Engineering Management Services, Inc. v. Maryland State Highway Administration

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that “the term ‘shall’ is presumed mandatory on the parties, denoting an imperative obligation inconsistent with the exercise of discretion” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)
• noting that the standard of review for the grant of summary judgment, whether it is “legally correct,” is “the same standard of review we apply to the question of the legal correctness of an administrative agency’s decision”
• “The standard for appellate review of a summary judgment is whether it is ‘legally correct.’ ”
• \[w]hether summary judgment is properly granted as a matter of law is a question of law. The standard for appellate review of a summary judgment is whether it is `legally correct'\
• “[w]hether summary judgment is properly granted as a matter of law is a question of law. The standard for appellate review of a summary judgment is whether it is ‘legally correct’ ”
• “The standard for appellate review of a summary judgment is whether it is ‘legally correct.’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).