Himes Associates, Ltd. v. Anderson

How courts have described this case

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

• reviewing a personal jurisdiction question based on entire record in light of Maryland appellate courts’ broad discretion to review jurisdictional issues
• applying the MWPCL to an employee who lived in Maryland, worked primarily in Virginia for a Virginia corporation, but attended meetings twice a month in Maryland
• applying □□□ .. MWPCL to an employee who lived in Maryland, worked primarily in Virginia for a Virginia 16 corporation, but attended meetings twice a month in Maryland
• affirming the trial court’s award of treble damages on the severance payment
• “Our standard of review is de novo: we decide whether the trial court was legally correct to exercise personal jurisdiction over” the defendant. (Citation and internal quotation marks omitted)
• “Anderson had to attend meetings twice a month at Lockheed Martin’s Baltimore office, in the State of Maryland. On that evidence alone, Himes was an ‘employer’ under the MWPCL, and therefore was subject to liability for violating it.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).