ÿWPC ǽA tìÅmþÒBAãü«à¿çö\ìL!¿€‘2’›a{ÏØ]mrâ²cŽP{9üЬYLRex0”šžv  aÆÉ«ö`N›Ai ëïÊì¡›j¬ œ$ Á%ƒ”Ww¸LÍÒY„©â Á±‚©{¢÷h ¯ŒS½ð\ ‡L´eæápÿ”™m¸úu?^gá(Å4ºɈF_ѳ+îçF„×ûnú…z±¶õ yQÉSvvm©$@§aü‹ŸYü*ÝZÊúb/… ƒeÙ(pˆ"…Êó&OøâSÕÒ„Ø‘6ºÖeØä·n´ä®«gû¥y`JòêFåš3ù~Ê÷H²zhíø:r3Âl€·èŒ¿ÝdñOƒ»Ä"Ó¯+6³ÕTŠæþ`¶;™ ó¥K¢ž×NDŸ®ù²3 =BÏTùF‰?_ãFŒ…µ&P^E:òàöyedí"Sì0öÔyßW*s̨V[÷I1ž·hË`½—=@DŸÀ<6ó¯gÅη¯[æ-Šþ9ƒuçtpClãïAS¯Ð䱑h‰M^)öêèµO9>|n—Ãô[”©û§Ê ÒÏpE^´Õo[+¸½¦U>Ò %U:NPb R^nXn 0ØÆ#!ž^ ¿wË4Ûï mñ,xÐðA`&UniversScalableX<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpi- ù -#|x «,xÐðA`&UniversScalableXX~xÐðPö»7ûXP<þ6X9`("Courier 10cpieXôxþ6X@É“8Ç;X@(°K>$¡¡ÓÓÓ  ÓѰ°ÑÑX°ÑÑ8€‰9XXdðdð8ÑÔ€X‰9XXXÔÔ€XP+XXX‰9Ô˜Acrobat PDFWriter,ü,,,,,ü0$’v'cD DAj'ê:i¢Ø+00(ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀÝ ƒK>!ÝÓÓÓ  ÓѰ°ÑÑX°ÑÑ8€\øXXdîdð8ÑÔ€X\øXXXÔÔ€XÜÙXXX\øÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓÓÑ8€ÜÙXXdâXXdî8ÑÑ€ÑÑ = Ñà@3 3 ìàCOURT€OF€APPEALS€STANDING€COMMITTEEˆÐ ° Ðà@k k ìàòòON€RULES€OF€PRACTICE€AND€PROCEDUREóóˆÐ ’â ÐÌÌÌÓÓà  àMinutes€of€a€meeting€of€the€Rules€Committee€held€in€Room€1100A,ÏPeople's€Resource€Center,€Ô_ÔCrownsvilleÔ_Ô,€Maryland€on€ÌMay€22,€1998.ÌÓÓÌà  àMembers€present:ÌÌHon.€Joseph€F.€Murphy,€Jr.,€ChairÌLinda€M.€Ô_ÔSchuettÔ_Ô,€Esq.,€Vice€ChairÌÌLowell€R.€Bowen,€Esq.à h àà À àà  àTimothy€F.€Ô_ÔMaloneyÔ_Ô,€Esq.Ð ² ÐÔ_ÔBayardÔ_Ô€Z.€Ô_ÔHochbergÔ_Ô,€Esq.à h àà À àà  àAnne€C.€Ô_ÔOgletreeÔ_Ô,€Esq.Ð ”ä ÐH.€Thomas€Howell,€Esq.à h àà À àà  àLarry€W.€Ô_ÔShipleyÔ_Ô,€ClerkÐ vÆ ÐHon.€G.€R.€Ô_ÔHoveyÔ_Ô€Johnsonà h àà À àà  àSen.€Norman€R.€Stone,€Jr.Ð X¨ ÐHon.€Joseph€H.€H.€Kaplanà h àà À àà  àMelvin€J.€Sykes,€Esq.Ð :Š ÐRichard€M.€Ô_ÔKarceskiÔ_Ô,€Esq.à h àà À àRoger€W.€Titus,€Esq.Ð l ÐRobert€D.€Klein,€Esq.à h àà À àà  àHon.€James€N.€VaughanÐ þN ÐÌÌà  àIn€attendance:ÌÌSandra€F.€Haines,€Esq.,€ReporterÌÔ_ÔSherieÔ_Ô€B.€Libber,€Esq.,€Assistant€ReporterÌEvan€Ô_ÔThalenbergÔ_Ô,€Esq.ÌJames€E.€Carbine,€Esq.ÌMelvin€Ô_ÔHirshmanÔ_Ô,€Esq.,€Bar€CounselÌJoseph€Ô_ÔEspoÔ_Ô,€Esq.ÌKeith€Ô_ÔMilliganÔ_ÔÌAnne€Ô_ÔBlumenbergÔ_Ô,€Esq.ÌÌÌÓÓà  àThe€Chair€convened€the€meeting.€€He€introduced€Timothy€Ô_ÔMaloneyÔ_Ô,ÏEsq.,€the€newest€member€of€the€Rules€Committee.€€The€Chair€asked€ifÏthere€were€any€additions€or€corrections€to€the€minutes€of€the€AprilÏ24,€1998€Rules€Committee€meeting.€€There€being€none,€Judge€KaplanÏmoved€to€accept€the€minutes€as€presented,€the€motion€was€seconded,Ïand€it€carried€unanimously.Ð /`*0= ÐÓÓññÌññññÐ  ˆ,Ø'3=á ÐññAgenda€Item€4.€€Consideration€of€proposed€rules€changes€to€allowÌ€€inspection€of€the€property€of€a€nonparty:€€New€Rule€2„422.1Ì€€(Inspection€of€Property€„„€Nonparty)€and€Amendment€to€Rule€Ì€€2„422€(Discovery€of€Documents€and€Property)Ì_________________________________________________________________ÌÌÌÔ_ÔÓÓà  àThe€Chair€explained€that€Agenda€Item€4€would€be€consideredÏfirst,€and€he€noted€that€Evan€Thalenberg,€Esq.,€was€present€toÏdiscuss€this€agenda€item.€€The€Vice€Chair€presented€Rules€2„422.1€Ï(Inspection€of€Property€„„€Nonparty)€and€2„422€(Discovery€ofÏDocuments€and€Property)€for€the€Committee's€consideration.€€ÌÓÓÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÌà@÷ ÷ ìàMARYLAND€RULES€OF€PROCEDUREˆÌÌà@§ § ìàTITLE€2€„€CIVIL€PROCEDURE€„„€CIRCUIT€COURTˆÌÌà@ÙÙìàCHAPTER€400€„€DISCOVERYˆÌÌÌÌà ¸ àADD€new€Rule€2„422.1,€as€follows:ÌññÓÝ ÓññÌÌRule€2„422.1.€€INSPECTION€OF€PROPERTY€„„ÏNONPARTYÌÌÌ€€(a)€€DefinitionÌÌà ¸ à€€For€purposes€of€this€Rule,€the€termÏ"nonparty"€includes€any€person€in€possession€orÏcontrol€of€land€or€other€property€and,€ifÏdifferent,€the€record€owner€of€the€land€orÏother€property.ÌÌ€€(b)€€MotionÌÌà ¸ à€€A€party€may€move€for€an€order€to€permitÏentry€upon€designated€land€or€other€property€inÏthe€possession€or€control€of€a€nonparty€for€theÏpurpose€of€inspection,€measuring,€surveying,Ïphotographing,€testing,€or€sampling€theÐ ..~)/ Ðproperty€or€any€designated€object€or€operationÏon€the€property.€€The€motion€shall€(1)€describeÏwith€reasonable€particularity€the€land€or€otherÏproperty€to€be€inspected€and€any€related€actsÏto€be€performed,€(2)€specify€a€reasonable€timeÏand€manner€of€making€the€inspection€andÏperforming€the€related€acts,€and€(3)€notify€aÏnonparty€that€the€nonparty€has€the€right€toÏobject€to€the€inspection€and€related€acts€byÏfiling€a€response,€that€any€response€shall€beÏfiled€within€15€days€after€the€nonparty€isÏserved€with€the€motion,€and€that€a€nonparty€whoÏdesires€a€hearing€on€the€motion€shall€requestÏit€in€the€response€under€the€heading€"RequestÏfor€Hearing."ÌÌ€€(c)€€ServiceÌÌà ¸ à€€The€motion€shall€be€served€upon€eachÏnonparty€in€the€manner€provided€by€Chapter€100Ïof€this€Title€for€service€of€summons.ÌññÓÝ ÓññÌCross€reference:€€For€service€of€the€motionÏupon€parties,€see€Rule€1„321.ÌÌ€€(d)€€ResponseÌÌà ¸ à€€A€nonparty€against€whom€a€motion€isÏdirected€shall€file€a€response€within€15€daysÏafter€being€served€with€the€motion.€€If€theÏnonparty€desires€a€hearing,€the€nonparty€shallÏso€request€in€the€response€under€the€heading,Ï"Request€for€Hearing."€€If€the€nonparty€failsÏto€file€a€response€required€by€this€section,Ïthe€court€may€proceed€to€rule€on€the€motion.ÌÌ€€(e)€€HearingÌÌà ¸ à€€If€the€nonparty€requests€a€hearing,€theÏcourt€shall€hold€a€hearing€on€the€motion.€ÏOtherwise,€the€court€shall€determine€in€eachÏcase€whether€a€hearing€will€be€held.ÌÌ€€(f)€€OrderÌÌà ¸ à€€The€court€may€enter€an€order€grantingÏthe€motion€only€upon€good€cause€shown.€€AnÏorder€granting€the€motion€shall€specify€theÐ ..~)/ Ðtime,€place,€and€manner€of€inspection€and€theÏrelated€acts€that€may€be€performed.€€The€orderÏalso€may€include€reasonable€provisions€toÏprotect€the€interests€of€the€nonparty,Ïincluding€provisions€relating€to€the€privacy€ofÏthe€nonparty€and€the€filing€of€a€bond.ÌÌSource:€€This€Rule€is€new.ÌññÓÝ ÓññÌÌññÓÝ ÓññÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àRule€2„422.1€was€accompanied€by€the€following€Reporter'sÌÌNote.ÌÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ àProposed€new€Rule€2„422.1€establishes€aÏprocedure€for€inspection€of€the€property€of€aÏnonparty.€€The€Discovery€SubcommitteeÏrecommends€this€change€in€light€of€òòWebb€v.Ð ² ÐJoyce€Real€Estateóó,€108€Md.App.€512€(1996),Ð ”ä Ðòòcert.óó€òòdeniedóó,€242€Md.€582€(1996)€and€amendmentsÐ vÆ Ðto€Fed.R.Civ.P.€34€that€allow€inspection€of€aÏnonparty's€property.€€ÌÌà ¸ àUnder€proposed€new€Rule€2„422.1,Ïinspection€may€be€allowed€upon€motion€of€aÏparty,€for€good€cause€shown.€€The€Rule€isÏderived€in€part€from€portions€of€Rules€2„311Ïand€2„422,€with€the€inclusion€of€additionalÏprovisions€for€the€protection€of€the€nonparty.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(a)€defines€"nonparty"€to€includeÏboth€the€record€owner€of€the€land€or€otherÏproperty€and€any€person€in€possession€€orÏcontrol€of€the€land€or€property.ÌÌà ¸ àThe€contents€of€the€motion€are€set€out€inÏsection€(b).€€Subsections€(b)(1)€and€(b)(2)€areÏderived€from€the€requirements€set€out€in€RuleÏ2„422€(a)€and€(b).€€Subsection€(b)(3)€requiresÏthe€moving€party€to€notify€the€nonparty€of€theÏnonparty's€right€to€object€and€how€to€do€so.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(c)€requires€service€upon€eachÏnonparty€in€the€manner€provided€by€Title€2,ÏChapter€100.ÌÌà ¸ àSections€(d)€and€(e)€are€based€uponÏsimilar€provisions€in€Rule€2„311€(b),€(e),€andÐ ..~)/ Ð(f),€except€that€a€hearing€is€mandatory€if€theÏnonparty€requests€one.ÌÌà ¸ àUnder€section€(f)€of€the€proposed€newÏRule,€an€order€allowing€the€inspection€may€beÏentered€only€upon€good€cause€shown.€€The€secondÏsentence€of€section€(f)€requires€that€an€orderÏcontain€specific€information€concerning€theÏtime,€place,€and€manner€of€inspection€and€anyÏrelated€acts€that€may€be€performed.€€The€thirdÏsentence€allows€the€court€to€include€in€theÏorder€reasonable€provisions€for€the€protectionÏof€the€privacy€and€other€interests€of€theÏnonparty,€which€may€include€requiring€the€partyÏseeking€inspection€to€file€a€bond.ÌÌÌà@÷ ÷ ìàMARYLAND€RULES€OF€PROCEDUREˆÌÌà@§ § ìàTITLE€2€„€CIVIL€PROCEDURE€„„€CIRCUIT€COURTˆÌÌà@ÙÙìàCHAPTER€400€„€DISCOVERYˆÌÌÌÌà ¸ àAMEND€Rule€2„422€to€change€the€name€of€theÏRule,€as€follows:ÌññÓÝ ÓññÌÌRule€2„422.€€DISCOVERY€OF€DOCUMENTS€ANDÏPROPERTY€ò ò„„€PARTIESó óÐ ,| ÐÌÌ€€€.€.€.ÌÌÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àRule€2„422€was€accompanied€by€the€following€Reporter's€Note.ÌÌÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ àThe€proposed€amendment€to€Rule€2„422Ïchanges€the€title€of€the€Rule€to€distinguish€itÏfrom€proposed€new€Rule€2„422.1,€Inspection€ofÏProperty€„„€Nonparty.ÌÌÌÓÓÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àThe€Vice€Chair€explained€that€the€Rule€is€new€and€is€proposedÏto€allow€the€inspection€of€property€of€nonparties.€€This€arose€out€ofÐ ..~)/ Ðthe€lead€paint€litigation.€€In€the€case€of€òòWebb€v.€Joyce€Real€Estateóó,Ð ° Ð108€Md.€App.€512€(1996),€òòcert.óó€òòdeniedóó,€242€Md.€582€(1996),€the€CourtÐ tÄ Ðof€Special€Appeals€had€held€that€there€is€no€authority€in€the€RulesÏof€Procedure€to€allow€an€inspection€of€the€property€of€a€third€personÏwho€is€not€a€party€to€a€case.€€In€lead€paint€cases,€this€means€thatÏthe€plaintiff€or€the€plaintiff's€experts€have€no€way€to€gain€accessÏto€a€non„party's€property€which€allegedly€contains€lead€paint.€€Ìà  àThe€Vice€Chair€pointed€out€that€the€proposed€Rule€allows€for€anÏinspection€by€motion€only.€€Section€(a)€provides€a€definition€of€aÏnonparty€which€takes€into€account€the€landlord„tenant€situation,€soÏthat€both€get€notice.€€Section€(b)€provides€for€court€approval€of€theÏinspection,€and€it€notifies€the€nonparty€of€his€or€her€rights€after€aÏmotion€to€inspect€a€property€is€filed.€€Section€(d)€tracks€theÏlanguage€of€Rule€2„311,€Motions.€€Section€(e)€provides€that€if€aÏnonparty€requests€a€hearing,€the€court€must€hold€one.€€Section€(f)Ïstates€that€good€cause€must€be€shown€for€the€court€to€enter€an€orderÏgranting€the€motion.€€The€order€must€state€the€specific€details€ofÏthe€inspection€and€provide€for€protection€of€the€nonparty.€€TheÏSubcommittee€had€discussed€a€different€method€which€did€not€provideÏfor€a€motion€in€every€case.€€Most€members€felt€that€court€approval€ofÏthe€inspection€was€important.€€Ìà  àMr.€Sykes€commented€that€section€(f)€provides€for€the€filing€ofÏa€bond,€but€it€does€not€say€why€a€bond€is€to€be€filed€or€what€is€toÏbe€protected€against.€€He€suggested€that€language€be€added€whichÐ L-œ(. Ðindicates€that€the€bond€protects€against€damage€to€the€nonparty'sÏproperty.€€The€Vice€Chair€responded€that€the€suggested€language€isÏnarrower€than€stating€that€the€bond€protects€against€liability.€€Mr.ÏBowen€said€that€a€written€undertaking€should€be€filed€with€theÏmotion.€€The€Rule€provides€no€obligation€on€the€part€of€the€partyÏentering€the€nonparty's€property,€and€if€there€were€any€problems,€theÏnonparty€would€have€to€file€a€separate€action.€€The€Chair€suggestedÏthat€written€undertaking€portion€of€the€Rule€could€track€the€languageÏof€Rule€2„504.3,€Computer„Generated€Evidence.€€The€Vice€Chair€askedÏMr.€Bowen€if€a€separate€action€has€to€be€filed€on€the€bond.€€Mr.ÏBowen€replied€that€a€separate€action€to€establish€damage€would€haveÏto€be€filed€if€there€is€no€undertaking.€€There€has€to€be€anÏaffirmative€duty€on€the€part€of€the€person€filing€the€bond€to€make€itÏgood.€€Ìà  àMr.€Thalenberg€told€the€Committee€that€he€represents€hundredsÏof€children€with€lead€paint€poisoning.€€He€expressed€the€view€thatÏthe€proposed€Rule€is€a€good€idea,€because€currently,€a€large€numberÏof€cases€are€precluded€from€proceeding€due€to€an€inability€to€inspectÏthe€property€alleged€to€contain€lead€paint€on€it.€€He€did€express€theÏconcern€that€the€way€the€Rule€is€Ìdrafted€puts€some€burden€on€Judge€Thomas€Noel,€who€hears€the€leadÏpaint€cases€in€the€Baltimore€City€Circuit€Court€and€would€have€toÏhear€100%€of€the€requests€for€inspection€of€the€property€of€a€party.€ÏMr.€Thalenberg€questioned€whether€some€of€the€changes€made€could€beÐ L-œ(. Ðless€burdensome€in€terms€of€the€mechanics€of€the€Rule.€€€The€bondÏcould€be€simple€with€minimal€court€intervention.€€The€Rule€isÏnecessary€from€a€litigation€as€well€as€a€public€health€standpoint.€€Ìà  àMr.€Bowen€pointed€out€that€the€Rule€is€broader€than€justÏpertaining€to€lead€paint€cases,€and€the€nonparty€deserves€moreÏprotection.€€The€Chair€commented€that€Joseph€Espo,€Esq.€was€present.€ÏMr.€Espo€remarked€that€there€needs€to€be€a€mechanism€to€be€able€toÏenter€upon€the€land€of€a€nonparty.€€This€is€a€recurring€problem.€€HeÏexpressed€his€agreement€with€Mr.€Thalenberg€that€the€Rule€should€beÏas€minimally€burdensome€as€possible.€€Allowing€someone€onto€propertyÏfor€non„invasive,€non„destructive€testing€is€less€burdensome€thanÏrequiring€a€nonparty€to€produce€business€documents.€Ìà  àMr.€Hochberg€suggested€that€in€subsection€(b)(3)€after€theÏfirst€three€words€which€are€"notify€a€party",€the€words€"in€writing"Ïbe€added.€€He€said€that€he€read€this€subsection€to€mean€that€theÏnonparty€had€already€received€notice.€€Mr.€Sykes€observed€that€thereÏwould€be€no€reason€to€give€prior€notice.€€Mr.€Hochberg€questionedÏwhether€additional€language€should€be€added€to€section€(f)€whichÏindicates€that€the€court€has€leeway€to€add€provisions€as€justice€mayÏrequire.€€The€Vice€Chair€responded€that€section€(f)€is€not€intendedÏto€preclude€the€court€from€taking€any€action€that€is€necessary.€€Mr.ÏHochberg€remarked€that€his€concern€is€that€arguments€would€arise€asÏto€the€court€having€no€authority€under€the€new€rule.€€The€Vice€ChairÏsuggested€that€the€last€sentence€of€section€(f)€could€end€with€theÐ L-œ(. Ðfollowing€language:€€"and€any€other€provisions€the€court€deemsÏappropriate."€€Mr.€Sykes€noted€that€the€Rule€already€has€similarÏlanguage€regarding€nonparties.€€Mr.€Hochberg€observed€that€thisÏshould€apply€to€parties,€as€well.€€Ìà  àThe€Chair€referred€to€Mr.€Bowen's€suggestion€about€adding€inÏlanguage€pertaining€to€an€undertaking€by€the€moving€party.€€The€ViceÏChair€asked€for€clarification€about€this.€€She€expressed€the€viewÏthat€if€the€nonparty€later€alleges€damage€due€to€the€inspection,€theÏnonparty€still€has€to€file€an€action€against€the€bond,€whether€or€notÏthere€has€been€a€written€undertaking.€€Mr.€Bowen€explained€that€if€anÏundertaking€is€filed€with€the€motion,€the€person€filing€is€admittingÏfinancial€responsibility,€and€a€bond€may€not€be€necessary.€€If€theÏcourt€requires€a€bond€without€an€undertaking,€the€nonparty€propertyÏowner€may€have€a€problem,€because€there€is€no€underlying€obligationÏupon€which€the€bond€is€based.€€Ìà  àMr.€Sykes€commented€that€in€lead€paint€cases,€the€plaintiffsÏmay€not€be€financially€responsible.€€A€bond€is€a€substantial€expense,Ïand€a€promise€by€the€plaintiff€may€not€be€worth€much.€€Mr.€BowenÏnoted€that€the€Rule€is€broader€than€just€lead€paint€cases.€€The€ChairÏcommented€that€there€may€be€a€need€for€a€comparable€rule€in€theÏDistrict€Court.€€Mr.€Hochberg€inquired€where€the€conditions€of€theÏbond€appear.€€Mr.€Bowen€said€that€the€undertaking€of€the€individualÏis€backed€by€the€promise€of€the€surety.€€The€problem€is€that€a€bondÏis€not€filed€in€every€case,€but€the€obligation€to€make€good€should€beÐ L-œ(. Ðin€every€case.€€Judge€Kaplan€remarked€that€he€would€not€like€to€see€aÏrequirement€of€a€bond€in€every€case.€€In€many€cases,€a€bond€is€notÏjustified.Ìà  àJudge€Vaughan€pointed€out€that€the€nonparty€may€be€forced€toÏhire€an€attorney€to€protect€his€or€her€interests.€€The€ChairÏresponded€that€this€is€not€that€different€from€the€situation€where€aÏnonparty€is€served€with€a€subpoena€and€does€not€want€to€comply.€ÏJudge€Vaughan€noted€that€it€is€more€of€an€intrusion€when€theÏsituation€involves€someone's€home.€€Ìà  àMr.€Titus€expressed€the€concern€that€this€Rule€could€causeÏmischief€in€other€areas€of€the€law,€such€as€a€domestic€case€where€theÏwife€seeks€permission€to€inspect€the€house€of€her€husband's€allegedÏgirl€friend.€€The€Chair€agreed€that€it€could€apply€in€such€a€case.€ÏMr.€Titus€pointed€out€that€the€nonparty€has€to€reply€more€quickly€toÏthe€motion€than€if€the€person€were€served€with€a€complaint€in€aÏlawsuit.€€He€asked€whether€the€time€to€reply€in€section€(d)€could€beÏchanged€from€15€to€30€days.€€The€Vice€Chair€said€that€15€days€isÏmotions€practice.€€Mr.€Titus€moved€to€change€the€time€period€inÏsection€(d)€from€15€to€30€days,€the€motion€was€seconded,€and€itÏcarried€unanimously.Ìà  àThe€Vice€Chair€referred€to€the€issue€of€adding€languageÏpertaining€to€an€undertaking.€€She€suggested€that€the€language€couldÏbe:€€"The€motion€shall€be€accompanied€by€a€written€undertaking€of€aÏparty€to€assume€the€liability€for€damage€and€related€acts."€€Ð L-œ(. Ðà  àMr.€Karceski€commented€that€the€parties€may€make€a€good€faithÏeffort€to€contact€the€nonparty€before€filing€a€motion,€and€heÏsuggested€that€language€to€encourage€this€could€be€added€into€theÏRule.€€Judge€Kaplan€pointed€out€that€nothing€stops€the€parties€fromÏcontacting€the€nonparty.€€Mr.€Karceski€said€that€he€reads€the€Rule€toÏmean€that€the€parties€have€to€file€this€motion€to€be€able€to€inspectÏthe€property.€€Mr.€Sykes€suggested€that€language€could€be€added€toÏsection€(b)€providing€that€it€applies€where€a€request€for€entry€uponÏdesignated€land€has€been€denied.€€The€Vice€Chair€noted€that€thisÏwould€force€a€request€by€the€parties.€€Mr.€Bowen€added€that€no€otherÏrule€requires€a€motion€after€a€request€has€been€denied.€€Mr.€KarceskiÏstated€that€the€nonparty€is€an€innocent€third€party€and€needsÏprotection.€€He€moved€to€make€Mr.€Sykes'€suggested€language€part€ofÏthe€allegations€of€the€motion€listed€in€section€(b).€€The€motion€wasÏseconded.€The€Vice€Chair€asked€if€the€Rule€needs€to€include€how€theÏrequest€was€denied€and€how€long€the€party€must€wait€after€the€requestÏwas€made€before€he€or€she€files€the€motion.€€The€Chair€suggested€thatÏthe€language€of€Rule€2„431,€Certificate€requirement,€which€reads:€Ï"...the€attorney€seeking€action€by€the€court€has€filed€a€certificateÏdescribing€the€good€faith€attempts€to...."€could€be€adapted€to€RuleÏ2„422.1€by€requiring€a€description€of€good€faith€attempts€to€discussÏwith€the€nonparty€the€circumstances€under€which€the€inspection€wouldÏtake€place.€€Mr.€Espo€commented€that€as€a€practical€matter,€leadÏpaint€inspectors€are€routinely€sent€out€to€houses,€and€the€occupantsÐ L-œ(. Ðmay€or€may€not€allow€the€inspection.€€The€Reporter€remarked€that€thisÏis€more€advantageous€to€the€moving€party€because€it€does€not€requireÏthat€the€other€side€be€notified.€€Ìà  àThe€Vice€Chair€said€that€as€long€as€requests€for€inspectionsÏhappen€anyway,€there€is€no€harm€building€into€the€Rule€a€requirementÏto€try€to€make€the€inspection€before€a€motion€is€filed.€€Mr.ÏThalenberg€noted€that€this€is€one€more€layer€of€qualitativeÏassessment€„„€how€much€effort€must€the€party€make€to€inspect€theÏproperty€before€a€motion€is€filed?€€€The€Chair€expressed€the€viewÏthat€the€Rule€does€not€impose€any€hardship€if€it€requires€aÏdescription€of€good€faith€efforts€to€inspect€the€property€before€theÏmotion€is€filed.€€Judge€Kaplan€remarked€that€this€is€another€burdenÏto€the€litigants€and€to€the€court.€€The€court€has€to€go€throughÏanother€hearing€to€determine€whether€there€have€been€good€faithÏefforts.€€The€Chair€commented€that€if€Judge€Noel€gets€a€stack€ofÏinspection€motions,€it€might€help€him€to€know€of€the€good€faithÏefforts€expended€to€inspect€before€the€motion€was€filed.€€Mr.€TitusÏpointed€out€that€one€of€the€problems€caused€by€adding€in€aÏrequirement€of€attempting€the€inspection€before€the€court€is€involvedÏwould€be€that€the€nonparty€may€be€forced€to€hire€an€attorney.€€ItÏcould€also€cause€problems€in€non„lead„paint€cases.€€Mr.€Sykes€notedÏthat€one€of€the€dangers€with€the€way€the€Rule€is€drafted€now€is€thatÏin€a€non„lead„paint€case,€the€plaintiff€attorney€may€think€that€it€isÏnecessary€to€file€a€motion,€and€it€may€not€be€obvious€that€there€areÐ L-œ(. Ðother€ways€to€approach€this.Ìà  àMr.€Thalenberg€pointed€out€that€the€suggested€change€to€sectionÏ(b)€is€more€onerous€than€what€Rule€2„431€requires.€€€Mr.€SykesÏexplained€that€the€motion€would€describe€any€reasonable€efforts€madeÏto€inspect€the€property,€and€if€the€efforts€were€not€reasonable,€theÏjudge€could€deny€the€motion€to€inspect.€€Ìà  àThe€Chair€called€for€a€vote€on€Mr.€Karceski's€motion€to€add€toÏsection€(b)€a€requirement€that€the€motion€describe€the€previous€goodÏfaith€efforts€made€to€inspect€the€property.€€The€motion€carried€withÏone€opposed.€€The€Chair€said€that€the€Style€Subcommittee€will€makeÏthe€change€using€the€suggested€language€and€making€it€similar€to€RuleÏ2„431.€€Ìà  àMr.€Howell€commented€that€it€may€be€prudent€to€have€a€separateÏrequirement€as€to€the€reason€for€the€inspection.€€The€nonparty€whoÏreceives€the€motion€may€not€know€what€is€going€on.€€There€is€noÏrequirement€that€the€moving€party€has€to€state€the€reasons€for€theÏinspection.€€The€Vice€Chair€cautioned€that€the€wording€is€important,Ïbecause€counsel€should€not€have€to€divulge€his€or€her€strategy.€€Mr.ÏBowen€suggested€that€the€following€language€could€be€added€toÏsubsection€(b)(1):€€"the€purpose€of€the€inspection."€€Ìà  àMr.€Titus€said€that€the€nonparty€probably€knows€nothing€aboutÏthe€case.€€No€copy€of€the€original€complaint€was€served€upon€theÏnonparty.€€Mr.€Karceski€pointed€out€that€the€inspector€who€asks€toÏsee€the€property€may€give€the€nonparty€evasive€answers€about€theÐ L-œ(. Ðpurpose€of€the€inspection.€€Mr.€Titus€moved€that€the€motion€shouldÏinclude€a€description€of€the€nature€of€the€controversy€and€theÏrelationship€of€the€desired€inspection€to€the€controversy.€€TheÏmotion€was€seconded.€€Mr.€Bowen€noted€that€Mr.€Titus'€motion€mayÏcause€the€moving€party€to€have€to€tell€all€about€the€proceeding,Ïwhile€Mr.€Bowen's€suggestion,€which€was€to€include€in€the€motion€theÏpurpose€of€the€inspection,€would€not€be€so€comprehensive.€€Mr.€TitusÏremarked€that€this€is€not€an€insignificant€difference€because€simplyÏincluding€the€purpose€of€the€inspection€may€not€provide€sufficientÏnotice€to€the€nonparty.€à h àMr.€Bowen€hypothesized€a€situation€where€aÐ ”ä Ðstream€has€been€polluted.€€A€sues€B,€and€both€parties€wish€to€inspectÏthe€property€of€C.€€Mr.€Thalenberg€expressed€the€view€that€the€motionÏis€turning€into€a€brief,€and€he€disagreed€with€this€approach.€€TheÏChair€commented€that€previously€there€has€been€no€rule€at€all.€€JudgeÏKaplan€suggested€that€the€Rule€could€be€simplified€by€being€limitedÏto€lead€paint€cases.€€Including€a€statement€of€the€reason€for€theÏinspection€is€a€good€idea.€€The€discovery€rules€are€impractical€inÏlead€paint€cases.€€The€Reporter€commented€that€one€impetus€for€theÏRule€was€that€the€federal€rule€was€changed,€and€that€rule€appliesÏgenerally.€€Mr.€Howell€reiterated€his€original€suggestion€that€theÏRule€should€have€a€statement€of€the€reason€or€the€purpose€for€theÏinspection,€even€if€the€Rule€is€limited€to€lead€paint€cases.€€TheÏChair€said€that€the€Rule€applies€to€more€than€lead€paint€cases.€€Ìà  àThe€Chair€called€for€a€vote€on€Mr.€Titus'€motion€to€include€inÐ L-œ(. Ðthe€Rule€a€requirement€that€the€motion€state€the€nature€of€theÏcontroversy€and€the€relationship€of€the€desired€inspection€to€theÏcontroversy.€€The€motion€passed€with€two€opposed.Ìà  àThe€Reporter€inquired€if€the€language€about€the€undertaking€isÏto€be€included.€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€to€include€theÏlanguage.€€The€Chair€asked€about€having€the€Rule€apply€in€theÏDistrict€Court.€€The€Vice€Chair€suggested€that€the€District€CourtÏSubcommittee€look€into€this.Ìà  àThe€Vice€Chair€suggested€that€there€be€a€cross€reference€toÏRule€2„311€following€section€(d).€€Mr.€Howell€cautioned€that€sectionÏ(d)€should€not€be€construed€that€parties€cannot€file€responsesÏpursuant€to€Rule€2„311.€€The€Reporter€said€that€a€Committee€noteÏcould€make€this€clear.€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€to€add€theÏCommittee€note.€€The€Reporter€asked€if€parties€have€15€days€toÏrespond.€€Mr.€Titus€replied€that€in€the€affirmative.€€Ìà  àThe€Vice€Chair€moved€that€the€third€sentence€of€section€(f)Ïread€as€follows:€€"The€order€may€also€include€any€other€provisionÏthat€the€court€deems€appropriate,€including€provisions€relating€toÏthe€privacy€of€the€nonparty€and€the€filing€of€a€bond."€€The€motionÏwas€seconded,€and€it€passed€unanimously.€€The€Reporter€asked€if€aÏreference€to€"parties"€will€be€included€in€the€third€sentence€ofÏsection€(f).€€The€Chair€said€that€parties€should€be€included.€€TheÏCommittee€agreed€by€consensus€to€this€change.Ìà  àMr.€Karceski€moved€to€approve€the€Rule€as€amended€at€theÐ L-œ(. Ðmeeting.€€The€motion€was€seconded,€and€it€carried€unanimously.€ÌÓÓÌAgenda€Item€1.€€Consideration€of€policy€issues€raised€by€theÌ€€Style€Subcommittee€concerning€proposed€new€Rules€16„709Ì€€(Confidentiality€and€Disclosure€of€Information)€and€16„731Ì€€(Petition€for€Disciplinary€Action)€€(See€Appendix€1).Ì______________________________________________________________ÌÌÓÓà  àMr.€Bowen€presented€Rules€16„709€(a)€and€16„731€(a)€for€theÏCommittee's€consideration.€€(See€Appendix€1).€€Mr.€Bowen€explainedÏthat€when€the€Style€Subcommittee€was€reviewing€Rule€Ì16„709€(a),€the€question€arose€as€to€when€does€the€petition€forÏdisciplinary€action€become€public€„„€when€it€is€filed€or€when€it€isÏserved?€€€The€Style€Subcommittee€recommends€that€the€petition€becomeÏpublic€when€filed.€€Mr.€Hirshman€pointed€out€that€under€the€currentÏRules,€the€petition€becomes€public€as€soon€as€it€is€filed€in€theÏCourt€of€Appeals.€€The€issue€of€what€becomes€public€has€been€raisedÏpreviously.€€It€is€the€portions€of€the€file€dealing€with€the€PanelÏhearings€and€the€transcripts.€€The€Chair€said€that€the€proposed€RuleÏtakes€care€of€this€issue.€€By€changing€the€trigger€to€filing€insteadÏof€service,€the€Rule€will€be€consistent€with€current€practice.€€TheÏfiling€of€a€petition€creates€an€action€for€everyone€to€see.€€There€isÏno€need€to€hide€the€petition€until€service€has€been€effected.€€Ìà  àMr.€Howell€noted€that€one€problem€is€establishing€a€bright€lineÏbetween€confidentiality€and€public€proceedings.€€The€Subcommittee€andÏthe€Rules€Committee€had€taken€the€position€that€it€was€unfair€to€haveÏfiling€as€the€bright€line,€because€the€attorney€has€not€yet€beenÏserved€and€may€not€be€served€for€some€time.€€To€address€this€problem,Ð ..~)/ Ðthe€Style€Subcommittee€proposes€a€return€to€the€practice€of€theÏpresent€rule€and€an€amendment€to€proposed€Rule€16„731€to€provide€thatÏBar€Counsel€notifies€the€attorney€before€the€petition€is€filed,€whichÏserves€as€a€manner€of€alerting€the€attorney.€€Mr.€Hirshman€commentedÏthat€currently€his€office€sends€out€a€letter€informing€an€attorneyÏthat€public€charges€will€be€filed€as€of€a€date€named€in€the€notice.Ìà  àMr.€Titus€moved€to€approve€the€amendments€to€proposed€new€RulesÏ16„709€and€16„731.€€The€motion€was€seconded,€and€it€passedÏunanimously.ÌÓÓÌAgenda€Item€2.€€Consideration€of€proposed€new€Rule€8„115Ì€€(Citation€Format)Ì________________________________________________________________ÌÌÓÓà  àThe€Chair€presented€Rule€8„115,€Citation€Format,€for€theÏCommittee's€consideration.€€ÌÓÓÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÌà@÷ ÷ ìàMARYLAND€RULES€OF€PROCEDUREˆÌÌà@§ § ìàTITLE€8€„€APPELLATE€REVIEW€IN€THE€COURT€OFˆÌ€à@ú ú ìàAPPEALS€AND€COURT€OF€SPECIAL€APPEALSˆÐ  ^ ÐÌà@Ü Ü ìàCHAPTER€100€„€GENERAL€PROVISIONSˆÌÌÌà ¸ àADD€new€Rule€8„115,€as€follows:ÌññÓrivaÓññÌÌRule€8„115.€€CITATION€FORMATÌÌÌ€€(a)€€Sequential€NumberingÌÌà ¸ à€€As€a€part€of€the€official€text€of€eachÏreported€opinion,€the€Court€of€Appeals€andÏCourt€of€Special€Appeals€shall€provide€a€uniqueÏsequential€decision€number€which€contains€theÐ ..~)/ Ðfollowing€three€elements,€each€elementÏseparated€by€a€space:ÌÌ€€€€(1)€€The€first€element€of€the€decisionÏnumber€shall€be€the€calendar€year€in€which€theÏcase€was€decided.ÌÌ€€€€(2)€€The€second€element€of€the€decisionÏnumber€shall€be€the€abbreviated€identificationÏof€the€court€rendering€the€decision.€€The€CourtÏof€Appeals€shall€be€identified€by€theÏabbreviation,€"MD."€€The€Court€of€SpecialÏAppeals€shall€be€identified€by€theÏabbreviation,€"MD€App."ÌÌ€€€€(3)€€The€third€element€of€the€decisionÏnumber€shall€be€the€sequential€number€of€theÏdecision€within€each€calendar€year€cycle.ÌÌ€€(b)€€Paragraph€NumberingÌÌà ¸ à€€The€Court€of€Appeals€and€Court€ofÏSpecial€Appeals€shall€provide€paragraph€numbersÏas€a€part€of€the€official€text€of€each€reportedÏopinion.€€The€paragraph€numbers€may€provide€theÏinternal€marker€for€pinpoint€citations€toÏspecific€portions€of€the€text€of€the€opinion.ÌÌ€€(c)€€Approved€Citation€FormatÌÌà ¸ à€€Any€reported€opinion€of€a€case€decidedÏby€the€Court€of€Appeals€or€the€Court€of€SpecialÏAppeals€after€January€1,€1999,€may€be€cited€byÏuse€of€the€format€authorized€by€this€Rule,€soÏlong€as€it€is€accompanied€by€a€parallelÏcitation€to€a€commonly€used€printed€caseÏreport.€€If€the€internal€paragraph€marker€isÏused€in€the€primary€citation,€parallel€pinpointÏcitations€are€not€needed.ÌññÓrivaÓññÌCommittee€note:€€For€the€first€decision€of€theÏCourt€of€Appeals€in€1999,€the€citation€formatÏwould€be,€"1999€MD€1."€€The€pinpoint€citationÏto€a€quotation€taken€from€paragraph€12€wouldÏbe,€"1999€MD€1,€12."€€The€full€parallelÏcitation€would€be,€"1999€MD€1,€12,€723€A.2dÏ452."€€The€first€decision€of€the€Court€ofÏSpecial€Appeals€in€2001€would€be€cited,€"2001Ð ..~)/ ÐMD€App€1."€€The€third€decision€of€the€Court€ofÏSpecial€Appeals€in€2001€would€be,€"2001€MD€AppÏ3."ÌÌSource:€€This€Rule€is€new.ÌÌÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àRule€8„115€was€accompanied€by€the€following€Reporter's€Note.ÌÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ àThis€Rule€presents€a€new€universalÏcitation€system€which€allows€for€the€citationÏof€cases€disseminated€on€the€Internet€or€CD„¼Rom.€€The€current€system€cannot€cite€casesÏdisseminated€by€computer€because€there€is€noÏpagination€on€the€computer.€€At€least€nineÏother€states€have€similar€proposals€pending,Ïand€eight€states€have€either€adopted€a€parallelÏsystem€or€a€system€which€includes€paragraphÏnumbering.ÌÌÌÓÓÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àThe€Chair€stated€that€James€Carbine,€Esq.,€a€consultant€to€theÏGeneral€Court€Administration€Subcommittee,€had€presented€the€issue€ofÏa€uniform€citation€system€to€the€Subcommittee€and€would€explain€thisÏto€the€Rules€Committee.€€Mr.€Carbine€told€the€Committee€that€the€textÏof€the€proposed€Rule€is€a€variant€of€the€American€Bar€AssociationÏ(ABA)€Model€Rule.€€In€the€summer€of€1996,€the€ABA€recommended€thatÏall€jurisdictions€adopt€a€universal€system€of€citation.€€The€draft€ofÏRule€8„115€is€not€identical€to€the€ABA€Rule.€€Ìà  àMr.€Carbine€said€that€he€would€present€the€background€to€theÏRule.€€In€the€late€1980's€and€early€1990's,€grass€roots€user„€drivenÏpressure€arose€to€develop€a€citation€convention,€which€would€be€freeÏfrom€page€and€volume€numbers€to€accommodate€electronic€citation.€ÏThis€spawned€a€number€of€experimental€systems.€€By€November,€1994,Ïthe€ABA€got€involved€in€the€effort.€€There€were€at€least€fourÐ ..~)/ Ðjurisdictions€with€experimental€systems€„„€Louisiana,€Colorado,ÏWisconsin,€and€the€U.S.€Court€of€Appeals€for€the€Sixth€Circuit.€€AllÏwere€different.€€The€ABA€feared€"do„it„yourself"€attempts€to€solveÏthe€problem€of€electronic€citation.€€Mr.€Carbine€had€been€on€the€ABAÏcommittee€to€analyze€the€issue.€€Ìà  àMr.€Carbine€stated€that€he€strongly€recommends€changing€theÏcurrent€citation€system€in€Maryland.€€It€is€preferable€to€use€aÏuniform€system€which€can€be€used€around€the€country,€so€that€it€isÏnot€necessary€for€lawyers€to€learn€50€different€citation€systems.€ÏThe€system€can€work€equally€well€for€an€attorney€without€a€computer.€ÏThe€Committee€note€explains€how€the€system€works.€€The€citationÏcontains€the€year€and€the€court€identifier.€€The€decisions€areÏnumbered€in€the€sequence€in€which€they€are€rendered.€€It€is€withinÏthe€discretion€of€the€court€to€decide€which€judicial€acts€get€aÏnumber€and€how€to€assign€sequential€numbers.€€The€ABA€recommends€thatÏeach€paragraph€be€numbered.€€The€case€citation€is€part€of€theÏofficial€text€of€the€opinion.€€The€new€form€of€citation€in€the€ABAÏRule€is€mandatory,€but€in€proposed€Rule€8„115,€it€is€permissive,Ïproviding€that€the€new€form€of€citation€"may"€be€used.€€This€allowsÏfor€a€first€step€in€the€process€of€converting€to€a€new€system€inÏwhich€the€ABA€system€would€totally€replace€the€Maryland€Reports.€€ForÏexample,€in€1999,€the€book€of€cases€would€look€the€same,€but€theÏspine€of€the€book€would€read€"1999€MD.€1€„€50."€€The€first€50Ïopinions€would€be€in€the€book€in€sequential€order€with€numberedÐ L-œ(. Ðparagraphs.€€Under€this€proposal,€there€are€two€parallel€citationsÏwhich€are€functionally€equivalent.€€Eventually€the€system€will€be€theÏsame€as€the€ABA€system.€€In€10€or€15€years,€there€may€be€no€more€caseÏbooks,€and€the€marketplace€will€demand€the€universal€citator.€€Ìà  àMr.€Klein€pointed€out€that€the€transitional€book€would€continueÏto€have€page€numbers.€€Ms.€Ogletree€noted€that€a€parallel€citationÏcould€be€1999€MD.€1,€400€Md.€253.€€Mr.€Carbine€explained€that€theÏproposal€recommended€by€the€Subcommittee€is€less€aggressive€than€theÏABA€proposal.€€It€would€require€the€opinions€to€be€cited€as€"1999€MD.Ï1",€and€the€paragraphs€would€be€numbered,€but€the€case€book€wouldÏlook€like€it€does€currently.€€Mr.€Titus€asked€if€the€Atlantic€2ndÏcitation€would€be€used.€€Mr.€Carbine€explained€that€either€theÏMaryland€or€the€Atlantic€2nd€citation€could€be€used.€€Mr.€TitusÏremarked€that€it€is€a€benefit€to€be€liberated€from€page€numbers.€€Mr.ÏCarbine€noted€that€the€beauty€of€this€system€is€that€one€would€haveÏaccess€to€slip€opinions€with€a€workable€cite.Ìà  àMr.€Howell€commented€that€one€issue€which€the€Subcommittee€hadÏdiscussed€was€how€the€new€system€would€work€if€the€appellate€courtÏmodified€an€opinion€after€its€initial€release€by€adding€paragraphs.€ÏMr.€Carbine€responded€that€this€is€not€a€problem.€€Currently€whatÏhappens€is€that€the€slip€opinion€looks€different€from€what€is€in€theÏbook.€€In€the€new€scheme,€it€would€be€similar,€with€the€book€varyingÏfrom€the€initial€opinion.€€In€the€future,€it€will€become€a€biggerÏproblem,€because€the€day€the€opinion€is€issued,€it€will€becomeÐ L-œ(. Ðavailable€on€the€Internet.€€To€modify€it,€the€revised€opinion€willÏhave€to€be€given€a€new€number,€such€as€1999€MD.€1,€as€modified€byÏ1999€MD.€32.€€The€Chair€pointed€out€that€the€appellate€courtsÏwithdraw€an€opinion€and€refile€it€if€there€is€a€substantive€change.€ÏRarely€are€the€opinions€in€the€green€book€of€Court€of€Special€AppealsÏdecisions€different€than€when€the€€reported€opinion€was€filed.€€TheÏnew€system€will€help€the€courts€deal€with€the€problem€of€attorneysÏusing€unreported€opinions.€€Ìà  àMr.€Howell€inquired€what€would€happen€if€the€court€issues€anÏunreported€opinion€and€later€decides€to€report€it.€€The€Chair€repliedÏthat€this€is€not€a€problem;€it€would€be€published€in€a€citableÏformat.€€Mr.€Howell€observed€that€this€would€not€be€in€sequence.€€TheÏChair€said€that€unreported€opinions€are€handled€differently.€€Mr.ÏHowell€noted€that€an€unreported€opinion€could€be€issued€in€January,Ïand€then€in€March,€the€court€decides€to€publish€it.€€Mr.€CarbineÏexplained€that€the€opinion€would€be€the€functional€equivalent€of€aÏMarch€opinion.Ìà  àThe€Chair€stated€that€under€the€new€system,€there€would€beÏthree€citations,€the€new€one€which€would€be€1999€MD.€1,€the€boundÏvolume€citation,€and€the€Atlantic€2nd€citation.€€The€old€system€isÏnot€being€abandoned.€€Mr.€Bowen€asked€why€the€new€system€is€not€theÏsame€as€the€one€proposed€by€the€ABA.€€The€Reporter€said€that€she€hadÏspoken€with€Alex€Cummings,€Esq.,€the€Clerk€of€the€Court€of€Appeals,Ïwho€had€explained€that€the€contract€with€West€Publishing€Company€forÐ L-œ(. Ðpublishing€Maryland€opinions€is€renegotiated€each€December.€€AfterÏthat,€the€new€system€could€be€started.€€The€Chair€pointed€out€thatÏunder€the€new€system,€there€would€be€no€page€numbers.€€Mr.€CarbineÏremarked€that€the€paragraphs€would€be€numbered.€€The€Vice€ChairÏsuggested€that€West€could€be€asked€to€put€the€number€of€the€case€inÏthe€right„hand€corner€of€each€page.Ìà  àJudge€Kaplan€expressed€the€view€that€the€Subcommittee€wasÏtimid,€and€it€should€have€adopted€the€new€system€entirely.€€Mr.€KleinÏnoted€that€section€(c)€of€Rule€8„115€could€be€changed€to€mandatoryÏinstead€of€permissive,€as€it€is€now.€€The€universal€cite€would€beÏmandatory,€and€the€parallel€cite€strongly€encouraged.€€Mr.€HowellÏobserved€that€there€is€a€statute€which€refers€to€"Maryland€Reports."€ÏMs.€Ogletree€noted€that€this€will€not€be€changed€„„€only€theÏnumbering€system€is€changed.€€The€Reporter€commented€that€theÏMaryland€Report€is€the€official€cite,€and€parallel€cites€may€beÏadded.€€The€Vice€Chair€asked€if€Rule€Ì8„504€requires€both€cites,€and€the€Chair€replied€that€only€theÏMaryland€cite€is€necessary.€€Mr.€Sykes€remarked€that€this€may€be€moreÏburdensome.€€Mr.€Bowen€moved€that€the€Rule€shall€be€mandatory,€usingÏthe€same€citation€for€the€bound€volume€and€ÌCD„Rom,€and€it€may€be€accompanied€by€a€parallel€citation.€€The€motionÏwas€seconded€and€passed.Ìà  àMr.€Karceski€suggested€that€the€subscription€to€Atlantic€2ndÏcould€be€stopped€as€of€January,€1999.€€The€Chair€said€that€theÐ L-œ(. Ðopinion€printed€in€the€Atlantic€2nd€Reporter€as€of€that€date€wouldÏhave€numbered€paragraphs.€€Mr.€Karceski€inquired€if€the€spine€of€theÏnew€volume€would€have€a€new€sequential€number.€€Mr.€Carbine€answeredÏthat€the€volume€number€could€be€numbered€just€as€it€is€now,€exceptÏthat€the€year€and€case€numbers€would€be€printed€on€the€spine.€€TheÏVice€Chair€stated€that€she€was€impressed€with€the€foresight€of€theÏRules€Committee.€€Ìà  àMr.€Hochberg€asked€about€citation€of€denials€of€writs€ofÏcertiorari.€€Mr.€Carbine€replied€that€the€principle€is€that€eachÏreported€decision€is€cited€by€the€new€system.€€It€would€be€up€to€theÏCourt€of€Appeals€as€to€whether€it€will€assign€a€number€to€the€denialÏof€a€writ€of€certiorari.€€Mr.€Maloney€suggested€that€the€words€"andÏorder"€could€be€added€into€the€first€sentence€of€section€(a)€afterÏthe€word€"opinion."€€Mr.€Bowen€observed€that€the€cases€should€beÏcited€using€the€abbreviation€"MD"€because€this€is€the€abbreviationÏused€by€the€U.S.€postal€service.€€Mr.€Carbine€added€that€the€ABAÏrecommends€that€each€state€use€the€postal€abbreviation.Ìà  àThe€Chair€suggested€that€something€be€added€to€the€Rule€toÏrefer€to€decisions€other€than€opinions.€€Mr.€Carbine€proposed€usingÏthe€language€"and€such€other€judicial€acts€as€the€court€deemsÏappropriate."€€The€Chair€expressed€doubt€about€this€language.€€TheÏfact€that€certiorari€was€granted€or€that€certiorari€is€pending€mayÏneed€to€be€in€the€citation€as€well€as€the€date€on€which€the€petitionÏfor€certiorari€was€filed€and€the€date€on€which€it€was€granted.€€Mr.Ð L-œ(. ÐCarbine€commented€that€this€may€be€going€beyond€the€needs€of€theÏRule,€which€does€not€address€the€history€of€the€case.€€Mr.€MaloneyÏremarked€that€what€is€now€in€the€bound€volumes€goes€into€the€newÏcitation.€€Mr.€Klein€expressed€his€agreement€that€the€word€"opinion"Ïin€section€(a)€is€too€limited.€€Ìà  àThe€Chair€said€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€probably€would€notÏwant€to€assign€a€decision€number€to€every€petition€for€certiorari.€ÏCounsel€can€find€them€the€same€way€they€do€now€by€going€to€the€pageÏwhich€has€on€it€the€grants€and€denials€of€certiorari.€€Mr.€TitusÏpointed€out€that€no€other€rule€provides€how€to€cite€grants€andÏdenials€of€certiorari.€€This€is€a€mechanical€matter€for€the€court.€ÏMs.€Ogletree€noted€that€memorial€services€are€listed€in€the€boundÏvolumes,€and€Mr.€Sykes€added€that€rules€orders€are€also€listed.€€TheÏChair€reiterated€that€the€suggestion€had€been€made€to€include€theÏwords€"and€order"€after€the€word€"opinion"€in€the€first€line€ofÏsection€(a).€€à ¸ àMr.€Howell€suggested€that€section€(a)€could€be€brokenÐ ,| Ðdown€into€two€parts,€one€of€which€would€clarify€that€sequentialÏnumbers€may€be€given€to€items€other€than€opinions.€€Mr.€SykesÏquestioned€whether€the€Rule€should€refer€to€the€sequential€number€ofÏa€denial€of€certiorari.€€Mr.€Howell€explained€that€it€is€notÏnecessary€to€cite€it,€but€the€court€may€wish€to€number€it.€€OrdersÏdealing€with€disciplinary€actions€are€published€frequently.€€TheÏChair€said€that€no€rule€requires€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€numberÏsequentially€each€denial€of€certiorari.€€The€denial€of€50€petitionsÐ L-œ(. Ðcould€be€given€one€number.€€A€separate€subsection€dealing€withÏcertiorari€petitions€in€the€Court€of€Appeals€could€be€included€in€theÏRule.€€Ìà  àMr.€Sykes€commented€that€now€when€certiorari€is€denied,€theÏpage€number€is€referenced.€€If€certiorari€is€granted,€the€date€couldÏbe€listed€in€the€book.€€A€number€can€be€assigned€later.€€Judge€KaplanÏsuggested€that€there€could€be€a€separate€sentence€in€the€Rule€whichÏprovides€that€any€reported€order€of€the€court€may€be€given€a€number.€ÏMr.€Howell€noted€that€there€is€no€requirement€that€the€court€publishÏits€orders.€€The€Chair€stated€that€if€the€Court€of€Appeals€doesÏpublish€an€order,€the€Court€will€do€what€it€is€doing€now.€€Mr.€BowenÏremarked€that€denials€can€go€into€one€order€with€pinpoint€paragraphs,Ïsuch€as€1999€MD.€26,€10.€€Judge€Kaplan€asked€how€the€ABA€handlesÏthis.€€Mr.€Carbine€replied€that€the€ABA€gives€the€courts€latitude,Ïincluding€as€little€in€the€Rule€as€possible.€€The€Chair€commented€itÏis€better€that€the€Court€of€Appeals€does€not€have€to€report€theÏdenial€of€certiorari.€€Ìà  àMr.€Bowen€moved€that€the€words€"and€order"€be€added€in€afterÏthe€word€"opinion"€in€the€first€line€of€section€(a),€the€motion€wasÏseconded,€and€it€passed€unanimously.Ìà  àMr.€Sykes€inquired€about€citing€cases€from€other€juris„¼dictions.€€Mr.€Bowen€responded€that€those€jurisdictions€that€haveÏadopted€this€system€will€be€cited€similarly.€€Otherwise,€the€case€isÏcited€using€the€system€of€that€jurisdiction.€€Citing€otherÐ L-œ(. Ðjurisdictions€is€not€part€of€Rule€8„115.€€Mr.€Howell€suggested€thatÏthe€Courts€Article€should€be€checked€to€make€sure€that€the€new€systemÏis€not€inconsistent€with€any€statutes.€€Mr.€Sykes€asked€about€Rule€8„¼504€(a)(1).€€Mr.€Maloney€observed€that€no€substantive€change€isÏrequired,€and€the€Reporter€stated€that€she€would€draft€any€conformingÏamendment€that€may€be€needed€for€clarity.€€Mr.€Bowen€moved€to€adoptÏRule€8„115€as€it€was€amended€at€the€meeting.€€The€motion€was€secondedÏand€passed€unanimously.€€à h àThe€Chair€thanked€Mr.€Carbine€for€hisÐ  \  Ðassistance€in€developing€Rule€8„115.€€ÌÓÓÌAgenda€Item€3.€€Continued€consideration€of€proposed€new€Rule€Ì€€3„721€(Receivers)Ì______________________________________________________________ÌÌÓÓÌà  àThe€Reporter€presented€Rule€3„721,€Receivers,€for€theÏCommittee's€consideration.€€ÌÓÓÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÌà@÷ ÷ ìàMARYLAND€RULES€OF€PROCEDUREˆÌÌà@o o ìàTITLE€3€„€CIVIL€PROCEDURE€„„€DISTRICT€COURTˆÌÌà@¤ ¤ ìàCHAPTER€700€„€SPECIAL€PROCEEDINGSˆÌÌÌà ¸ àADD€new€Rule€3„721,€as€follows:ÌÌÌRule€3„721.€€RECEIVERSÌÌÌ€€(a)€€ApplicabilityÌÌà ¸ à€€This€Rule€applies€when€a€receiver€isÏappointed€by€the€District€Court€to€take€chargeÏof€property,€pursuant€to€the€statutoryÐ ..~)/ Ðprovisions€granting€equitable€jurisdiction€toÏthe€court,€for€the€enforcement€of€a€local€orÏstate€code,€or€to€abate€a€nuisance.€€ÌÌ€€(b)€€Applicability€of€Other€RulesÌÌà ¸ à€€Except€as€otherwise€specificallyÏprovided€in€this€Chapter,€the€procedures€forÏmaking€a€sale€of€property€by€the€receiver€shallÏbe€governed€by€Title€14,€Chapter€300€of€theseÏRules.ÌÌ€€(c)€€BondÌÌà ¸ à€€The€court€may€require€bond€to€the€StateÏof€Maryland,€to€be€filed€with€the€court,€in€anÏamount€not€to€exceed€the€value€of€the€property.ÌÌ€€(d)€€OrderÌÌà ¸ à€€An€order€appointing€a€receiver€shallÏspecify€(1)€the€powers€of€the€receiver,Ïincluding€the€ability€to€incur€expenses€andÏcreate€liens€on€the€property€to€secure€paymentÏof€those€expenses,€and€(2)€the€terms€of€sale.ÌÌ€€(e)€€Employment€of€Other€ProfessionalsÌÌà ¸ à€€A€receiver€shall€not€employ€an€attorney,Ïaccountant,€appraiser,€auctioneer,€or€otherÏprofessional€without€prior€approval€by€theÏcourt.ÌÌ€€(f)€€Procedures€Following€Sale€of€the€ÌPropertyÌÌ€€€€(1)€€Notice€by€Certified€MailÌÌà ¸ à€€€€In€lieu€of€the€clerk€issuing€noticeÏand€publication€thereof€when€filing€the€ReportÏof€Sale,€the€receiver€shall€send€a€notice,Ïwhich€states€that€the€sale€has€been€completed,Ïby€certified€mail€to€the€last€known€address€of:€Ïthe€mortgagor;€the€present€record€owner€of€theÏproperty;€and€the€holder€of€a€recordedÏsubordinate€mortgage,€deed€of€trust,€or€otherÏrecorded€or€filed€subordinate€interest,Ïincluding€a€judgment€in€the€property.€€TheÐ ..~)/ Ðnotice€shall€provide€that€the€sale€of€theÏproperty€shall€be€final€unless€cause€to€theÏcontrary€is€shown€within€30€days€after€the€dateÏof€the€notice.ÌÌ€€€€(2)€€Posting€of€PropertyÌÌà ¸ à€€€€The€receiver€shall€cause€the€sheriffÏto€post€a€notice€in€a€conspicuous€place€on€theÏproperty.€€The€notice€shall€provide€that€theÏsale€of€the€property€shall€be€final€unlessÏcause€to€the€contrary€is€shown€within€30€daysÏafter€the€date€of€the€notice.ÌÌ€€€€(3)€€Exceptions€to€SaleÌÌà ¸ à€€€€An€exception€to€a€sale€may€be€filedÏwithin€30€days€after€the€date€of€the€noticeÏissued€pursuant€to€subsections€(f)(1)€andÏ(f)(2)€of€this€Rule.ÌÌ€€(g)€€Final€AccountingÌÌà ¸ à€€After€a€sale€has€been€ratified€by€theÏcourt,€the€receiver€shall€file€a€proposedÏaccounting.€€The€receiver€shall€send€notice€ofÏthe€accounting€to€the€persons€listed€inÏsubsection€(f)(1)€of€this€Rule,€who€shall€haveÏten€days€after€the€date€of€the€notice€to€fileÏexceptions.€€The€court€may€decide€exceptionsÏwithout€a€hearing€unless€a€hearing€is€requestedÏwith€the€exceptions.ÌÌ€€(h)€€Conveyance€to€PurchaserÌÌà ¸ à€€After€a€sale€has€been€ratified€by€theÏcourt€and€the€purchase€money€paid,€the€receiverÏshall€promptly€convey€the€property€to€theÏpurchaser,€and€cause€to€be€recorded€among€theÏland€records€of€each€county€where€any€part€ofÏthe€property€is€located€a€certified€copy€of€theÏdocket€entries,€the€report€of€sale,€the€finalÏorder€of€ratification€and€any€other€ordersÏaffecting€the€property.ÌÌ€€(i)€€Distribution€and€TerminationÌÌà ¸ à€€After€the€final€account€has€beenÐ ..~)/ Ðratified€by€the€court,€the€receiver€shallÏdistribute€the€proceeds€of€the€sale.€€Once€theÏproceeds€have€been€distributed,€the€receiverÏshall€petition€the€court€to€terminate€theÏreceivership.ÌÌ€€(j)€€Removal€of€ReceiverÌÌà ¸ à€€Removal€of€a€receiver€or€of€any€personÏemployed€by€the€receiver,€may€be€instituted€onÏthe€court's€own€initiative€or€upon€petition€ofÏany€person€having€an€interest€in€the€property.€ÏA€petition€shall€state€the€reasons€for€theÏrequested€removal€and€may€include€a€request€forÏthe€appointment€of€a€successor€receiver.€€TheÏcourt€may€grant€or€deny€the€relief€requestedÏwith€or€without€a€hearing.ÌÌ€€(k)€€Resignation€of€ReceiverÌÌ€€€€(1)€€Petition€to€ResignÌÌà ¸ à€€€€A€receiver€may€file€a€petition€toÏresign.€€The€petition€shall€state€the€reasonsÏfor€the€proposed€resignation€and€may€include€aÏrequest€for€the€appointment€of€a€successorÏreceiver.ÌÌ€€€€(2)€€Report€of€Resigning€ReceiverÌÌà ¸ à€€€€The€resigning€receiver€shall€file€withÏthe€petition€a€report€and€accounting€from€theÏdate€the€receiver€was€appointed.€€ResignationÏof€a€receiver€does€not€terminate€theÏappointment€until€the€resignation€has€beenÏapproved€by€the€court.€€The€court€may€grant€orÏdeny€the€requested€relief€with€or€without€aÏhearing.ÌññÓxt€oÓññÌSource:€€This€Rule€is€derived€as€follows:ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(a)€is€in€part€derived€from€RuleÏ13„102€and€is€in€€part€new.Ìà ¸ àSection€(b)€is€derived€from€Rule€13„103.Ìà ¸ àSection€(c)€is€derived€from€Rule€13„107.Ìà ¸ àSection€(d)€is€new.Ìà ¸ àSection€(e)€is€derived€from€Rule€13„301Ï(a).Ð ..~)/ Ðà ¸ àSubsection€(f)(1)€if€derived€from€Rule€14„¼206€(b)(2).Ìà ¸ àSubsection€(f)(2)€is€derived€from€Rule€14„¼503€(c).Ìà ¸ àSubsection€(f)(3)€is€derived€from€Rule€14„¼305€(d).Ìà ¸ àSection€(g)€is€in€part€derived€from€RuleÏ2„543€and€is€in€part€new.Ìà ¸ àSection€(h)€is€in€part€derived€from€RuleÏ14„207€(f)(1)€and€Rule€14„306.Ìà ¸ àSection€(i)€is€in€part€derived€from€RuleÏ13„503€and€is€in€part€new.Ìà ¸ àSection€(j)€is€in€part€derived€from€RuleÏ13„701€and€in€part€from€Rule€13„702.Ìà ¸ àSection€(k)€is€derived€from€Rule€13„702.ÌÌÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àRule€3„721€was€accompanied€by€the€following€Reporter's€Note.ÌÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÌà ¸ àThis€Rule€was€requested€by€the€CommunityÏLaw€Center€because€of€problems€that€have€arisenÏwhen€organizations€are€appointed€by€theÏDistrict€Court€as€receivers€to€sell€properties,Ïmany€of€which€are€vacant,€at€public€auction.€ÏBecause€there€are€no€rules,€some€titleÏcompanies€are€hesitant€about€insuringÏproperties€that€have€been€sold€by€a€receiverÏappointed€by€the€District€Court.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(a)€is€partly€derived€from€RuleÏ13„102,€Scope,€which€is€one€of€the€RulesÏpertaining€to€receivers€and€assignees€in€theÏcircuit€court.€€Rule€3„721€(a)€covers€thoseÏareas€specifically€excluded€from€subsectionÏ(b)(2)€of€Rule€13„102,€such€as€enforcement€ofÏlocal€or€state€codes€and€abatement€of€aÏnuisance.€ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(b)€is€derived€from€Rule€13„303Ï(c),€Applicability€of€Other€Rules,€whichÏpertains€to€receivers€and€assignees€in€theÏcircuit€court.€€Since€proposed€Rule€3„721€is€aÏDistrict€Court€rule,€the€Title€2€Rules€do€notÏapply€as€they€do€in€the€circuit€courtÏreceiverships,€but€Title€14,€Chapter€300€doesÏapply.ÌÐ ..~)/ Ðà ¸ àSection€(c)€is€derived€from€a€few€of€theÏsalient€provisions€of€Rule€13„107,€Bond.€€ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(d)€is€new.€€Neither€Titles€13€norÏ14€has€a€provision€exactly€parallel€to€this€oneÏwhich€clarifies€that€the€court€may€give€theÏreceiver€certain€powers€and€may€set€out€theÏterms€of€the€sale€of€the€property.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(e)€is€derived€from€section€(a)€ofÏRule€13„301,€Employment€of€Attorney,€Account,ÏAppraiser,€Auctioneer,€or€Other€Professional.ÌÌà ¸ àSubsection€(f)(1)€is€derived€fromÏsubsection€(b)(2)€of€Rule€14„206,€ProcedureÏPrior€to€Sale.€€To€simplify€the€procedure€inÏthe€District€Court,€there€is€no€publicationÏrequirement€by€the€clerk€as€there€is€withÏcircuit€court€receiverships.€€Instead,€theÏreceiver€sends€notice€to€the€persons€who€haveÏan€interest€in€the€property€informing€them€ofÏthe€sale€of€the€property.ÌÌà ¸ àSubsection€(f)(2)€is€derived€from€sectionÏ(c)€of€Rule€14„503,€Process.€€Because€there€isÏno€publication€requirement,€the€postingÏprovision€has€been€added€as€an€extra€dueÏprocess€protection.ÌÌà ¸ àSubsection€(f)(3)€is€derived€from€sectionÏ(d)€of€Rule€14„305,€Procedure€Following€Sale.€ÏIt€provides€a€simple€mechanism€for€someone€withÏan€interest€in€the€property€to€contest€theÏsale.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(g)€is€in€part€derived€from€RuleÏ2„543,€Auditors,€but€since€there€is€no€auditorÏavailable€in€District€Court,€the€rule€could€notÏdirectly€follow€the€circuit€court€receivershipÏprocedure.€€The€receiver€files€the€accountingÏand€send€notice€of€it€to€interested€persons€whoÏhave€the€right€to€file€exceptions.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(h)€is€derived€from€subsectionÏ(f)(1)€of€Rule€14„207,€Sale,€and€Rule€14„306,ÏReal€Property„„Recording.€€It€provides€for€theÏproperty€to€be€conveyed€to€the€purchaser€afterÏthe€sale€has€been€ratified€and€for€recordationÐ ..~)/ Ðof€the€sale€transaction€in€the€appropriate€landÏrecords.Ìà ¸ àÌà ¸ àSection€(i)€is€in€part€derived€from€RuleÏ13„503,€Distribution,€which€is€the€distributionÏprovision€in€the€circuit€court€receivershipÏrules.€€The€second€sentence€is€new€and€wasÏadded€to€provide€a€method€to€close€the€case.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(j)€is€mostly€derived€from€RuleÏ13„701,€Removal€of€Assignee,€Receiver,€orÏProfessional,€which€is€the€removal€provision€inÏthe€circuit€court€receivership€rules.€€TheÏthird€sentence€is€derived€from€Rule€13„702,ÏResignation€of€Receiver€or€Assignee,€in€theÏcircuit€court€receivership€rules.ÌÌà ¸ àSection€(k)€is€derived€from€Rule€13„702,ÏResignation€of€Receiver€or€Assignee,€theÏparallel€circuit€court€rule.€€It€provides€theÏmechanism€for€a€receiver€to€resign.ÌÌÌÓÓÒ°` ÒÒ°` Òà  àThe€Reporter€explained€that€Judge€Rinehardt,€District€CourtÏSubcommittee€Chair,€was€unable€to€attend€today's€meeting€to€presentÏRule€3„721€(Receivers).€€The€Reporter€told€the€Committee€that€theÏproposed€Rule€includes€what€has€been€excluded€from€Rule€13„102€(b),ÏScope,€in€the€Rules€pertaining€to€Receivers€and€Assignees.€€MichaelÏI.€Gordon,€Esq.,€sent€in€a€comment€letter€in€which€he€suggested€thatÏsection€(h)€should€be€amended€to€mirror€the€wording€of€Rule€14„306,Ïsince€that€Rule€requires€recordation€among€the€land€records€only€whenÏthe€sale€is€made€of€an€interest€in€real€property€in€a€county€otherÏthan€one€in€which€all€of€the€property€is€located.€€The€Reporter€saidÏthat€Anne€Blumenberg,€Esq.,€and€Keith€Milligan€of€the€Community€LawÏCenter€were€present€to€discuss€Rule€3„721.Ìà  àThe€Reporter€said€that€she€had€included€in€the€meetingÐ ..~)/ Ðmaterials€a€recent€Court€of€Appeals€case,€òòMartin€v.€Howard€County,Ð ° ÐMarylandóó,€No.€13,€September€Term,€1996,€filed€May€13,€1998,€whichÐ tÄ Ðheld€that€there€is€a€right€to€a€jury€trial€in€an€action€to€abate€aÏnuisance€when€real€property€is€used€in€connection€with€controlledÏdangerous€substances€or€controlled€paraphernalia.€€The€CommitteeÏagreed€that€this€would€not€cause€a€problem€with€the€Rule.€€Mr.€SykesÏsuggested€that€section€(a)€should€contain€a€cross€reference€to€theÏlist€of€relevant€ordinances€and€statutes€which€allow€the€appointmentÏof€a€receiver.€€This€list€is€contained€in€the€May€7,€1998€memorandumÏsent€by€Ms.€Blumenberg,€a€copy€of€which€appears€in€the€meetingÏmaterials.€€The€Reporter€inquired€if€the€list€is€exhaustive,€and€Ms.ÏBlumenberg€replied€that€it€is.€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensusÏwith€this€suggestion€to€cross€reference€the€list.€€Mr.€SykesÏsuggested€that€the€cross€reference€could€be€worded€as€follows:€€"ForÏthe€power€of€the€District€Court€to€appoint€a€receiver,€see....".Ìà  àMr.€Sykes€suggested€that€in€section€(c),€the€word€"appraised"Ïshould€be€added€in€before€the€word€"value"€and€after€the€word€"the."€ÏThe€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€with€this€change.€€Mr.€SykesÏsuggested€that€in€section€(d),€the€word€"ability"€should€be€changedÏto€the€word€"power."€€The€Committee€also€agreed€by€consensus€withÏthis€suggestion.Ìà  àTurning€to€section€(e),€the€Chair€asked€if€the€receiver€canÏemploy€anyone€without€prior€court€approval.€€Ms.€Blumenberg€answeredÏthat€the€receiver€always€needs€court€approval,€and€this€is€always€inÐ L-œ(. Ðthe€court€order.€€Mr.€Sykes€suggested€that€sections€(d)€and€(e)€couldÏbe€collapsed€by€adding€language€to€section€(d)€which€includes€theÏpower€to€employ€professionals.€€The€Reporter€noted€that€after€theÏtime€of€the€order€appointing€the€receiver,€a€professional€may€beÏneeded.€€Mr.€Sykes€suggested€that€the€new€language€in€section€(d)Ïcould€include€the€substance€of€the€language€in€section€(e)€byÏproviding€that€the€receiver€should€not€employ€a€professional€withoutÏprior€court€approval.€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€to€thisÏsuggestion.€€Ìà  àMr.€Bowen€pointed€out€that€in€subsection€(f)(1),€there€shouldÏbe€a€comma€after€the€word€"judgment."€€The€Committee€agreed€byÏconsensus€with€this.€€The€Chair€asked€about€the€term€"subordinateÏinterest"€in€subsection€(f)(1).€€Mr.€Bowen€said€that€the€mortgageeÏgets€the€benefit€of€the€sale€and€that€the€mortgagor€needs€notice€asÏwell€as€any€subordinate€mortgagees.€€The€wording€of€subsection€(f)(1)Ïappears€to€be€correct.€€Ìà  àMr.€Howell€suggested€that€in€the€first€sentence€of€subsectionÏ(f)(2),€the€word€"a"€should€be€changed€to€the€word€"the,"€since€theÏnotice€has€already€been€referred€to€previously.€€The€Committee€agreedÏby€consensus€to€this€change.€€Mr.€Sykes€suggested€that€in€the€secondÏsentence€of€subsection€(f)(2),€the€word€"provide"€should€be€changedÏto€the€word€"state."€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€to€thisÏsuggestion.Ìà  àThere€was€no€discussion€of€subsection€(f)(3).€€Turning€toÐ L-œ(. Ðsection€(g),€Ms.€Ogletree€asked€who€can€do€the€accounting€since€noÏauditor€is€available€in€the€District€Court.€€Mr.€Maloney€asked€whatÏthe€current€procedure€is.€€Ms.€Blumenberg€replied€that€the€receiverÏsubmits€a€final€accounting.€€Judge€Vaughan€remarked€that€the€judgeÏcould€do€the€accounting,€since€an€auditor€is€an€added€expense.€€Ms.ÏOgletree€cautioned€that€in€a€county€which€has€one€judge€one€day€aÏweek,€it€would€be€difficult€for€that€judge€to€be€responsible€for€theÏaccount.€€Ìà  àThe€Chair€suggested€that€the€word€"proposed"€be€deleted€fromÏthe€first€sentence€of€section€(g).€€Ms.€Blumenberg€commented€that€theÏaccounting€is€a€very€simple€one,€consisting€of€no€more€than€twoÏpages.€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€with€the€Chair's€suggestionÏto€delete€the€word€"proposed."€€Ìà  àJudge€Johnson€inquired€if€someone€can€file€in€the€circuit€courtÏto€stop€the€proceedings€if€a€receiver€has€been€appointed€to€takeÏcharge€of€a€property€with€a€mortgage€on€it.€€Ms.€Blumenberg€answeredÏthat€anyone€with€an€interest€in€the€property€can€come€in€initiallyÏafter€the€receivership€petition€is€filed,€to€bring€the€property€up€toÏCode€standards.€€Judge€Vaughan€noted€that€the€statute€allows€theÏDistrict€Court€to€decide€title.€€Ms.€Ogletree€said€that€she€hadÏproblems€with€notice€and€process€in€the€Rule.€€She€questioned€whetherÏthe€mortgagee€has€notice€of€the€Code€enforcement€violation.€€Ms.ÏBlumenberg€responded€that€the€mortgagee€was€notified€initially.€€Ms.ÏOgletree€pointed€out€that€the€mortgage€may€have€been€transferredÐ L-œ(. Ðthree€or€four€times€to€various€companies.€€The€notice€may€have€goneÏto€the€original€mortgage€company.€€Then€the€property€is€foreclosed,Ïand€the€latest€mortgagee€does€not€get€due€process.€€The€Chair€notedÏthat€the€property€involved€is€usually€not€in€good€shape.€€TheÏsituation€has€already€reached€the€point€where€a€judge€is€involvedÏwith€the€enforcement€of€Code€violations.€€The€protections€wereÏafforded€earlier€in€the€proceedings.€€The€judge€has€said€that€theÏCode€violations€are€so€bad€that€the€judge€is€ordering€the€sale€of€theÏproperty.€€Mr.€Maloney€inquired€if€the€District€Court€isÏadministratively€equipped€to€handle€the€sale€of€the€property.€€TheÏChair€answered€that€the€statute€provides€that€the€proceeding€is€toÏtake€place€in€the€District€Court.Ìà  àMs.€Ogletree€reiterated€that€due€process€problems€exist.€€TheÏChair€stated€that€if€the€Committee€can€agree€on€the€rest€of€the€Rule,Ïat€the€next€meeting,€Judge€Rinehardt€can€give€the€District€CourtÏperspective.€€She€had€attended€the€April€meeting€at€which€Rule€3„721Ïwas€discussed,€and€she€had€indicated€that€she€thought€the€Rule€wouldÏwork.€€Ms.€Blumenberg€remarked€that€the€Rule€is€similar€to€a€tax€saleÏin€terms€of€getting€title€insurance.€€Ms.€Ogletree€expressed€the€viewÏthat€it€is€not€the€same€as€a€tax€sale,€and€she€asked€whether€titleÏinsurance€companies€are€willing€to€write€policies€after€the€title€isÏtransferred€by€these€proceedings.€€The€Chair€questioned€whether€theÏRule€should€build€in€extra€protections.€€Ms.€Ogletree€stated€thatÏwhen€a€tax€sale€takes€place,€there€is€proof€offered€to€the€titleÐ L-œ(. Ðinsurance€company€that€all€persons€have€been€notified.€€Ms.ÏBlumenberg€said€that€she€does€that€in€the€receivership€cases.€€Ms.ÏOgletree€suggested€that€the€Rule€should€specify€this.€€Judge€JohnsonÏadded€that€this€is€to€be€done€before€the€sale.€€Mr.€Bowen€pointed€outÏthat€Rules€14„300€òòet.€seq.óó€pertain€to€the€sale€of€the€property.€€ThisÐ À  ÐRule€covers€what€happens€after€the€sale.Ìà  àThe€Chair€drew€the€Committee's€attention€to€section€(h).€€Ms.ÏBlumenberg€referred€to€the€comment€letter€from€Mr.€Gordon.€€She€saidÏthat€a€compromise€to€this€issue€could€be€accomplished€by€referencingÏthe€case€in€the€deed.€€Ms.€Ogletree€told€the€Committee€that€she€hadÏspoken€with€Julia€Freit,€Esq.,€an€Assistant€Attorney€General€whoÏrepresents€the€court€clerks,€and€Ms.€Freit€had€had€a€problem€with€aÏsimilar€provision€in€Rule€Ì14„306,€concerning€the€recordation€of€a€sale€among€the€land€recordsÏof€other€counties.€€Ms.€Ogletree€agreed€that€the€case€should€beÏindexed€where€the€title€would€be€searched.€€Should€it€be€in€theÏcircuit€court€or€the€land€records?€€The€Chair€answered€that€the€caseÏshould€be€indexed€in€the€land€records.€€Judge€Vaughan€remarked€thatÏthere€are€deed€references,€and€Ms.€Ogletree€said€that€these€should€beÏattached€to€the€deed.€€The€Chair€suggested€that€there€be€aÏrequirement€that€the€report€of€sale€and€final€order€be€filed€amongÏthe€land€records.€€Ms.€Ogletree€said€that€it€should€be€a€copy€of€theÏdocket€entries€and€the€final€order€of€ratification,€and€the€CommitteeÏagreed€by€consensus€with€this€suggestion.Ð L-œ(. Ðà  àTurning€to€section€(i),€the€Chair€suggested€that€the€wordsÏ"final€account"€be€changed€to€the€word€"accounting."€€The€CommitteeÏagreed€by€consensus€with€this€suggestion.€€Mr.€Sykes€suggested€thatÏsection€(i)€be€collapsed€to€read:€"After€the€accounting€has€beenÏratified€by€the€court,€the€receiver€shall€distribute€the€proceeds€ofÏthe€sale€and€petition€the€court€to€terminate€the€receivership."€€TheÏCommittee€agreed€by€consensus€to€this€change.€€Judge€Vaughan€askedÏwhat€happens€if€the€receivership€is€not€terminated.€€The€ChairÏresponded€that€it€is€the€receiver's€duty€to€terminate,€but€there€isÏno€consequence€if€the€receivership€is€not€terminated.Ìà  àThe€Chair€drew€the€Committee's€attention€to€section€(j).€€Mr.ÏHochberg€inquired€as€to€the€meaning€of€"any€person€having€an€interestÏin€the€property."€€The€Reporter€replied€that€those€persons€are€theÏones€listed€in€subsection€(f)(1).€€Mr.€Sykes€asked€if€the€receiversÏget€paid.€€Ms.€Blumenberg€said€that€usually€the€receivers€work€forÏnon„profit€organizations.€€Mr.€Sykes€questioned€whether€receivers€canÏbe€removed€without€a€hearing.€€The€Chair€asked€from€where€theÏlanguage€of€section€(j)€is€derived.€€The€Reporter€answered€that€it€isÏfrom€Title€13.€€Mr.€Sykes€expressed€his€concern€with€removal€of€aÏreceiver€without€a€hearing,€because€there€is€no€procedure€availableÏfor€the€receiver€to€respond.€€Mr.€Howell€suggested€that€the€lastÏsentence€of€section€(j)€be€patterned€after€the€last€sentence€ofÏsection€(g).€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€to€this€suggestion.€€Ìà  àThe€Chair€drew€the€Committee's€attention€to€subsection€(k)(1).€Ð L-œ(. ÐHe€suggested€that€the€subsection€be€changed€to€read€as€follows:€€"AÏpetition€to€resign€shall€state€the€reasons€for€the€proposedÏresignation€and€may€include€a€request€for€the€appointment€of€aÏsuccessor€receiver."€€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€with€thisÏsuggestion.€€Mr.€Hochberg€asked€about€a€notice€provision.€€The€ChairÏsuggested€that€subsection€(k)(1)€could€read€as€follows:€€"A€petitionÏto€resign€must€certify€that€notice€has€been€given€to€all€personsÏentitled€to€notice€under€subsection€(f)(1)€were€sent€notice€of€theÏproposed€resignation."€The€Committee€agreed€by€consensus€to€thisÏchange.Ìà  àMr.€Howell€pointed€out€that€the€title€of€subsection€(k)(2)€isÏnot€applicable€to€the€last€two€sentences€in€that€subsection.€€TheÏChair€suggested€that€the€last€two€sentences€of€subsection€(k)(2)Ïshould€be€moved€to€subsection€(k)(1).€€The€Committee€agreed€byÏconsensus€with€this€change.Ìà  àThe€Chair€said€that€Rule€3„721€will€again€be€considered€whenÏJudge€Rinehardt€is€present.€€The€Committee€can€take€one€final€look€atÏit,€and€if€satisfied€with€the€Rule,€approve€it.Ìà  àThe€Chair€adjourned€the€meeting.