District Court for the District of Maryland Court Cases

Search
  1. United States v. Focarile (1972)

    Motions to suppress the contents of intercepted telephone communications and evidence derived therefrom have been filed in three related cases. The telephone involved in all the motions was located in the apartment of Dominic Nicholas Giordano in Baltimore. For the purpose of ruling on the motions to suppress, the three cases shall be treated as one.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Crim. Nos. 70-0483-M, 70-0486-M and 70-0487-M
  2. United States v. Mandel (1976)

    On November 24, 1975, the defendants in this case were indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 on twenty counts of mail fraud and under 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., on four counts of prohibited patterns of racketeering activity. The defendants have now moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing, inter alia, that the indictment fails to allege a cognizable scheme to defraud, that it is vague and fatally defective, that it is premised on erroneous and unconstitutional assumptions concerning the duties of [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Crim. No. HM75-0822
  3. United States v. Stark (1955)

    The questions now before the court require the construction of title 18, § 1001, United States Code, with respect to its application to the factual situation arising in these cases, which are substantially identical in subject matter. For brevity it will be sufficient to refer to No. 22813, as the procedure involved in the questions raised are identical with case No. 22814.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Crim. A. Nos. 22813, 22814
  4. Davison v. Sinai Hospital of Baltimore (1978)

    Defendants Lionel Glassman, M.D., Lionel Glassman & Associates, and Zoena A. Yannakakis, M.D., have moved this court for dismissal of the instant action pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Defendants contend that this court has no subject matter jurisdiction over the claim and that the claim does not state a cause of action upon which a United States District Court situated in Maryland may grant relief.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. No. HM78-841
  5. Franklin v. Mazda Motor Corp. (1989)

    J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Atty. Gen. of Md., Judson P. Garrett, Jr., Deputy Atty. Gen. of Md., and Robert A. Zarnoch and Kathryn M. Rowe, Asst. Attys. Gen., of Md., Annapolis, Md., for defendant-intervenor State of Md.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. No. PN-87-2203
  6. Ortiz v. Greyhound Corporation (1959)

    This is a suit to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been due to the negligence of the defendant. The case was permitted to go to the jury which found a verdict for the plaintiff in the amount of $5,000. The defendant having moved for a directed verdict in its favor at the conclusion of the case, has renewed the motion now for a judgment in favor of the defendant n. o. v., but without also moving for a new trial.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. A. No. 10312
  7. United States v. Gould (2007)

    In 1985, Gould was convicted of assault with intent to commit sodomy while armed in the District of Columbia under D.C.Code §§ 22-503 and 22-302. Indictment ¶ 1. On July 8, 2002, Gould was released from custody. Id. ¶ 2.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Criminal No. WDQ-07-0359
  8. Furness v. Lilienfield (1983)

    On May 17, 1982, Colin W.E. Furness, a resident of the Bahamas, filed a complaint alleging a violation of the Racketeering-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1961-68, and several state common-law claims in federal court under diversity jurisdiction. Named as defendants were Gerald S. Lilienfield, one other individual, and several corporate entities. A scheduling order was issued on August 10, 1982, setting the trial date for May 9, 1983. After an evidentiary hearing, service [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. No. Y-82-1272
  9. Koffman v. Osteoimplant Technology, Inc. (1995)

    For the third time, this case is before the Court on a motion for summary judgment. Having granted summary judgment for the plaintiff/counterdefendant, Milton Koffman, on the underlying cause of action on February 3, 1995, the Court is now presented with this motion for summary judgment on the defendant/counterplaintiff corporations' counterclaims. The counterclaims allege civil conspiracy, abuse of process, and malicious prosecution. Koffman maintains that the evidence before this Court is [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. No. S 94-1485
  10. Ostrofsky v. United Steelworkers of America (1959)

    These four consolidated actions are before the court on motions for summary judgment filed by each of the parties. Each action was originally brought in the Superior Court of Baltimore City by a former employee of Bethlehem Steel Company (Bethlehem) against that Company, The United Steelworkers of America AFL-CIO (the Union), and the local of which he was a member. The actions were removed to this court, by the Union and the locals on the ground that a federal question is involved, and by [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. Nos. 10909-10912
  11. Johnson v. Asset Management Group, LLC (1998)

    The Court has before it Appellant Mozelle E. Johnson's appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland's Order dismissing the Debtor's Objection to the Amended Proof of Claim and the materials submitted by the parties relating thereto. The Court finds that a hearing is unnecessary.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: CIV. A. MJG-98-2049
  12. Miller v. Pacific Shore Funding (2002)

    Fred Thompson, Daniel O. Myers, Kevin Oufnac, A. Hoyt Rowell, III, Ness Motley PA, Mt. Pleasant, SC, Joseph Christopher Garland, Law Offices of Joseph C. Garland, Towson, MD, Edwin David Hoskins, The Law Offices of E. David Hoskins LLC, Baltimore, MD, for plaintiffs.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: 02-CV-569
  13. Bennett v. Gravelle (1971)

    The plaintiffs in this proceeding are twenty-seven (27) black and two (2) white former employees of the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) who were discharged for engaging in an unlawful walkout against the WSSC; four (4) current black employees of the WSSC who intervened after this action commenced; and one minor black woman suing through her father for the denial of employment by the WSSC, who likewise intervened after this action commenced. The defendants are the six (6) members [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. A. No. 70-534-N
  14. United States v. Amazon Industrial Chemical Corporation (1931)

    Tydings, Levy & Archer, of Baltimore, Md., for American Solvents & Chemical Corporation of Delaware, American Solvents & Chemical Corporation of Maryland, American Solvents & Chemical Sales Corporation of Delaware, William Ulrich, Arthur P. Jell, American Oil & Supply Co., and John J. Butler.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: 15026-15028
  15. In Re Medimmune, Inc. Securities Litigation (1995)

    Plaintiffs, who seek to represent a class of persons purchasing common stock of Defendant MedImmune, Inc. between January 4 and December 2, 1993, have sued the corporation and various of its officers, alleging violations of federal securities law, common law fraud, and negligent misrepresentation. Defendants have filed a Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim under Fed.R.Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6) and failure to plead fraud with particularity as required by Rule 9(b). The Court has determined [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: PJM 93-3980
  16. Chambers v. GD Searle & Co. (1975)

    In this products liability case, the plaintiff is seeking damages from the defendant, G. D. Searle & Co., a manufacturer of oral contraceptives, for injuries sustained by the plaintiff as the result of a stroke which she alleges was caused by taking the defendant's drug, Enovid-E. After approximately six days of trial, one of plaintiff's medical witnesses became ill and could not continue. However, the direct examination of such witness had been almost completed. The Court therefore [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. No. 73-1027-H
  17. The Bill (1944)

    The above case is a libel in rem to recover for a cargo loss. An opinion in the case with respect to liability was filed November 28, 1942 (47 F.Supp. 969) with the final paragraph of the opinion, page 979, reading as follows:


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: 2533
  18. Schwing Motor Company v. Hudson Sales Corporation (1956)

    William L. Marbury and John Martin Jones, Jr., Baltimore, Md., and Richard W. Larwin and Beaumont, Smith & Harris, Detroit, Mich., for Hudson Sales Corp., Hudson Motor Car Co., and Frank Burnham.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. A. Nos. 6362, 6363
  19. Collins v. Schoonfield (1972)

    On May 7, 1971, this suit was instituted by eight pre-trial detainees then in the Baltimore City Jail. Prior to the commencement of trial on January 10, 1972, an amended complaint was filed by seven of the original named plaintiffs[1] plus one additional plaintiff, also a pre-trial detainee. By the time of trial, several of the original and continuing plaintiffs had been tried and either released from, or continued in post-trial, confinement in the Jail. Defendants are the Jail's Warden and two [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: Civ. No. 71-500-K
  20. INTERN. ASS'N OF MACHINISTS v. Werner-Masuda (2005)

    Lee Seham, Seham Seham Meltz and Petersen LLP, Stanley J. Silverstone, Scham Scham Meltz and Petersen LLP, James Klimaski, Klimaski and Associates PC, Washington, DC, for McCormick Advisory Group.


    Court: District Court for the District of Maryland Docket: CIV.A. DKC 2004-2552

1 of 251 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2
  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 5