Argument Schedule -- November, 2022


September Term, 2022


Thursday, November 3, 2022:

Bar Admissions

Misc. No. 3 In the Matter of the Application of William Wallace Montier for Admission to the Bar of Maryland

Attorney for Applicant: Stephan Y. Brennan

AG No. 48 (2021 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Ali Mansouri Kalarestaghi

Attorney for Petitioner: Clara H. Salzberg
Attorney for Respondent: David G. Mulquin

No. 11 Maryland Department of the Environment v. Assateague Coastal Trust

Issues – Environmental Law – 1) Was the Department’s final determination to require individualized assessments of gaseous emissions for poultry houses and other animal feeding operations covered by the general permit supported by substantial evidence in the record and not arbitrary and capricious? 2) Did the Department err in issuing a General Discharge Permit for Animal Feeding Operations without including controls for ammonia emissions, when Md. water pollution control laws unambiguously require regulation of ammonia emissions 3) Do the Clean Water Act and the more stringent Md. water pollution control laws require water discharge limitations that take into account impaired receiving waters (i.e. water quality-based effluent limitations) where effluent limitations based solely on minimum levels of treatment achieved by technology are ineffective?

Attorney for Petitioner: Matthew Standeven
Attorney for Respondent: David L. Reed

No. 15 Tyrie Washington v. State of Maryland

Issues – Criminal Law – 1) In light of the legitimate reasons why young Black men may be afraid of interacting with the police, what weight, if any, should “unprovoked” flight from the police be given in the reasonable suspicion analysis? 2) Does flight from the Baltimore police by a young Black man in Baltimore City give police reasonable suspicion to make a Terry stop? 3) Did CSA err by holding that the stop of Petitioner did not violate Petitioner’s rights under the Fourth Amendment, despite recognizing the “problematic implications” of relying on flight from the police in the reasonable suspicion analysis? 4) Did CSA err by holding that the stop of Petitioner did not violate Petitioner’s rights under Article 26 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, and, if so, does a violation of Article 26 require the exclusion of the illegally seized evidence? 5) Should the detectives’ observations of a “bulge” in Petitioner’s waistband and that Petitioner was “manipulating something at his front as he’s running” be imputed to the arresting officer and considered in the reasonable suspicion analysis under the collective knowledge doctrine?

Attorney for Petitioner: Claire Rasin Caplan
Attorney for Respondent: Andrew J. DiMiceli



Friday, November 4, 2022:

AG No. 41 (2021 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. George L. Farmer

Attorneys for Petitioner: Lydia E. Lawless
Attorney for Respondent: George L. Farmer

AG No. 1 (2021 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Gregory Wayne Jones

Attorney for Petitioner: Erin A. Risch
Attorney for Respondent: Gregory Wayne Jones



After November 4, 2022, the Court will recess until December 1, 2022. On the day of argument, counsel must register in the Clerk's Office no later than 9:30 a.m., unless otherwise notified.