SCHEDULE OF ORAL ARGUMENTS
September Term, 2015
Wednesday, June 1, 2016:
Issues – Estates & Trusts – 1) Did the Orphans’ Court err in construing the decedent’s last will and testament to require the personal representative to fund the family trust prior to the payment of estate taxes, such that the older children’s trusts will bear the burden of all the estate’s federal and state estate taxes? 2) Did the Orphans’ Court err in finding that a marital deduction savings clause in a codicil to decedent’s will had the effect of overriding and eliminating the fundamental structure created by the will?
Attorney for Appellant: Jerrold A. Thrope
Attorneys for Appellee: Norman L. Smith and Jeffrey E. Nusinov
No. 101 United Insurance Company of America and The Reliable Life Insurance Company v. The Maryland Insurance Administration and Therese Goldsmith, in her official capacity as Commissioner
Issue – Courts and Judicial Proceedings – Must a party who challenges the constitutionality and retroactive effect of a newly-enacted Maryland statute exhaust administrative remedies of those challenges before a court can resolve them in a declaratory judgment action?
Attorney for Petitioner: Brian P. Morrissey
Attorney for Respondent: J. Van Lear Dorsey
No. 100 State of Maryland v. Juan Carlos Sanmartin Prado
Issue – Criminal Law – Did CSA incorrectly hold that trial counsel’s advisement – that there “could and probably would be immigration consequences” to the defendant’s conviction for a “deportable” or “potentially deportable” offense – was constitutionally deficient because counsel “qualified” his advice and “did not provide him with the ‘correct available advice about the deportation risk’?
Attorney for Petitioner: Mary Ann Ince
Attorney for Respondent: Stephen H. Sacks
No. 103 Brenda Smith v. Delaware North Companies, et al.
Issues – Health Occupations – 1) Does the privilege set forth under § 14-410 of the Health Occupations Article (“H.O.”) bar the admission of evidence of a Board of Physicians Consent Order to impeach a physician who is offering testimony as an expert witness? 2) Was the privilege set forth under § 14-410 intended to be strictly limited to medical malpractice actions?
Attorney for Appellant: Christopher C. Dahl
Attorneys for Appellee: Anthony J. D'Alessandro and Lindsey M. Cook
AG No. 73 (2014 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Rhonda I. Framm
Attorney for Petitioner: Lydia E. Lawless
Attorney for Respondent: Alvin I. Frederick
No. 95 Carville A. Hollingsworth, et al. v. Severstal Sparrow Point, LLC, et al.
Issue – Labor & Employment – Does a workers’ compensation award for permanent disability which resulted from an accidental injury survive the death of the claimant under § 9-632 of the Labor & Employment Art., so that it is payable to his dependents in a case where he was found to have additional disability due to a pre-existing condition which caused him to be permanently totally disabled?
Attorney for Appellant: Theodore B. Cornblatt
Attorneys for Appellee: Robert C. Erlandson and James A. Turner
No. 104 State of Maryland v. Lawrence Johnson
Issues – Criminal Procedure – 1) As a matter of first impression, where a defendant waives all post-conviction rights as part of a sentencing agreement, does the waiver include the right to pursue post-conviction relief on claims arising from § 7-106 of the Criminal Procedure Article? 2) Where the legislature has mandated that a trial court “may reopen a postconviction proceeding … if the court determines that the action is in the interests of justice,” did CSA err when it ordered the trial court on remand to treat Respondent’s first petition for postconviction relief as a motion to reopen a postconviction proceeding?
Attorney for Petitioner: Cathleen C. Brockmeyer
Attorney for Respondent: Brian Saccenti
No. 105 State of Maryland v. James Leslie Adams-Bey, Jr.
Issue – Criminal Procedure – Where the legislature has mandated that a trial court “may reopen a postconviction proceeding … if the court determines that the action is in the interests of justice,” did CSA err when it ordered the trial court on remand to reopen Respondent’s postconviction proceeding?
Attorney for Petitioner: Cathleen C. Brockmeyer
Attorney for Respondent: Jeffrey M. Ross
No. 102 Maryland Commissioner of Financial Regulation v. Brown, Brown & Brown, P.C., et al.
Issues – Commercial Law – 1) Does the Maryland Credit Services Businesses Act apply to providers of loan modification services? 2) Where the Maryland Credit Services Businesses Act expressly exempts from its coverage only attorneys who meet specified statutory criteria, are attorneys who do not satisfy those criteria subject to the statute?
Attorney for Petitioner: Christopher B. Lord
Attorney for Respondent: Christopher E. Brown
On the day of argument, counsel are instructed to register in the Clerk’s Office no later than 9:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified.
After June 2, 2016, the Court will recess until September 1, 2016.
BESSIE M. DECKER