Md. Code Ann. § 5-101

Section 5-101 establishes a three-year limitations period for civil actions at law, running from accrual of the cause of action.

Brown & Sturm v. Field Farms Ltd · filed 1997-08-11

The applicable statute of limitations for a civil action at law in Maryland is three years from the date of accrual of the cause of action. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... Thus, the bankruptcy court determined correctly that the statute of limitations bars the malpractice claims.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after accrual unless another Code provision provides a different limitations period.

McNeal v. Montgomery County MD · filed 2009-01-20

The applicable Maryland Statute of Limitations requires that “a civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which the action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (2008); ... The last possible tortious act occurred no later than January 2001, when he retired from his employment with the County. ... McNeal does not contest that the three year period is applicable, but argues that the Statute of Limitations for the state law claims should be equitably tolled during the time in which he was exhausting administrative procedures as to his Title VII claims, which arose from the same set of circumstances. ... The district court correctly held that the filing of McNeal’s claim with the Office of Human Rights “does not toll the statute of limitations for claims that ‘although related, and although directed to most of the same ends, are separate, distinct, and independent.’”

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year statute of limitations on the Maryland-law claims identified by the court.

Rhoads v. State of Maryland Judiciary · filed 2013-10-15

With respect to any potential state law claims against Bank of America, including malicious abuse of process, abuse of process, and conversion, the District Court correctly concluded that Rhoads did not state any timely claims against Bank of America under Maryland law because the claims are governed by a three-year statute of limitations under Maryland law. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. The events at issue occurred in 2003, and Rhoads did not bring this suit until 2013.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year statute of limitations for general civil actions.

Martin v. Montgomery County Police · filed 2015-12-17

Martin’s claims, whether brought under state law or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012), were subject to, at longest, a three-year statute of limitations. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (2013) (general civil statute of limitations); Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-105 (2013) (actions for assault and defamation); Owens v. Balt. City State’s Attorneys Office, 767 F.3d 379, 388 (4th Cir. 2014) (§ 1983 claims), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 1893 (2015).

Section 5-101 requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual unless another Code provision provides a different period.

Brilliant Semenova v. MD Transit Administration · filed 2017-01-10

Rather, the closer state-law analog to such an ADA claim is Maryland’s more general statute of limitations, requiring plaintiffs to file civil actions “within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides” otherwise. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; see A Soc’y Without A Name, 655 F.3d at 347.

Section 5-101 gives a § 1983 plaintiff three years from accrual to file a civil action.

Halle Development, Inc. v. Anne Arundel County · filed 2005-02-04

Here, Maryland’s general statute of limitations provides that “[a] civil action at law shall ... be filed within three years from the date it accrues.”

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for wage-and-hour actions under Maryland law.

Radtke v. Caschetta · filed 2017-06-07

Under Maryland law, the statute of limitations for wage and hour actions is three years. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year statute of limitations running from the date of the occurrence.

Shifflette v. Anzalone · filed 2019-07-31

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for MWHL and MWPCL claims.

Johnson v. Silver Diner, Inc. · filed 2019-08-07

A three-year statute of limitations applies to MWHL and MWPCL claims. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 sets a three-year limitations period for personal-injury claims, measured from the date of occurrence.

Falkenstein v. Rahman · filed 2020-03-03

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence.

Section 5-101 generally requires civil actions to be filed within three years after the cause of action accrues.

Clayton v. Delmarva Community Services, Inc. · filed 2020-03-23

Unlike the FLSA, however, the statute of limitations for the MWHL and the MWPCL is three years. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; see also Guerra v. Teixeira, Civ. No. CV TDC-16-0618, 2019 WL 330871, at *13 (D. Md. Jan. 25, 2019).

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues.

Smith v. Potomac Electric Power Company · filed 2020-04-17

PEPCO also raises a statute of limitations defense against all Plaintiffs, arguing that their claims arose in 2009 and were therefore initiated long after Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations on civil claims had run. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (LexisNexis 2013). As in Webb, the Court finds that where Plaintiffs McCullough and Powell continued to work for PEPCO in 2017, and the Complaint can be construed to assert that the alleged breach of implied contract included actions occurring in 2017, their breach of implied contract claims are not time-barred on the face of the Complaint, which was filed on June 17, 2019. See Webb, 2020 WL 1083402, at *7. However, Plaintiffs Smith and Harris both retired in 2015. While Smith and Harris may have delayed bringing this state law claim while waiting for the EEOC’s decisions on their EEOC Charges, the pendency of an EEOC investigation does not toll the statute of limitations on separate state law claims. See Johnson v. Ry. Express Agency, Inc., 421 U.S. 454, 462-66 (1975) (holding that Title VII claims did not toll the governing state law statute of limitations applicable to a separate claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1981); McNeal v. Montgomery Cty., 307 F. App’x 766, 771-72 (4th Cir. 2009) (holding that the statute of limitations on the plaintiff’s state law claims may not be equitably tolled during the time in which he was exhausting his related Title VII claims). Where this case was brought in 2019 and the allegations of Smith and Harris all relate actions taken prior to their retirement in 2015, the Court finds that the breach of implied contract claims of Smith and Harris are time-barred. The Court will therefore dismiss Count III as to Smith and Harris, while allowing Count III to proceed as to McCullough and Powell.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for Maryland personal injury tort claims, which supplies the limitations period for § 1983 claims.

Welshons v. Baltimore City Correctional Center · filed 2020-04-22

Because § 1983 does not have its own statute of limitations, the applicable limitations period is the state law statute of limitations for personal injury torts. Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007). In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (LexisNexis 2013).

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for civil actions, including negligence, invasion-of-privacy, and intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress claims.

Brooks v. TVOne, LLC · filed 2020-07-07

Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations for civil actions applies to each of the claims. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; see Daniels v. Carter-Jones Lumber Co., No. 17-cv-00982-ELH, 2017 WL 5495959, at *3 (D. Md. Nov. 16, 2017) (“Under Maryland law, the statute of limitations for a negligence action is generally three years.”); Melendez v. Bd. of Educ. for Montgomery Cty., No. DKC 14-3636, 2015 WL 3540947, at *11 (D. Md. June 3, 2015) (holding that claims of “intrusion upon Plaintiff’s seclusion or solitude” and “invasion of privacy” were subject to the three-year statute of limitations); Mason v. Capitol Office Sols., No. PJM 13-2290, 2014 WL 4825931, at *4 (D. Md. Sept. 23, 2014) (citing Knickman v. Prince George’s Cty., 187 F. Supp. 2d 559, 563–64 (D. Md. 2002) (“A three years statute of limitations applies to claims of wrongful discharge and intentional infliction of emotional distress.”)).

Section 5-101’s three-year limitations period also applies to detinue actions.

Edokobi v. U.S. Department of Justice · filed 2019-08-21

This three-year limitations period also applies to Edokobi’s detinue claim.

Section 5-101 requires a negligence action to be filed within three years after the date it accrues.

Booker v. The National Fallen Firefighters Foundation · filed 2021-02-11

In Maryland, a negligence action must be filed within three years from the date it accrues. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Booker alleges in the original and in the amended complaint that he was injured on October 9, 2016. (ECF 4 ¶¶ 7, 14; ECF 41-2 ¶¶ 8, 16). Accordingly, his claim accrued at that time. The three-year statute of limitations therefore had expired by the time Booker sought to amend his complaint in October 2020.

Section 5-101 provides a general three-year limitations period for civil actions unless another limitations period applies.

Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Faruque · filed 2021-06-10

Because Pro Street concerned the same statutes under similar facts present here, the Court adopts its reasoning and applies the three-year limitations period provided in Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (West 2014).

Section 5-101 requires a trespass claim to be filed within three years after accrual, which occurs when the plaintiff knows or should have known of the injury giving rise to the claim.

Hardie v. Deutsche Bank Trust Company America · filed 2021-06-16

Under Maryland law, however, a claim for trespass must be filed within three years from the date the action accrues. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (LexisNexis 2013); Litz v. Ma. Dep’t of Env't, 76 A.3d 1076, 1086 (Md. 2013). The action accrues when the “plaintiff knows or should have known of the injury giving rise to his or her claim.” Litz, 76 A.3d at 1086 (citation omitted).

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period on trespass and conversion claims, with accrual determined under Maryland's discovery rule.

Hardie v. CIT bank · filed 2021-08-16

Maryland law provides three years to file a claim for trespass. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; Litz v. Md. Dep’t of Env’t, 76 A.3d 1076, 1086 (Md. 2013) (“Counts for . . . trespass . . . must be filed within three years from the date the action accrues.”). Maryland courts apply the discovery rule when determining when an action accrued, meaning the limitations period begins when the “plaintiff knows or should have known of the injury giving rise to his or her claim.” Litz, 76 A.3d at 1086. Plaintiffs were alerted “that intruders were breaking into the property” on May 30, 2017. ECF No. 9 ¶ 12. Plaintiffs filed this action on September 12, 2020, ECF No. 1, more than three years from the date the action accrued. Because Plaintiffs did not file suit within the three-year limitations period, their trespass claim will be dismissed.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action to be filed within three years after it accrues unless another Code provision provides a different limitations period.

Sens v. Whiteford Taylor & Preston, LLP · filed 2021-09-30

The Court concludes that the limitations period on the Plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendants began to run on December 18, 2018 when the Circuit Court for Baltimore County granted summary judgment in favor of the Sureties in the Surety Lawsuit. Therefore, as detailed below, the Sens Parties timely filed the Initial Complaint on February 28, 2020 because it was filed less than three years later. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (requiring that any malpractice claim be brought within three years).

Section 5-101 requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual unless another Code provision sets a different period.

Hayat v. Diaz · filed 2022-01-27

Under Maryland law, “a civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. And so, generally, a three-year statute of limitations applies to civil claims brought in Maryland.

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year statute of limitations running from the date of the occurrence.

Potts v. DiPaola · filed 2022-03-02

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 gives personal-injury actions a three-year limitations period measured from the date of the occurrence.

Tang v. Schmoke · filed 2022-06-10

Maryland’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims is three years from the date of the occurrence. Id.; see also Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 supplies Maryland’s general three-year limitations period, while the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law extends the period by two weeks after wages are due.

Boyd v. SFS Communications, LLC · filed 2021-04-15

As a general proposition, the statute of limitations under Maryland law is three years. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5- 101. Under the MWPCL, this three-year limitation begins tolling two weeks after “the date on which the employer was required to have paid the wages,”

Section 5-101 gives § 1983 claims a three-year limitations period running from accrual of the claim.

Weiler v. Town of Berwyn Heights, Maryland · filed 2021-10-29

Pursuant to Maryland’s statute of limitations, Plaintiff’s Section 1983 claim expired on June 14, 2017.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues.

Smith v. Martz · filed 2022-08-29

The statute of limitations in Maryland for fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims is three years. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (“A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues . . .”); see also Ladzinski v. MEBA Pension Tr., 951 F. Supp. 570, 574 (D. Md. 1997) (applying the general three-year statute of limitations to breach of fiduciary duty claims). ... Thus, assuming, most favorably for Ms. Smith, that she only possessed sufficient knowledge of her claims on the date she filed suit, the statute of limitations ran on June 5, 2018.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues.

Harrison v. DPSCS - Secretary · filed 2022-09-01

For a § 1983 claim arising in Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is the general civil statute applicable to personal injury suits. ... Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (West 2020) (‘A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues . . .”).

Section 5-101 provides a three-year statute of limitations for claims of this type under Maryland law.

Oliver v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. · filed 2022-12-27

While the precise nature of her legal claims is not specified, the applicable statute of limitations for claims of this type, under Maryland law, is three years.1 Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Plaintiff’s complaint does not allege any actions taken by Wells Fargo after 2018, when it initiated foreclosure proceedings. Thus, any lawsuit contesting any of Wells Fargo’s actions, including its accounting of Plaintiff’s mortgage payments and its conduct surrounding the modification of Plaintiff’s loan, would have had to be filed by, at the latest, 2021.

Section 5-101 requires civil actions, including suits on standard contracts, to be filed within three years after accrual unless another statutory period applies.

JTH Tax LLC d/b/a Liberty Tax Service v. Irving · filed 2023-02-01

Maryland law has a three-year statute of limitations to bring suit for standard contracts. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. More specifically, “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Id. Because the Court has determined that the notes are not under seal and are not negotiable instruments, no other provision of the Maryland Code applies. Consequently, Plaintiffs’ claims concern standard contracts which are subject to a three-year statute of limitations.

Section 5-101 generally requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual, unless another Code provision supplies a different limitations period.

Chicago Title Insurance Company v. Delgado · filed 2023-07-14

Under Maryland law, a civil action must “be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... Unjust enrichment claims in Maryland are subject to the three-year statute of limitations. ... Under Hill, Chicago Title conferred a benefit on the Delgados when it paid the balance due on the Countrywide Loan. That payment occurred in November 2021. “[A] cause of action does not accrue until all of its elements are present.” Catler v. Arent Fox, LLP, 71 A.3d 155, 171 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2013) (citing Doe v. Archdiocese of Wash., 689 A.2d 634, 638–39 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1997)). Thus, the unjust enrichment claim did not accrue until November 2021 at the earliest. Chicago Title filed suit within three years of that date, so the unjust enrichment claim is timely.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years from the date it accrues.

Bailey-Bey v. Mosby · filed 2023-08-03

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (providing that “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues”).

Section 5-101 requires a Maryland personal-injury action, including a § 1983 claim using Maryland's limitations period, to be filed within three years after the cause of action accrues.

Charette v. Wexford Health Sources Inc. · filed 2023-09-11

A plaintiff in Maryland must bring a personal injury action within three years of the date the cause of action accrues. Owens v. Balt. City State’s Att’ys Off., 767 F.3d 379, 388 (4th Cir. 2014) (citing Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101).

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years from the date the cause of action accrues.

Mahammend v. Mayor of Baltimore City · filed 2023-10-12

“Section 1983 provides a federal cause of action, but in several respects relevant here, federal law looks to the law of the State in which the cause of action arose. This is so for the length of the statute of limitations: it is that which the State provides for personal-injury torts.” Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007) (citing Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 249–50 (1989)). In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101. ... Here, Mahammend alleges that his medical treatment was interfered with in November and December 2016, almost seven years ago. Therefore the statute of limitations period ended in December 2019. ... As such, Mahammend initiated this case more than three years after the end of the limitations period.

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period on fraudulent-concealment, fraudulent-inducement, and intentional-infliction claims under Maryland law.

Jones v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC · filed 2023-09-29

However, the statute of limitations for fraudulent concealment is three years. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; Johnson v. Nadwodny, 461 A.2d 67, 68 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1983)).

Section 5-101 supplies Maryland’s three-year limitations period for civil actions, including unjust-enrichment, contract, and quantum-meruit claims.

McMillan-McCartney v. McMillan, Jr. · filed 2022-09-30

Under Maryland law, unjust enrichment claims, like an action on contract, are subject to a three-year statute of limitations. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5–101.

Section 5-101 generally requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual unless another Code provision sets a different period; the court applied that period to strict-liability claims.

Carter v. Lindsay Corporation · filed 2023-11-17

Maryland law provides that “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. “Under the Maryland statutes, actions for . . . strict liability . . . are barred three years after the cause of action accrues.”

Section 5-101 gives Maryland state-law claims a three-year limitations period, making claims filed more than four years after the alleged wrongdoing untimely.

Knight v. Citifinancial, Inc. · filed 2024-11-08

of limitations for civil actions is three years. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. As such, any state law claims should have been brought by December 2022 at the latest. Because Plaintiff filed this suit in July 2024, her state law claims are untimely filed.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year statute of limitations for the claims at issue, and claims filed within that period are not barred by limitations.

Warn · filed 2026-01-30

As noted by Warn, the Maryland law applicable to the claims here provides for a statute of limitations of three years. ... Either way, the allegations in the complaint fall well within the three-year statute of limitations period, as the complaint was filed on September 11, 2023. ... Dismissal of the complaint for statute of limitations reasons is not warranted.

Section 5-101 generally gives civil claims a three-year limitations period, subject to Maryland’s discovery-rule exception.

McGinn v. Broadmead, Inc. · filed 2026-02-18

Generally, Maryland applies a three-year limitations period for civil claims. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (West 2025). But the discovery rule provides an exception. It protects plaintiffs “where it was not reasonably possible to have obtained notice of the nature and cause of an injury,” and it tolls the limitations period “until the time the plaintiff discovers, or through the exercise of diligence, should have discovered, the injury.” ... But McGinn doesn’t satisfy the conditions to invoke the discovery rule. ... Because McGinn’s alleged gluten exposure occurred in February 2018, the three-year limitations period ran in February 2021. She didn’t file suit until September 2023, so her breach of contract and negligence claims arising from that incident are barred by the statute of limitations.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action, including a battery claim, to be filed within three years after accrual, with accrual governed by Maryland's discovery rule.

Brown · filed 2026-02-19

In their Motion, Defendants assert that most of the battery claims are time-barred pursuant to Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations for battery claims. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; Ford v. Douglas, 799 A.2d 448, 450 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2002). ... On the issue of when a claim accrues for purposes of the statute of limitations, Maryland law applies the discovery rule, under which a limitations period begins to run when “the claimant in fact knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.” ... Where all of the incidents of physical contact alleged by Caroline Brown occurred prior to April 25, 2022, any claims of battery arising from those incidents are time-barred. ... Caroline Brown’s battery claim in Count 3 will therefore be dismissed as time-barred.

Section 5-101 supplies a three-year limitations period for civil actions, including fraud and conspiracy claims arising from other causes in connection with health care rather than traditional malpractice, subject to Maryland’s discovery rule.

Brunenkant v. Suburban Hospital, Incorporated · filed 2026-05-21

Against this backdrop of Maryland legal principles, we are of opinion that the claims alleged by Brunenkant in his fraud and conspiracy complaint fall well within the ambit of section 5-101, and not section 5-109. ... Instead, as our distinguished Maryland colleague Judge Niemeyer recognized in the 1993 Brooks decision, they are civil “[c]laims for injuries arising from other causes in connection with health care,” such that they are excluded from the Act. ... To be sure, rather than invoking section 5-109, the district court should have applied Maryland’s general three-year statute of limitations for civil claims to assess whether the claims alleged in Brunenkant’s fraud and conspiracy complaint are time barred. ... And section 5-101 specifically provides that “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.”

Section 5-101 requires Maryland civil claims to be filed within three years after accrual, and the court applied that period to time-bar the plaintiff’s non-discrimination claims.

Olanipekun v. Housing Authority of Baltimore City · filed 2025-08-27

Under Maryland law, “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues,” unless another limitations period is specifically provided. ... As such, any cause of action against HABC must have been filed within at least three years of Plaintiff’s departure in 2016. Since Plaintiff waited until the end of 2024 to file suit, Plaintiff’s additional (non-discrimination) claims are time-barred and are similarly dismissed.

Section 5-101 begins the three-year limitations period when the breach is reasonably discoverable under Maryland’s discovery rule, not when the full extent of damages becomes ascertainable.

Kodor Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Rose · filed 2007-03-20

The parties do not dispute that the trial court was legally correct in applying Maryland’s discovery rule2 to the statute of limitations analysis, and determining that the statute of limitations began to run when the breach was readily discoverable, not at the moment when the extent of the damages was ascertainable.

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period that begins under Maryland’s discovery rule when the plaintiff knows or reasonably should have known of the wrong; an agent’s knowledge is imputed unless the adverse-interest exception applies.

Tobacco Technology, Inc. v. Taiga International N.V. · filed 2010-07-20

We now turn to the final issue, whether the district court erred in finding the balance of TTI’s tort-based claims barred by the applicable three-year statute of limitations, Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... Under Maryland’s “discovery rule,” a statute of limitations begins to run when the plaintiff “kn[ows] or reasonably should have known of the wrong.” ... TTI cannot show that Whitehead acted with “complete adversity” to its own interests, and so is “chargeable with [Whitehead’s] knowledge.” ... TTI’s tort claims are therefore time-barred.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after accrual, with accrual governed by when the claimant knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.

Turner v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. · filed 2013-10-18

“A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” ... “Maryland follows the discovery rule, which provides that a “cause of action accrues when the claimant in fact knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.” ... Maryland adheres strictly to this facts-based approach for determining when a claim accrues and consistently maintains that a party’s knowledge of facts, not the party’s unfettered ability to immediately press a viable claim, is the only trigger.

Section 5-101 sets a three-year limitations period for civil actions, running from when the cause of action accrues under Maryland’s discovery rule.

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation v. Weyerhaeuser Company · filed 2014-07-31

Maryland’s statute of limitations provides that “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Maryland follows the discovery rule, which provides that “the cause of action accrues when the claimant in fact knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.” ... Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, a genuine dispute exists as to whether knowledge of the water infiltration problem would have put a reasonable person on notice that the Parallams were susceptible to premature deterioration and that their PolyClear 2000 treatment would not preserve them. ... To the extent that the 2001 and 2002 Reports nevertheless may have put the plaintiffs on inquiry notice of the Parallam deterioration, there is a genuine dispute as to whether the plaintiffs conducted a reasonably diligent investigation by seeking and receiving assurances from Weyerhaeuser that the Parallams were properly treated.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action to be filed within three years after accrual, and because it does not define accrual, Maryland courts use the discovery rule to determine when the period begins.

Shirley Johnson, Personal Representative of the Estate of Elbert Davis, Sr. v. Baltimore City Police Department · filed 2020-04-07

Maryland law on this point is largely identical, and therefore instructive. It provides that any civil action must be filed “within three years from the date it accrues.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Because section 5-101 leaves the word “accrues” undefined, Maryland courts use the discovery rule to determine accrual.

Section 5-101 establishes a three-year limitations period subject to Maryland's discovery rule, so the period begins when the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.

Ten-X, Inc. v. Pasha Realty Holdings, LLC · filed 2022-04-28

Under Maryland law, the three-year statute of limitations, which the parties agree applies to the counterclaims, is subject to the discovery rule, which starts the clock on the date the plaintiff “knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.” Cain v. Midland Funding, LLC, 256 A.3d 765, 783 (Md. 2021) (quoting Poffenberger v. Risser, 431 A.2d 677, 680 (Md. 1981)); Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; Windesheim v. Larocca, 116 A.3d 954, 960 n.12, 962–67 (Md. 2015) (discussing the discovery rule).

Section 5-101 requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual, and Maryland applies the discovery rule to determine when a claim accrues.

Shirley Johnson, Personal Representative of the Estate of Elbert Davis, Sr. v. Baltimore City Police Department · filed 2022-06-21

Maryland law on this point is largely identical, and therefore instructive. It provides that any civil action must be filed “within three years from the date it accrues.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Because section 5-101 leaves the word “accrues” undefined, Maryland courts use the discovery rule to determine accrual.

Section 5-101’s three-year limitations period is subject to Maryland’s discovery rule, under which accrual occurs when the plaintiff knows or reasonably should know of the wrong.

The Lebbin-Spector Family Trust by and Through Its Trustees Roger M. Lebbin and Carole Sue Lebbin v. Transamerica Life · filed 2021-08-02

The court also found that Maryland has adopted the discovery rule, which provides that a cause of action accrues “when a plaintiff in fact knows or reasonably should know of the wrong.”

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period that begins when the claimant knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.

Hardwire, LLC v. Freyssinet International et CIE · filed 2023-02-08

Hardwire’s state law breach of contract claim is subject to Maryland’s three-year limitations period because it is shorter than New York’s six-year statute of limitations. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 214(4). Under the Maryland rule, the statute of limitations period runs from when Hardwire “knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.” Am. Gen. Assur. Co. v. Pappano, 822 A.2d 1212, 1219 (Md. 2003).

Section 5-101 generally gives Maryland breach-of-contract claims a three-year limitations period, subject to the discovery rule.

Fowose v. Bank of America · filed 2024-06-12

Maryland law generally applies a three-year statute of limitations for breach of contract claims. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; ... Nonetheless, the discovery rule applies such that the statute of limitations will not start running until the plaintiff “knew or should have known” of the breach.

Section 5-101’s three-year period for breach-of-contract claims begins when the breach occurs and was or should have been discovered.

Trattner v. National Western Life Insurance Company · filed 2024-06-28

That limitations period applies to breach of contract actions. ... Such a claim accrues when a party “breached its contract” and “when the breach was or should have been discovered.”

Section 5-101(h), read with the definition of “deliver,” treats distribution as encompassing transfers of controlled substances without remuneration.

ARUNA · filed 2008-07-01(h)

The Maryland Code and the CSA both define the term “distribution” to encompass transfers of controlled substances without remuneration. Compare Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law §§ 5-101(h), (l) (West 2007), with 21 U.S.C. §§ 802(8), (11) (2000).

Section 5-101 requires civil actions at law to be filed within three years after accrual; in this ERISA benefits dispute, the court treated it as the applicable limitations period and held the action timely because accrual followed exhaustion of administrative remedies.

Cross v. Bragg · filed 2009-07-24

The defendants next contend that Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations for civil actions bars the plaintiffs’ Count IV claim. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (“A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues . . . .”). Because ERISA itself establishes no limitations period for initiating a cause of action under 29 U.S.C. § 1132, “the federal courts look to state law for an analogous limitation provision to apply.” Dameron v. Sinai Hosp. of Baltimore, Inc., 815 F.2d 975, 981 (4th Cir. 1987). When an ERISA plan is alleged to have breached its duty to provide beneficiaries with the benefits due them, the analogous state cause of action is breach of contract. See id. ... On this point, the parties agree: the three-year Maryland statute of limitations for individual contract actions applies in this dispute. Nonetheless, the parties disagree on when the limitations period was triggered. ... As explained below, we agree with the plaintiffs. ... We thus reject the defendants’ statute of limitations contention, and conclude that the Complaint was timely filed.

Section 5-101 gives plaintiffs three years to file personal-injury actions.

Owens v. Baltimore City State's Attorneys Office · filed 2014-09-24

Maryland law affords plaintiffs three years to file a personal-injury action. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Hence, a three-year limitations period applies to Owens’s claims.

Section 5-101 requires a breach-of-contract action to be filed within three years after the cause of action accrues.

Parkway 1046, LLC v. U. S. Home Corporation · filed 2020-06-03

In Maryland, an action for breach of contract must “be filed within three years from the date it accrues.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; see Kumar v. Dhanda, 43 A.3d 1029, 1033–34 (Md. 2012). ... The plain language of the contract supports the district court’s finding that there was no breach—and thus Parkway’s claim did not accrue—until 2017.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for civil claims when no more specific limitations period applies.

Martin v. Baltimore City Police · filed 2015-12-17

Martin’s claims, whether brought under state law or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012), were subject to, at longest, a three-year statute of limitations. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (2013) (general civil statute of limitations); Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-105 (2013) (actions for assault and defamation); Owens v. Balt. City State’s Attorneys Office, 767 F.3d 379, 388 (4th Cir. 2014) (§ 1983 claims), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 1893 (2015).

Section 5-101 generally requires civil claims to be filed within three years.

Martin v. Howard Walsh, III · filed 2016-11-23

Martin’s claims, whether brought under state law or 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012), were subject to, at longest, a three-year statute of limitations. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (2013) (general civil statute of limitations); Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-105 (2013) (actions for assault and defamation); Owens v. Balt. City State’s Attorneys Office, 767 F.3d 379, 388 (4th Cir. 2014) (§ 1983 claims), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 1893 (2015).

Section 5-101 requires a civil action to be filed within three years after it accrues, and Maryland's discovery rule generally determines accrual when the plaintiff knew or should have known of the actionable harm.

Gillis v. Household Finance Corporation III · filed 2019-07-29

Household Finance’s argument that Plaintiffs’ MCDCA claims are barred by a three-year statute of limitations fails. Maryland law requires “a civil action at law [to be] filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different time period within which an action shall be commended.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. In Maryland, the “discovery rule” is applied “generally in all civil actions.” Hecht v. Resolution Tr. Corp., 333 Md. 324, 333 (1994). The discovery rule provides that “a cause of action ‘accrues’ when plaintiff knew or should have known that actionable harm has been done to him.” Doe v. Maskell, 342 Md. 684, 690 (1996). As alleged, Plaintiffs did not learn that Household Finance violated the MCDCA until December 2015 when they discovered through discussions with Caliber’s representatives that Household Finance had continued to divert their payments towards unauthorized charges despite its May 2015 admission to this error. ECF No. 1-2 ¶¶ 32–33. Thus, Plaintiffs’ cause of action accrued in December 2015, less than three years before Plaintiffs filed suit in October 2018.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after the cause of action accrues; applied with the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law, the unpaid-wage claim had to be filed within three years and two weeks from when the wage was due.

Cage v. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center · filed 2019-08-14

Under either Maryland or federal law, however, Cage’s claim is barred by the statute of limitations. A claim for unpaid wages under the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law “must be filed within three years and two weeks from the date on which the employer should have paid the wage.” Butler v. VisionAIR, Inc., 385 F. Supp. 2d 549, 554 (D. Md. 2005); see also Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. § 3-507.2(a); Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for civil actions, measured from the date of occurrence.

Certeza v. Krishnaswamy · filed 2019-09-09

In Maryland the general statute of limitations for civil actions is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (West 2013).

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after it accrues unless another Maryland Code provision sets a different limitations period.

Bird v. Ocwen Federal Bank, FSB · filed 2019-09-30

Under Maryland law, a civil action must be filed “within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the [Maryland] Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (West 2019). As Bird has cited no other Code provisions that would extend the statute of limitations on his state claims, the Court concludes that the statute of limitations for those claims is, at most, three years.

Section 5-101's three-year limitations period applies to civil actions at law, not equitable foreclosure actions.

Ahmed v. NewRez LLC · filed 2020-04-17

Maryland’s general three-year statute of limitations for civil actions applies only to actions at law and thus does not apply to foreclosure actions, which are actions in equity.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period in Maryland, which applies here as the borrowed limitations period for § 1983 claims.

White v. City of Hagerstown · filed 2020-06-05

Because Section 1983 does not include a statute of limitations, “courts borrow the statute of limitations from the most analogous state-law cause of action.” Owens v. Baltimore City State’s Attorneys Office, 767 F.3d 379, 388 (4th Cir. 2014). In Maryland, the applicable limitations period is three years. See id. (citing Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101).

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for claims running from the date of the occurrence.

Gordon v. Wexford · filed 2020-06-26

There is no federal statute of limitations for actions under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2018), and the limitations period for § 1983 claims is to be determined by the analogous state law statute of limitations. See Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007). In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. The date of accrual occurs “when the plaintiff possesses sufficient facts about the harm done to him that reasonable inquiry will reveal his cause of action.” Nasim v. Warden, Md. House of Corr., 64 F.3d 951, 955 (4th Cir. 1995) (citing United States v. Kubrick, 444 U.S. 111, 122–24 (1979)). ... Because Gordon filed his Complaint on June 5, 2019, claims that predate June 5, 2016 are barred by the statute of limitations.

Section 5-101 gives Maryland personal-injury claims a three-year limitations period running from the date of the occurrence.

Henson v. Bishop · filed 2020-07-10

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Pro. Code § 5-101.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for Maryland claims and is strictly construed; absent a legislatively created exception, courts will not engraft an implied equitable exception.

Braxton v. Simon · filed 2020-07-15

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations for Braxton’s complaints is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Pro. Code § 5-101 (2014). Under Maryland law, the statute of limitations is strictly construed.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year statute of limitations for civil actions and applies that period to claims governed by Maryland’s limitations law.

Canaan Christian Church v. Montgomery County, Maryland · filed 2020-09-30

All of the events in this case occurred in Maryland. Consequently, Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations for civil actions, Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (West 2013), applies to these claims.

Section 5-101 gives breach-of-contract and tortious-interference claims a three-year limitations period, which here began when the plaintiff received clear notice of termination rather than an earlier threat to terminate.

KVC Waffles Ltd v. New Carbon Company, LLC · filed 2020-10-22

In Maryland, a breach of contract claim is subject to a three-year statute of limitations. ... The same statute of limitations applies to KVC Waffles’ tortious interference claims. ... Having stipulated the existence of an ongoing agreement between the parties, the Court cannot find that New Carbon’s threat that “[i]n the event that we cannot come to an agreement, [New Carbon] will have no choice but to terminate KVC [Waffles] as a distributor” sufficed to place KVC Waffles on notice of its breach. ... Drawing all inferences in favor of KVC Waffles, as the Court is obliged to do at this stage of the proceedings, the Court can reasonably conclude that KVC Waffles was not on notice that New Carbon was in breach until New Carbon’s letter of January 23, 2017, in which it informed KVC Waffles in no uncertain terms that it was terminating their business relationship.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues, unless another statutory period applies.

Collington v. Calvert County · filed 2021-07-26

Under Maryland law, “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Since this action was originally filed on April 14, 2020, an unjustified detention that occurred before April 14, 2017 cannot support Plaintiff’s false imprisonment and false arrest claims.

Section 5-101 supplies Maryland’s general three-year statute of limitations for battery and negligence claims.

Lancaster v. Smith · filed 2021-08-10

Under Maryland law, these claims are subject to the general three-year statute of limitations. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 requires a breach-of-contract action to be filed within three years after the claim accrues, with accrual occurring on the date of the alleged breach.

Robinson v. Pennsylvania National Mutual Casualty Insurance Company · filed 2021-12-16

Under Maryland law, a breach of contract action must be filed within three years of the date that the claim accrues. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. And so, the Fourth Circuit has recognized that this statute of limitations period begins to run from the date of the alleged breach. See Curry, 600 F. App’x at 882 (citing Jones, 741 A.2d at 1104). In this case, there can be no genuine dispute that plaintiff’s breach of contract claim accrued when the post-judgment interest on the Tort Judgment began to accrue. Compl. at ¶ 15. In this regard, plaintiff alleges in the complaint that Penn National materially breached the contract by failing to pay the post-judgment interest “from 9/19/14-8/5/20.” Id. And so, to be timely, plaintiff’s breach of contract claim must have been brought within three years of the date of Penn National’s alleged breach—September 19, 2017. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; Curry, 600 F. App’x at 882. Because plaintiff failed to do so here, his breach of contract claim in Count I of the complaint is time-barred.

Section 5-101 establishes a three-year limitations period for civil claims.

316 Charles, LLC v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company · filed 2022-06-08

Maryland has a three-year limitations period for civil claims. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... Cazbar moved for leave to amend in March 2022, well within the three-year limitations period for any of these dates.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period, and for a continuing duty the period runs separately from each individual breach, allowing claims for damages within the statutory period.

CASA de Maryland, Inc. v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. · filed 2022-09-06

Maryland law provides a three-year statute of limitations for civil claims. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Pro. § 5-101. ... Thus, the statute of limitations is not calculated from the first breach, but is calculated for each individual breach of a continuing duty.

Section 5-101 requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual, with accrual determined under Maryland's discovery rule.

Tate v. American General Life Insurance Company · filed 2022-09-13

These claims are untimely. In Maryland, a civil action must “be filed within three years of the date it accrues.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. “In determining when an action accrues, Maryland courts [employ] the discovery rule.” ... Under Maryland law, the statute of limitations for these tort claims ran on September 25, 2002, exactly three years after the Plaintiffs received the finalized Policies and were placed on inquiry notice of their terms. Md. Code Ann, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; Est. of Adams, 233 Md. App. at 25. As Plaintiffs’ negligent and fraudulent misrepresentation claims are time-barred, American General’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 21) is hereby GRANTED as to Counts III and IV.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after the claim accrues.

Charette v. Wexford Health Sources Inc. · filed 2022-09-23

Her claims against them are time-barred under the most liberal reading of the limitations period. The latest date her claims against Rufael and Barry could have accrued is March 24, 2017, when Miller was released on parole. The applicable statute of limitations is three years, so any claim needed to be filed by March 24,2020. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Charette moved to amend her complaint on October 1, 2021, far past the limitations period.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for Maryland-law claims, applied here to bar claims based on property sales that were outside that period.

Layani v. Ouazana · filed 2022-10-20

Defendants next assert that certain of Plaintiffs’ claims are time-barred, both by RICO’s four-year statute of limitations, see Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley Duff & Assoc., Inc., 483 U.S. 143, 156-57 (1987), and the three-year limitations period for claims brought under Maryland law, see Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... Because Defendants’ conduct related to the marketing and sale of these properties is not actionable under RICO’s four-year statute of limitations, it follows that suit must also be barred by Maryland’s stricter three-year limitations period. Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ state law counts are dismissed to the extent that they relate to the marketing and sale of the North Hilton Street properties.

Section 5-101 requires civil actions to be filed within three years after the date the claim accrues.

Harris v. Wells Fargo Corporate Office Headquarters HQ · filed 2023-01-11

Under Maryland law, Civil actions such as this one must be filed within three years from the date it accrues. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Plaintiff’s letter identifying that Cool Air Express was denied a loan is dated September 17, 2018. More than three years have passed since that date and the Court will therefore dismiss the Complaint with prejudice and without leave to amend.

Section 5-101 requires civil claims to be filed within three years after the claims accrue.

Columbus Care and Rehabilitation Center, LLC v. Congressional Bank · filed 2023-01-18

Under Maryland law, civil claims must be filed within three years from the date on which the claims accrue. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... Thus, the Court finds the breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation claims to be barred under Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations.

Section 5-101 generally imposes a three-year limitations period on civil actions, subject to Maryland’s discovery rule, under which accrual begins when the plaintiff discovers or should have discovered the injury through due diligence.

McClain v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo Home Mortgage · filed 2023-01-30

In Maryland, civil actions are generally subject to a three-year statute of limitations. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Maryland courts have adopted the “discovery rule,” which provides that time does not begin accruing until “the potential plaintiff either discovers his or her injury, or should have discovered it through the exercise of due diligence.”

Section 5-101 supplies a three-year statute of limitations for personal-injury claims, measured from the date of the occurrence.

Stuckey v. Corizon Health Maryland · filed 2023-03-08

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. ... Assuming that Stuckey gave the initial complaint to prison staff for mailing the same day he signed it, this case was initiated on December 13, 2021. ... While Stuckey’s earliest allegations against the Wexford Defendants occurred more than three years prior to the initiation of this case, the Court liberally construes the Amended Complaint as alleging his claims accrued upon developing the alleged bone infection years later as a result of Defendants’ failure to modify his SNO or surgically treat his hip. As such, the Court will proceed to the merits of his claims.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues unless another Code provision sets a different filing period.

U.S. Bank National Association v. Mitchell · filed 2023-03-09

Under Maryland law, “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the [Maryland] Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... The Court agrees with Ms. Mitchell that USB’s claims for reformation, declaratory judgment, declaration of equitable lien, equitable subrogation, and unjust enrichment accrued no later than in 2015, when USB acknowledges that it became aware of Ms. Mitchell’s allegation during the Order to Docket proceedings that she canceled the adjustable-rate mortgage loan for the Property. ... And so, USB brings this matter more than three years after Ms. Mitchell made her allegation in the Order to Docket proceedings. ... Because USB brings the aforementioned claims at least six years, and in some cases more than a decade, after they accrued, its claims for reformation, declaratory judgment, declaration of equitable lien, equitable subrogation, and unjust enrichment are time-barred.

Section 5-101 supplies a general three-year statute of limitations for Maryland wage claims.

Guillen v. Armour Home Improvement, Inc. · filed 2023-06-05

The MWHL and MWPCL use Maryland’s general three-year statute of limitations, Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101, with the quirk that MWPCL-claims do not accrue until two weeks after a missed wage payment, Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. § 3-507.2(a).

Section 5-101 generally requires civil actions to be filed within three years after the cause of action accrues.

Chukwurah v. Corizon Health Care · filed 2023-06-29

Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 387 (2007) (citing Owens v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 249-50 (1989)); Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101. ... A claim begins to accrue when “plaintiff possesses sufficient facts about the harm done to him that reasonable inquiry will reveal his cause of action.” ... Because Chukwurah filed suit within three years from the onset of symptoms, the Court will not dismiss the claims on limitations grounds.

Section 5-101 generally requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual, and an insurance-coverage limitations period begins when the insurer notifies the insured of the allegedly wrongful denial of coverage.

Betskoff v. Standard Guaranty Insurance Company · filed 2023-07-06

Lastly, under Maryland law, “a civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Maryland Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. 5-101. And so, generally, a three-year statute of limitations applies to civil claims brought in Maryland. See id. Relevant to this case, the statute of limitations for an insurance coverage dispute begins to run when an insurer notifies the insured of an allegedly wrongful denial of coverage.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after it accrues, subject to a different period provided elsewhere in the Code.

Siantou v. DK Associates, LLC · filed 2023-07-20

In Maryland, “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. This three-year requirement applies to Wantou’s claims.

Section 5-101 supplies Maryland’s general three-year civil limitations period, which applies to § 1983 claims brought in Maryland.

Grant v. Prince George's County, Maryland · filed 2023-09-18

Under this principle, for § 1983 claims brought in Maryland, courts apply Maryland’s general civil statute of limitations of three years. ... Accordingly, § 1983 claims arising no more than three years before that date, or earlier than August 24, 2018, are timely. In turn, § 1983 claims arising more than three years before that date are time-barred.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for personal-injury claims in Maryland, including the limitations period applicable to § 1983 claims arising in Maryland.

Jones v. Arguela · filed 2023-11-15

“In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101. ... The claims against Defendant Perez are therefore barred by the statute of limitations; and summary judgment will be granted in his favor.”

Section 5-101 supplies a three-year limitations period for personal-injury claims in Maryland.

Canty v. Hoover · filed 2024-02-12

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101. ... Assuming that Canty gave the initial complaint to prison staff for mailing the same day he signed it, this case was initiated on December 10, 2022. ... However, the deadline is actually December 10, 2019, three years prior to when Canty signed the Complaint.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after accrual unless another Code provision sets a different period.

Vass v. Nathan · filed 2024-06-18

Regardless, Maryland’s general statute of limitations is three years. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (“A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the Code provides a different period of time within with an action shall be commenced.”). All factual allegations in Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint—including those regarding his passport denial—likewise occurred more than three years prior to Plaintiff filing this lawsuit and those claims are therefore untimely and subject to dismissal.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil tort action for damages to be filed within three years after accrual, which occurs when the claimant knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.

White v. Sheraton Hotel North, Beltsville, MD · filed 2024-07-26

In Maryland, a civil tort action for damages must generally be brought “within three years from the date it accrues.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. “[T]he cause of action accrues when the claimant in fact knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.” ... “A plaintiff’s knowledge of the ‘nature’ and ‘cause’ of the injury triggers the running of the limitations period.” ... Here, White’s claim accrued on the date of the alleged tort—sometime in 2011—as that is when she knew of both the nature and cause of the injury. Thus, any claim for damages resulting from the employee’s allegedly tortious act should have been brought no later than 2014. White filed the instant suit in the Southern District of Illinois on January 4, 2021—well after the statute of limitations had run. See ECF 1. White’s complaint, therefore, must be dismissed as time barred.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period, which the court applied to bar claims filed more than three years after the plaintiff knew of the injury.

Mills v. Mumby & Simmons Dental Consultants, PC · filed 2024-08-14

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101. ... Therefore, Plaintiff knew on January 17, 2020 that the poor dental care he received had caused irreversible damage to his teeth, and the statute of limitations began to accrue on that date. As the Complaint was not filed until June 15, 2023, approximately three years and five months past January 17, 2020, Plaintiff’s claims are barred by the statute of limitations and the Dental Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on that basis.

Section 5-101 generally requires civil actions to be filed within three years after accrual; for this fraud claim, accrual was governed by Maryland's discovery rule, when the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.

Hoang v. Prince George's County · filed 2024-09-05

Under Maryland law, the statute of limitations for a fraud claim is three years unless otherwise specified. ... To determine when the three years begins, Maryland recognizes the “discovery rule” which holds that “a cause of action accrues when a plaintiff in fact knows or reasonably should know of the wrong.” ... Thus, even when viewing the facts in his favor, the Court finds that Plaintiff had actual notice of Defendant’s fraudulent conduct as early as September 2019. Therefore, the statute of limitations expired in September 2022.

Section 5-101 sets a three-year limitations period for civil actions, including fraudulent-conveyance and unjust-enrichment claims, subject to applicable tolling principles.

Milligan v. May · filed 2024-09-26

In Maryland, the statute of limitations for bringing a civil action, including an action for fraudulent conveyance or unjust enrichment, is three years. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. When a Court applies a state statute of limitations, it also applies state tolling principles. ... The Court declines to find the complaint barred by the statute of limitations where this Court has — and continues to — exercise its broad equitable powers in overseeing a multimillion-dollar receivership, where the Receivership Orders expressly tolled the statute of limitations for exactly these types of claims, and where the Receivership Orders expressly barred the Receiver from bringing such claims until permitted by the Court overseeing the Enforcement Action. ... The Court denies the motions to dismiss on this basis.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period for Maryland state-law claims, which begins under the injury-discovery rule when the plaintiff discovers or should have discovered the injury.

Layani v. Ouazana · filed 2024-12-12

RICO has a four-year statute of limitations, see Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley Duff & Assoc., Inc., 483 U.S. 143, 156–57 (1987), and Plaintiffs’ state-law claims have a three-year limitations period, see Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Both the Fourth Circuit (when deciding RICO claims) and Maryland courts apply the “injury discovery rule,” which dictates that the limitations period begins to run from “the time the plaintiff discovers, or through the exercise of due diligence, should have discovered, the injury.” Frederick Rd. L.P. v. Brown & Sturm, 360 Md. 76, 95–96 (2000); see also Potomac Elec. Power Co. v. Elec. Motor & Supply, Inc., 262 F.3d 260, 266 (4th Cir. 2001). A party is on “inquiry notice,” meaning it should have discovered the injury, when it has “knowledge of circumstances which ought to have put a person of ordinary prudence on inquiry … with notice of all facts which such an investigation would in all probability have disclosed if it had been properly pursued.” Windesheim v. Larocca, 443 Md. 312, 327 (2015) (citation omitted); see also Caviness v. DeRand Res. Corp., 983 F.2d 1295, 1303 (4th Cir. 1993).

Section 5-101 provides a three-year statute of limitations for personal-injury claims in Maryland, measured from the date of occurrence.

Deshields Jr. v. Jessup Correctional Institution · filed 2025-03-24

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101.

Section 5-101 requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues.

Newcomb v. Warden of Kent Co. Det. Center · filed 2025-05-08

In Maryland, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (providing that “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues”).

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year statute of limitations on civil claims.

Mark Vogel Acquisitions, LLC v. Prince George's County MD · filed 2025-08-14

It is also well-established that claims brought pursuant to Sections 1983 and Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights are subject to a three-year statute of limitations. See Owens, 767 F.3d at 388; see also Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. But this limitations period does not begin to run until the last alleged discriminatory act occurs, when a plaintiff alleges discrimination claims based upon the continuing violation doctrine. See Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101, 118 (2002).

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period on fraud or misrepresentation claims.

Bhutta · filed 2025-12-18

Maryland’s statute of limitations for fraud or misrepresentation claims is three years. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; James v. Weisheit, 367 A.2d 482, 484-85 (Md. 1977). ... Accordingly, where Dr. Bhutta’s Complaint was filed over four years after the issuance of the May 18, 2020 adverse action report, Count 2 is also time-barred.

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period on breach-of-contract claims, running when the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known the facts giving rise to the claim under the discovery rule.

Mbanusi · filed 2026-03-27

Under Maryland law, the statute of limitations for breach of contract claims is three years. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. A statute of limitations begins to run when “all of the elements of a cause of action have occurred so that it is complete.” ... But, under the discovery rule, “even if all the elements for a cause of action have been met,” the claim does not accrue until the plaintiff “‘knew or reasonably should have known of the wrong.’” ... In other words, “the cause of action accrues when the wrong is discovered or when with due diligence it should have been discovered.” ... Thus, a party asserting a breach of contract claim must file suit within three years of when they knew or should have known the facts giving rise to the alleged breach. ... By then, the statute of limitations had expired two months earlier.

Section 5-101 bars the remedy on a claim after Maryland’s three-year limitations period but does not extinguish the underlying debt.

Dubois v. Atlas Acquisitions LLC · filed 2016-08-25

Under Maryland law, the statute of limitations “does not operate to extinguish [a] debt, but to bar the remedy.” Potterton v. Ryland Grp., Inc., 424 A.2d 761, 764 (Md. 1981) (quotation omitted); see also Higginbotham v. Pub. Serv. Comm’n of Md., 985 A.2d 1183, 1191 (Md. 2009) (“[W]e have regarded limitations as not denying the plaintiff’s right of action, but only the exercise of the right.” (quotation omitted)). Indeed, a stale debt may be revived if the debtor sufficiently acknowledges the debt’s existence. Potterton, 424 A.2d at 764; see also FTC, Time-Barred Debts (July 2013), https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0117-time-barred-debts (“Although the [debt] collector may not sue you to collect [a time-barred] debt, you still owe it. The collector can continue to contact you to try to collect . . . . [and] [i]n some states, if you pay any amount on a time-barred debt or even promise to pay, the debt is ‘revived.’”) (saved as ECF opinion attachment). Thus, under Maryland law, a time-barred debt still constitutes a “right to payment” and therefore a “claim” that the holder may file under the Bankruptcy Code.

Under Maryland law, an unconditional acknowledgment of a debt can revive a remedy after § 5-101’s limitations period has run.

India Globalization Capital, Inc. v. Apogee Financial Investments, Inc. · filed 2022-03-04

Accordingly, accepting the well-pled allegations in the Amended Counterclaim as true, the December 2018 acknowledgement reset the statute of limitations, moving its expiration to December 2021, well after this claim was filed.

Section 5-101(v) defines possession for drug offenses as actual or constructive dominion or control over a thing.

Williams v. State · filed 2016-12-02(v)

For purposes of drugs offenses, “possess” is defined by statute as the “exercise [of] actual or constructive dominion or control over a thing by one or more persons.”

Section 5-101 requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues, but its limitations period does not apply to mortgage foreclosure actions because they are equitable actions.

Mobashera B Ahmed · filed 2020-04-17

Maryland’s general three-year statute of limitations for civil actions applies only to actions at law and thus does not apply to foreclosure actions, which are actions in equity. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (“A civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues . . . .”).

Section 5-101 requires a personal injury action at law to be filed within three years after the date of occurrence.

Collington v. Calvert County · filed 2023-01-31

Maryland requires that a personal injury action at law be filed within three years from the date of occurrence. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.

Section 5-101 requires personal-injury claims to be filed within three years of the occurrence.

Tang v. Schmoke · filed 2022-07-25

Maryland’s statute of limitations for personal injury claims is three years from the date of the occurrence. Id.; see also Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Because Plaintiff’s appeal was denied by UB on July 22, 2015, he knew of his injury, at the latest, by that date. Thus, his statute of limitations would have run on July 22, 2018.

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period for personal injury claims.

Cary v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority · filed 2024-02-08

The District of Columbia and Maryland have a three-year statute of limitations period for personal injury claims. D.C. Code Ann. § 12-301(a)(8); Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... Accordingly, the relevant statutes of limitations have lapsed and it is too late for him to bring this suit.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after accrual, with Maryland’s discovery rule delaying accrual until the plaintiff knew or should have known of the injury.

Whiteford Taylor and Preston, L.L.P v. SENS, Inc. · filed 2022-07-29

It is well-established under Maryland law that “[a] civil action at law shall be filed within three years from the date it accrues unless another provision of the [Maryland] Code provides a different period of time within which an action shall be commenced.” Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Maryland law also recognizes that the discovery rule can toll “the accrual of the limitations period until the time the plaintiff discovers, or through the exercise of due diligence, should have discovered, the injury.” Frederick Rd. Ltd. P’ship v. Brown & Sturm, 756 A.2d 963, 973 (Md. 2000). And so, the limitations period for a civil action begins to run when the plaintiff knows of circumstances which would cause a reasonable person in the plaintiff’s position to investigate with reasonable diligence and such investigation would have led to the discovery of the alleged tort. Pennwalt Corp. v. Nasios, 550 A.2d 1155, 1163 (Md. 1988). ... Because the record for this appeal shows that the Bankruptcy Court did not clearly err in determining that the Sens Parties’ legal malpractice claim accrued on December 18, 2018, and that this claim was timely filed under Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations, the Court AFFIRMS the Bankruptcy Court’s September 30, 2021, Order.

Section 5-101 supplies Maryland’s three-year limitations period, which begins under the injury-discovery rule when the plaintiff discovers or should have discovered the injury.

North Avenue Capital, LLC v. United States of America · filed 2023-04-10

Similarly, this Court concludes that Legalist’s claims are not subject to dismissal pursuant to Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... But Maryland applies the “injury discovery rule,” which dictates that the limitations period begins to run from “the time the plaintiff discovers, or through the exercise of due diligence, should have discovered, the injury.” ... Accordingly, the counterclaims are not subject to dismissal on limitations grounds, though they are dismissed for the reasons described above.

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year limitations period that begins when the plaintiff knows or reasonably should know of the wrong.

Harden v. Budget Rent A Car System, Inc. · filed 2024-03-27

Under Maryland law, the three-year statute of limitations for civil actions and violations of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act starts to run when the plaintiff knows or reasonably should know of the wrong.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after accrual, but for continuing harm the limitations period begins with the last repetition of the wrong rather than its initial discovery.

Shabazz v. Dept of Pub. Safety & Corr. Servs. · filed 2024-04-18

Appellees are mistaken. Indeed, a civil action ordinarily must be filed within three years from the date it accrues, see Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101, and an action is generally considered to have “accrued” when the wrong is discovered, which, in this case, would have occurred when Shabazz was first required to register. ... But, when a plaintiff suffers a “continuing harm,” that is, when a defendant is accused of committing an ongoing tort, “every repetition of the wrong creates further liability and creates a new cause of action, and a new statute of limitations begins to run after each wrong perpetuated.” ... Here, the “harm” was Shabazz’s placement on the sex-offender registry, which began in December 2010. That harm did not abate until, at the earliest, August 24, 2016, when the Department informed Shabazz that he was no longer required to register. Thus, under the continuing harm doctrine, the statute of limitations did not begin to run until August 24, 2016, despite the fact that the harm was discovered well before that date. And, because Shabazz filed the instant complaint on July 18, 2019, his claim was not barred by the three-year statute of limitations.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action at law to be filed within three years after it accrues.

Schoberg v. Schwartzman · filed 2024-04-23

Statutes of limitations preclude Schoberg’s claims for false imprisonment and intentional infliction of emotional distress, which accrued on the date of his arrest, June 30, 2019. Under Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations, Schoberg therefore needed to file those claims by June 30, 2022. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. However, Schoberg did not formally file his original complaint for over one year past that date, June 30, 2023, albeit with procedural deficiencies.

Section 5-101 imposes a three-year statute of limitations on Maryland civil claims, including breach of contract, quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, fraud, and the MWPCL and DCWPL claims addressed here.

Herbert Core Drill, LLC v. Brothers Mechanical, Inc. · filed 2024-12-03

In Maryland, civil claims — including breach of contract, quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, and fraud — have a three-year limitations period. ... Because the 2018-2019 invoices clearly fall outside of the three-year statute of limitations period, the claims related to them under Counts I, II, and III will be dismissed.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil action to be filed within three years after it accrues; the court applied that limitations period to claims arising from the condominium water damage and found them untimely.

Mbanusi v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company · filed 2025-05-06

The original complaint, filed September 13, 2022, concerned water damage to Mbanusi’s property in her storage locker that occurred in July 2018. Mbanusi alleged she did not learn about the damage until a year later, and Liberty Mutual did not assert a statute of limitations defense. See Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (three-year statute of limitations). ... Because the proposed claims were filed more than six years after they accrued, they are barred by the statute of limitations. Moreover, even if the claims related back, they would not have been timely when the original complaint was filed in September 13, 2022. The water damage in the condominium occurred in September 2018—four years earlier. Mbanusi does not allege that it took her a year to discover the damage to her residence and the personal property in it, as she did with the damage to her storage locker. Therefore, they would be barred by the statute of limitations even if they related back.

Section 5-101’s three-year period accrues separately for each breach of a continuing contractual obligation, so claims for damages within the statutory period are timely.

CONTOUR DATA SOLUTIONS LLC v. GRIDFORCE ENERGY MANAGEMENT LLC · filed 2024-08-28

Where a contract provides for continuing performance over a period of time, each successive breach of that obligation begins the running of the statute of limitations anew, with the result being that accrual occurs continuously and a plaintiff may assert claims for damages occurring within the statutory period.

Section 5-101 accrues a continuing-contract claim when the plaintiff reasonably should have known the defendant would not pay, rather than when the work was first performed.

Hess Construction v. Francis O'Day Co. · filed 2025-02-28

The correct accrual date for claims relating to each PCO is the first date on which F.O. Day “reasonably should have known” that Hess had determined not to pay F.O. Day for all or part of the work requested in that PCO.

Section 5-101 supplies Maryland’s general three-year statute of limitations for civil actions.

Reichert v. Hornbeck · filed 2025-07-23

Under Maryland law, a malicious prosecution claim accrues from the date that the criminal proceeding terminates in a plaintiff’s favor. ... Thus, Plaintiff’s malicious prosecution claim was required to be filed by August 5, 2024 in order to be timely filed pursuant to Maryland’s general three (3)-year statute of limitations. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. ... This close factual nexus between the two claims allows Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint to relate back to the June 24, 2024 original Complaint, bringing it within Maryland’s three (3)-year limitations period. ... The Second Amended Complaint therefore relates back to the original Complaint and will be deemed timely filed.

Section 5-101 provides a three-year limitations period running from the date of the occurrence unless another Maryland provision provides otherwise.

Carter v. Department of Public Safety and Correction Services · filed 2025-08-11

In Maryland, unless otherwise provided in a different provision of the Maryland Code, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101. The three year statute of limitations therefore applies to Carter’s federal civil rights claims.

Section 5-101 generally imposes a three-year limitations period running from the date of the occurrence unless another Maryland Code provision provides otherwise.

Campbell · filed 2026-03-25

In Maryland, unless otherwise provided in a different provision of the Maryland Code, the applicable statute of limitations is three years from the date of the occurrence. See Md. Code Ann., Cts & Jud. Proc. Code § 5-101. The three year statute of limitations therefore applies to Campbell’s federal civil rights claims.

Section 5-101 generally requires a civil claim to be filed within three years after it accrues.

Richburg · filed 2026-03-27

As to the negligence claim (Count 1), the statute of limitations is three years. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Therefore, only alleged breaches that occurred after April 2, 2021 are timely.

Section 5-101(r)(2)(xv) excludes Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifles from the definition of a regulated firearm, and the State must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the firearm does not fall within that exception.

Howard v. State · filed 2024-04-24(r)(2)(xv)

Adhering to the test established in Mackall, we hold that, under a plain reading of the statutes and the overall statutory scheme under review, the “Colt AR-15 Sporter H-BAR rifle” exception in PS § 5-101(r)(2)(xv) is an essential ingredient of the possession offenses underlying Appellant’s convictions under PS § 5-133(c) and PS § 5-138 because the exception is “descriptive of the offense or so incorporated in the clause creating it as to make the exception a part of the offense[.]” Mackall, 283 Md. at 110. Accordingly, we further hold that the State bore the burden to “negate the exception to prove its case.” Id.

For an out-of-State conviction, Maryland uses the law in effect when the firearm application is submitted and treats the conviction as disqualifying if its elements match or are narrower than a Maryland disqualifying crime, or if conclusively established acts would support one.

In the Matter of McCloy · filed 2024-08-20(g)

In sum, we hold that the relevant Maryland law in determining whether an out-of-State crime is equivalent to a disqualifying crime in Maryland under PS § 5-101(g) is the law in effect when the application is submitted. To determine whether a conviction under an out-of-State law constitutes a conviction for a disqualifying crime, the MSP should first determine whether the elements of the out-of-State crime of which the applicant was convicted are the same as or narrower than any Maryland crime that is disqualifying under PS § 5-101(g). If the answer to that question is yes, then the applicant’s out-of-State conviction is likewise disqualifying. If the answer to that question is no, and if the MSP has a sufficient basis to conclusively determine the acts of which the applicant was convicted, then the MSP should determine whether such acts would support a conviction under a disqualifying Maryland crime.

Section 5-101(v) defines “possess” as exercising actual or constructive dominion or control over a thing, either individually or jointly.

Scott v. State · filed 2025-12-17(v)

see Md. Code Ann., Crim. Law § 5-101(v) (defining “possess” as the “means to exercise actual or constructive dominion or control over a thing by one or more persons”).