Legal Opinion

Hamdan v. Klimovitz

Court of Special Appeals of Maryland

Decided December 30, 1998No. 1887PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtMarvin H. Smith, Judge

(Retired, Specially Assigned).

Appellant, Hassan Hamdan (Hamdan or appellant), a Harford County pawnbroker, contended unsuccessfully in the Circuit Court for Harford County that sections 188-3 and 188-4 of the Harford County Code were preempted by Title 12 of the Maryland Business Regulation Article. Section 188-3 *317requires “[ejvery pawnbroker doing business in the county” to submit to “the Sheriff of the County, a list of articles bought, traded or pledged” daily. Section 188-4 spells out in detail what must be included in that list. We would affirm but for the failure of the trial court to…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. State Insurance Commissioner v. National Bureau of Casualty UnderwritersCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1967
  2. Hunt v. Montgomery CountyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1968
  3. BOARD OF CTY. COMMISSIONERS OF PRICE GEORGE v. Oak Hill FarmsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1963
  4. Turner v. HammondCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1973
  5. Goodwich v. NolanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1996

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Shipley v. MatlackCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API