Petitions for Writ of Certiorari - January, 2023


September Term, 2022



Granted January 20, 2023

Katz, Abosch, Windesheim, Gershman & Freedman, P.A., and Mark E. Rapson v. Parkway Neuroscience and Spine Institute, LLC – Case No. 30, September Term, 2022

Issue – Maryland Rules – Did ACM err in finding that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding expert testimony on lost profits?

Jonathan D. Smith v. State of Maryland – Case No. 31, September Term, 2022

Issue – Criminal Law – Does the State’s two-decade long pattern of intentional, willful, and/or reckless misconduct, including widespread suppression of exculpatory evidence under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) and knowing false statements, mandate dismissal with prejudice under the Due Process Clause? A. Did the lower courts apply an erroneous standard and/or err in their evaluation of the prejudice suffered by Petitioner? B. Did the lower courts apply an erroneous standard and/or err in their determination that there was a less drastic alternative remedy to dismissal with prejudice?

Comptroller of Maryland v. Comcast of California/Maryland/Pennsylvania/Virginia/West Virginia, LLC., et al. – Case No. 32, September Term, 2022

Issues – Taxation – 1) Does the remedial scheme in Tax-General (“Tax-Gen.”) Title 13, including an express prohibition against judicial interference in tax assessment and collection, Tax-Gen. § 13-505, preclude taxpayers from bringing a court challenge to the constitutionality of the digital ad tax before exhausting administrative remedies? If not: 2) Did the trial court err in declaring that the Act violates the dormant Commerce Clause, where the Act’s plain language ensures that it taxes only revenue earned in Maryland, in fair proportion to a taxpayer’s economic activity in the State, and the Act applies equally to Maryland-based and out-of-state businesses? 3) Did the trial court err in declaring that the Act violates the First Amendment, where it satisfies the criteria in Clear Channel Outdoor, Inc. v. Director, Dept. of Finance of Baltimore City, 472 Md. 444 (2021), and the Act does not disfavor but instead benefits the press? 4) Did the trial court err in declaring that the digital advertising tax violates the Supremacy Clause and the federal Internet Tax Freedom Act, 47 U.S.C. §151 (“ITFA”), where the Supreme Court has held that the Supremacy Clause does not give rise to any right of action, Congress has not authorized a private right of action or remedy to enforce the ITFA, which lacks a feature needed for preemption, and the Act does not conflict with the ITFA? 5) Did the trial court err in granting summary judgment when there remained genuine disputes of material fact?



Denied/Dismissed January 24, 2023

Bickford, David Paul v. State - Pet. Docket No. 279
Brown v. Reagans - Pet. Docket No. 275
Cox, Dwayne v. State - Pet. Docket No. 277
Davis, Larry v. State - Pet. Docket No. 264
Davis v. Univ. of Maryland - Pet. Docket No. 276
Georgakopoulos v. Georgakopoulos - Pet. Docket No. 295
GPL Enterprise v. Certain Underwriters at London - Pet. Docket No. 160
Harris, Anthony v. State - Pet. Docket No. 274
Hawes, Tracey v. State - Pet. Docket No. 296
In the Matter of Myers, MD - Pet. Docket No. 272
In the Matter of Nolan - Pet. Docket No. 294
Lawrence v. Univ. of Md. Obstetrical & Gynecological Assoc. - Pet. Docket No. 270
Tashes Ankh, Inc v. Liberty-Milford - Pet. Docket No. 233
Tyson v. Dept. of Assessments & Taxation - Pet. Docket No. 265
UK Construction & Mgmt. v. Betterson - Pet. Docket No. 292