Cases

Opinion GRUENDEL, J. The defendants, Visual Perceptions, LLC, and Robert W. Aube, Jr.,1 appeal from the judgment of the trial court in favor of the plaintiff, Norma I. Cruz. On appeal, the defendants argue that the court improperly (1) determined that the parties entered into an employment contract for a definite term and that the plaintiffs employment could therefore

OPINION AND ORDER ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge. In its Second Amended Complaint, Plaintiff The Velvet Underground (“VU”) seeks, inter alia, a declaration that Defendant The Andy Warhol Foundation for the Visual Arts, Inc. (the “Warhol Foundation”) has no copyright in a banana image designed by artist Andy Warhol (the “Banana Design”). (SAC ¶¶2, 43). The Warhol Foundation has covenant

14 A.3d 1179 (2011) 197 Md. App. 561 Giuseppina MUTI, et al. v. UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND MEDICAL SYSTEMS CORPORATION. No. 1991, September Term, 2009. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. February 4, 2011. Reconsideration Denied April 6, 2011. *1181 Julia R. Arfaa & Benjamin S. Salsbury

ORDER DOUGLAS HARPOOL, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 42). Upon *1042careful review of the issues raised and arguments provided, the Court hereby GRANTS Defendants’ motion and enters judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff on all remaining claims.

OPINION J. STEVEN STAFFORD, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ALAN E. HIGHERS, P.J., W.S., and HOLLY M. KIRBY, J., joined. This is a breach of contract case. Appellant/Homeowner contracted with Appel-lee for the installation of a “smart home” system. After myriad problems arose, Appella

*7ADKINS, Judge. In this opinion we address two appeals filed by Appellant Maryland Reclamation Associates (“MRA”) involving a sixty-eight acre agriculturally zoned property located in Harford County Maryland (“Property”) on which MRA seeks to construct and operate a rubble landfill. This rubble landfill has been highly contro

CATHELL, Judge, dissenting. I respectfully dissent. The majority has completely misconstrued the statutory scheme the Legislature has created to protect Maryland workers from the trauma of unemployment. In simplified terms, the Legislature has created a scheme that denies benefits to *406e

ARTHUR, J. Pursuant to Md.Code (1998, 2010 RepLVol., 2014 Supp.), §§ 7-207 and 7-208 of the Public Utilities Article (“PUA”), the Maryland Public Service Commission authorized Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP (“Dominion”), to construct an electric generating station to power a natural gas liquefaction facility. The Circuit Court for Baltim

956 A.2d 223 (2008) 181 Md. App. 217 Rebecca Marie WALDT, et al. v. UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND MEDICAL SYSTEM CORPORATION, et al. No. 2623, September Term, 2006. Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. September 5, 2008. *226 Andrew G. Slutkin and Jamison G. White (Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White LLC on

SUPERIOR COURT ZEMCAR INC. d/b/a GRIP MOBILITY CO. vs. UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Docket: 2484CV01525-BLS2 Dates: January , 2025 Present:

MEMORANDUM OPINION T.S. Ellis, III, United States District Judge At issue in this trademark infringement case is whether plaintiffs expert on the question of likelihood of confusion should be excluded pursuant to Rule 702, Fed. R. Evid., and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786, 125 L.Ed.2d 469 (1993). As the matter has been fully briefed, and because oral argument w

Mark S. Davis, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE This maritime matter is before the Court following a bench trial, and involves a contract dispute between third-party plaintiff CMA CGM, S.A. ("CMA") and third-party defendant Marine Repair Services of Virginia ("MRS"). Although a trial was necessary in this case, the majority of the facts are not in dispute, and the primary legal issue is whether CMA is entitled to complete indemnit

BATTAGLIA, J. In the present case, Cedric Stansbury, Respondent, was informed by Allstate Lien, Jeremy Martin, and Russel Collision, Petitioners, that he would have to pay $1,000 representing “lien enforcement costs” or “cost of process” fees1 in order *190to redeem his Mazda RX-8 prior to it

OPINION & ORDER JAMES D. PETERSON, District Judge Plaintiff Epic Systems Corporation is suing defendants YourCareUniverse, Inc., MEDHOST of Tennessee, Inc., and MEDHOST Direct, Inc. under both state and federal law on the grounds that defendants’ YOURCAREEVERYWHERE mark infringes Epic’s trademark for CARE EVERYWHERE and results in unfair competition. Defendants have moved for summary judgment

ADKINS, J. FACTS AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS Maryland Department of the Environment (“MDE”) issued municipal separate storm sewer system (“MS4”) discharge permits (“the Permits”) to Anne Arundel County, Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Montgomery County, and Prince George’s County (“the Counties”). Multiple orga

DEBORAH S. EYLER, J. John T. Mitchell applied to the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration (“MVA”) for vanity plates bearing the letters MIERDA. The application was granted. Two years later, the MVA received a complaint from a member of the public about Mitchell’s vanity plates. It investigated and determined that “mierda” is the Spa

211 B.R. 154 (1997) In re AUDIO VISUAL WORKSHOP, INC., Debtor. Bankruptcy No. 97 B 42775 (JLG). United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York. July 25, 1997. *155 *156 Capetanakis & Preite, Brooklyn, NY, for Alleged Debtor. Tenzer, Greenblatt, L.L.P., New York City, for Times Circle Associa

Affirmed by published opinion. Judge NIEMEYER wrote the opinion, in which Judge MICHAEL and Judge TRAXLER joined. OPINION NIEMEYER, Circuit Judge: Based on its efforts to purchase 1,400 calculators from Sharp Electronics Corporation, Audio Visual Associates, Inc., filed this action against Sharp for breach of contract, tortious b

OPINION OF THE COURT Rosalyn Richter, J. In this action, plaintiffs School of Visual Arts (SVA) and Laurie Pear lb erg, SVA’s Director of Human Resources, contend that defendant Diane Kuprewicz, a former employee at SVA, engaged in a campaign of unlawful harassment against plaintiffs. Specifically, plaintiffs allege that Kuprewicz posted two false job listings on www.craigslist.com, an Internet Web site, sta

29 A.3d 584 (2011) 422 Md. 294 PATUXENT RIVERKEEPER v. MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF the ENVIRONMENT, et al. No. 139, September Term, 2010. Court of Appeals of Maryland. September 30, 2011. Reconsideration Denied October 24, 2011. G. Macy Nelson (David S. Lynch of Law Office of G. Macy Nelson, LLC, Towson, MD), on brief, for appella