Legal Opinion

Hansen v. City of Laurel

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided July 15, 2011No. 78, September Term, 2010PublishedCited by 60 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHarrell, J.

The parties here challenge us to interpret the pre-suit notice requirement of the 2007 iteration of the Local Government Tort Claims Act (“LGTCA”). Petitioner, Jerry Hansen (“Hansen”),1 asserts that he complied, strictly or at least substantially, with the required notice provision of the LGTCA as regards Prince George’s County (notice of a claim must be served on the county solicitor or attorney) by delivering written notice of his claims against the City of Laurel (“City”) to the City Administrator. Respondent, the City, contests vigorously his assertions. Although the focus of the parties’…

2Cases cited48 opinions

  1. Moragne v. States Marine Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. The HarrisburgSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  3. Henderson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
  4. Ashton v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
  5. DiPino v. DavisCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999

43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by60 opinions

  1. Rounds v. Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning CommissionCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  2. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Apex Oil Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 2015
  3. Oliver v. Dep't of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs.District Court, D. Maryland · 2018
  4. Fordyce v. Prince George's County MarylandDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2014
  5. Williams v. Morgan State Univ.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2023

55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API