Edwards Systems Technology v. Corbin

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the home rule county exceeded its authority by creating a private right to sue in its anti-employment discrimination ordinance because it was a “general law” not a “local law,” it encroached on a state function, and it addressed a statewide problem
• upholding the constitutionality of the combined operation of § 42(a) and PGCC §§ 2-186(a)(3
• construing the analogous Prince George’s County Code section as “covering only discrimination occurring in Prince George’s County by an employer with a significant presence in Prince George’s County”
• In order to avoid a constitutional issue under Article XI-A of the Maryland Constitution, a county ordinance was construed to apply only in the enacting county
• “This Court has consistently adhered to the principle that ‘an interpretation which raises doubts as to a legislative enactment’s constitutionality should be avoided if the language of the Act permits,’ ”
• “As this issue [presented for the first time in the brief] was not presented in the certiorari petition, a cross-petition, or added by order of this Court, it is not properly before us”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).