Court of Appeals of Maryland· 11/7/1997
Tuer v. McDonald
Citations
- 701 A.2d 1101
- 347 Md. 507
- 1997 Md. LEXIS 554
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that remedial measures evidence was not admissible to impeach testimony that, at the time of the event, the measure was not believed to be as practical as the one employed
- holding that remedial measures evidence was not admissible to impeach testimony that, at the time of the event, the measure was not believed to be as practical as the one employed
- circuit court’s exclusion of evidence based on lack of relevancy reviewed for abuse of discretion
- “The prevailing, and pragmatically necessary, view is that the impeachment exception cannot be read in so expansive a manner.”
- “The prevailing, and pragmatically necessary, view is that the impeachment exception cannot be read in so expansive a manner.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Bell, Eldridge, Rodowsky, Chasanow, Raker, Wilner, Karwacki
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
10 cases in this archive cite this case.
- State v. NeedsSupreme Court of South Carolina· 1998-11-23· cited 76×
- Duchess v. Langston Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2001-04-19· cited 49×
- Nash v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 2014-06-20· cited 28×
- Clark v. Prince George's CountyCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2013-05-02· cited 28×
- Jensen v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1999-08-31· cited 13×
- East Park Ltd. Partnership v. LarkinCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2006-03-06· cited 8×
- Angelakis v. TeimourianCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2003-05-01· cited 5×
- Thompson v. StateCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 2005-10-05· cited 2×
- State v. ThurstonCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland· 1999-10-29· cited 2×
- Kristen Johnson v. AdotArizona Supreme Court· 2010-07-08
Cites
33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Columbia & Puget Sound Railroad v. HawthorneSupreme Court· 1892-04-04· cited 207×
- Sarah Helen Williams Dollar v. Long Mfg., N. C., Inc., and Third-Party v. Nichols Tractor Company, Inc., Third-PartyThird Circuit· 1977-11-30· cited 188×
- Rahmig v. Mosley MacHinery Co.Nebraska Supreme Court· 1987-09-11· cited 154×
- Forrest A. Flaminio and Gloria Flaminio v. Honda Motor Company, Ltd., a Japanese CorporationSeventh Circuit· 1984-05-02· cited 132×
- Unnamed caseFourth Circuit· 1980-08-04· cited 71×
- Richard GAUTHIER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AMF, INC., Defendant-AppellantNinth Circuit· 1986-04-29· cited 65×
- Mills v. Beech Aircraft Corporation, Inc.Fifth Circuit· 1989-10-26· cited 65×
- Clare Immaculata Kenny, in 77-2489 v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, in No. 77-2490, and City of PhiladelphiaThird Circuit· 1978-07-18· cited 52×
- Dawn Muzyka v. Remington Arms Co., Inc.Fifth Circuit· 1985-10-25· cited 52×
- Linda Anderson, Derriel Anderson v. James E. Malloy, Peter Zes, Edward J. GibsonEighth Circuit· 1983-03-09· cited 41×
- Public Service Company of Indiana, Inc., and Riley Stoker Corporation, Cross-Appellees v. Bath Iron Works Corporation, Cross-AppellantSeventh Circuit· 1985-10-28· cited 40×
- Brenda D. HARDY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHEMETRON CORPORATION, Defendant-AppelleeFifth Circuit· 1989-04-25· cited 37×
- Wetherill v. University of ChicagoN.D. Illinois· 1983-06-17· cited 37×
- Davenport Ex Rel. Davenport v. Ephraim McDowell Memorial Hospital, Inc.Court of Appeals of Kentucky· 1988-12-22· cited 34×
- Robert PROBUS and Geneva Probus, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. K-MART, INC., and Keller Industries, Inc., Defendants-AppelleesSeventh Circuit· 1986-06-30· cited 33×
- Hallmark v. Allied Products Corp.Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1982-06-01· cited 31×
- Wilson v. MorrisCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1989-09-12· cited 29×
- President of the Baltimore v. CrowtherCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1885-06-23· cited 27×
- Brookshire Bros., Inc. v. LewisTex. App. Ct., 12th Dist. (Tyler)· 1995-12-29· cited 26×
- Unnamed caseSecond Circuit· 1993-05-25· cited 21×
Other cases named Tuer v. McDonald
1 other CourtListener record shares this case 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.