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
019 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Shockett   2016-09-01
[Oral Arguments]

2016-10-05
[Opinion]

2016-09-06
[PC Order]

Attorney disciplinary matter
001
2016 Cane EZ Rentals 2016-02-19 2016-09-01
[Oral Arguments]
 

Real Property – 1) Did the trial court err in denying Petitioner the opportunity to assert and prove a defense under the Rent Escrow Statute to the landlord’s summary ejectment action? 2) Did the trial court err in denying Petitioner’s defense seeking rent offsets in the summary ejectment action?

Circuit Court for Calvert Co., No. 04-C-15-000089

005
2016 Washington State   2016-09-01
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-01
[Opinion]
DNA appeal
003
2016 Bottini Dept. of Finance 2016-02-19 2016-09-07
[Oral Arguments]
2016-10-07
[Opinion]

Criminal Procedure – 1) Did CSA erroneously conclude that a seized bank account was “money” within the meaning of Md.’s CDS forfeiture statute where different deadlines for filing a forfeiture petition apply to “money” than to other types of tangible or intangible personal property? 2) Did CSA erroneously apply to Petitioners’ seized bank account the longer post-conviction forfeiture petition filing deadline for “money”?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1857, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported).

008
2016 Colvin State 2016-03-25 2016-09-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – 1) Did CSA err in upholding the trial court’s conclusion that, upon request for a jury poll, polling the jury foreperson is unnecessary to ensure a unanimous verdict? 2) Is the claimed defect in the polling procedure cognizable on a motion to correct an illegal sentence?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2341, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

009
2016 Hanover Investments Volkman 2016-03-25 2016-09-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Courts and Judicial Proceedings – 1) Did CSA erroneously impose new standards under Md. Code Ann., Courts & Judicial Proceedings Art. (“CJP”) § 3-409(c) by depriving the trial court of all discretion to adjudicate a declaratory judgment action when there is a concurrent proceeding? 2) Did CSA erroneously apply, and thereby alter, the standards under CJP § 3-409(a) and (c) by concluding that there were insufficient facts and circumstances to support the trial court’s findings of unusual and compelling circumstances?

Corut of Special Appeals, No. 1595, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

010
2016 Mitchell Motor Vehicle Admin. 2016-04-22 2016-09-07
[Oral Arguments]
2016-10-28
[Opinion]

Constitutional Law - 1) Did CSA err in concluding that personalized vanity plates are a non-public forum in which motorists who pay the fee to express their 7-character message may be censored despite expressing otherwise constitutionally protected private speech? 2) Did CSA err in choosing to censor a Spanish word based on the most offensive definition it could imagine, despite the existence of innocuous definitions of the term?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 713, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinon]

027 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Ucheomumu   2016-09-08
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter
094
2015 Spencer State 2016-01-27 2016-09-08
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – 1) Did the trial court commit reversible error by reseating three jurors who had been struck by the defense where there was no evidence to support a finding of racial discrimination and where counsel’s explanations advanced the defense’s strategy and have previously been accepted by the courts as valid, race-neutral explanations for striking a juror? 2) Was the evidence sufficient to support a finding of specific intent for a conviction of attempted second-degree murder?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 493, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

004
2016 State Hines 2016-02-19 2016-09-08
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-10
[Opinion]

Criminal Law – 1) In a joint trial, was the trial court within its discretion in admitting a co-defendant’s exculpatory statement which did not mention Respondent, but did mention the street where Respondent lived? 2) Was any error in admitting the co-defendant’s statement harmless?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2334, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

002
2016 SPAW, LLC Annapolis 2016-02-19 2016-09-08
[Oral Arguments]
 

Local Government – 1) Did the trial court err by failing to dismiss the city’s civil citation for a municipal infraction against Petitioner under § 6-103 of the Local Government Article (“L. G.”) and awarding the city broad injunctive relief? 2) Did the trial court err in holding that abatement of a municipal infraction is not a “penalty” under L. G. § 6-110 for the purpose of applying the one year statute of limitations in § 5-107 of the Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article? 3) Did the trial court err by ignoring newly amended Md. Rules 2-501, which excludes the filing of a motion for summary judgment “after evidence is received at trial on the merits,” when the trial court granted summary judgment in the middle of trial before Petitioner could either respond in writing or present any evidence? 4) Did the trial court err in holding that municipal infractions were civil matters subject to Title 2 of the Md. Rules?

Circiut Court for Anne Arundel County, Nos. 02-C-13-181644 & 02-C-13-181663

006
2016 Jamison State   2016-09-09
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-15
[Opinion]
DNA appeal
011
2016 Bd. of Physicians Geier 2016-04-22 2016-09-09
[Oral Arguments]
 

Civil Procedure – 1) Did the trial court err in rejecting the defendants’ assertion of absolute quasi-judicial immunity and denying reconsideration of its default order on liability? 2) Did the trial court err in compelling the production of personal financial information in aid of punitive damages despite the defendants’ absolute quasi-judicial immunity? 3) Did the trial court err in granting the Respondents’ motion for sanctions based on the Petitioners’ refusal to produce materials protected by the deliberative process, executive, attorney-client, and attorney-work-product privileges and the mandatory nondisclosure requirement of Health Occupations § 14-410?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 124, Sept. Term, 2016 (Pending)

052
2015 State Jones 2015-08-21 2016-09-09
[Reargument]

2016-01-12
[Oral Arguments]

2016-05-23:
[Order for supplemental briefing and reargument]

Criminal Law – 1) As a matter of first impression, where the modality of the commission of a first degree assault is use of a firearm, is first degree assault an inherently dangerous felony capable of supporting a conviction for second degree felony murder or a non-inherently dangerous felony that would support a conviction for second degree felony murder only if committed in an inherently dangerous manner? 2) As a matter of first impression, where the modality of the commission of a first degree assault is the intent to cause or attempt to cause serious physical injury, is first degree assault a lesser included offense of second degree intent-to-inflict-grievous-bodily-harm murder?

Supplemental briefing and reargument ordered on the following additional issue: In deciding this case, should the Court re-consider its holding in Roary v. State, 385 Md. 217, 226-36, 867 A.2d 1095, 1100-6 (2005), as to whether first-degree assault may serve as a predicate for second-degree felony murder?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2475, Sept. Term, 2013 [Opinion]

007 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Thomas-Bellamy   2016-10-06
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-22
[Opinion]
Attorney disciplinary matter.
016
2016 Eastern Shore Title Ochse 2016-05-20 2016-10-06
[Oral Arguments]
 

Civil Procedure – 1) May a party recover their attorney’s fees for the exact same matter more than one time as “damages”, even in separate cases? 2) Did the trial court and CSA err in the legal standard used to determine the correct amount of the damages award pursuant to the collateral litigation rule for legal expenses incurred? 3) Does the collateral source rule apply to an award of damages for the breach of two separate contracts involving different parties under different circumstances in different courts where separate consideration was paid for each contract?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 999, Sept. Term, 2013 (Unreported)

014
2016 Balfour Beatty Rummel Klepper & Kahl 2016-04-22 2016-10-06
[Oral Arguments]
 

Torts – 1) Did CSA err by applying the economic loss doctrine to a limited class of professionals – designers in government contracts – to shield an engineer from liability to a contractor when the engineer knows that its services will be relied upon to the contractor’s detriment if the engineer’s services are negligently performed? 2) Does the economic loss doctrine bar a government contractor’s action under Restatement of Torts (Second) § 552 against an engineer who negligently supplied information when all other elements are met and when other professional providers of information are not so protected? 3) Does the economic loss doctrine bar a government contractor’s action for negligent misrepresentation against an engineer when the engineer: (a) intended the contractor to rely upon the representations; (b) knew that the contractor would rely upon the design; and (c) knew that the contractor would be harmed if the design was negligently performed?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 496, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

007
2016 Phillips State 2016-03-25 2016-10-06
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – 1) Under the Frye-Reed standard what is “generally accepted as reliable” in analyzing and interpreting complex mixtures of low template “touch” DNA? 2) In this case, was the Prince George’s County Crime Lab’s methodology “generally accepted as reliable” in the relevant scientific field? 3) Did CSA improperly deviate from Frye-Reed by reaching a conclusion without considering evidence from the relevant scientific community, other than the two opinions expressed at a pretrial hearing? 4) Did CSA err in holding that compliance with § 10-915 of the Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article required certification of meeting a non-existent standard neither party advocated?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 456, Sept. Term, 2013 [Opinion]

009 AG


025 AG
2015


2015
Attorney Grievance Allenbaugh   2016-10-07
[Oral Arguments]

2016-10-27
[Opinion]

2016-10-07
[PC Order]

Attorney disciplinary matter.
017
2016 Oliveira Sugarman 2016-05-20 2016-10-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Corporations & Associations – 1) Is a board of directors entitled to the presumption of the business judgment rule contained in Md. Code Ann, Corps. & Ass’ns § 2-405.1 when responding to a shareholder demand without presenting evidence that the board acted independently, in good faith, and was reasonably informed as required by Boland v. Boland, 423 Md. 296, 31 A.3d 529 (2011)? 2) May shareholders of a Md. corporation bring direct claims against the board of directors for misrepresentations made in a proxy statement soliciting shareholder votes and for breaches of a shareholder-approved incentive stock plan?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1980, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

015
2016 Hartman State 2016-05-20 2016-10-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – Where a defendant enters into a non-binding plea agreement in the District Court in which the State agreed to recommend no incarceration, and subsequently notes a de novo appeal from the final judgment of the District Court, does the State remain obligated to make that sentencing recommendation in the Circuit Court if the defendant pleads guilty?

Circuit Court for Allegany County (No. 01-K-15-016567)

021
2016 Hughes Moyer 2016-06-23 2016-10-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

State Personnel & Pensions – 1) Did the trial court err in failing to consider the notice requirements imposed on the State by Md. Code. Ann, State Pers. & Pens. § 11-106(a)(5)? 2) Did the trial court err in failing to consider the minimum level of due process due to Petitioner prior to the State’s deprivation of a property right?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 275, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

015 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Moore   2016-10-11
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter.
052 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Kirwan   2016-10-11
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-21
[Opinion]
Attorney disciplinary matter.
012
2016 Attar DMS Tollgate 2016-04-22 2016-10-11
[Oral Arguments]
 

Zoning and Planning – 1) Does Maryland’s special exception jurisprudence require the Baltimore Co. Board of Appeals to define the boundaries of the neighborhood of the proposed special exception before approving that special exception? If so, did the Board of Appeals’ opinion satisfied Maryland’s minimum requirements for articulating the facts found regarding the neighborhood’s boundaries? 2) Did CSA err in holding that the Applicant met its burden of proof, as articulated by the concurring opinion in People’s Counsel for Baltimore County v. Loyola College in Maryland, 406 Md. 54 (2008)?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2368, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

019
2016 Seley-Radtke Hosmane 2016-05-20 2016-10-11
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-22
[Opinion]

Torts – In a defamation case brought by a private individual, does the heightened standard for overcoming a conditional privilege, as recognized in Jacron Sales Co., Inc. v. Sindorf, 276 Md. 580 (1976), impose a burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 689, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

047 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Phillips   2016-10-13
[Oral Argument]
2016-10-14
[PC Order]
Attorney disciplinary matter.
018
2016 Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Fund for Animals 2016-05-20 2016-10-13
[Oral Argument]
 

Insurance Law – 1) Did CSA err in holding that the actual prejudice standard in Insurance Art. § 19-110 requires an insurer to prove that, had it received timely notice, the outcome would have been different? 2) Did CSA exceed its authority by instructing the trial court on remand to permit and grant a belated motion for judgment, when such a motion was never filed at the time of trial? 3) Did Petitioner waive the affirmative defense of collateral estoppel by failing to plead that defense in its answer or mention it during discovery? 4) Does collateral estoppel apply to the findings made in the Endangered Species Act case?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2598, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

013
2016 Breck Md. State Police 2016-04-22 2016-10-13
[Oral Argument]
 

Public Safety – Did CSA err in holding that Extra-Duty Secondary Employment, as that term is used by the Maryland State Police, is not Secondary Employment within the meaning of Public Safety § 3-103(b)?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1661, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

020
2016 Glass Anne Arundel Co. 2016-06-23 2016-10-13
[Oral Argument]
 

State Government – 1) Are the trial courts precluded from making any finding that material sought by a person about himself may be severed from an internal affairs file pertaining to a specific, identified law enforcement officer under the Public Information Act? 2) Does the custodian of records for a governmental unit have any responsibility under the Public Information Act to disclose computerized records created and used in the work of the unit, but stored outside the unit, when the governmental unit has the right and practical ability to retrieve the records on demand? 3) Having determined that the custodians knowingly and willfully failed to conduct a legally adequate search in locations where responsive material is likely to be found, was it error for the trial court to decline to order a remedial search in those locations?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 185, Sept .Term 2015 (Unreported)

064
2015 Brown State 2015-11-20

2016-10-13
Reargument
[Oral Argument]

2016-03-31
[Oral Arguments]

2016-08-29
[Order setting the case for reargument]

2016-04-04
[Order remanding to the circuit court for entry of findings of fact]

Criminal Law – 1) Pursuant to the “supplemental rule of interpretation,” where a motions court makes a legal determination without making factual findings, must an appellate court fill in the fact-finding gaps by giving little or no weight to the losing party’s evidence, discrediting the losing party’s witnesses, and resolving any ambiguities and drawing all inferences in favor of the prevailing party? 2) In reversing a suppression ruling, may an appellate court rely on a fact on which conflicting evidence was presented below or must the court accept the version of facts most favorable to the prevailing party? 3) What effect does a motions judge’s failure to make factual findings to support its legal conclusion have on the parameters of the appellate court’s review where conflicting versions of events necessitating factual findings were not presented at the motions hearing? 4) Did CSA err in reversing the motions court’s grant of Petitioner’s suppression motion?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 212, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

050
2016 Lamone Schlakman 2016-10-06 2016-10-18
[Oral Arguments]
2016-10-18
[PC Order]

Election Law – Did the trial court err in entering an ex parte temporary restraining order that requires the Appellants to remove the name of a qualified candidate from the ballot in Baltimore City Councilmanic District No. 12 for the 2016 General Election?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1492, Sept. Term, 2016 (Pending)

082 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Mahone   2016-11-03
[Oral Arguments]
  Attorney disciplinary matter.
011 AG
2014 Attorney Grievance Sweitzer   2016-11-03
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-04
[PC Order]
Attorney disciplinary matter.
024
2016 Collins State 2016-06-23 2016-11-03
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law –Did the trial court’s method of conducting voir dire fail to reasonably ensure that the court received truthful and accurate responses to its questions, thus constituting an abuse of discretion and violating Petitioner’s right to a fair and impartial jury?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 618, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

025
2016 Frederick Classical Bd. of Education 2016-07-11 2016-11-03
[Oral Arguments]
 

Education – 1) Did the State Board err in finding that Petitioner contractually agreed to forego funding proportionate to the Local Board’s transportation spending because its students would not necessarily receive transportation from the school? 2) Did the State Board err by deferring to the Local Board’s interpretation of the contract and application of state law and by misstating its own precedent?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 42, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

068 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Johnson   2016-11-04
[Oral Arguments]

  Attorney disciplinary matter.
027
2016 In Re: Cody H.   2016-07-11 2016-11-04
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Procedure – 1) Does MD’s restitution statute allowing for recovery of lost earnings “as a direct result of the crime” permit the court to order restitution for lost earnings to be earned in the future and for lost earnings for a randomly selected period of time? 2) Did CSA err in finding that competent evidence was introduced to support the claim for eight months of lost wages?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1190, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

023
2016 Kor-Ko & Rothamel Dept. of Environment 2016-06-23 2016-11-04
[Oral Arguments]
 

Environmental Law – 1) Did Maryland Department of the Environment (“MDE”) err by interpreting the definition of “premises” in COMAR § 26.11.15.06 to include the entire commercial park rather than one tenant in the multi-tenant commercial park? 2) Did MDE err by concluding that its “air toxics regulations do not apply” anywhere within the entire commercial park? 3) Did MDE err by not evaluating whether emissions of toxic air pollutants will unreasonably endanger the health of the neighboring tenant in the commercial park?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1660, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

005 Misc.
2016 In the Matter of Hon. White     2016-11-04
[Oral Arguments]
  Judicial Disabilities Commission matter.
060
2016 V.O.I.C.E. Balt. City Elections Bd.   2016-11-07
[Oral Arguments]
2016-11-07
[PC Order]
Election appeal.
028
2016 State, et al. Falcon 2016-07-11 2016-11-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Constitutional Law – 1) Did the trial court err in enjoining portions of Chapter 35 of the 2016 Laws of Md. that alter the composition of the Nominating Commission where the law made permanent changes to the composition of the Commission to make it locally appointed? 2) Did the trial court err in treating members of the Nominating Commission as “officers” within the meaning of Article II, § 15 where they do not exercise any portion of the sovereign power of the State?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 539, Sept. Term, 2016 (Pending)

026
2016 Accokeek, Mattawoman, PIscataway Creeks Public Service Comm'n 2016-07-11 2016-11-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Public Utilities – 1) Did the Public Service Commission (“PSC”) act outside of its statutory authority by imposing taxes, or mandatory payments, which it was not empowered to enact? 2) Did PSC violate Petitioner’s right to due process by failing to make sufficient findings of fact on the record regarding the economic effects of the Generating Station? 3) Were PSC’s findings regarding the economic effects of the Generating Station under Md. Code Public Utilities § 7-207(e)(2)(ii) supported by substantial evidence in the record?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2437, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

022
2016 Smallwood State 2016-06-23 2016-11-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Procedure – 1) Where a psychiatrist initially determined that Petitioner was criminally responsible for acts leading to criminal charges and that opinion led Petitioner to withdraw a plea of not criminally responsible (“NCR”) and proceed to trial on an agreed statement of facts and where, approximately 25 years later, the same psychiatrist concluded that Petitioner was in fact NCR at the time he committed the acts leading to the criminal charges, is the psychiatrist’s revised opinion about criminal responsibility newly discovered evidence that creates a substantial or significant possibility that the result may have been different such that Petitioner is entitled to relief under Criminal Procedure Article § 8-301? 2) Does § 8-301, which governs petitions for writs of actual innocence, contemplate relief for an individual who was convicted of a crime but who later presents newly discovered evidence that he was not criminally responsible at the time of the crime? 3) May a person who was convicted after a trial on an agreed statement of facts obtain relief under § 8-301? 4) Does an expert’s opinion that Petitioner was NCR, offered many years after the same expert opined that the petitioner was criminally responsible constitute “newly discovered evidence” under § 8-301? 5) Does the revised expert opinion that Petitioner was not criminally responsible at the time of the crime create a substantial or significant possibility that the result in this case may have been different?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2627, Sept. Term, 2012 [Opinion]

037
2016 Robinson State 2016-08-19 2016-12-01  

Criminal Law – 1) When an officer detects an “overwhelming smell” of “fresh marijuana” coming from a car, does the officer have probable cause to search the car in light of the fact that possession of less than ten grams of marijuana is now a “civil offense” punishable only by a fine? 2) Did the trial court err when it denied Petitioner’s motion to suppress?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 119, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

039
2016 Williams State 2016-09-02 2016-12-01  

Criminal Law – 1) When an officer smells the odor of marijuana from the interior of a car and when the driver and sole occupant admits that he has an unspecified amount of marijuana in the car, does the officer have probable cause to search the car in light of the fact that possession of less than ten grams of marijuana is now a “civil offense” punishable only by a fine? 2) Did the trial court err when it denied Petitioner’s motion to suppress?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1466, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

046
2016 Spriggs State 2016-09-02 2016-12-01  

Criminal Law – 1) When an officer detects the odor of marijuana coming from a car, does that officer have probable cause to search the car in light of the fact that possession of less than ten grams of marijuana is now a “civil offense” punishable only by a fine? 2) Did the trial court err when it denied Petitioner’s motion to suppress?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 412, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

031
2016 URS Corp. Ft. Myer Construction 2016-08-19 2016-12-02  

Courts and Judicial Proceedings – 1) Did CSA err in deciding Respondent’s appeal when there is no final judgment in the case? 2) Did CSA err in holding that the trial judge’s finding that Respondent had maintained its case without substantial justification was clearly erroneous? 3) Did CSA err in holding that the trial judge’s denial of Respondent’s amended motion for reconsideration was an abuse of discretion?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 16, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

038
2016 Johnson State 2016-08-19 2016-12-02  

Criminal Procedure – 1) Did the trial court’s grant of Petitioner’s Motion for Judgment of Acquittal (“MJOA”) on the express basis of legally insufficient evidence preclude further proceedings under the Md. common law of double jeopardy and/or the Federal Constitutional prohibition upon double jeopardy? 2) Was the trial court’s grant of the MJOA procedurally proper because the trial court has the authority to reconsider and retract the grant of a mistrial? 3) Was the trial court’s grant of the MJOA legally proper because the court retained fundamental jurisdiction to render the ruling? 4) Even assuming arguendo that the grant of the MJOA was procedurally flawed, under the Md. common law of double jeopardy was an acquittal upon the express basis of legally insufficient evidence nevertheless final and binding?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 189, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

040
2016 State Ebb 2016-09-02 2016-12-02  

Criminal Law – Did the trial court properly deny a Petition for Writ of Actual Innocence in which the Petitioner neither (a) claimed innocence, or (b) presented any meaningful “new” evidence?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1427, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

034
2016 Copsey Park 2016-08-19 2016-12-05  

Torts – 1) Did the trial court err in admitting evidence of the negligence of non-party, subsequent treating physicians, including evidence that they were once defendants in the instant suit? 2) Did the trial court err in instructing the jury on superseding cause when the negligence of all the treating physicians amounted to one indivisible injury, that being death?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2170, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

036
2016 Gupta State 2016-08-19 2016-12-05  

Criminal Procedure – 1) When a judge violates Md. Rule 4-326(d) by communicating an ex parte answer to a juror’s question that “pertains to the action”, without disclosing it to the defendant or any lawyer, can the presumption of prejudice be overcome by adding a new standard of review claiming the judge’s ex parte answer was not “substantive” enough? 2) Did the trial court err by not granting pre-trial suppression of Petitioner’s custodial interrogation statement after finding he communicated repeated demands for a lawyer to police officers while he was locked up in a cell just before being interrogated?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1185, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

041
2016 Insurance Admin. State Farm 2016-09-02 2016-12-05  

Insurance Law – 1) Does the exception in § 19-505(c)(1)(ii) of the Insurance Article permit an insurance company to exclude coverage under a motor vehicle policy that includes personal injury protection for an accident involving a taxicab owned by the insured and for which the owner was unable to obtain personal injury protection coverage? 2) Did the Md. Insurance Commissioner correctly determine that the insured was entitled to the benefit of his motor vehicle policy’s personal injury protection coverage for injuries sustained while driving his taxicab, for which he carried the insurance coverage required under the Transportation Article?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2496, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

043
2016 Liquor License Comm'rs Kougl 2016-09-02 2016-12-06  

Alcoholic Beverages – Did the Liquor Board correctly interpret its rules to impose upon licensees strict liability for sexual display, performance, or illegal activity conducted on licensed premises, where the pertinent portions of the rules contain no language limiting a licensee’s responsibility to situations where the licensee has actual or constructive knowledge of the offending conduct?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 935, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

035
2016 Yuan Johns Hopkins Univ. 2016-08-19 2016-12-06  

Labor & Employment – 1) Did CSA err in precluding Md. employees from bringing wrongful termination claims based on retaliation for reporting research misconduct, by refusing to recognize the federal law prohibiting research misconduct as a public policy basis, contrary to this Court’s recognition of wrongful termination claims? 2) Did CSA err in precluding Md. employees from bringing conversion claims based on the employer’s conversion of the employee’s personal research materials, by improperly drawing inferences in favor of Respondent when it interpreted Respondent’s research materials policy?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 600, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

030
2016 Bainbridge St. Elmo White Flint Exp. Realty 2016-08-19 2016-12-06  

Contract Law – Did CSA undermine Nova Research v. Penske Truck Leasing Co., 405 Md. 435 (2008), concerning the limited circumstances under which a contractual indemnity provision can be read as a first-party fee shifting provision overriding the American Rule that each party bears its own attorneys’ fees?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 376, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

036 AG
2015 Attorney Grievance Dyer & Gray   2017-01-05   Attorney disciplinary matter.
033
2016 Elvaton Towne Condo. Rose 2016-08-19 2017-01-05  

Real Property – 1) Does Md. law permit and do Petitioner’s Declaration and Bylaws provide authority to implement rules that temporarily suspend unit owners who are delinquent in their condominium assessments from using the community parking lot and pool? 2) Did CSA err by finding that Respondents were precluded from pursuing a declaratory judgment related to Petitioner’s Statement of Lien, which established an interested in Respondents’ real property, and Respondents’ only procedural remedy was to pursue a defense in a money damages consumer collection action pending in the District Court?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1033, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)

032
2016 Rohrer Humane Society, Washington Co. 2016-08-19 2017-01-06  

Criminal Law – 1) Does Criminal Law § 10-615 permit the notice and removal of an animal under §§ 10-615(c) and (d) when the animal was seized pursuant to a search and seizure warrant and is in the custody of the State? 2) Must the factors and conditions that permit the removal of an animal pursuant to § 10-615(c) exist at the time the “notice of removal” is given to the owner under § 10-615? 3) Does the denial of a petition for the return of animals pursuant to § 10-615(d)(2) during the pendency of a criminal charge against the owner pursuant to § 10-604 result in the loss of ownership and disposal of those animals, or is the denial temporary until there is a final disposition of the criminal matter?

Circuit Court for Washington County (No. 21-C-15-054127)

047
2016 Edwards State   2017-01-06   DNA Appeal

042
2016 UFCWIU Wal-Mart Stores 2016-09-02 2017-01-06  

Labor & Employment – Did CSA err when it held that this case does not involve a labor dispute and the National Labor Relations Act does not preempt Walmart’s claims?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 376, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

049
2016 State Bey 2016-09-28 2017-01-09  

Criminal Law – Did CSA err in concluding that Criminal Law § 3-315, which prohibits engaging in a continuing course of conduct with a child, prohibits more than one conviction and sentence per victim, regardless of the duration of the abuse or the type of sexual acts committed?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 413, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

044
2016 Cruz-Quintanilla State 2016-09-02 2017-01-09  

Criminal Law – May a sentencing court consider a criminal defendant’s gang membership when the State presents no evidence (1) that the underlying crime is gang related or (2) that the defendant committed any criminal actions on behalf of the gang?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1505, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

045
2016 Cain Midland Funding 2016-09-02 2017-01-09  

Courts and Judicial Proceedings – 1) Did CSA err in concluding that a debt buyer’s pattern of filing thousands of collection actions in Md. courts, and obtaining judgments in those actions, was unrelated to a later putative class action seeking a judicial declaration that those earlier judgments were void and disgorgement of the money so obtained, thus finding the doctrine of waiver inapplicable and permitting the debt buyer to compel arbitration on an individual basis? 2) In concluding that no waiver of the right to arbitrate had occurred, did CSA err in disregarding the tactical timing of the debt buyer’s motion to compel arbitration, which it filed only after a CSA opinion in a related case that was adverse to the debt buyer’s litigation position?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 530, Sept. Term, 2014 (Unreported)