District Court, E. D. Michigan, S. D. August 19, 1980. *783 George B. Washington, Detroit, Mich., for plaintiffs. Daniel M. Share, Detroit, Mich., for amicus curiae. Haywood W. Julian, Ass

QUILLEN, Justice Ad Litem, dissenting: I respectfully dissent from the opinion of the majority. I would be less than candid if I did not admit that the decision reached by the majority is technically defensible on a narrow view of the issues presented by the record in this case. But nonetheless I find the decision is wrong and therefore I am compelled to express with regret a contrary conclusion. In my jud

253 Md. 151 (1969) 252 A.2d 242 MONTGOMERY CITIZENS LEAGUE, ET AL. v. GREENHALGH, ET AL. [No. 339, September Term, 1968.] Court of Appeals of Maryland. Decided April 8, 1969. The cause was argued before HAMMOND, C.J., and MARBURY, BARNES, SINGLEY, and SMITH, JJ. Joe M. Kyle, with whom were Heise, Kyle & Jorgensen on t