October 2015 Maryland Certiorari Grants

Yesterday’s conference of the Court of Appeals yielded five cert grants. The grants include two family law cases, plus environmental law, criminal sentencing, and proof of lead paint exposure. The full list is after the jump.

Assateague Coastal Trust, Inc. v. Roy T. Schwalbach, et al. – Case No. 59, September Term, 2015

Issues – Environmental Law – 1) Did CSA veto the Legislature’s amendments to the Critical Areas Law and restore the formulation of “unwarranted hardship” as articulated in Belvoir Farms v. North, 355 Md. 259 (1999)? 2) Did CSA improperly expand the common law doctrine of riparian rights? 3) Did CSA limit the effectiveness of the Critical Areas Law by negating the presumption of non-compliance? 4) Did CSA ignore the Legislature’s requirement that the appellant prove the variance shall not adversely affect water quality or fish, wildlife or plant habitat?

Milton Everett Jackson v. Gayle Ann Sollie f/k/a Gayle S. Jackson – Case No. 62, September Term, 2015

Issue – Family Law – Should Md. follow the majority of states and require a trial judge to consider whether Social Security benefits should be offset against the marital portion of a Civil Service Retirement System pension upon dividing assets as a result of divorce?

Rowhouses, Inc. v. Myishia Smith – Case No. 60, September Term, 2015

Issue – Torts – Was the trial court legally correct in granting summary judgment in favor of Petitioner where Respondent failed to prove the existence of lead at 1622 E. Oliver Street?

Justin Sharp v. State of Maryland – Case No. 58, September Term, 2015

Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Did the trial court impermissibly consider Petitioner’s refusal to plead guilty and his exercise of his constitutional right to a trial in fashioning his sentence? 2) Did CSA err in determining that defense counsel did not preserve this issue for appellate review?

Marvin Wilson v. Sylvia Wilson – Case No. 61, September Term, 2015

Issues – Family Law – 1) Did the trial court and CSA err as a matter of law by finding that Petitioner had breached the parties’ contract when in fact the contract had been void ab initio? 2) Is a service member required to obtain the express agreement of his or her ex-spouse to waive disability benefits, which the ex-spouse would not be entitled to under Federal Law, in order to resolve the issue of the division of the military pension and not be obligated to pay disability benefits directly to the ex-spouse? 3) Did the trial court and CSA err in contravening two prior court orders by requiring Petitioner to pay one-half of his gross disability benefits to Respondent?