Court Calendar, Including Dates of Certiorari Conferences, Now on Md. COA Website
By Michael Wein
Attorneys have wondered in the past, “What date will the Court of Appeals decide my certiorari petition?” Wonder no more. To continue its evolution under Chief Judge Mary Ellen Barbera – who, as discussed in previous posts, has required that an opinion in each case be issued by the end of the term in which it was considered, and spearheaded a “pending cases” webpage to keep track of undecided cases – the Court of Appeals this week created an online calendar on its homepage listing dates of significant Court events, including oral arguments. Of most interest is that now, for the first time, the anticipated dates of certiorari conferences will be available to the general public. (Thursday, September 18, 2014, and Monday, October 20, 2014, are the next-scheduled conferences.) That of course does not necessarily mean that a party’s certiorari petition will be decided at any certain conference, but at least practitioners will know to check for the outcome a day or two after each conference rather than daily throughout the month. There are additional certiorari decisions that come from time-sensitive petitions (such as in some injunction, family law, and election law cases) that are unlikely to be scheduled in advance. Still, this calendar feature should give approximate notice to most certiorari applicants of when they can learn the fate of their petitions, a welcome improvement.
Consolidated Cases: Establishing Commonality for Finality
“There’s many a slip ‘twixt’ the cup and the lip” because “the opera ain’t over ‘til the fat lady sings.” Or, a case can quickly go in an unanticipated direction because there is no final appealable judgment until all claims are adjudicated – and knowing when that happens in consolidated actions can be tricky.
One Month to Go, Only Seven Cases Left! (With One Potential Blockbuster)
By Michael Wein
[EIC’s Update, 8/27/2014: The Court this morning decided Kulbicki, along with Spacesaver, and Brooks. It decided Raynor this afternoon.]
[EIC’s Update, 8/18/2014: The Court has since decided Chesapeake Bay, Peters, and NIHC. We’re still waiting on Spacesaver, Raynor, Brooks, and, notably, Kulbicki.]
As a follow up on previous posts by myself and members of this Blog, the Court of Appeals, under the helm of Chief Judge Mary Ellen Barbara, appears to be smoothly finishing work for the remaining cases from the 2013 Term by the self-imposed deadline of August 31, 2014. Per the handy “Pending Cases” link on the Court of Appeals’ website, discussed previously here, only seven cases from the term remain on the Court of Appeals’ docket. Read More…
July 2014 Maryland Certiorari Grants
Ta-da! A new batch of cert grants to get you through the dog days of summer. Check out this sundry lineup of cases — including one on warrantless cell phone searches incident to arrest, a topic that’s all the rage these days in criminal procedure — after the jump.
June 2014 Maryland Certiorari Grants
The Court of Appeals website is listing four June 18, 2014 certiorari grants. The cases, listed after the jump, include authentication of Facebook posts at trial. Read More…
Supreme Court to Review Maryland Tax Case
This morning, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari to review the decision of the Court of Appeals of Maryland in Maryland State Comptroller of the Treasury v. Wynne, 431 Md. 147 (2013). The Order list is here. For prior blog coverage of Comptroller v. Wynne, see the following posts:
Maryland Certiorari Grants, May 2014
The Court of Appeals website reflects that the Court has granted merits review in two cases. Not listed below are six cases for which the website does not reflect the questions presented. The fact that all six have been assigned September 2013 Term docket numbers, combined with the lack of a question presented, suggests that the Court is taking summary action on those six cases or consolidating them with a case pending this term.
Alan Sternstein previously posted on this blog regarding the Court of Special Appeals decision in one of the two cases, Espina. The questions presented in the two new certiorari grants to be argued next term are:
Estela Espina, et al. v. Steven Jackson, et al. – Case No. 35, September Term, 2014
Issues – Constitutional Law – 1) Can the General Assembly contravene or restrict by statute self-executing rights in the state constitution? 2) Does the Local Government Tort Claims Act (LGTCA) encompass and serve to cap self-executing constitutional rights? 3) With 96.5% of the verdict stripped from the petitioners, is the application of the LGTCA damages cap to the facts here unconstitutional under Art. 19? 4) Did CSA err in applying the LGTCA cap to the constitutional deprivations here after the jury found malice and the County stipulated to scope of employment? 5) Did CSA err in holding that all wrongful death claims are reduced to one claim?
David Payne, et ux. v. Erie Insurance Exchange, et al. – Case No. 38, September Term, 2014
Issue – Insurance Law – Under Maryland Indemnity Insurance Co. v. Kornke, et al., 21 Md.App. 178, 319 A.2d 603 (1974) and its progeny, did the trial court err in holding that Erie was not required to provide coverage to a second permittee using an insured’s car within the named insured’s original grant of permissive use?
Court of Appeals to Address Standing to Challenge Legislative Comprehensive Zoning Enactments
Last year, the Court of Appeals addressed standing requirements for challenging zoning and land use decisions, issuing opinions significantly shaping the standards for standing. See Kendall v. Howard Cnty., 431 Md. 590, 66 A.3d 684 (2013); Ray v. Mayor & City Council of Baltimore, 430 Md. 74, 59 A.3d 545 (2013). This year, the Court is poised to do so again. On March 21, 2014, the Court granted certiorari in Anne Arundel Cnty. v. Bell, 437 Md. 422, 86 A.3d 1274 (2014) to consider these three issues: Read More…
Amalgamated Transit v. Loveless – Judicial Imposition of Procedural and Remedial Due Process in Private Relationships
In a host of private, essentially, contractual arrangements that nevertheless affect important or broad public interests, parties provide for procedures and remedies for the resolution of disputes between them. Examples include hospital credentialing of doctors or grants of hospital privileges, labor relations in industries ranging from the entertainment arts, to sports, to the skilled trades, and trade and professional competency certifications by trade and professional associations. In most cases, the source of the public interest is ultimately one of economics. Association credentialing and certification, for example, apart from often being critical to one’s ability to engage in a business or profession and, thereby, earn a living, also can substantially affect competition—where, for example, credentialing or certification programs are operated as barriers to entry. Another important interest is the country’s unquenchable thirst for live sports. As a consequence, player rights and labor disputes, franchise ownership and franchise location issues, particularly where these issues affect the availability or quality of sporting events, garner considerable public attention. Read More…
Maryland Certiorari Grants, April 2014
The Court of Appeals website shows the following April 18, 2014 grants of certiorari:
Marcus Lee Smiley v. State of Maryland – Case No. 37, September Term, 2014
Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Did the trial court err in admitting the prior recorded statement of an unavailable witness after finding that Petitioner procured the witness’s unavailability at trial? 2) Did the lower court err in failing to suppress an extrajudicial identification of Petitioner where his photograph was one of only two in a photographic array which was not visibly altered and his clothing matched the shooter’s described attire? 3) Should MD adopt, either as a matter of State constitutional or evidentiary law, a standard for evaluating the admissibility of eyewitness identifications which better reflects present scientific knowledge concerning eyewitness memory?
State of Maryland v. Gregory Graves – Case No. 36, September Term, 2014
Issues – Criminal Procedure – 1) As a matter of first impression, did CSA err in determining that § 8-401 of the Criminal Procedure Article, which was enacted while Respondent’s appeal was pending, applies retroactively to Respondent’s case? 2) If § 8-401 applies retroactively, is the appropriate remedy a remand and not a reversal?
Maryland Appellate Blog 