Maryland Courts

NOTE: Cases are added to this table when they are scheduled for oral argument. Note that oral argument dates may change at any time. After oral arguments, a link to the archived video recording is added. Cases are removed when the mandate issues (or, for attorney disciplinary matters, approximately 30 days after the opinion was filed).

Click on the column title to sort by that column.

Case No. Year Petitioner Respondent Cert. Granted Oral Arguments Opinion Filed Issues
013
2013 Kulbicki, James State 2013-02-22 2013-10-03
[Oral Arguments]
2014-08-27
[Opinion]

Criminal Law - 1) Does a conviction obtained through the use of scientific evidence that is later demonstrated to be unreliable, misleading, and inadmissible violate a defendant's guarantee of due process? 2) Does the use of perjured expert testimony by a State expert violate a defendant's due process rights when the perjured testimony involves the expert's qualifications and background? 3) Does the failure of defense counsel to investigate or challenge the State's scientific evidence and failure to object to the scope of the State's closing arguments constitute ineffective assistance of counsel? 4) Did CSA err in stating that the State is chargeable with the “knowing use of perjured testimony” where the falsity is unknown at the time of the testimony?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2940, Sept. Term, 2007 [Opinion]

046
2013 Brooks, Wardell Monroe State 2013-06-20 2014-02-07
[Oral Arguments]
2014-08-27
[Opinion]
Criminal Law - 1) Where the defense seeks to impeach a witness at trial pursuant to MD Rules 5-613 and 5-616 using a prior inconsistent statement to police, must the extrinsic evidence of the prior inconsistent statement take the form of testimony by the police officer who took the statement or may the properly authenticated police report be used? 2) What is the appropriate standard of review for a trial court's ruling concerning the admission of impeachment evidence? 3) Did the trial court err by admitting testimony by a nurse, accepted as an expert in forensic nursing examinations with an emphasis in sexual assault”, concerning the victim's injuries? 4) Did CSA err in holding that even if the nurse's testimony was inadmissible, the error was harmless? 5) Did the trial court err in failing to merge false imprisonment into first degree rape for sentencing purposes?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 437, Sept. Term, 2010, Unreported
069
2012 Raynor, Glenn Joseph State 2012-09-21 2014-04-08
[Oral Arguments]
2014-08-27
[Opinion]

Criminal Law – (1) Whether, under the Fourth Amendment & Art. 26 of the Md. Declaration of Rights, a citizen maintains an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the DNA found in genetic material involuntarily and knowingly deposited through ordinary biological processes? (2) Whether, under the Fourth Amendment & Art. 26 of the Md. Declaration of Rights, the determination of an individual's expectation of privacy requires consideration of the privacy interest in the information obtained, & not just the privacy interest in the place in which it was found? (3) Was the collection and testing of Petitioner's perspiration a limited intrusion justified by reasonable suspicion? (4) Even if not constitutionally reasonable, does law enforcement conduct in this case not justify application of the Fourth Amendment's exclusionary rule?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1629, Sept. Term, 2009 [Opinon]

098
2013 Spacesaver Systems Adam 2013-10-18 2014-06-05
[Oral Arguments]
2014-08-27
[Opinion]

Labor & Employment – 1) Under MD Law, is there a distinction between a lifetime employment contract and a “continuous for-cause contract,” both terminable for any reason by employee and only for cause by employer, such that each should have different amounts and degrees of proof and different consideration required? 2) Where an employment contract contains no provision addressing duration of employment, must the contract be clear, specific and definite that the parties intended to create continuous and indefinite employment, terminable only for cause? 3) Where an employment contract contains no provision addressing the duration of employment, does a “for-cause” provision transform the contract to one providing employment for life where there is no “special consideration” to establish a contract for lifetime employment? 4) Is this Court’s dicta in Towson University v. Conte, 384 Md. 68, 862 A.2d 941 (2004) suggesting that a “just cause” provision transforms “at-will” employment into employment terminable only for cause inconsistent with this Court’s holding in Suburban Hospital v. Dwiggins, 324 Md. 294, 596 A.2d 1069 (1991) that employment contracts of an indefinite duration create “at-will” employment and remain so even if that agreement sets forth some bases that provide the employer cause for termination? 5) Does the presence of a “for cause” provision in an employment contract transform at-will employment to lifetime employment terminable only for cause?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1797, Sept. Term, 2011 [Opinion]

081 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Litman   2014-09-03
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
025 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Gage-Cohen   2014-09-03
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
049 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Blair   2014-09-03
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
003
2014 State Johnson 2013-11-22 2014-09-03
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – Is a “suggestion” by the defendant that the victim’s mental health records may contain information that is either exculpatory or relating to the victim’s “propensity for veracity,” not sufficient, under Goldsmith v. State, 337 Md. 112 (1995), to “call for an in camera review” of those records?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2776, Sept. Term, 2011, Unreported

097
2013 Howard State 2013-10-18 2014-09-03
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – 1) Did the trial court err in refusing Petitioner’s request for a postponement without sending the matter to the administrative judge or its designee? 2) Did the trial court fail to make the necessary inquiry regarding Petitioner’s request for counsel before denying the request for a postponement? 3) Did the trial court err in finding that Petitioner’s waiver of counsel resulted in a concomitant waiver of the right to discovery? 4) Was Petitioner deprived of his constitutional right to a speedy trial?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 456, Sept. Term, 2011, Unreported

010 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Weiers   2014-09-04
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
036 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Gelb   2014-09-04
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
016 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Brigerman   2014-09-04
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
099
2013 Gales Sunoco & Amer. Zurich Ins. 2013-10-18 2014-09-04
[Oral Arguments]
 

Workers’ Compensation – Are Appellants in a de novo workers’ compensation appeal required to admit into evidence the award from which the appeal was taken as an element of their burden of proof?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 127, Sept. Term, 2012, Unreported

073 AG
2012 Attorney Grievance Kum   2014-09-09
[Oral Arguments]
2014-09-10
[PC Order]
Attorney disciplinary matter
072 AG
2012 Attorney Grievance Adams   2014-09-09
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
002
2014 Burson Capps 2013-11-22 2014-09-09
[Oral Arguments]
 

Financial Institutions – 1) Whether a Truth-in-Lending Act (“TILA”) Notice of Rescission can be effective to cancel a loan transaction that has not yet taken place, and remain effective despite the issuing party’s subsequent acceptance of the benefits of the transaction? 2) Whether a TILA action filed in December 2009 on the basis of a Notice of Rescission issued in April 2007 was untimely as beyond the one-year statute of limitation in 15 U.S.C. § 1640(e)? 3) Whether rescission is an available remedy when the trial court has no jurisdiction over either the original lender or its assignee because all claims against both have been dismissed, with no appeal taken from that dismissal?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 327, Sept. Term, 2012, Unreported

005 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Reno   2014-09-10
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
033 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Felder   2014-09-10
[Oral Arguments]
2014-09-11
[PC Order]
Attorney disciplinary matter
085
2013 State Payne & Bond 2013-09-20 2014-09-10
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – 1) May a trial court allow a lay witness, without qualification as an expert, to testify about objectively verifiable facts regarding cell phone towers that do not involve the witness forming any opinion or drawing any inference or conclusion? 2) Did CSA err in ruling that wiretap statements made by Respondent Bond but not Respondent Payne were nevertheless admissible against Payne as statements by a party-opponent?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2156, Sept. Term, 2009 [Opinion]

004
2014 Hiob Progressive Amer. Ins. 2013-11-22 2014-09-10
[Oral Arguments]
 

Civil Procedure – 1) Did CSA err in holding that a partial voluntary dismissal can constitute an appropriate “separate document” for the purpose of Maryland Rule 2-601 even though that document is not signed by the clerk or the court? 2) Whether judgment was entered on the date the clerk entered the court’s order entering judgment and whether the notice of appeal filed prior to that docket entry is a premature appeal saved by the provisions of Rule 8-602(d)?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 3009, Sept. Term, 2010 [Opinion]

002 AG
2014 Attorney Grievance Poverman   2014-10-02   Attorney disciplinary matter
014 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Worsham   2014-10-02   Attorney disciplinary matter
016
2014 Allen, Traimne Martinez State 2013-12-20 2014-10-02  

Criminal Law – Did the lower court err in reading MD Code, Public Safety Art., § 2-510, so broadly as to conclude that crime scene DNA of other suspects – one of whom had a conviction for a crime very similar to the events for which Petitioner stood trial – was not admissible at trial, and was Petitioner denied his constitutional right to present a defense?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 932, Sept. Term, 2010 [Opinion]

017
2014 Diggs, Howard Bay State 2013-12-20 2014-10-02  

Criminal Law – 1) Does MD Code, Public Safety Art., §2-510, which provides that “a DNA database match may be used to establish probable cause to charge and arrest an individual” but “the database match would be inadmissible at a trial of that individual…,” prohibit the introduction at trial by a criminal defendant of evidence of DNA matches to alternative suspects; and if so, does §2-510 deny a criminal defendant his/her constitutional right to present a defense? 2) Did the trial court err in excluding evidence offered by Petitioner of DNA database matches to other suspects on evidence collected at the crime scene?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 929, Sept. Term, 2010 [Opinion]

028 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Barnett   2014-10-03   Attorney disciplinary matter
018
2014 Williams Peninsula Regional Med. Ctr. 2013-12-20 2014-10-03  

Torts – Does MD’s involuntary admission immunity statute, Health General § 10-618, apply to health care providers who evaluate an individual and decide to discharge the patient from psychiatric care?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 284, Sept. Term, 2012 [Opinion]

017 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Merkle   2014-10-06   Attorney disciplinary matter
013
2014 Peterson, Jerrod M. State 2013-12-20 2014-10-06  

Criminal Law – 1) Did the trial court err in ruling that the attorney-client privilege prevented the co-conspirator’s attorney from testifying about the co-conspirator’s proffer session with a prosecutor and a county homicide detective? 2) Was Petitioner’s Sixth Amendment Right of Confrontation violated when the trial court limited his cross-examination of multiple State witnesses? 3) Did the trial court commit reversible error by limiting Petitioner’s cross-examination of multiple State witnesses? 4) Are Petitioner’s claims regarding cross-examination of witnesses properly before this Court for review?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1715. Sept. Term, 2011, Unreported

014
2014 Jones, Kevin E. State 2013-12-20 2014-10-06  

Criminal Law – Was the evidence sufficient to convict Petitioner of second degree assault of the intent to frighten modality where the State failed to prove that Petitioner was aware of the existence of the victim?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 660, Sept, Term, 2011 [Opinion]

063 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Thomas   2014-10-07   Attorney disciplinary matter
061 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Hodes   2014-10-07   Attorney disciplinary matter
015
2014 State Stachowski, Kenneth Martin, Jr. 2013-12-20 2014-10-04  

Criminal Law – 1) Did CSA err in holding that a court may not order restitution as part of a plea agreement on a charge as a condition of a probation in another matter before the court, creating uncertainty in conflict with this Court’s holdings in Walczak and Lee? 2) Did CSA err in vacating only the negotiated and accepted restitution condition required of Petitioner, which was part of the plea agreement, rather than rescinding the entire plea agreement, thus allowing Petitioner the full benefit of his bargain with the State without assuming any of his negotiated burden?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2051, Sept. Term, 2006 [Opinion]

102
2013 Johnson, Steven M. State   2014-10-07   DNA Appeal
003 Misc.
2014 Application of T. Z.-A. O. for Admission to the Bar of Md.     2014-11-06   Show cause
004 AG
2014 Attorney Grievance Chang   2014-11-06   Attorney disciplinary matter
007 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Mixter   2014-11-06   Attorney disciplinary matter
020
2014 McCree State 2014-01-24 2014-11-06  

Criminal Law – Is the trademark counterfeiting statute, Md. Code, Crim. Law Art. § 8-611 (2012 Repl. Vol.), unconstitutional because it is overbroad and/or void-for-vagueness?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 525, Sept. Term, 2011 [Opinion]

023
2014 Oglesby State 2014-01-24 2014-11-07  

Criminal Law – Pursuant to the rule of lenity, was Appellant required to be sentenced for possession of a firearm pursuant to Crim. Law Art., § 5-622, one of the two statutes punishing the conduct for which he was sentenced, because it prescribed a more lenient sentence than that mandated by the statute, Public Safety Art., § 5-133, under which he was sentenced?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 197, Sept. Term, 2013 (bypass)

026
2014 Kelly Duvall 2014-02-21 2014-11-07  

Estates & Trusts – 1) Did the lower court err in construing the Will in a manner inconsistent with Md. Code Ann. Estates & Trusts § 4-401 and finding that it imposed survivorship as a condition precedent to inheritance under the Will? 2) Did the lower court err in construing the Will as demonstrating the Testatrix’s contrary intent sufficient to overcome the presumption that § 4-403 (2013) (the “anti-lapse” statute) applies?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1688, Sept. Term, 2012, Unreported

022
2014 Simpson State 2014-01-24 2014-11-07  

Criminal Law – Pursuant to the rule of lenity, was Appellant required to be sentenced for possession of a firearm pursuant to Crim. Law Art., § 5-622, one of the two statutes punishing the conduct for which he was sentenced, because it prescribed a more lenient sentence than that mandated by the statute, Public Safety Art., § 5-133, under which he was sentenced?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2833, Sept. Term, 2011 [Opinion]

003 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Smith   2014-11-10   Attorney disciplinary matter
021
2014 People's Insurance Counsel Div. State Farm Fire & Casualty 2014-01-24 2014-11-10  

Insurance Law – 1) Should this Court reexamine Maryland common law on construing insurance contracts and, recognizing that such contracts are not the product of equal bargaining, hold that terms contained in an insurance policy must be strictly construed against the insurer? 2) Did the Commissioner err in allowing State Farm to deny coverage for damage to a collapsed carport under a policy that insured against “the sudden, entire collapse of a building” based on a restrictive definition of the term “building” that does not appear in the insurance policy or any other written document, and is based only on oral instructions given to a catastrophe claims adjuster when she was dispatched to handle claims following a severe snowstorm?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1353, Sept. Term, 2012 [Opinion]

025
2014 Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1300 & McClure Lovelace 2014-02-21 2014-11-10  

Labor & Employment – Is an internal union remedy “inadequate” under Md. common law if it does not allow for the monetary damages that the plaintiff seeks in court?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1020, Sept. Term, 2012 [Opinion]

019
2014 Rounds M-NCPPC 2013-12-20 2014-11-12  

Local Government – 1) Whether parties seeking redress from alleged government violations of the Constitution should be required to adhere to the strict notice requirements of the Local Government Tort Claims Act? 2) Did CSA err in upholding the severe remedy of dismissal for an alleged failure to join necessary parties, despite the Complaint’s assertion that non-defendant neighbors did not oppose action? 3) Did CSA err in its factual determination that Petitioners failed to file this cause of action within the statute of limitations?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 889, Sept. Term, 2012 [Opinion]

032 & 046 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Green   2014-11-12   Attorney disciplinary matter
027
2014 Cunningham Feinberg 2014-02-21 2014-11-12  

Labor & Employment – 1) Does application of the Md. choice of law principle of lex loci contractus preclude a claim under the Md. Wage Payment and Collection Law (MD. Code Ann. Lab. & Empl. § 3-501 et seq. (“MWPCL”))? 2) Does proper application of lex loci contractus preclude respondent’s MWPCL claim?

Circuit Court for Montgomery Co., No. 8778D

012 AG
2014 Attorney Grievance Buehler   2014-12-05   Attorney disciplinary matter
083 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Shapiro   2014-12-05   Attorney disciplinary matter
029
2014 Anne Arundel Co. Bell 2014-03-21 2014-12-05  

Zoning and Planning – 1) Whether the prima facie aggrievement standard established in Bryniarski v. Montgomery County Bd. of Appeals, 247 Md. 137 (1967), should be expanded beyond challenges to administrative land use decisions to include challenges to legislative comprehensive zoning enactments? 2) Whether the “almost prima facie” standard as established in Ray v. Mayor of Baltimore, 430 Md. 74 (2013), should be expanded beyond challenges to administrative land use decisions to include challenges to legislative comprehensive zoning enactments? 3) Whether noise from a predicted increase in traffic constitutes “special damages”?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 273, Sept. Term, 2012 [Opinion]

028
2014 State Callahan 2014-03-21 2014-12-05  

Criminal Law – 1) Did CSA err in concluding that the lower court violated the doctrine of the separation of powers in finding respondent in violation of his probation based upon his failure to comply with a lawful order of his probation agent where the order was a requirement of his mandatory parole release conditions? 2) Did CSA correctly hold that the lower court erred in revoking Callahan’s probation?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2365, Sept. Term, 2011 [Opinion]

008 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Haley   2014-12-08   Attorney disciplinary matter
001 Misc.
2014 Antonio SSA Security   2014-12-08  

Certified question of Law from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Does the Maryland Security Guards Act, Md. Code Ann., Bus. Occ. & Prof. § 19-501, impose liability beyond common law principles of respondeat superior such that an employer may be responsible for off-duty criminal acts of an employee if the employee planned any part of the off-duty criminal acts while he or she was on duty?

031
2014 Metro Maint. Sys. South Milburn 2014-03-21 2014-12-08  

Civil Procedure – 1) Did CSA err in its decision that the lower court’s remand order was not a “final judgment” as defined by CJP § 12-301? 2) Did the lower court act arbitrarily and capriciously in remanding a final administrative decision to the processes of an administrative agency without conducting any record review and without any finding of fraud, mistake, inadvertence, cognizable defect, intervening factors or subsequent events? 3) Did CSA properly decide Anne Arundel County v. Rode, 214 Md.App. 702 (2013), and properly apply that ruling to the procedural circumstances in this case?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2367, Sept. Term, 2012, Unreported

086 AG,
013 AG,
057 AG
2014
2013
2013
Attorney Grievance Barton   2014-12-09   Attorney disciplinary matter
030
2014 Falls Garden Condo. Falls HOA 2014-03-21 2014-12-09  

Civil Procedure – 1) Whether it was error to enforce the Letter of Intent given the parties never intended to be bound by the Letter of Intent and the Letter of Intent does not contain all material terms? 2) Did the lower court err in failing to hold a full plenary hearing on the Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement since the existence of a binding and enforceable agreement was contested and there were contradicting proffers regarding a material issue, i.e. whether the parties intended to be bound by the Letter of Intent?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 443, Sept. Term, 2012 [Opinion]

033
2014 Gladden State   2014-12-09   DNA Appeal
048 AG
2013 Attorney Grievance Olszewski   2014-12-10   Attorney disciplinary matter
036
2014 State Graves 2014-04-18 2014-12-10  

Criminal Procedure – 1) As a matter of first impression, did CSA err in determining that § 8-401 of the Criminal Procedure Article, which was enacted while Respondent’s appeal was pending, applies retroactively to Respondent’s case? 2) If § 8-401 applies retroactively, is the appropriate remedy a remand and not a reversal?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2832, Sept. Term, 2011 [Opinion]

047
2014 State Smith 2014-07-18 2014-12-10  

Criminal Law – Did CSA err in reversing the circuit court’s denial of Respondent’s petition for a writ of coram nobis where Respondent had waived her coram nobis claims, failed to meet her burden of proving that her guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered and was barred from seeking a writ of coram nobis on grounds of laches?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2224, Sept. Term, 2012, Unreported