Gaver v. Harrant
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1Dissent
ADKINS, judge,
dissenting.
I agree with the majority that “adoption of a new cause of action involves serious public policy concerns,” and that this Court should not “ ‘alter a common law rule in the face of indications that to do so would be contrary to the public policy of the State.’ ” Gaver v. Harrant, 316 Md. 17, 28-29, 557 A.2d 210, 216 (1989) (quoting Harrison v. Montgomery Co. Bd. of Educ., 295 Md. 442, 460, 456 A.2d 894, 903 (1983)); see also, e.g., Kelley v. R.G. Industries, Inc., 304 Md. 124, 141, 497 A.2d 1143, 1151 (1985). I respectfully dissent because I believe that the…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- In Re WINSHIPSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Goss v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Smith v. City of FontanaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.