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
073
2016 Chateau Foghorn Hosford 2016-12-02 2017-03-30
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-28
[Opinion]

Real Property – Did CSA err in its preemption analysis by concluding that Section 8-402.1 of the Real Property Article (Md. Code Ann.) does not do “major damage” to the clear and manifest intent of Congress and the express language of the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development’s implementing regulations for project-based rental subsidy programs?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 852, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

077
2016 Powell DHMH 2016-12-02 2017-03-31
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-28
[Opinion]

Criminal Procedure – 1) After a court finds a criminal defendant incompetent to stand trial and in need of mental health treatment and orders the person committed to DHMH for such treatment under § 3-106(b) of the Criminal Procedure Article (“Crim. Proc.”), does the court have the authority to specify the date by which DHMH must comply with the court’s order? 2) After a court finds a defendant incompetent to stand trial and in need of mental health treatment, does Article 24 of the Declaration of Rights require the individual to be removed from jail or detention and placed in a DHMH mental health facility by the date set in the court’s §3-106(b) commitment order or by a reasonably short time thereafter?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1596, Sept. Term, 2016 (Pending)

079
2016 Castruccio Estate of Castruccio 2017-01-09 2017-05-05
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-25
[Opinion]

Estates & Trusts - 1) Is a Will validly executed if (a) the witnesses did not sign on the same page as the testator, or on one physically connected to it, (b) the Will contained no proper attestation clause, and (c) the Will was not otherwise regular on its face because it expressly stated the pages were initialed but they were not? 2) Can a presumption of due execution attach to such a Will, where the only confirmation that the witnesses signed in the presence of the testator is a common font and consecutive page numbering? 3) Can summary judgment as to the validity of the Will properly be granted where two of the witnesses testified the Will was stapled when they signed, and one testified the pages were initialed, but the Will submitted for probate was never stapled or initialed?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1665, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

089
2016 Moats State 2017-02-03 2017-05-08
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-31
[Opinion]

Criminal Law – 1) Does an individual’s suspected involvement in a crime and a police officer’s belief that a cell phone could be used in that crime, without more, constitute probable cause to search and seize that individual’s cell phone? 2) Does the good faith exception to illegal searches and seizures apply in this case?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1219, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

092
2016 Stevenson State 2017-02-03 2017-05-08
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-31
[Opinion]

Criminal Law – 1) Did the search warrant applications establish a sufficient nexus between the alleged crimes and Petitioner’s cell phone, such that the warrant-issuing judges had a substantial basis for finding probable cause? 2) Did the trial court err in denying petitioner’s motion to suppress the fruits of a search conducted pursuant to the warrant? 3) If the warrant-issuing judges did not have a substantial basis for finding probable cause, did police nonetheless rely on the warrants in good faith?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 76, Sept. Term. 2016 (Pending)

077 AG
2016 Reinstatement of Alston     2017-05-08
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-24
[Order]
In the matter of the petition for reinstatement of Tiffany T. Alston

086
2016 Newton State 2017-02-03 2017-05-09
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-23
[Opinion]

Criminal Law – Did CSA err in reversing the trial court’s determination that trial counsel, appellate counsel and the trial court committed reversible error in permitting alternate jurors to be present during jury deliberations?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1751, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

097
2016 Burak Burak 2017-03-03 2017-06-02
[Oral Arguments]
2017-08-29
[Opinion]

Family Law – 1) May grandparents intervene in a custody dispute between parents to seek custody of their grandchild before there has been an adjudication of the unfitness of the custodial parents? 2) May the “exceptional circumstances” test set forth by this Court in Ross v. Hoffman, 280 Md. 172 (1977) be used to take custody away from a biological parent with whom the child has lived for his entire life? 3) May a parent be required to pay child support to grandparents, and if so, may such child support be awarded without consideration of the financial resources of the grandparents?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2744, Sept. Term, 2014 [Opinion]

098
2016 Doe Alternative Medicine MD 2017-06-09 2017-07-27
[Oral Arguments]

2017-08-25
[Opinion]

2017-07-28
[PC Order]

Health General – 1) Are Appellants entitled to participate in a lawsuit, including a preliminary injunction hearing, where the Appellee (plaintiff in the trial court) has expressly asked to invalidate their award and any injunction would destroy their businesses, force them to lay off employees, cause substantial economic losses and deprive some Petitioners of needed cannabis therapy? 2) Should the trial court action be stayed pending resolution of the issue of indispensable parties, given that the Appellee waited months or years to seek a preliminary injunction and has no likelihood of success on the merits?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 40, Sept. Term, 2017 (Pending)

015 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Woolery   2017-09-06
[Oral Arguments]
 

Attorney disciplinary matter.

003
2017 U. of MD Med. System Kerrigan 2017-03-27 2017-09-06
[Oral Arguments]
 

Civil Procedure – 1) Did CSA substitute its judgment and fail to defer to the wide discretion owed to the trial court’s reasoning in support of transfer? 2) Did CSA fail to review this case on its individual merits by placing too much reliance upon Scott v. Hawit, 211 Md.App. 620 (2013), a decision with different facts? 3) Did CSA err by holding that the residence of foreign plaintiffs should not factor into the convenience of the parties analysis under Md. Rule 2-327(c)?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1710, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

001
2017 Sizer State 2017-03-03 2017-09-06
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – 1) Where the police make an illegal stop of a person, discover a valid, pre-existing arrest warrant, and seize evidence from the person during a search incident to arrest, must the admissibility of that evidence be determined based on an application of the “attenuation factors,” as held in Utah v. Strieff, 136 S.Ct. 2056 (2016), Cox v. State, 397 Md. 200 (2007), and Myers v. State, 395 Md. 261 (2006), or may a court, as CSA did in this case, reject the attenuation doctrine and find that such evidence will always be admissible because the arrest warrant constitutes an “independent source”? 2) Did the hearing judge correctly rule that the discovery of a valid pre-existing arrest warrant did not attenuate the connection between the illegal stop of Petitioner and the evidence seized from him shortly thereafter? 3) Where a person is under no obligation to interact with the police, does flight to avoid that interaction, by itself, justify a Terry stop; and if so, does it still justify the stop where there is evidence that flight was provoked by the threatening or startling actions of the police officers? 4) Did the hearing judge correctly rule that police violated Petitioner’s Fourth Amendment rights where the only observation officers made regarding Petitioner before tackling him was that he immediately ran upon noticing the six bicycle-riding police officers riding towards him?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 784, Sept. Term, 2016 [Opinion]

002
2017 In Re: C.E.   2017-03-27 2017-09-06
[Oral Arguments]
 

Family Law – 1) Did the trial court err in holding that the waiver of reasonable efforts pursuant to Courts & Judicial Proceedings § 3-812 was constitutional and appropriate? 2) Did CSA err in holding that the ruling was not a final order and not appealable where the issue was not raised in any brief or argument?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 464, Sept. Term, 2016 (Unreported)

014 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Butler   2017-09-07
[Oral Arguments]

2017-09-07
[PC Order]
Attorney disciplinary matter.

005
2017 In Re: J.J. and T.S.   2017-04-04 2017-09-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Family Law – 1) Under Criminal Procedure § 11-304, Maryland’s tender years statute, in a CINA case, where a child victim does not testify and the court declines to examine the child in chambers, must the court find that the child is competent before admitting her audiotaped ex parte statement into evidence at an adjudication hearing for the truth of the matter asserted therein? 2) Did the facts in this case establish that the child victim was competent, where the child did not testify in court and the court did not examine the child because it found that the audio recording of the child’s statement made an examination of the child unnecessary, although the audio recording contained no indication that the child was aware of the difference between the truth and a lie, and the child previously had fabricated an allegation of sexual abuse? 3) Did J.J.’s hearsay statement have particularized guarantees of trustworthiness to be allowed into evidence?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2631, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

004
2017 Green State 2017-03-27 2017-09-07
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Procedure – 1) Does Md. Rule 4-263(d)(7)(B), which requires the State to disclose “[a]ll relevant material or information regarding…pretrial identification of the defendant by a State’s witness,” require the State to disclose all relevant material or information regarding pretrial identification of a co-defendant by a State’s witness? 2) Where Petitioner and co-defendant were both present at the scene of the crime and the eyewitness identification of the co-defendant as the non-shooter implicated Petitioner as the person who shot and killed the victim, did CSA err in holding that information regarding the identification of co-defendant did not fall within the scope of “relevant material or information regarding…pretrial identification of the defendant by a State’s witness,” under Rule 4-263(d)(7)(B)?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 490, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

047 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance McLaughlin   2017-09-11
[Oral Arguments]
2017-09-11
[PC Order]
Attorney disciplinary matter.

007
2017 Monarch Academy Bd. of School Comm'rs 2017-04-04 2017-09-11
[Oral Arguments]
 

Administrative Law – 1) Is a trial court’s issuance of an indefinite stay of plaintiffs’ action, requiring “administrative review of the parties’ dispute,” an appealable order where it imposes a condition that (a) is beyond the control of the plaintiffs to satisfy and (b) requires that plaintiffs undertake actions that even if satisfied would substantively impair plaintiffs’ substantive and procedural rights? 2) Did the trial court err in determining that the State Board of Education has “primary jurisdiction” over the Charter School Operators’ contract actions and, as a consequence, staying the proceedings “pending administrative review of the parties’ dispute by the State Board of Education?” 3) If Question (2) is answered in the negative, then what process is available to plaintiffs both at the State Board and then in court that would permit their claims to be fully heard and adjudicated, with relief granted, and that would not deprive Petitioners of their substantive rights?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 404, Sept. Term, 2016 [Opinion]

038 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Moody   2017-09-12
[Oral Arguments]
2017-09-12
[PC Order]
Attorney disciplinary matter.

001 Misc.
2017 Brownlee Liberty Mutual Fire Ins.   2017-09-12
[Oral Arguments]
  Certified Question from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland

Question - Would application of Georgia's interpretation of the pollution exclusion contained in the insurance policy issued by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company to the Salvation Army as excluding coverage for bodily nijuries resulting form the ingestion of lead-based paint violate Maryland public policy?
006
2017 Johnson State 2017-04-04 2017-09-12
[Oral Arguments]
 

Criminal Law – 1) Does CSA’s opinion in Gross v. State, 229 Md.App. 24 (2016), holding that expert testimony is not necessary for the admission of GPS-derived location evidence, conflict with this Court’s opinion in State v. Payne, 440 Md. 680 (2014)? 2) As applied in this case, did the trial court err under Payne in permitting a State’s witness to read a cell phone’s GPS location record to the jury and permitting that witness to interpret those records, when the witness admitted that he did not understand how the technology worked or how it produced the record at issue? 3) Was this question properly preserved for appellate review?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1533, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

019
2017 State Simms 2017-06-21 2017-10-05  

Criminal Procedure – 1) Does the State have the authority to enter a nolle prosequi on a charge after a conviction? 2) If the State does have the authority to do so, was Respondent’s appeal moot because the State entered a nolle prosequi in the circuit court as to the entire case, without objection?

Court of Special Appals, No. 1942, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

012
2017 Davis Frostburg Facility Ops. 2017-05-09 2017-10-05  

Torts – 1) Did CSA err in holding that Petitioner was required to file in the Md. Healthcare Alternative Dispute Resolution Office so that office could make the initial determination of whether Petitioner’s injuries were the result of ordinary negligence or medical negligence? 2) Did CSA err in holding that Petitioners’ complaint was not sufficient on its face to survive the granting of a motion to dismiss on the remaining counts?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 540, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

010
2017 Santiago State 2017-05-09 2017-10-05  

Criminal Law – 1) Did CSA err in holding that the trial court properly admitted testimony from the State’s cellular communication expert when the expert admitted his opinion was based on a critical assumption the factual underpinning of which was not established and a report that was destroyed before trial? 2) Did CSA err in holding that the trial court properly admitted evidence of Petitioner’s silence during an investigation by his automobile insurer that was related to and concurrent with the police investigation in this case?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1694, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

003 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Smith   2017-10-06   Attorney disciplinary matter.

008
2017 Young Electrical Dustin Construction 2017-04-04 2017-10-06  

Contract Law – 1) Did CSA err in holding that a “flow down” provision in the subcontract between the prime contractor and a subcontractor created a right for the subcontractor to sue the Owner? 2) Did CSA err in holding that the denial of Petitioner’s claim was a Final Decision to trigger the dispute resolution process in the general contract? 3) Did CSA err in not considering Respondent’s alleged breach of the subcontract by preventing the contractor from pursuing its claims through the Prime Contract, the Prevention Doctrine? 4) Did CSA err in relying upon a “pay-when-paid” provision in the subcontract that Respondent did not raise in its Motion for Summary Judgment and that neither party raised in argument before the trial court? 5) Did CSA err in upholding the trial court’s summary judgment prior to any discovery and factual determination regarding the cause of the delays to the project?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 226, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

011
2017 Lopez State 2017-05-09 2017-10-06  

Criminal Procedure – Is a music video/slide show depicting the lives of the victims a permissible form of victim impact evidence, and does its admission violate a criminal defendant’s rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1887, Sept. Term, 2013 [Opinion]

026 AG
074 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Smith   2017-10-10   Attorney disciplinary matter
015
2017 People's Counsel Public Service Comm'n 2017-06-21 2017-10-10  

Public Utilities – 1) Did the Public Service Commission make an error of law by failing to conclude that the premium that PHI’s shareholders received as a result of its acquisition by Exelon Corp. violated § 6-105 of the Public Utilities Article and the regulatory compact governing the obligations and rights of monopolistic utilities in that it harmed customers and was inconsistent with the public interest? 2) Does the Commission’s unexplained conclusion that allegations of harm to the distributed generation and renewable energy markets resulting from Exelon’s acquisition of PHI were “speculation” render the Commission’s decision to approve the acquisition arbitrary and capricious?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2547, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

014
2017 Manchame-Guerra State 2017-05-23 2017-10-10  

Criminal Procedure – 1) Did this Court’s decision in Peterson v. State, 444 Md. 105 (2015), alter the threshold a factual proffer must satisfy to permit questioning of a witness’s subjective expectation of a benefit under Md. Rule 5-616(a)(4)? 2) Did the trial court err in prohibiting defense counsel from questioning the State’s main witness about whether he subjectively expected a benefit in exchange for his statements and testimony in this case?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 899, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

013
2017 Blentlinger, LLC Cleanwater Linganore 2017-05-09 2017-10-10  

Land Use – 1) Did CSA err by holding that a Development Rights and Responsibilities Agreement (“DRRA”), in order to be valid, must include “enhanced public benefits” to the local governing body? 2) Did CSA err by holding that Petitioners’ proffer of a school site did not constitute adequate consideration for the DRRA?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2212, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

009
2017 Harris State 2017-05-09 2017-10-11  

Criminal Law – 1) Did the trial court abuse its discretion by issuing a missing witness instruction concerning Petitioner’s mother, without conducting any inquiry or making any findings as to whether they had a relationship that would have rendered her peculiarly available to the defense? 2) Is a mother/son relationship, without more, sufficient to establish that the mother is peculiarly available to the son for purposes of the missing witness rule? 3) Did CSA err in finding that the trial court committed harmless error when it allowed a detective to testify that Petitioner had invoked his right to an attorney during a police interview?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 484, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

018
2017 Waterman Family Ltd. P'ship Boomer 2017-06-21 2017-10-11  

Local Government – 1) May county commissioners rescind an express approval in accordance with Local Government Article (“LG”) § 4-416 to place newly annexed land in a zoning classification that allows a land use or density different from the land use or density specified in the zoning classification of the county or agency with planning and zoning jurisdiction over the land prior to its annexation? 2) May county commissioners rescind an express approval in accordance with LG § 4-416 allowing development of annexed land for land uses substantially different than the authorized use, or at a substantially higher density, not exceeding 50%, than could be granted for the proposed development, in accordance with the zoning classification of the county applicable at the time of the annexation?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1783, Sept. Term, 2015 [Opinion]

016
2017 Ellis McKenzie 2017-06-21 2017-10-11  

Environmental Law – 1) Does the Dormant Mineral Interests Act (“DMIA”) violate Article 24 of the Md. Declaration of Rights and Article III, § of the Md. Constitution by retrospectively taking a vested property interest from a mineral owner and transferring it to a surface owner without compensation? 2) Is a notice of intent to preserve a severed mineral interest effective if recorded by the personal representative of a deceased owner’s estate while an action to terminate the interest is pending against the decedent’s descendants but not against the personal representative?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 1723, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)

025
2017 Williams State 2017-07-31 2017-11-02  

Criminal Law – 1) Is a conviction that is more than fifteen years old irrelevant as a matter of law to a character witness’s opinion about a defendant? 2) Were questions revealing Petitioner’s prior conviction, which occurred at least a decade before any of his character witnesses had met him, irrelevant to their opinions as to his reputation for peacefulness? 3) Were questions revealing Petitioner’s prior conviction substantially more prejudicial than they were probative of the witnesses’ opinions as to his reputation for peacefulness?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 537, Sept. Term, 2016 [Opinion]

021
2017 In the Matter of the Aaron Living Trust   2017-07-31 2017-11-06  

Estates & Trusts – Did the trial court err in entering an order approving restatement of the living trust in which the court approved the Trustees’ restatement of the trust with respect to the survival of the Aaron Family Foundation?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 253, Sept. Term, 2016 (Unreported)

005 Misc.
2016 In the Matter of Hon. White     2017-11-03   Judicial disabilities matter

017
2017 Watts State 2017-06-21 2017-11-03  

Criminal Law – 1) Are intent to frighten and battery merely varieties of a single crime under Md’s assault statute or are they separate crimes, thus requiring individualized jury unanimity? 2) Is Petitioner’s claim of error unpreserved where Petitioner did not ask for the unanimity instruction he now claims was mandatory?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 98, Sept. Term, 2016 (Unreported)

023
2017 Dabbs Anne Arundel Co. 2017-07-31 2017-11-03  

County Government – 1) Did the lower courts err in determining that “…the rough proportionality test [or the rational nexus test] has no application to development impact fees. . .where monetary exactions are imposed,” in contravention of Howard County v. JJM, 301 Md. 256 (1984)? 2) Did the lower courts err in permitting the retroactive application of legislation and not finding a taking under Article III, section 40 of the Maryland Constitution?

Court of Special Appeals (No. 2653, Sept. Term, 2015) [Opinion]

002 Misc.
2017 Application of Hamilton     2017-11-02   In the Matter of the Application of Maso Toussaint Hamilton for Admission to the Bar of Maryland
075 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Kargbo   2017-11-06   Attorney disciplinary matter.
054 AG
2016 Attorney Grievance Giannetti   2017-11-07   Attorney disciplinary matter
020
2017 Bank of New York Mellon Georg 2017-06-21 2017-11-07  

Civil Procedure – 1) Does judicial estoppel require a showing of an intention to mislead the court apart from a demonstration that the party “has succeeded in persuading a court to accept that party’s earlier position, so that a judicial acceptance of an inconsistent position in a later proceeding would create ‘the perception that either the first or the second court was misled[.]’” New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742, 750-51 (2001)? 2) Is a ruling that a party lacked standing to assert its claims, but subject to the caveat that if the court was found to be wrong with regard to standing, the party failed to prove its case on the merits, a contingent ruling on the merits and thus not a final judgment for purposes of res judicata and collateral estoppel, or are the ruling on standing and the ruling on the merits alternative rulings, each entitled to preclusive effect?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 2396, Sept. Term, 2015 (Unreported)