April 2022 Maryland Certiorari Grants
Yesterday, the Court of Appeals of Maryland granted certiorari in four cases.
M. Abraham Ahmad v. Mehdi Ahmad & Giti Ahmad Revocable Trust, et al. – Case No. 2, September Term, 2022 (Unreported COSA Opinion by Judge Friedman)
Issues – Estates & Trusts – 1) Can the statute of limitations operate to adversely affect a substantive right of a party acquired under the laws of a foreign jurisdiction? 2) Can a legal nullity start the running of the statute of limitations? 3) Can a trust void ab initio and made in violation of law benefit from a statute of limitations defense?
Hector Fussa v. Margaret Chippendale, Warden – Case No. 3, September Term, 2022 (Bypass Review)
Issues – Correctional Services – Has Petitioner been “previously convicted” pursuant to Md. Code § 3-702 of the Correctional Services Article, where the conviction for the first offense was imposed during the same criminal proceeding as the conviction for which he is denied diminution of confinement credit and, if not, is Petitioner being illegally detained and entitled to immediate release?
Ray Crawford, et al. v. County Council of Prince George’s County, Sitting as the District Council, et al. – Case No. 4, September Term, 2022 (Bypass Review)
Issue – Land Use – Is an Amazon Last Mile Hub a “warehouse” and, therefore, permitted by right at the Subject Property?
Access Funding, LLC, et al. v. Chrystal Linton, et al. – Case No. 5 , September Term, 2022 (Reported COSA Opinion by Judge Nazarian)
Issues – Courts & Judicial Proceedings – 1) Did CSA err in ruling that the trial court must determine whether an arbitration agreement exists between the parties when Respondents did not challenge the validity or enforceability of the underlying agreements containing the arbitration clauses in their complaint? 2) Did CSA err in ruling that the trial court must decide the existence of an arbitration agreement when well-established Federal and Maryland law mandates that the arbitrator and not the court decides the issue of arbitrability when Respondents executed agreements containing arbitration clauses that expressly stated the arbitrator shall decide the arbitrability of the parties’ dispute, and Respondents have only alleged fraud and misrepresentation as to the agreements as a whole and not with respect to the arbitration clause separately and specifically?
Trackbacks / Pingbacks