The Court of
Special Appeals affirmed the trial court.
Not exact matches
By what Whitehead styled «the
appeal to the direct intuition of
special occasions --» he was referring to the primitive days of the Church in which Jesus» impact was known as a reality — we may possess, and Christian conviction
affirms that we do possess, a key or clue «of universal validity, to be applied by faith to the ordering of all experience.»
In August, 2016, the First District Court of
Appeals affirmed the ruling of the Circuit Court, holding that the plaintiffs suffered no
special injury from the tax credit scholarship program, and that the state legislature did not exceed its authority under the constitution.
The confusion continues with the decision in R v Corbeil, where the Quebec Court of
Appeal affirmed a conviction where the accused represented that she had
special training in palm reading, and charged an undercover police officer ten dollars.
In Brown v. Wheeler, the Court of
Special Appeals of Maryland
affirmed the trial court judgment holding in favor of defendant because plaintiff failed to allege or show that: (1) landlord had actual knowledge or reason to know of the presence of chipping, peeling, and flaking lead paint and that such condition was hazardous, and (2) landlord was given reasonable opportunity to correct hazard.