Court of Appeals of Maryland· 2/5/2001

Rawlings v. Rawlings

Citations

766 A.2d 98
362 Md. 535
2001 Md. LEXIS 19

How courts have described this case

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

stating that a statute effecting a change in procedure only ... ordinarily applies to all actions whether accrued, pending or future, unless a contrary intention is expressed
noting that issues of interpretation of Maryland Rules are treated the same as statutory interpretation issues
noting that issues of interpretation of Maryland Rules are treated the same as statutory interpretation issues
stating that “if the Rule only [a]ffects procedure, and not substantive rights, and is therefore remedial in nature ... [it] may be applied retrospectively unless a contrary intention is expressed”
“The contemnor may ... defend by establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, ‘that the failure to pay was not an act of willful or contumacious non-compliance’ ”
Sanctions “in the civil contempt proceedings” may not be imposed upon a contemnor if “it was shown that ... he or she did not have the present ability to purge”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Harrell

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.