SCHEDULE OF ORAL ARGUMENTS
September Term, 2018
Thursday, June 6, 2019:
AG No. 5 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Eugene Ignatius Kane, Jr.
Attorney for Petitioner: Erin A. Risch
Attorneys for Respondent: William C. Brennan, Jr. and Michael E. Lawlor
No. 75 Davona Grant, et al. v. County Council of Prince George's County sitting as the District Council, et al.
Issues – Administrative Law – 1) Does Maryland administrative law authorize a zoning tribunal to vote to approve a special exception without deliberating on the factual issues and then delegate to its staff attorney the authority to make the required factual findings without informing the staff attorney of the factual basis of the tribunal’s decision? 2) If CSA is correct that the District Council’s staff “attorney prepared a draft opinion and showed it separately to individual members of the District Council” before the meeting, is such a process an “evasive device” which violates the Open Meeting Act? 3) Did the District Council err by exercising original jurisdiction when it reversed the Zoning Hearing Examiner’s decision?
Attorney for Petitioner: G. Macy Nelson
Attorneys for Respondent: Rajesh A. Kumar and M. Celeste Bruce
Friday, June 7, 2019:
No. 64 Joseph Stracke, et al. v. Estate of Kerry Butler, Jr., et al.
Issues – Courts & Judicial Proceedings – 1) Does willful or gross negligence by an omission defeat the immunity from liability granted to fire and rescue personnel by the Maryland Fire and Rescue Company Act, Md. Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings § 5-604, or is the immunity lost only by a willful or grossly negligent affirmative act? 2) Did CSA err in finding sufficient evidence that Petitioners committed gross negligence that caused the death of a patient, when undisputed evidence established that Petitioners assessed the patient, including taking vital signs, and within seven minutes transported the patient to the hospital, where his condition suddenly worsened? 3) Does § 5-604 afford Petitioners, as employees of a fire department, limited immunity against claims for simple negligence?
Attorney for Petitioner: Andre Davis
Attorney for Respondent: Alan Belsky
No. 72 Edinson Herrera Ramirez v. State of Maryland
Issues – Criminal Procedure – 1) Did CSA err when it held that a structural error did not occur when a biased juror was not stricken from the jury by trial counsel? 2) Did CSA err when it held that even if a structural error occurred Petitioner was not prejudiced? 3) Was Petitioner denied effective assistance of counsel under Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)? 4) Did CSA err when, as support for its decision, it used the number of prospective jurors in St. Mary’s County when trial in this case was held in Carroll County?
Attorney for Petitioner: J. Paul Krawczyk, Jr.
Attorney for Respondent: Brenda Gruss
No. 78 Timothy Heidenberg v. Claudia Grier
Issues – Courts & Judicial Proceedings – 1) Does Dawkins v. Balt. City Police Department, 376 Md. 53 (2003), preclude a parent immediate appellate review from the rejection of the doctrine of parent-child immunity? 2) Does the doctrine of parent-child immunity survive the death of a child?
Attorneys for Petitioner: Lorraine Lawrence-Whittaker
Attorneys for Respondent: Michael S. Warshaw and Elyse Strickland
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 7, 2019, the Court will recess until September 5, 2019.
SUZANNE C. JOHNSON