Argument Schedule -- May 2022


September Term, 2021


Notice Regarding COVID-Related Protocols for the Court of Appeals of Maryland Oral Arguments

Updated April 26, 2022

The Court of Appeals has issued a notice regarding COVID-19 related protocols for oral arguments in May, 2022. Please refer to the COVID Protocols for May, 2022 Oral Arguments for the details.



Thursday, May 5, 2022:

No. 59 Luis Felepe Huggins v. State of Maryland

Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Did CSA err by raising and deciding, on its own initiative, that Petitioner waived his objection to the denial of his motion to suppress where the State did not argue waiver on appeal? 2) If a pretrial motion to suppress is heard and denied and at trial when the evidence is offered by the State defense counsel says “no objection,” does counsel’s statement constitute a waiver, so that the issue is not preserved for review?

Attorney for Petitioner: Piedad Gomez
Attorney for Respondent: Jessica V. Carter

No. 58 William Madison v. The CopyCat Building, LLC

Issue – Real Property – Did the trial court err in construcing Md. Code § 8-208(a) and § 8-402(c) of the Real Property Article to find that the term for a tenant living in an unlicensed dwelling without a written lease as one year that becomes month-to-month when the tenant accepted the landlord’s written offer to renew her tenancy for an additional year and the landlord, in violation of § 8-208(a), did not provide the tenant with a written lease after the expiration of the year term?

Attorney for Petitioner: Douglas Edward Nivens, II
Attorney for Respondent: Alexandra Neifert


Monday, May 9, 2022:

No. 62 Roger Johann Garcia v. State of Maryland

Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Is it legally possible to be an accessory before the fact to non-premeditated intent to kill murder? 2) Must a conviction be vacated if the jury considered a legally impossible theory of liability?

Attorney for Petitioner: John N. Sharifi
Attorney for Respondent: Jer Welter

No. 53 Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc., et al. v. CREG Westport I, LLC, et al.

Issues – Environmental Law – 1) Do the provisions of the Forest Conservation Act require an opportunity for direct appeal of an approved forest conservation plan? 2) Does the approval of a forest conservation plan constitute a final agency action subject to judicial review?

Attorney for Petitioner: Paul W. Smail
Attorneys for Respondent: Joseph F. Snee, Jr. and Meaghan G. Alegi

No. 57 Andrea Jo Hancock, et al. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, et al.

Issues – Torts – 1) Does an employer’s duty to exercise reasonable care in hiring an independent contractor extend to employees of the independent contractor? 2) When a contractor recognizes dangerous job site conditions, does the contractor owe a duty to employees of a co-contractor to identify, warn against, or mitigate the hazard?

Attorney for Petitioner: Todd W. Hesel
Attorneys for Respondent: Louis C. Long and Craig D. Roswell


Tuesday, May 10, 2022:

AG No. 72 (2020 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Amber Lisa Maiden

Attorney for Petitioner: Jessica B. McCully
Attorney for Respondent: Amber Lisa Maiden

No. 55 The Town of Upper Marlboro v. The Prince George's County Council

Issues – Land Use – 1) Was CR-72-2019 a final appealable decision that had to be challenged within 30 days of finality as required by Md. Code § 22-407 of the Land Use Article? 2) Was Petitioner’s appeal of CR-98-2019 sufficient to challenge the deficiencies in CR-72-2019? 3) Was the decision of the County Council sitting as the District Council deficient in setting for the purpose and scope of the minor amendment in the initiating resolution (CR-72-2019) as required by Section 27-642 of the Prince George’s County Code?

Attorney for Petitioner: Kevin J. Best
Attorney for Respondent: Rajesh A. Kumar

No. 52 Pedro Steven Buarque De Macedo, et al. v. The Automobile Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut

Issue – Courts & Judicial Proceedings – Does Md. Code § 5-806 of the Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article render the household exclusion clause in an umbrella policy void, up to the limits of motor vehicle liability coverage, as to motor vehicle personal injury or wrongful death claims of unemancipated children or estates of such children against their parent?

Attorney for Petitioner: Martin H. Freeman
Attorney for Respondent: Steven M. Klepper



On the day of argument, counsel must register in the Clerk's Office no later than 9:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified. After May 10, 2022, the Court will recess until June 1, 2022.