Maryland Certiorari Grants and Other Docket Developments
By Steve Klepper (Twitter: @MDAppeal)
We’ve been posting (here and here) about apparent changes in the timing of certiorari grants by the Court of Appeals of Maryland. It’s becoming clear that the Court of Appeals will now be granting certiorari as soon as the judges decide a case is worthy of review. They will not be waiting for their monthly conferences, which are likely to focus on closer calls that warrant discussion. Yesterday, the court posted its second pre-conference batch of certiorari grants for November. It also recently accepted a certified question from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland.
In other news affecting the Court of Appeals docket, The Daily Record’s Steve Lash reported yesterday (from behind the paywall) that Glenn Grossman is retiring as Bar Counsel on January 31, 2017. We don’t usually cover Attorney Grievance Commission cases here at the blog, but it’s important to remember that those cases represent a significant part of the court’s business.
The new certiorari grants and the certified question are listed (with questions presented) after the jump. Read More…
November 2016 Maryland Certiorari Grants
It looks like the new normal is that the Court of Appeals of Maryland will now issue two batches of certiorari grants each month: one during its argument session at the beginning of the month, and one following its mid-month conference. The Court just posted four certiorari grants. Lewis v. State presents some interesting questions under the Uniform Act to Secure Attendance of Witnesses from Without a State in Criminal Proceedings (Court of Specials opinion here). The full list, including questions presented, appears after the jump.
Remembering a Mentor
Anyone who has clerked for a judge knows that a special bond develops during that relationship. For a budding attorney, a clerkship provides one of the first opportunities to gain insights into the practice of law. The perspective of a judge can form a strong foundation for a law clerk’s future pursuit of a law practice. I had the good fortune to serve as a law clerk to the Hon. Rosalyn B. Bell when she sat on the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland. With her passing in August, and a memorial service in October, it seemed like a good time to reflect on the impact she had on her clerks, the legal profession, and the practice of law.
Three more October 2016 Maryland certiorari grants hint at a new pattern
The Maryland Appellate Blog launched in 2013 at the beginning of Chief Judge Mary Ellen Barbera’s first full term as chief. Since then, the Court has continued the same usual schedule for certiorari grants that we saw under her predecessor, Chief Judge Bell. The Court holds a monthly conference, apart from post-argument conferences, to review certiorari petitions and draft opinions. One business day after that monthly conference, it posts certiorari grants. It then issues certiorari denials the next business day.
The first two months of the September 2016 Term have seen a tweak to the schedule. Read More…
On Love-Making, Regrets, and Footnotes in Appellate Briefs
British playwright Noel Coward memorably observed that coming across a footnote is like going downstairs to answer the doorbell while making love. Although this quip has left my mind’s eye with an image it can’t un-see every time I consider dropping a footnote, it has not banished footnotes from my legal writing. But the vivid quote and a recent Maryland federal-court opinion have prompted me to consider more carefully when and when not to use footnotes.
Rules Committee recommends ending ethics prohibition on “specialist” label
By Michael Wein
In a report released online on Wednesday, the Maryland Rules Committee recommended to the Maryland Court of Appeals that attorneys be no longer prohibited from advertising themselves as “specialists.” This was proposed as an amendment to Rule 19-307.4, Communication of Fields of Practice. (If you’ve never heard of Chapter 19, which now incorporates the Maryland Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct (MLRPC), you’re in good company, as the reorganization only took effect on July 1.) A briefing on why this change has been suggested can be found in my previous extensive write-up two years ago on this Blog.
Doe I, Doe II, Federal Dough and Federalism
Though supreme in their own domains, even sovereigns may, by agreement, accept obligations that lawfully bind them. Depending on the case, they may also pursue, even by coercion, rights granted by other sovereigns. This reflects nothing more than the operation at ever-higher levels of organization (partnerships, corporations, municipalities, states, and nations) the fundamental principles governing legal relationships between individuals. See generally W. Hohfeld, Fundamental Legal Conceptions (1919). These principles recognize the ability of juridical entities through the power of contract to create rights, duties, and other legal relationships among themselves, regardless of the comparative strength of their sovereignties by other measures.[i]
October 2016 Maryland Certiorari Grants
By Steve Klepper (Twitter: @MDAppeal)
Six days after granting expedited review of a Baltimore City ballot dispute, the Court of Appeals issued its regularly scheduled monthly batch of certiorari grants. The five grants include Norman v. State (previously covered by Chris Mincher as part of his COSA Dissent Watch feature), involving pat-downs of passengers when officers smell marijuana during a traffic stop. Continuing the theme of impaired driving, the Court of Appeals accepted two petitions by the MVA in cases where drivers refused intoxication tests. The entire list, including questions presented, appears after the jump. Read More…
Regulatory deference, not restrooms, at issue in high-profile petition
By John Grimm
One of the most closely watched cert petitions before the U.S. Supreme Court in its new term is G.G. v. Gloucester County School Board, scheduled for conference on October 14. The Fourth Circuit decision — which gained national attention in April — was a major milestone for transgender rights, but the petition raises only a narrow question unrelated to civil rights: whether the Court should abandon a relatively obscure, but increasingly controversial, doctrine of administrative law. G.G. is a striking example of how seemingly dry concepts of administrative procedure can have unexpected relevance outside of traditional “administrative law” practice areas.
Maryland high court grants expedited hearing for Baltimore City Council ballot
By Steve Klepper (Twitter: @MDAppeal)
This past Thursday, which seems like a political lifetime ago, the Court of Appeals of Maryland granted certiorari in the following case:
Linda H. Lamone, et al. v. Ian Schlakman, et al. – Case No. 50, September Term, 2016
Issue – Election Law – Did the trial court err in entering an ex parte temporary restraining order that requires the Appellants to remove the name of a qualified candidate from the ballot in Baltimore City Councilmanic District No. 12 for the 2016 General Election?
The Court of Appeals will hear the argument at a special sitting on October 18.
Green Party nominee Ian Schlakman and independent candidate Frank W. Richardson filed suit against the State Administrator of Elections, seeking to remove Dan Sparco (a self-described “Unaffiliated Democrat”) from the ballot. According to an August article by the Baltimore Sun’s Luke Broadwater, Sparaco “acknowledges he missed the state’s deadline,” but he “gained access to the ballot through his own federal lawsuit, which alleged that Maryland’s February filing deadline was unconstitutionally too early.” Sparaco “agreed to drop his suit once State Board of Elections officials agreed to let him on the ballot if he gathered enough signatures.” Read More…
Maryland Appellate Blog 