ÿWPCÃ@ ?LõS©ÆU7s)ŽÞݾð3æ•äÊN´¯|W£öyOlça)&ÝtÒ€™ €íoÛ¼bÝÿ>€NʤJ=]”H-á*2ÕP¾|kSžBnÞÖ2%žŒÄO,³6NnYé+u8?*„Àµ-}ÁV680 0"cv0U,Ù0 1u1 72z1 1‡¬1 1‡32 1‡º2 0¦A3 0Uç3 00<4 0-l5 0*™6 0'Ã7 0$ê8: 0Ü$: 0!; 0!< 0?= 0Z> 1gr? 7Ù?ç?bdï?NS@U@k@@—@­@˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL$,,,,$0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ô(5hCEKQW]cioAutoList1a.a.a.a.a.a.a.a.ŽÕ0â ïsU-ê:i¢×+003|x$ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ*+ ÿÿ(_26Ô2ÔÔ3  Ôà..à*D+J ÿÿ(_25Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*A+J ÿÿ(_24Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*>+J ÿÿ(_23Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*;+J ÿÿ(_22Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*8+J ÿÿ(_21Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*5+J ÿÿ(_20Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*2+J ÿÿ(_19Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*/+J ÿÿ(_18Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó* ÿÿ(_17Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô€*DJ ÿÿ(_16Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*AJ ÿÿ(_15Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*>J ÿÿ(_14Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*;J ÿÿ(_13Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*8J ÿÿ(_12Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*5J ÿÿ(_11Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó*2J ÿÿ(_10Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(/J ÿÿ&_9Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô€Ó  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó( ÿÿ&_8Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô(DJ ÿÿ&_7Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(AJ ÿÿ&_6Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(>J ÿÿ&_5Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(;J ÿÿ&_4Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(8J ÿÿ&_3Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(5J ÿÿ&_2Ó ¨ý ÓÓ h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó(2J ÿÿ&_1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó&/J ÿÿ$_Ó ¨ý ÓÓ  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓ ¨ý Ó6? 2ÿÿ4heading 1Ñ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ‡XXXÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔó óÑ  Ñ64 'ÿÿ4heading 2Ñ  Ñò òÔ‡XXXÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÑ  Ñ61 $ÿÿ4heading 3Ñ  ÑÔ‡¼¼¼ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÔ‡ôôôÔÑ  Ñ<ÿÿ:Default Para8$$ÿÿ6Fax HeaderÑ  ÑÔ‡ôôôÔÑ  ÑÔ‡ôôôÔ<£µÿÿ:envelope addÑ  ÑÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÔ‡¼¼¼ÔÔM‡<%ä2¼A`‹ Arial NarrowMÔÔ‡ôôôÔÔS‡=ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÑ  Ñ6KKÿÿ4Body TextÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÓÓÓÓÔ‡XXXÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÓÓÑ  ÑÓÓ2YYÿÿ0TxBr_p6Ñ  ÑÓ5+Ü Ü†4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÑ  ÑÓ5+Ü Ü†4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5Ó:33ÿÿ8Body Text 2Ñ  ÑÓ X Óò òÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔó óÑ  ÑÓ X Ó<;;ÿÿ:Body Text I1Ñ  ÑÓ X ÓÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÑ  ÑÓ X Ó<>>ÿÿ:Body Text InÑ  ÑÓ X ÓÓ  Óò òÔ‡XXXÔÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔó óÑ  ÑÓ X Ó2$$ÿÿ0TxBr_t1Ñ  ÑÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÑ  Ñ4‚|ÿÿ2TxBr_p11Ñ  ÑÓ Á ÓÓ „ ÓÓ8.`_` 4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤8ÓÓðÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÑ  ÑÓ Á Ó4ssÿÿ2TxBr_p12Ñ  ÑÓ  ÓÓ5+Ü Üñ4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5ÓÓëÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓÓÑ  ÑÓ5+Ü Üñ4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5ÓÓ  Ó4ggÿÿ2TxBr_p13Ñ  ÑÓ5+Ü Ü†4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5ÓÓëÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓÓÑ  ÑÓ5+Ü Ü†4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5Ó4bbÿÿ2TxBr_p14Ñ  ÑÓ í ÓÓ2(É öÉ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÑ  Ñ2ggÿÿ0TxBr_p1Ñ  ÑÓ5+Ü Ü†4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5ÓÓæÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓÓÑ  ÑÓ5+Ü Ü†4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5Ó2qnÿÿ0TxBr_p2Ñ  ÑÓ Îþ ÓÓ ¨ ÓÓ5+„ „4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤5ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÑ  ÑÓ Îþ Ó2ppÿÿ0TxBr_p3Ñ  ÑÓ ¨ ÓÓ2(„ „4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓæÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÑ  Ñ2jpÿÿ0TxBr_p4Ñ  ÑÓ 6 ÓÓ,"  í <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÓæÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÑ  Ñ2knÿÿ0TxBr_p5Ñ  ÑÓ Ûþ ÓÓ  ÓÓ/%î Ç í î <”ìDœôL¤/ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÑ  ÑÓ Ûþ Ó%ä2¼A`‹ Arial Narrowô\  `‹&Times New Roman(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à(ô\ Y`‹Symbol3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)@i)(UhCEKQW]cioAutoList31.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(EhCEKQW]cioAutoList21.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.(ehCEKQW]cioAutoList41.1.1.1.1.1.1.1.0;;ÿÿ.footerÑ  ÑÓ ÜÜìù!ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ‡ôôôÔÑ  ÑÓ ÜÜìù!Ó(-2†æ$©©Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ý<c+f ÿÿ:Outline001_1Ó Ôþ ÓÓ X ÓÓ/%4 4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤/ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ Ôþ Ó<`+f ÿÿ:Outline001_2Ó Ôþ ÓÓ ° ÓÓ,"Œ Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤,ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ Ôþ Ó<]+f ÿÿ:Outline001_3Ó jÿ ÓÓ  ÓÓ)ä ä <”ìDœôL¤)ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ jÿ Ó<Z+f ÿÿ:Outline001_4Ó Ôþ ÓÓ ` ÓÓ&<<”ìDœôL¤&ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ Ôþ Ó<W+f ÿÿ:Outline001_5Ó Ôþ ÓÓ ¸ ÓÓ#””ìDœôL¤#ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ Ôþ Ó Ñ ‹ Ñ<PPD£ê:QuickFormat1Ô€XÔÔ€XÿÿXÔÔ  ÔÔcÿÔÔb  ÔÔ€XÔÔ€XÿÿXÔÔ  ÔÔcÿÔÔb  Ô<T+f ÿÿ:Outline001_6Ó jÿ ÓÓ  ÓÓ ììDœôL¤ ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ jÿ Ó<Q+f ÿÿ:Outline001_7Ó Ôþ ÓÓ h ÓÓDDœôL¤ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ Ôþ Ó<N+f ÿÿ:Outline001_8Ó Ôþ ÓÓ À ÓÓœœôL¤ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ Ôþ Ó<K+f ÿÿ:Outline001_9Ó jÿ ÓÓ  ÓÓ ôôL¤ÓÓÓÓÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ2(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤2ÓÓÓÓÓÓ jÿ ÓGHIJKNOP ÿÿ35=CIOU[a1(a)a.i.1.a.i.1.a.RQi. Questions and Representative Answers Page ù of &ù Ñ X Ñ Ñ ° Ñ Ñ X Ñ Ñ ° Ñ Ñ H ÑÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôò òÓ  ÓÑ€Lp,ÑÑ€UÑÑ8€ïlXXdìdÈ8ÑÑ€W/VÑÑ€XOaÑÑ€Y/VÑÑ€ZOaÑÑ€[?T#ÑFEBRUARY€2004€BAR€EXAMINATIONÐ ° ÐÌQUESTIONS€AND€REPRESENTATIVE€GOOD€ANSWERSÐ ˆØ ÐÌQUESTION€1ó óÐ `° ÐÓ@ÓÌÓ  Óà  àOn€May€1,€2003,€North€County,€Maryland€solicited€proposals€for€the€construction€of€a€countyÐ 8 ˆ Ðoffice€building.€€The€solicitation€notice€provided€that€the€County€would€accept€the€lowest€bid€fromÐ $ t Ða€qualified€bidder.€€On€June€3òòrdóó,€the€county€administrator€recommended€to€the€County€Council€thatÐ  ` Ðit€accept€the€proposal€of€BigCo,€a€Pennsylvania€company.€€The€administrator€explained€that€BigCoððsÐ ü L  Ðbid€was€the€lowest€and€it€appeared€fully€qualified.€€The€Council€deferred€awarding€the€contract.€€TheÐ è 8  Ðadministratorððs€recommendation€dismayed€Joe€Smith,€a€local€builder€who€was€the€next€lowestÐ Ô$  Ðbidder.Ð À  ÐÌà  àAnne€Attorney€is€a€lawyer€practicing€in€North€County€and€is€also€the€president€of€the€NorthÐ ˜è  ÐChamber€of€Commerce,€a€non„profit€civic€organization€which€lobbies€local€government€bodies€onÐ „Ô  Ðissues€relating€to€the€business€community.€€Smith€retained€Attorney€to€block€the€award€of€theÐ pÀ Ðcontract€to€BigCo.€€Without€disclosing€her€relationship€with€Smith,€and€stating€that€she€was€actingÐ \¬ Ðas€president€of€the€Chamber€of€Commerce,€Attorney€appeared€before€the€Council€and€argued€thatÐ H˜ Ðthe€construction€contract€should€be€awarded€to€a€local€contractor.€€Attorney€also€persuaded€the€localÐ 4„ Ðnewspaper€to€publish€an€editorial€with€the€same€message.€€Ð  p ÐÌà  àSmith€met€with€the€members€of€the€County€Council€privately€on€an€individual€basis.€€SmithÐ øH Ðtold€each€Council€member€that€BigCo€had€been€involved€in€three€lawsuits€arising€out€its€projectsÐ ä4 Ðover€the€last€five€years€and€that€Len€Large,€the€president€of€BigCo,€was€a€convicted€criminal.€€SmithÐ Ð  Ðknew,€but€did€not€tell€the€Council€members,€that€BigCo€had€won€each€lawsuit€and€that€LargeððsÐ ¼  Ðcriminal€record€was€a€conviction€for€assault€when€he€was€eighteen,€more€than€30€years€ago.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àThe€Council€awarded€the€contract€to€Smith€during€the€Councilððs€deliberations,€one€CouncilÐ €Ð Ðmember€referred€to€the€ð ðserious€legal€problems€facing€BigCo€and€Large.ðð€€The€meeting€was€televisedÐ l¼ Ðon€local€cable€television.€€Smith€boasted€of€his€achievement€at€a€local€bar€shortly€thereafter€andÐ X ¨ ÐLarge€is€now€aware€of€the€facts.€€Had€BigCo€been€awarded€the€contract,€it€would€have€madeÐ D!” Ðsubstantial€profits.Ð 0"€  ÐÌò òà  àBased€upon€these€facts:€Ð $X" ÐÌà  àa.€€What€causes€of€action€can€be€asserted€by€Large€and/or€BigCo€against€Smith€and/orÐ à%0!$ ÐAttorney?€€What€are€the€chances€of€success?€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àb.€€What€ethical€considerations€are€raised€by€Attorneyððs€conduct?Ð ¤(ô#' Ðó óÓžÓÌÌÐ h+¸&* Ðò òÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ ° ÐÓŽ ÓÌA.€€òòCause€of€Action€and€Potential€for€SuccessóóÐ ˆØ ÐÌÓ  Óà  àFirst,€BigCo€may€have€a€cause€of€action€versus€Attorney€for€interference€with€a€prospectiveÐ `° Ðbusiness€contract.€€It€was€clear€that€BigCo€submitted€the€lowest€bid€for€the€project€prior€to€AttorneyÐ L œ Ðbeing€retained€by€Smith€to€ð ðblock€the€award€of€the€contract€(K)€to€BigCo.ðð€€Thereafter,€abusing€herÐ 8 ˆ Ðposition,€an€issue€discussed€in€more€detail€later,€as€president€of€the€North€Chamber€of€Commerce,Ð $ t ÐAttorney€lobbied€the€County€Council€to€award€the€bid€to€a€local€contractor€while€not€divulging€herÐ  ` Ðrepresentation€of€Smith.€€Ultimately,€Attorneyððs€efforts€resulted€in€the€contract€being€awarded€toÐ ü L  ÐSmith€and€resulting€in€BigCo€losing€substantial€profits.€€As€Attorney€did€nothing€that€could€beÐ è 8  Ðconstrued€as€illegal,€her€tortious€conduct€toward€BigCo€is€most€likely€actionable€with€a€marginalÐ Ô$  Ðsuccess€potential.Ð À  ÐÌà  àSecond,€BigCo€will€have€causes€of€action€versus€Smith€for€interference€with€the€prospectiveÐ ˜è  Ðbusiness€contract/advantage.€€Indeed,€BigCoððs€success€against€Smith€is€more€likely€because€SmithÐ „Ô  Ðmade€affirmative€representations€to€the€County€Council€regarding€BigCo€(and€Largeððs)€fitness€toÐ pÀ Ðperform,€the€work€by€meeting€with€the€Councilðð€members€individually,€and€advising€them€ofÐ \¬ ÐBigCoððs€litigation€woes€as€well€as€Largeððs€prior€involvement€with€the€police.€€These€representationsÐ H˜ Ðapparently€were€the€basis€for€not€awarding€the€K€to€BigCo.€€Therefore,€the€chances€of€success€areÐ 4„ Ðvery€good.Ð  p ÐÌà  àBigCo€will€also€have€a€cause€of€action€versus€Smith€for€portraying€the€company€in€a€falseÐ øH Ðlight€to€the€Council€without€regard€to€the€curative€facts€„€BigCo€won€all€lawsuits€and€LargeððsÐ ä4 Ðconviction€was€over€30€years€old€€„€Smith€painted€BigCo€as€a€less€than€desirable€company.€€ThisÐ Ð  Ðresulted€in€not€obtaining€the€K,€and€a€loss€of€substantial€profits.€Ð ¼  ÐÌà  àBigCo€may€be€able€to€sue€for€defamation€because€there€were€statements€concerning€BigCo€Ð ”ä Ðproblems€to€the€Council€members€by€Smith.€€However,€both€were€true€which€is€an€affirmativeÐ €Ð Ðdefense€to€slanderous€statements€when€not€involving€a€public€figure€or€public€concern.€€This€wouldÐ l¼ Ðnot€be€successful.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àLarge€may€also€sue,€as€President€of€BigCo,€for€interference€with€a€business€K/advantageÐ 0"€  Ðbased€on€the€reasons€alone€and€his€status€as€president.€€Large€may€also€sue€Smith€for€false€light€basedÐ #l! Ðon€Smiths€statements€to€the€Council€regarding€Largeððs€conviction.€€These€will€most€likely€beÐ $X" Ðsuccessful.Ð ô$D # ÐÌB.€€Attorney€has€violated€the€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct.€€First,€she€failed€to€disclose€herÐ Ì&"% Ðrepresentative€capacity€of€Smith€when€appearing€before€the€Board.€€Second,€although€permitted€toÐ ¸'#& Ðbe€on€the€Board€of€a€non„profit€organization€she€is€not€permitted€to€use€that€position€to€the€advantageÐ ¤(ô#' Ðof€her€client€without€disclosing€her€status€as€an€interested€party,€especially€where€the€subject€matterÐ )à$( Ðof€the€representation€is€so€closely€tied€to€the€position€Attorney€has€with€the€Chamber€of€Commerce.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÓ#ÓÐ h+¸&* Ðà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ ° ÐÌòòÓ  ÓLarge€v.€SmithóóÐ ˆØ ÐÌà  àòòSlander€per€seóó€is€a€defamatory€statement€which€concerns€either€a€loathsome€disease,Ð `° Ðcriminality€and€does€not€require€proof€of€special€damages.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àHere,€Large€will€allege€that€Smithððs€statement€that€he€was€a€ð ðconvicted€criminalðð€was€slanderÐ $ t Ðper€se.€€However,€Largeððs€chances€of€success€in€a€slander€per€se€action€is€low€because€truth€is€alwaysÐ  ` Ða€defense€to€an€allegation€of€defamation€and€Smith€will€argue€that€he€is€a€convicted€criminal€asÐ ü L  Ðevidenced€by€the€assault€conviction.Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àòòFalse€Lightóó€is€when€one€person€portrays€another€in€a€way€that€is€misleading,€even€thought€theÐ À  Ðunderlying€claim€may€be€true.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àHere,€Large€will€argue€that€calling€him€a€convicted€criminal€portrayed€him€in€a€false€lightÐ „Ô  Ðbecause€it€was€an€assault€charge€that€is€over€30€years€old.Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àLargeððs€chances€of€success€on€a€false€light€claim€are€better€than€with€slander€per€se€and€itÐ H˜ Ðwould€ultimately€be€for€a€jury€to€decide.Ð 4„ ÐÌòòBigCo€v.€SmithóóÐ  \ ÐÌà  àòòTortious€interference€with€contractóó€occurs€when€one€party€tortiously€interferes€with€theÐ ä4 Ðcontract€between€2€other€parties.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àHere,€BigCo€could€argue€that€Smith€tortiously€interfered€with€it€potential€contract€with€theÐ ¨ø ÐCouncil€by€hiring€Attorney€to€lobby€for€Smith€and€by€making€statements€to€the€Council.€€Had€it€notÐ ”ä Ðbeen€for€Smithððs€interference,€BigCo€would€have€gotten€the€contract€because€the€Council€was€goingÐ €Ð Ðto€award€it€to€the€lowest€bidder€which€was€BigCo.Ð l¼ ÐÌà  àBigCoððs€chance€on€this€claim€is€50/50€because€there€was€no€contract€at€the€time,€however€itÐ D!” Ðwas€the€lowest€bidder€and€should€have€been€awarded€the€contract.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àòòIntentional€Misrepresentationóó€occurs€when€an€individual€intentionally€misleads€the€otherÐ $X" Ðparty€as€to€a€material€fact€to€induce€reliance€and€there€is€reliance.Ð ô$D # ÐÌà  àHere,€BigCo€will€argue€that€Smithððs€statements€to€the€Council€were€an€intentionalÐ Ì&"% Ðmisrepresentation€of€fact€about€BigCo€because€Smith€knew€BigCo€had€won€the€lawsuits.€€There€wasÐ ¸'#& Ðdetrimental€reliance€on€the€Councilððs€par€because€it€had€to€accept€the€higher€bid.€€The€chance€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsuccess€on€this€is€questionable€because€BigCo€may€not€have€standing€to€bring€this€claim.Ð )à$( ÐÌòòBigCo€v.€AttorneyóóÐ h+¸&* Їà  àIntentional€Misrepresentation€and€Tortious€Interference€with€contract€(See€definitions€above)Ð ° ÐÌà  àAttorney€misrepresented€the€facts€buy€intentionally€not€disclosing€her€relationship€to€Smith.€Ð ˆØ ÐShe€also€tortiously€interfered€with€the€contract€because€she€was€hired€by€Smith€to€block€the€awardÐ tÄ Ðof€the€K.Ð `° ÐÌB.€€òòEthical€ConsiderationsóóÐ 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àIt€was€unethical€for€Attorney€to€go€to€the€Council€and€argue€that€the€K€should€be€awarded€toÐ  ` Ða€local€contractor€without€disclosing€her€relationship€to€Smith.€€It€also€may€be€a€conflict€of€interestÐ ü L  Ðfor€her€to€lobby€the€government€on€issues€while€also€representing€contractors€such€as€Smith.Ð è 8  ÐÓ¢ÓÌò òÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ÐQUESTION€2ó óÐ ° ÐÓ+ÓÓ  ÓÌà  àThe€ABC€Corporation€was€a€Maryland€corporation€engaged€in€the€real€estate€developmentÐ ˆØ Ðbusiness.€€Able€served€as€president€and€treasurer.€€The€corporationððs€by„laws€provided€for€threeÐ tÄ Ðdirectors,€Able,€Baker€and€Carla.€€Able€owned€90%€of€the€outstanding€stock€in€the€company;€BakerÐ `° Ðand€Carla€owned€5%€each.€€The€corporationððs€sole€asset€was€ð ðGreenfieldsðð,€a€farm€in€Queen€AnneððsÐ L œ ÐCounty,€Maryland.€€In€order€to€finance€the€purchase€of€the€property€and€its€operations,€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðcorporation€borrowed€$1,000,000€from€First€Bank€(the€ð ðBankðð).€€This€obligation€was€personallyÐ $ t Ðguaranteed€by€Able€but€was€not€otherwise€secured.€€The€business€did€not€prosper€and,€at€a€BoardÐ  ` Ðmeeting€on€May€15òòóó,€2003,€Able€suggested€to€the€Board€that€the€company€sell€the€farm€quickly€toÐ ü L  Ðminimize€losses.€€Baker€and€Carla€said€they€would€consider€the€matter.€Ð è 8  ÐÌOn€June€1,€2003,€the€corporationððs€articles€of€incorporation€were€forfeited€for€failure€to€pay€taxes.€Ð À  ÐThe€forfeiture€was€pursuant€to€Maryland€law.€€On€June€5òòóó,€2003,€Able€received€written€notice€of€theÐ ¬ü  Ðforfeiture.€€The€next€day,€as€president€of€the€corporation,€Able€signed€a€contract€to€sell€GreenfieldsÐ ˜è  Ðto€Bulldozer€Inc.€for€$800,000.€€Settlement€on€the€contract€took€place€two€months€later.€€The€onlyÐ „Ô  Ðdocument€signed€pertaining€to€the€title€to€Greenfields€was€a€deed€to€Bulldozer€which€was€signed€byÐ pÀ ÐAble€as€president€of€the€corporation.€€The€deed€was€recorded€in€the€land€records€of€Queen€AnneððsÐ \¬ ÐCounty.€€Able€did€not€inform€Ben€or€Carla€of€the€forfeiture,€the€contract€or€the€sale€until€after€theÐ H˜ Ðsettlement.€€Able€took€the€sale€proceeds€and€departed€for€Brazil.€€His€current€whereabouts€areÐ 4„ Ðunknown.Ð  p ÐÌà  àIn€September,€the€Bank€learned€that€the€articles€of€incorporation€of€ABC€had€been€forfeitedÐ øH Ðand€also€learned€of€the€sale€of€Greenfields.€€The€Bank€has€demanded€that€Baker€and€Carla€pay€theÐ ä4 Ðmoney€owed€the€Bank€from€their€personal€assets.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àò ò1.€€Was€the€transfer€to€Bulldozer€valid?Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  à2.€€Are€Carla€and€Ben€personally€liable€to€the€Bank?Ð €Ð ÐÌà  à3.€€How€can€Carla€and€Ben€transfer€Greenfields€at€this€point?€Explain€your€answerÐ X ¨ Ðthoroughly.ó óÐ D!” ÐÓ+ÓÌò òà@<<ìàREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ #l! ÐÌÓ  Ó1.€The€transfer€to€bulldozer€was€not€proper€under€corporations€law.€€Greenfields€was€the€sole€assetÐ ô$D # Ðof€the€corporation.€€Therefore,€sale€to€anyone€would€require€approval€of€a€majority€of€the€board€orÐ à%0!$ Ðunanimous€written€consent€that€action€can€be€taken€without.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àHere,€Baker€and€Carla€were€not€informed.€€The€only€other€way€for€this€sale€to€be€valid€wouldÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbe€if€B€and€C€ratified€it€which€they€didnððt.€€The€main€problem€here€is€that€the€charter€was€forfeited.€Ð )à$( ÐUnder€Maryland€law€a€director€can€be€personally€liable€for€still€acting€as€though€he€is€a€corporationÐ |*Ì%) Ðwhen€he€knows€the€charter€has€been€forfeited€or€he€allows€it€to€be.€€A€had€knowledge€before€the€sale.€Ð h+¸&* ÐHe€therefore€breached€his€duty€of€loyalty€and€care€to€the€corporation€because€he€did€not€act€as€aÐ ° Ðprudent€director€in€good€faith€as€a€reasonable€person€would.€€Although€the€sale€was€not€ratified,€theÐ œì Ðcharter€no€longer€existed€so€all€of€the€directors€acting€to€wind€up€would€have€had€to€sign€it,€transferÐ ˆØ Ðtherefore€was€not€valid€because€Able€didnððt€have€the€authority.Ð tÄ ÐÌ2.€€Carla€and€Ben€as€directors€could€be€liable€if€they€know€of€the€forfeit€of€the€charter€or€they€actedÐ L œ Ðin€such€a€way€to€allow€the€charter€to€forfeit.€€The€facts€do€not€indicate€such€action€or€knowledge€onÐ 8 ˆ Ðtheir€part.€€They€did€not€ratify€the€sale€so€Ableððs€actions€were€not€valid€corporate€acts.€€Additionally,Ð $ t Ðshareholders€are€generally€not€personally€liable€for€the€debts€of€the€corporation€but€in€some€instanceÐ  ` Ðthe€court€will€òòpierce€the€corporate€veilóó€to€get€to€them€to€prevent€òòfraudóó€or€òòenforceóó€a€òòparamount€equity.óó€Ð ü L  ÐThere€are€no€facts€present€here€to€consider€they€acted€with€Able,€they€didnððt€know€about€the€charterÐ è 8  Ðbeing€forfeited,€they€said€they€would€think€about€the€sale€and€the€facts€donððt€indicate€they€allowedÐ Ô$  Ðthe€charter€to€forfeit,€unless€their€failure€to€act€to€sell€the€land€indicated€this.Ð À  ÐÌà  àThe€bank€canððt€sue€them€personally€on€Ableððs€signature€because€he€breached€his€duty€of€careÐ ˜è  Ðto€the€corporation€and€they€didnððt€ratify€or€participate.€€Unless€it€is€shown€they€acted€fraudulently,Ð „Ô  Ðallowed€the€corporation€to€be€undercapitalized€or€enforce€paramount€equity,€the€corporation€couldÐ pÀ Ðalso€not€sue€them€as€a€shareholder.€€Able€personally€guaranteed€the€loan€as€an€individual€and€theyÐ \¬ Ðdid€not€sign€it,€therefore€they€cannot€be€personally€liable€to€the€bank€for€Ableððs€personal€guaranteeÐ H˜ Ðnot€secured€by€assets€of€the€corporation.Ð 4„ ÐÌ3.€€Since€the€charter€has€been€forfeited€Carla€and€Ben€need€to€dissolve€the€corporation€and€wind€up.€Ð  \ ÐAs€the€other€directors€they€could€ratify€the€sale€and€create€a€new€deed€selling€the€property€toÐ øH ÐBulldozer€as€directors€acting€to€wind€up€the€corporationððs€assets.€€They€should€reform€the€deed€toÐ ä4 Ðhave€their€signatures€because€Able€did€not€have€the€authority€to€transfer€or€sell€without€theirÐ Ð  Ðapproval.€€If€the€court€demands€dissolution,€a€trustee€may€be€appointed€and€such€person€could€signÐ ¼  Ðand€sell€the€property.Ð ¨ø ÐÓ^6ÓÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ €Ð ÐÌÓ  Ó1.€€The€transfer€to€Bulldozer€was€not€valid.€€Able€suggested€selling€Greenfield,€,€but€Baker€and€CarlaÐ X ¨ Ðdid€not€agree€to€it.€€Had€they€known€Able€was€going€to€make,€or€had€made€the€transfer,€they€couldÐ D!” Ðhave€objected,€asked€A€to€reconsider,€brought€Shareholder€derivative€action€or€sold€their€shares€toÐ 0"€  Ðavoid€liability.€€Aððs€actions€do€not€appear€to€have€been€in€the€best€interests€of€the€corporation€andÐ #l! Ðconstitute€a€breach€of€his€fiduciary€duties€of€loyalty€and€care.€€A.€alone€lacked€the€capacity€to€validlyÐ $X" Ðtransfer€the€corporationððs€only€asset.€€Under€agency€principles,€however,€Bulldozer€will€have€a€strongÐ ô$D # Ðargument€that€A€had€apparent€authority€to€do€so€(Able€was€President€of€the€Corp.)€€Upon€whichÐ à%0!$ ÐBulldozer€reasonably€relied€„€B€may€be€charged€with€constructive€notice€that€the€Corp€no€longerÐ Ì&"% Ðexisted.€(matter€of€public€record).Ð ¸'#& ÐÌ2.€€C€and€B€are€not€personally€liable€to€the€bank.€€Only€A€personally€guaranteed€the€loan.€€Further,Ð )à$( Ðthere€is€no€indication€B€or€C€acted€fraudulently€or€otherwise€breached€their€duties€as€directors.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐRather€they€were€defrauded€by€A.Ð h+¸&* Ї3.€€B€and€C€should€bring€a€quiet€title€action€to€protect€Greenfield€from€any€claim€by€A€or€Bulldozer.€Ð ° ÐWhile€the€loan€from€Bank€was€not€secured€by€a€lien€(mortgage)€on€Greenfields,€it€will€seek€to€attachÐ œì Ðit€in€satisfaction€of€the€loan.€€Since€the€corporation€technically€does€not€exist€anymore,€B€and€CÐ ˆØ Ðeither€need€to€reinstate€the€corporation€or€wrap€it€up€and€convey€the€land€to€themselves€so€a€legalÐ tÄ Ðexisting€entity€has€ownership.Ð `° ÐÓÇDÓÌò òÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ÐQUESTION€3ó óÐ ° ÐÓ$LÓÌÓ  Óà  àTom,€Debbie€and€Harry€spend€an€evening€drinking€and€taking€illicit€drugs.€€The€three€of€themÐ ˆØ Ðcruise€the€streets€in€Harryððs€van€and€pick€up€Georgia€who€is€hitchhiking.€€Georgia€is€offered,€andÐ tÄ Ðshares€refreshments€with€the€three€of€them.Ð `° ÐÌà  àDebbie€is€driving€the€van€and€Tom€is€in€the€rear€of€the€vehicle€with€Georgia.€€Tom€beginsÐ 8 ˆ Ðstruggling€with€Georgia€but€is€unable€to€overcome€her€resistance.€€Tom€has€Debbie€stop€the€vehicleÐ $ t Ðat€which€point€Debbie€and€Harry€climb€into€the€rear€of€the€van€and€watch€Debbie€struggle€againstÐ  ` ÐTomððs€advances.€€At€Tomððs€request,€Debbie€helps€to€subdue€Georgia.€€At€that€time€Tom€assaults€andÐ ü L  Ðrapes€Georgia.€€Harry€also€has€intercourse€with€Georgia€while€Debbie€continues€to€restrain€her.€HarryÐ è 8  Ðthen€replaces€Debbie€in€holding€Georgia€down€while€Tom€attempts€intercourse€with€her.€€Tom€isÐ Ô$  Ðphysically€unable€to€perform€and€abandons€the€attempt.€€Georgia€at€this€point€has€passed€out€fromÐ À  Ðthe€stress€and€the€alcohol€and€drugs€which€she€ingested.€€Tom,€Debbie€and€Harry€decide€that€theyÐ ¬ü  Ðshould€leave€Georgia€by€the€side€of€the€road€in€the€hope€that€she€will€be€disoriented€and€either€notÐ ˜è  Ðremember€or€report€what€has€just€occurred;€that€if€left€in€a€remote€area€Georgia€might€not€surviveÐ „Ô  Ðdue€to€her€physical€condition€(injuries€sustained€in€her€rape€and€her€intoxicated€state).€€To€furtherÐ pÀ Ðensure€that€Georgia€might€not€ever€be€able€to€report€the€rape€or€identify€them,€they€drive€to€a€remoteÐ \¬ Ðarea€where€they€drag€Georgia€out€of€the€van€and€leave€her€in€the€woods.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àGeorgia€survives€and€Tom,€Debbie€and€Harry€are€each€charged€with€two€counts€of€firstÐ  p Ðdegree€rape€as€well€as€a€single€count€of€attempted€first€degree€rape.Ð  \ ÐÌà  àò òUnder€what€theories€of€criminal€responsibility€could€Tom€successfully€be€prosecutedÐ ä4 Ðfor€the€rapes€and€attempted€rape?Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àDiscuss€defenses€which€Debbie€might€raise€as€to€her€criminal€responsibility€and€theirÐ ¨ø Ðlikelihood€of€success€with€regard€to€the€two€counts€of€first€degree€rape€and€one€count€ofÐ ”ä Ðattempted€first€degree€rapeó ó.Ð €Ð ÐÓœLÓÌò òÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó ó€Ð \ ¬ ÐÓ…VÓÌÓ  Óà  àTom€could€successfully€be€convicted€of€two€counts€of€rape€both€as€a€principal€(for€actuallyÐ 8"ˆ  Ðcommitting€his€rape€of€Georgia)€and€a€principal€in€the€second€degree€for€Harryððs€rape€of€Georgia.Ð $#t! ÐÌà  àIn€Maryland,€first€degree€rape€is€the€sexual€assault€by€a€man€of€a€woman,€in€which€a€male,Ð ü$L # Ðthrough€physical€force€or€violence,€and€without€the€womanððs€consent,€engages€in€sexual€intercourseÐ è%8!$ Ðwith€her.Ð Ô&$"% Ðà  àÌà  àIn€this€case,€Tom€physically€struggled€with€Georgia,€and€did€in€fact€use€physical€force€(andÐ ¬(ü#' Ðcaused€others€to€use€such€force)€in€order€for€Tom€to€have€vaginal€sexual€intercourse€with€Georgia.€Ð ˜)è$( ÐThe€person€who€performs€the€actual€physical€act€of€a€crime€is€a€principal.Ð „*Ô%) ÐÐ p+À&* Ðà  àWhen€Harry€raped€Georgia,€he€also€used€physical€force€though€the€agency€of€Debbie,€in€orderÐ ° Ðto€accomplish€the€crime€of€first„degree€rape.€€Although€Tom€did€not€physically€participate€in€thisÐ œì Ðparticular€rape,€he€does€meet€the€requirements€for€a€principal€in€the€second€degree.€€A€principal€inÐ ˆØ Ðthe€second€degree€is€one€who€is€physically€present€at€the€scene€of€the€crime,€and€aids€or€encouragesÐ tÄ Ðothers€to€commit€the€crime.€€Tom€used€physical€force€against€Debbie€and€further€encouraged€DebbieÐ `° Ðto€use€physical€force€to€allow€him€to€commit€the€first€rape,€and€Debbie€continued€this€use€of€forceÐ L œ Ðthrough€the€second€rape.€€Because€Tom€was€present€at€the€scene,€and€this€act€was€a€foreseeableÐ 8 ˆ Ðconsequence€of€a€prior€or€criminal€action,€Tom€is€a€principal€in€the€second€degree.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àTom€could€successfully€be€convicted€of€attempted€first€degree€rape,€because€he€attemptedÐ ü L  Ðto€perform€a€third€rape.€€Attempt€requires€an€intent€to€commit€the€crime,€and€a€substantial€stepÐ è 8  Ðtoward€its€commission.€€Impotence€is€not€a€defense€to€attempted€rape.€€Although€Tomððs€specificÐ Ô$  Ðintent€to€attempt€may€potentially€be€negated€by€the€voluntary€intoxication,€voluntary€intoxication€isÐ À  Ðnot€an€absolute€defense€to€attempt,€especially€not€when€the€defendant€had€recently€performed€theÐ ¬ü  Ðcrime€that€is€newly€attempted.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àDebbieððs€primary€defense€to€the€rape€charges€is€that€she€is€a€woman€and€cannot€be€guilty€ofÐ pÀ Ðrape.€€This€would€be€true,€if€Debbie€were€the€only€person€charged€with€rape.€€Debbie€was€a€principalÐ \¬ Ðin€the€first€degree€to€the€two€counts€of€rape.€€In€order€to€be€a€principal€in€the€first€degree,€a€personÐ H˜ Ðmust€be€physically€present€at€the€scene€and€actually€contribute€to€the€commission€of€the€crime.€Ð 4„ ÐDebbie€was€present€at€the€scene,€and€although€she€could€not€have€committed€intercourse€element€ofÐ  p Ðthe€actual€rape,€she€did€provide€the€necessary€element€of€physical€force.€€Therefore,€because€sheÐ  \ Ðactually€participated€in€Tom€and€Harryððs€rapes€of€Georgia,€Debbie€is€liable€as€a€principal€in€the€firstÐ øH Ðdegree.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àDebbie€may€be€charged€as€an€accessory€after€the€fact€in€the€crime€of€attempted€rape.€€She€willÐ ¼  Ðallege€that€she€did€not€have€the€requisite€specific€intent€to€perform€attempted€rape.€€However,Ð ¨ø Ðspecific€intent€is€not€required€for€accessory€liability.€€In€this€case,€although€she€did€not€restrainÐ ”ä ÐGeorgia€during€Tomððs€attempted€rape€of€Georgia,€Debbie€did€participate€in€the€decision€to€abandonÐ €Ð ÐGeorgia,€and€therefore€provided€aid€and€comfort€to€Tom€and€Harry€after€the€commission€of€theÐ l¼ Ðattempted€rape.€Ð X ¨ ÐÓÒVÓÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó ó€€Ð 0"€  ÐÓ’fÓÌÓ  Óà  àConspiracy€is€an€agreement€between€two€or€more€individuals€to€commit€a€crime.€€Here,€Tom,Ð  $\" ÐDebbie€and€Harry€are€all€guilty€of€conspiracy€to€commit€the€attempted€rape€of€Georgia€by€theirÐ ø$H # Ðactions€of€Debbie€stopping€the€van,€climbing€into€the€rear€of€the€van€with€Harry€and€watchingÐ ä%4!$ ÐGeorgia€struggle€against€Tomððs€advances,€Harry€having€intercourse€with€Georgia€while€DebbieÐ Ð& "% Ðrestrained€her€and€Tom€assaulting€Georgia€and€attempting€to€have€intercourse€with€her.Ð ¼' #& ÐÌà  àRape€is€a€general€intent€crime€and€the€act€of€having€intercourse€with€the€victim€will€suffice.€Ð ”)ä$( ÐThe€intent€of€the€offender€will€be€irrelevant.€€Here,€Tom€assaulted€and€raped€Georgia€and€his€conductÐ €*Ð%) Ðalone€will€be€successful€in€getting€a€conviction€of€the€rape.€€Ð l+¼&* ЇÑ  Ñà  àAttempted€rape€is€a€specific€intent€crime€and€the€offenderððs€intent€to€have€intercourse€withÐ ° Ðthe€victim€will€suffice€even€if€the€act€of€raping€the€victim€is€incomplete.€€Here,€Tom€attempted€toÐ œì Ðhave€intercourse€but€is€physically€unable€to€perform€and€abandons€the€attempt.€€Tomððs€abandonmentÐ ˆØ Ðof€the€effort€will€not€prevent€conviction€of€the€attempted€rape€because€he€possessed€the€òòmens€reaóó€toÐ tÄ Ðcommit€the€crime.€€Again,€itððs€the€intent€that€is€relevant,€not€so€much€that€the€act€itself€wasÐ `° Ðincomplete.€€Ð L œ ÐÑ  ÑÌà  àDebbieððs€defenses:€€As€a€female,€Debbie€will€argue€that€it€is€impossible€for€her€to€be€chargedÐ $ t Ðwith€two€counts€of€first€degree€rape€and€one€count€of€attempted€first€degree€rape€because€she€canððtÐ  ` Ðpenetrate€a€woman.€€The€crime€of€rape€is€defined€as€the€unlawful€penetration€by€a€man€of€a€woman.€Ð ü L  ÐHowever,€women€may€be€convicted€for€this€crime€as€well€due€to€her€urging,€exciting€andÐ è 8  Ðencouraging€a€man€to€commit€the€rape.€€Here,€Debbie€at€Tomððs€request,€helps€to€subdue€GeorgiaÐ Ô$  Ðwhile€he€assaults€and€rapes€her.€€Debbie€continues€to€restrain€Georgia€while€Harry€has€intercourseÐ À  Ðwith€Georgia.€€Her€involvement€in€the€rape€was€substantial€and€she€will€be€convicted€of€theseÐ ¬ü  Ðcharges.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌÑ  Ñà  àVoluntary€intoxication€may€be€a€defense€to€a€specific€intent€crime€because€the€defendant€mayÐ pÀ Ðlack€the€requisite€òòmens€reaóó.€€Here,€Georgia€may€be€able€to€negate€the€charges€of€the€attempted€rapeÐ \¬ Ðbut€may€not€be€successful€in€the€two€counts€of€first€degree€rape,€which€is€a€general€intent€crime€toÐ H˜ Ðwhich€intoxication€is€not€a€defense.Ð 4„ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àThe€reasoning€regarding€voluntary€intoxication€will€apply€to€Tom€as€well.€€Ð  \ ÐÓãfÓÌò òÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ÐQUESTION€4ó óÐ ° ÐÓÍrÓÌÓ  ÓOn€June€1,€2002€Adam€was€driving€his€elderly€neighbor,€Ben,€to€a€local€food€market€in€SomersetÐ ˆØ ÐCounty,€Maryland,€a€weekly€courtesy€that€Adam€has€provided€to€Ben€for€the€past€year.€€Ben€noÐ tÄ Ðlonger€drives€because€of€physical€infirmities.Ð `° ÐÌAdam€drove€East€on€Secondary€Drive€to€its€intersection€with€Favored€Street.€€A€ð ðStopðð€signÐ 8 ˆ Ðcontrolled€traffic€entering€Favored€Street€from€Secondary€Drive.€€At€that€time,€Carl€was€driving€hisÐ $ t Ðautomobile€South€on€Favored€Street€at€a€speed€substantially€in€excess€of€the€posted€speed€limit€ofÐ  ` Ð50€miles€per€hour.€The€vehicles€collided€in€the€intersection.€Adam,€Ben€and€Carl€sustained€injuries.Ð ü L  ÐÌBased€on€the€police€investigation€at€the€scene,€Adam€was€cited€for€failure€to€stop€and€yield€at€theÐ Ô$  Ðintersection.€€Carl€was€cited€for€speeding€and€negligent€driving.Ð À  ÐÌà  àA.€On€July€8,€2002,€Adam€and€Ben€met€with€a€Somerset€County€attorney€to€discuss€hisÐ ˜è  Ðrepresentation€of€them€in€a€joint€suit€against€Carl€for€their€injuries€and€for€damages€to€Adamððs€car.Ð „Ô  ÐÌò òà  àBased€on€the€stated€facts,€can€the€attorney€appropriately€represent€both€Adam€andÐ \¬ ÐBen?ó óÐ H˜ ÐÌà  àB.€On€August€1,€2002,€Carlððs€attorney€filed€a€standard€negligence€complaint€and€demand€forÐ  p Ðjury€trial€against€Adam€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Somerset€County€claiming€property€and€personalÐ  \ Ðinjury€damages€in€the€amount€of€$200,000.00.Ð øH ÐÌò òà  àWhat€preliminary€motions€and/or€pleadings€should€Adamððs€attorney€file€in€responseÐ Ð  Ðto€the€Complaint?€€State€the€basis€for€any€such€motion€or€pleading.ó óÐ ¼  ÐÌà  àC.€Attached€to€Carlððs€complaint€is€a€set€of€30€Interrogatories€addressed€to€Adam.€€ò òWhenÐ ”ä Ðmust€Adamððs€attorney€file€responses?ó óÐ „Ô ÐÌà  àD.€Upon€receipt€of€Adamððs€answers€to€Interrogatories,€Carlððs€attorney€learned€for€the€firstÐ \ ¬ Ðtime€the€purpose€for€Adamððs€trip€on€June€1,€2002.€€ò òWhat€effect,€if€any,€could€this€informationÐ H!˜ Ðhave€on€Carlððs€pending€suit€against€Adam?ó óÐ 8"ˆ  ÐÌà  àò òWhat€action€should€Carlððs€attorney€take€in€light€of€this€information?ó óÐ $`" ÐÌà  àE.€In€preparation€for€trial,€Adamððs€attorney€served€on€Carl€a€request€for€production€of€theÐ è%8!$ Ðfollowing:Ð Ô&$"% ÐÌÓ€ (5h83@Óà  ài.€A€cassette€recording€of€Adamððs€interview€with€the€representative€of€Carlððs€insuranceÐ ¬(ü#' Ðcompany€concerning€the€accident.Ð ˜)è$( Ðâ âÐ „*Ô%) Ðà  àii.€A€copy€of€written€statements€from€witnesses€to€the€accident€taken€by€the€sameÐ ° Ðâ ârepresentative.Ð œì ÐÌà  àiii.€A€copy€of€Carlððs€automobile€insurance€policy€or€a€certified€statement€of€the€nature€andÐ tÄ Ðamount€of€liability€coverage.Ð `° ÐÌà  àiv.€A€list€identifying€all€medical€experts€who€treated€Carl€following€the€accident,€and€a€copyÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€any€written€opinion€of€these€experts€relative€to€the€nature€and€extent€of€injuries€claimed€to€haveÐ $ t Ðbeen€sustained€by€Carl€in€the€accident.Ð  ` ÐÌò òà  àIs€Adam€entitled€to€all€or€any€of€the€documents€sought?€Explain€your€reasons.ó óÐ è 8  ÐÓ4sÓÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ À  ÐÓ‚ÓÌÓ€ C(Eh88ÓÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÝ‚>3£á‚ÝÔ2EhÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝThe€conflict€of€interest€exists€when€an€attorney€is€asked€to€represent€two€or€more€parties€withÐ ˜è  Ðcompeting€and/or€potentially€competing€interests.€€Here,€as€a€passenger€in€Adamððs€vehicle,Ð „Ô  Ðone€of€Bensðð€likely€claims€for€damages€will€be€a€claim€of€negligence€against€Adam,€whichÐ pÀ Ðwill€be€permitted,€as€there€is€no€guest€statute€in€Maryland.€€As€a€result,€the€interest€of€BenÐ \¬ Ðand€Adam€are€or€will€be€directly€counter€to€one€another,€making€the€AttorneyððsÐ H˜ Ðrepresentation€of€both€Adam€and€Ben€inappropriate.݃>3£á‚ƒÝŒÐ4„(#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£†ÝÔ2EhÔÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝIf€the€attorney€wishes€to€assert€any€mandatory€defenses€identified€in€Maryland€Rule€2-322(a)Ð  \ Ða€Motion€to€Dismiss€should€be€filed.€€As€venue€and€jurisdiction€seem€proper€in€SomersetÐ øH ÐCounty€Circuit€Court,€jury€trial€prayer€and€accident€in€Somerset€County€any€such€motionÐ ä4 Ðseems€unlikely.݃>3£†E†ÝŒÐÐ (#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌà0  àAttorney€must€file€an€answer€to€the€Complaint€within€thirty€days€from€the€date€of€service€onÐ ¨ø ÐAdam.€€Attorney€must€include€all€affirmative€and€negative€defenses€and€permissive€defensesÐ ”ä Ðas€a€part€of€the€answer.€€As€the€claim€sounds€in€tort€and€is€for€a€specific€amount,€AttorneyÐ €Ð Ðmay€file€a€general€denial€on€Adamððs€behalf.€€Also,€if€Adam€wishes€to€pursue€his€claim€forÐ l¼ Ðproperty€damage€and€bodily€injury€he€should€file€a€counterclaim€against€Carl€as€part€of€hisÐ X ¨ Ðpleading.€ÐD!”(#(# ÐÌÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£¢ŠÝÔ2EhÔÚ  Ú3Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝIn€the€Circuit€Court€interrogatory€responses€are€due€within€30€days€of€service€or€within€15Ð #l! Ðdays€after€the€partyððs€initial€pleading€is€due.€€Because€these€Interrogatories€are€served€withÐ $X" Ðthe€Complaint€they€will€be€due€15€days€after€the€time€for€Adamððs€initial€pleading.€€AsÐ ô$D # ÐAdamððs€initial€Response/Motion€to€Dismiss€is€due€30€days€after€service€of€the€Complaint€theÐ à%0!$ Ðinterrogatory€answers€will€be€due€45€days€after€service€of€the€Complaint€and€InterrogatoriesÐ Ì&"% Ðupon€Adam.€Ýƒ>3£¢ŠÏŠÝŒÐ¸'#&(#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌ4.€à0  àUnder€the€theory€of€Ô  Ôòòrespondeat€superioróóÔ  Ô,€a€principal€is€liable€for€the€torts€of€his€agent.€€Here,Ð )à$( Ðas€Adam€was€driving€Ben€to€a€local€food€market€an€agency€relationship€appears€to€exist.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐAlso,€Benððs€presence€in€the€car€and€his€inability€to€drive€because€of€physical€infirmities€givesÐ h+¸&* Ðgreater€support€to€the€agency€claim.€€Accordingly,€Carl€and€his€attorney€should€file€anÐ ° ÐAmended€Complaint€adding€Ben€as€a€party€under€and€agency/Ô  Ôòòrespondeat€superioróóÔ  ÔÔ  Ô€theory.Мì(#(# ÐÌÓ€ B(Uh88CÓØ! !ØÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£ãÝÔ2UhÔÚ  Ú5Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  Ý(i)à0` (#(#àUnder€Maryland€Rule€2„402(d),€Adam€may€obtain€a€recording€as€it€is€a€statement€ofÐ tÄ Ðthe€party.݃>3£ã‘ÝŒÐ`°` (#` (# ÐŒÝ  Ýà  à(ii)à0 ` àA€party€is€not€entitled€to€statements€of€a€nonparty€taken€in€anticipation€of€litigation.€Ð L œ ÐHere€Carlððs€insurer€interviewed€the€witnesses€in€anticipation€of€litigation.€€TheÐ 8 ˆ Ðstatements€are€not€discoverable.€€However,€Carl€must€identify€the€witnesses€so€thatÐ $ t ÐAdam€may€conduct€his€own€interviews.Ð `` (#` (# Ðà  à(iii)à0 ` àUnder€Maryland€Rule€2„402(b),€the€insurance€agreement€is€discoverable€and€must€beÐ ü L  Ðprovided.Ðè 8 ` (#` (# Ðà  à(iv)à0 ` àIf€the€experts€treating€Carl€are€expected€to€testify€at€trial,€all€requestedÐ Ô$  Ðinformation/documents€must€be€produced.€If€the€doctors€are€not€going€to€testify,€theÐ À  Ðdocuments€are€likely€still€discoverable€as€they€serve€as€support€for€Carlððs€monetaryÐ ¬ü  Ðclaim€and€they€are€discoverable€by€Adam.Иè ` (#` (# ÐÓƒÓÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ pÀ ÐÓ&–ÓÌÓ€ C(Eh88BÓÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÝ‚>3£ö–ÝÔ2EhÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝThe€attorney€here€should€not€represent€both€Adam€and€because€the€likelihood€of€potentialÐ H˜ Ðconflicts€is€too€high.€€Ben€will€want€to€use€Adamððs€ticket€as€evidence€of€negligence€per€se.Ð 4„ ÐAdam€will€resist€this€because€any€finding€of€contributory€negligence€will€foreclose€hisÐ  p Ðcollecting€in€tort€from€Carl.€€A€reasonable€attorney€would€not€assume€these€conflicts€can€beÐ  \ Ðmanaged€and€should€only€agree€to€represent€one€or€the€other.݃>3£ö–/—ÝŒÐøH(#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£Æ™ÝÔ2EhÔÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝIn€response€to€the€Complaint,€Adamððs€attorney€should€file€preliminary€motions€for€any€of€theÐ Ð  Ðmandatory€defenses€that€must€be€either€claimed€or€waived.€€As€to€these€defenses€a€lack€ofÐ ¼  Ðjurisdiction/venue€do€not€apply,€as€it€appears€that€Somerset€County€is€the€appropriate€venueÐ ¨ø Ðand€there€is€no€indication€that€the€Defendants€didnððt€reside€there.€€There€is€no€indication€thatÐ ”ä Ða€summons/complaint€was€not€issued€or€served€on€Adam.€€It€does€not€appear€that€anyÐ €Ð Ðpreliminary€mandatory€defenses€are€applicable€in€this€case.€€If€no€preliminary€motions€areÐ l¼ Ðto€be€filed,€I€would€file€an€answer€to€the€Complaint€within€30€days€of€service€of€processÐ X ¨ Ðincluding€therein€my€admissions€or€denials€of€the€averments€in€the€Complaint€and€anyÐ D!” Ðnegative€or€affirmative€defenses€and€an€information€report.€€A€general€denial€of€liabilityÐ 0"€  Ðwould€be€fine€since€this€is€a€tort€for€money€relief€only.€€I€would€also€file€a€counterclaimÐ #l! Ðagainst€the€Plaintiff€for€negligence.€€The€counterclaim€must€be€filed€within€30€days€of€theÐ $X" ÐAnswer€or€Plaintiff€may€file€a€Motion€to€Strike.݃>3£Æ™ó™ÝŒÐô$D #(#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£‡ŸÝÔ2EhÔÚ  Ú3Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝAdamððs€attorney€must€file€Answers€to€Interrogatories€within€30€days€of€service€of€theÐ Ì&"% ÐInterrogatories.€€Service€of€the€Interrogatories€along€with€the€Complaint€is€proper€andÐ ¸'#& Ðbecause€it€was€served€with€the€Complaint€which€is€due€in€30€days,€the€Answers€toÐ ¤(ô#' ÐInterrogatories€must€also€be€filed€15€days€from€that€date€which€is€acceptable€under€2„421(a).݃>3£‡Ÿ´ŸÝŒÐ)à$((#(# Ðâ âŒÝ  ÝÐ |*Ì%) Ð4.€à0  àThis€information€would€indicate€that€Adam€may€have€been€acting€as€an€agent/servant€to€Ben.€Ð ° Ðâ âCarl€should€consider€vicarious€liability/Ô  Ôòòrespondeat€óóÔ  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔòòsuperioróóÔ  ÔÔ  Ô€as€an€avenue€to€add€Ben€as€aÐ œì ÐDefendant.€€Carl€should€amend€his€Complaint€to€include€Ben€as€a€Defendant.€€Carlððs€counselÐ ˆØ Ðshould€have€summons,€complaint€and€all€pleadings€served€on€Ben€as€long€as€it€is€not€lessÐ tÄ Ðthan€15€days€before€a€scheduled€trial€date.€€Within€15€days€of€filing€the€Amended€ComplaintÐ `° Ða€Motion€to€Strike€may€be€filed€by€Adamððs€counsel.€€Benððs€counsel€will€have€30€days€toÐ L œ Ðanswer/file€preliminary€motions.€Ð8 ˆ(#(# ÐÌÓ€ D(eh88CÓØ! !ØÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£ù¥ÝÔ2ehÔÚ  Ú5Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝAdamððs€attorney€is€entitled„not€entitled€to€the€following:݃>3£ù¥&¦ÝŒÐ `(#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÓ€ B(Uh88DÓØ! !Øà  à(i)à0 ` àCassette€recording€ð!ð€yes,€Adamððs€counsel€is€entitled€to€a€recording€of€his€clientÔ‡&õ%XXÔððsÐ ü L  Ðstatement€without€a€showing€of€hardship€as€a€party€to€the€action.€Ô#†XïlX%&õ¨#ÔÐè 8 ` (#` (# Ðà  à(ii)à0 ` àA€copy€of€witnesses€statements€is€work€product€and€must€only€be€turned€over€on€aÐ À  Ðshowing€of€substantial€hardship.€€Therefore,€Carl€need€not€produce€these€statements.€Ð¬ü ` (#` (# Ðà  à(iii)à0 ` àCarl€must€provide€the€insurance€information€pursuant€to€2„402(b)€although€it€wouldÐ ˜è  Ðnot€be€admissible€as€evidence€at€trial.€Ð„Ô ` (#` (# Ðà  à(iv)à0 ` àCarl€must€only€disclose€any€medical€experts€he€plans€to€call€at€trial€per€2„402.€€AÐ pÀ  Ðwritten€report€from€any€such€expert€is€required.€€Carl€can€only€obtain€the€statementsÐ \¬ Ðand€reports€of€physicians€not€being€called€at€trial€on€a€showing€of€relevance,Ð H˜ Ðsubstantial€need€and€inability€to€obtain€without€undue€hardship.€€This€informationÐ 4„ Ðmay€be€obtainable€by€interrogatory€but€not€by€request€for€production€of€documents.€Ð  p ЀÐ ` (#` (# ÐÓ#—ÓÓ  Óò òÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ @,'+ ÐQUESTION€5ó óòòóóÐ ° ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓÓ  Óà  àAl€and€Barbara€were€married€on€December€31,€1984€in€Cumberland,€Maryland.ò ò€ó óThreeÐ ˆØ Ðchildren€were€born€of€the€marriage,€David,€now€seventeen€years€old€and€in€his€third€year€at€PrivateÐ xÈ ÐHigh€School,€where€he€is€on€the€honor€roll;€Tony,€now€fourteen,€a€disabled€child,€who€attends€aÐ d´ Ðspecial€education€program€provided€by€the€public€school€system€for€disabled€children;€and€Mary,€ageÐ P   Ðthirteen€and€an€eighth€grade€student€in€a€public€middle€school.€Al€is€a€private€contractor€in€businessÐ < Œ Ðfor€himself€earning€$75,000€per€year€annually.€Barbara€is€a€public€school€teacher€earning€$40,000Ð ( x Ðper€year.€Medical€coverage€for€the€family€is€provided€as€a€fringe€benefit€of€Barbaraððs€employmentÐ  d Ðwith€the€Board€of€Education.€Al€and€Barbara€own€a€home€in€Allegany€County,€Maryland€where€theÐ  P  Ðfamily€resided.Ð ì <  ÐÌà  àAl€told€Barbara€on€May€31,€2003€that€he€could€no€longer€handle€the€stress€within€theÐ Ä  Ðhousehold€and€that€he€was€moving€into€the€apartment€above€the€detached€garage€located€at€theÐ °  Ðfamily€property.€He€promptly€moved€to€the€apartment€on€June€1,2003€leaving€the€children€with€hisÐ œì  Ðwife.Ð ˆØ  ÐÌà  àOn€January€1,€2004,€Barbara€contacts€you,€a€respected€domestic€relations€lawyer€in€WesternÐ `° ÐMaryland,€and€relates€the€above€facts.€She€also€informs€you€that€Al€does€not€work€regularly€and€isÐ Lœ Ðspending€time€on€his€new€boat.€She€further€related€that€Al€has€complained€to€her€that€the€poorÐ 8ˆ Ðeconomy€has€reduced€his€income€to€$50,000€annually€and€that€his€future€economic€prospects€areÐ $t Ðbleak€Nevertheless,€she€believes€Al€has€turned€down€work€recently.€Barbara€is€concerned€that€Al€willÐ ` Ðnot€continue€to€make€the€monthly€mortgage€payment€on€the€family€home,€which€Al€has€been€payingÐ üL Ðfrom€his€earnings.Ð è8 ÐÌà  àBarbara€has€asked€you€the€following€specific€questions:Ð À ÐÌà  àò òA.€Do€either€of€the€spouses€have€grounds€for€divorce?Ð ˜è Ðó óÌà  àò òB.€What€economic€assistance€to€the€family€is€available€to€be€secured€from€Al€throughÐ pÀ Ðthe€Court?Ð \ ¬ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñó óà  àò òC.€Can€the€Court€do€anything€if€Al€has€turned€down€contracting€jobs€thereby€reducingÐ 4"„  Ðhis€earnings?Ð  #p! ÐÌÑ  Ñà  àD.€Can€Al€be€required€to€contribute€to€the€school€tuition€at€Private€High€School€forÐ ø$H # ÐDavid€and€for€Mary,€whom€Barbara€would€like€to€enroll€at€Private€High€School?Ð ä%4!$ ÐÌà  àRespond€to€each€of€Barbaraððs€inquiries€and€explain€your€reasons€for€each€response.Ð ¼' #& ÐÓS­ÓÑ  Ñó óÌÌÌÐ l+¼&* Їò òREPRESENTATIVE€€ANSWER€1Ð ° Ðó óÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓA.à  àThere€are€two€kinds€of€divorce€(absolute€and€limited)€based€on€two€grounds€(no€fault€andÐ ˆØ Ðfault)€in€Maryland.€€First,€there€do€not€appear€to€be€grounds€for€an€absolute€divorce€based€on€faultÐ tÄ Ðgrounds€as€there€is€no€adultery,€12€month€desertion,€excessive€cruelty,€or€violence.€€Second,€doesnððtÐ `° Ðappear€to€have€necessary€grounds€yet€for€an€absolute€divorce€on€non„fault€grounds,€which€requiresÐ L œ Ðthat€a€marriage€be€irreconcilable,€broken,€which€needs€to€be€evidenced€by€one€year€separation€(bothÐ 8 ˆ Ðparties€seek€divorce)€or€two€year€separation€(if€only€one€party€seeks).€€€Al€and€Barbara€have€not€yetÐ $ t Ðbeen€separated€one€year.€€Thus,€the€best€option€is€for€a€limited€divorce€(i.e.,€legal€separation),€perhapsÐ  ` ÐBarbara€can€claim€physical€desertion€because€Al€has€left€the€marital€home€(technically)€and€there€isÐ ü L  Ðnot€required€desertion€time€duration€for€an€absolute€divorce.Ð è 8  ÐÌB.à  àPossible€economic€assistance€for€the€family€would€include€child€support€and€spousal€supportÐ À  Ð(alimony).Ð ¬ü  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  à1.€€òòChild€support.óó€€Al€has€an€obligation€to€financially€support€his€children€until€they€reachÐ „Ô  Ðmaturity,€(18€or€until€finish€high€school€if€19)€in€Maryland.€€In€assessing€a€support€action,€MarylandÐ pÀ Ðuses€parental€income€levels€in€accordance€with€statutes,€tables€and€guidelines.€€Note,€Alððs€supportÐ \¬ Ðto€Tony€may€run€past€age€18€if€due€to€his€disability,€he€will€not€be€self„supportive€once€he€reachesÐ H˜ Ðage€of€majority.Ð 4„ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  à2.€€òòSpousal€support.óó€€While€divorce€or€separation€proceedings€are€occurring,€Barbara€can€seekÐ  \ Ðalimony€òòpendente€liteóó,€which€would€provide€support€before€a€final€support€order€is€entered.€€GivenÐ øH Ðthat€Barbara€is€working,€permanent€support€would€not€likely€be€granted.€€In€fact,€it€is€questionableÐ ä4 Ðwhether€or€not€Barbara€would€quality€€for€rehabilitative€alimony€because€she€is€already€working€andÐ Ð  Ðdrawing€a€€salary.€Ð ¼  ÐÑ  ÑÌC.à  àYes,€a€court€in€equity€can€always€modify€child€support€arrangements€and€hold€Al€in€contemptÐ ”ä Ðof€court€for€not€pursuing€work€in€good€faith.€€While€a€court€cannot€specifically€compel€Al€to€work,Ð €Ð Ðthey€can€order€garnishment€of€wages€or€asset€seizures€to€satisfy€obligation€to€his€children.€€Ð l¼ Ðò òó óÌD.à  àA€court€can€require€Al€to€make€necessary€tuition€payments€to€Davidððs€private€high€schoolÐ D!” Ðunder€these€circumstances€as€he€only€has€one€year€remaining€at€his€school€and€it€is€clearly€in€the€bestÐ 0"€  Ðinterests€of€David€to€avoid€disruption€€at€school€due€to€parental€divorce€plus€the€economic€hardshipÐ #l! Ðto€Al€does€not€seen€unreasonable.€€As€per€Mary,€who€is€currently€in€public€middle€school,€the€courtÐ $X" Ðmust€assess€the€hardship€to€Al€by€requiring€him€to€pay€for€four€years€of€private€tuition.€€Here,€absentÐ ô$D # Ða€compelling€interest€on€Maryððs€behalf,€and€Alððs€bleak€economic€prospects,€I€find€it€unlikely€theÐ à%0!$ Ðcourt€would€order€Al€to€pay€four€years€of€private€tuition€for€Mary.Ð Ì&"% ÐÓq¹ÓÌÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ÐÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€€ANSWER€2Ð ° Ðó óÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓA.à  àI€would€advise€Barbara€that€currently€she€does€not€have€any€grounds€for€an€absolute€divorce.€Ð ˆØ ÐShe€does€not€have€grounds€for€desertion€even€though€Al€has€technically€moved€out€because€it€hasnððtÐ tÄ Ðbeen€a€year€and€they€also€have€not€been€separated€for€a€year.€€I€would€inform€her€that€she€does€haveÐ `° Ðgrounds€for€a€limited€divorce€which€is€a€legal€separation.€€Since€Al€has€deserted€her,€they€are€noÐ L œ Ðlonger€cohabitating€because€the€garage€is€detached€and€since€they€have€voluntarily€separated€andÐ 8 ˆ Ðhave€not€been€cohabitating,€she€has€grounds.€€She€can€pursue€this€route€and€sort€out€custody€andÐ $ t Ðalimony€issues€or€she€can€wait€until€Al€has€been€out€for€a€year€and€seek€an€absolute€divorce.Ð  ` ÐB.à  àòòAlimony.óó€€During€litigation,€Barbara€can€receive€òòpendente€liteóó€alimony€if€he€can€pay€and€sheÐ ü L  Ðshows€need.€€After€the€divorce,€the€court€will€award€rehabilitative€or€temporary.€€Maryland€courtsÐ è 8  Ðfavor€rehabilitative€and€aim€to€get€spouses€working€and€self„sufficient.€€Barbara€already€makesÐ Ô$  Ð$40,000.00€and€she€is€a€teacher€and€is€relatively€€young.€€Extra€schooling€could€benefit€her.€€I€wouldÐ À  Ðadvise€her€that€temporary€is€unlikely.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌÑ  Ñà  àòòChild€support.óó€€Under€the€Child€Support€Guidelines€and€examining€the€best€interests€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðchildren,€the€courts€will€take€both€spousesðð€income€into€account€up€to€$10,000€per€month.€€Since€AlÐ pÀ Ðnow€makes€$50,000€and€Barbara€$40,000€they€are€below.€€The€court€will€take€into€account€AlððsÐ \¬ Ðreduced€income€and€the€disabled€childððs€needs.€€Al€will€be€required€to€pay€the€amount€the€courtÐ H˜ Ðdeems€necessary.€€David€is€also€at€a€private€high€school€so€that€is€considered.€€Barbara€will€alsoÐ 4„ Ðreceive€the€marital€home€as€primary€care€giver€for€three€years,€then€since€it€is€titled€in€both€names,Ð  p Ðit€will€be€sold.€€Maryland€is€an€equitable€distribution€state€and€will€consider€all€marital€propertyÐ  \ Ðwhich€does€not€include€property€before€marriage€or€inheritance.€€The€court€will€then€decide€to€makeÐ øH Ðan€equitable€distribution€or€to€€give€a€monetary€award.Ð ä4 ÐÑ  ÑÌC.à  àIf€a€parent€acts€in€bad€faith€and€seriously€reduces€his€income€intentionally,€the€court€will€notÐ ¼  Ðtake€this€into€consideration.€€To€do€so€would€give€parents€an€out€and€allow€them€to€avoid€payingÐ ¨ø Ðchild€support.€€Circumstances€can€however€change€and€the€economy€can€suffer€and€individuals€canÐ ”ä Ðlose€their€job.€€As€long€as€the€parent€has€not€acted€in€bad€faith€and€circumstances€have€legitimatelyÐ €Ð Ðchanged,€the€court€will€adjust€payments€accordingly.€€If€Al€is€turning€down€work€for€no€good€reason,Ð l¼ Ðthis€is€bad€faith.€€However,€custody€is€determined€when€the€parents€enter€divorce€not€necessarilyÐ X ¨ Ðwhat€they€had€before.€€This€question€involves€a€factual€analysis€of€the€circumstances€which€the€courtÐ D!” Ðcan€and€will€consider€to€determine€what€is€in€the€best€interest€of€the€children.Ð 0"€  ÐÌD.à  àWhen€the€court€is€determining€child€support,€it€looks€at€the€current€state€of€affairs.€€Currently,Ð $X" ÐDavid€is€in€private€high€school€and€Al€has€been€contributing.€€Mary€is€not€in€private€school€probablyÐ ô$D # Ðbecause€she€is€not€old€enough€yet.€€What€was€the€parentððs€intent,€can€Al€pay?€€If€the€court€deems€thatÐ à%0!$ Ðit€is€in€Davidððs€best€interest€for€him€to€remain€in€private€school€and€in€Maryððs€€best€interest€for€herÐ Ì&"% Ðto€attend€private€school,€then€€yes€the€court€will€consider€it.€€The€court€will€examine€various€factorsÐ ¸'#& Ðsuch€as€parentððs€income,€changed€circumstances,€and€upheaval€to€remove€them€from€private€school.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐThe€court€can€and€does€have€the€authority€to€require€Al€to€pay.Ð )à$( ÐÓÏÇÓÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÌÐ h+¸&* ЇQUESTION€6Ð ° Ðó óÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓMarvin€Ramblin€purchased€7€acres€located€in€Prince€Georgeððs€County€approximately€4€miles€fromÐ ˆØ Ðthe€Mason/Dixon€River€in€April,€2002,€with€the€intention€of€developing€it€in€phases.€€The€zoning€inÐ tÄ Ðthat€area€required€all€dwellings€to€be€located€on€a€buildable€lot€of€2€acres€or€more.€€He€constructedÐ `° Ðhis€home€on€2€acres€in€October,€2002.€Ð L œ ÐÑ  ÑÌOn€March€22,€2003,€the€County€Council€of€Prince€Georgeððs€County,€Maryland,€enacted€a€subdivisionÐ $ t Ðlaw€that€requires€all€parcels€in€excess€of€2€acres€and€located€within€five€miles€of€the€Mason/DixonÐ  ` ÐRiver€to€dedicate€ðð€acre€of€land€to€the€County€as€recreational€open€space.€€The€dedication€was€aÐ ü L  Ðrequired€condition€of€subdivision€approval.€€The€law€was€enacted€for€the€purpose€of€reducing€theÐ è 8  Ðpossibility€of€adverse€impact€of€development€to€the€river.€€The€law€exempts€property€owned€byÐ Ô$  Ðchurches.€Ð À  ÐÌOn€March€24,€2003€he€went€to€the€applicable€County€office€to€begin€the€subdivision€process€for€theÐ ˜è  Ðremaining€acres€to€construct€two€homes€on€two€acres€each€and€was€informed€that€he€would€have€toÐ „Ô  Ðdedicate€ðð€acre€pursuant€to€the€new€law,€and€could€therefore€only€construct€one€home.Ð pÀ ÐÌMarvin€is€outraged€by€the€law€and€has€come€to€you,€a€licensed€Maryland€attorney,€to€find€a€way€toÐ H˜ Ðchallenge€it.Ð 4„ ÐÌÑ  Ñò òUnder€what€theory(ies)€might€you€challenge€the€Countyððs€law,€and€what€is€your€likelihood€ofÐ  \ Ðsuccess?€Discuss€fully.Ð øH Ðó óÓëØÓÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ Ð  ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓMarvin€can€make€several€constitutional€challenges€to€this€law€based€on€procedural€and€substantiveÐ ¨ø Ðdue€process,€equal€protection,€takings€and€the€establishment€clause.Ð ”ä ÐÑ  ÑMarvin€has€standing€because€his€property€fits€within€the€ordinance€and€he€is€subject€to€theÐ €Ð Ðdedication.Ð l¼ ÐÓàÓÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓProcedural€Due€ProcessÐ D!” ÐÌÓ¨áÓÓ  ÓWhen€a€personððs€life,€liberty€or€property€rights€are€violated€they€are€entitled€to€notice€and€a€hearing.€Ð #l! ÐHere,€Marvinððs€property€is€going€to€be€taken€and€there€are€no€procedures.€€The€deprivation€to€hisÐ $X" Ðrights€must€be€balanced€against€the€governmentððs€interest.€€Some€procedural€safeguards€would€notÐ ô$D # Ðbe€a€huge€hassle€in€comparison€with€the€extent€of€deprivation€entailed€in€losing€ðð€acre.Ð à%0!$ ÐÓðáÓÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓSubstantive€Due€ProcessÐ ¸'#& ÐÓäÓÌÓ  ÓMarvin€can€argue€that€the€statute€is€vague€because€itððs€unclear€what€is€included.€€It€is€also€overbroadÐ )à$( Ðâ âbecause€it€includes€too€much€land€for€all€subdivisions.€€There€is€no€fundamental€right€involved€hereÐ |*Ì%) Ðso€the€ordinance€needs€to€be€rationally€related€to€a€legitimate€interest.€€Marvin€can€argue€the€probableÐ ° Ðimpact€on€the€river€is€not€a€significant€reason.Ð œì Ðâ âÓPäÓÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓTakingsÐ tÄ ÐÓSæÓÌÓ  ÓThis€ordinance€is€taking€an€individualððs€property€for€a€public€purpose€without€just€compensation.€Ð L œ ÐHowever,€since€it€is€a€regulation€and€the€government€can€use€its€police€power€to€enforce€measuresÐ 8 ˆ Ðfor€health,€safety€and€welfare€it€will€most€likely€be€deemed€rationally€related€to€the€legitimate€interestÐ $ t Ðin€preventing€adverse€impact€of€development€on€the€river.€€Marvin€can€argue€that€all€economicÐ  ` Ðviability€of€the€land€is€taken,€but€this€will€probably€lose€because€this€is€a€regulation€and€itððs€only€ððÐ ü L  Ðacre€of€land€that€is€affected.Ð è 8  ÐÓŒæÓÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓEstablishment€ClauseÐ À  ÐÓXéÓÌÓ  ÓUnder€the€First€Amendment€the€government€cannot€enact€laws€that€either€advance€or€inhibit€religion.€Ð ˜è  ÐThe€court€uses€a€3„part€test:€€(1)€was€there€a€secular€purpose?€(3)€did€it€advance€or€inhibit€religion?,Ð „Ô  Ðand€(3)€did€it€cause€excessive€government€entanglement?€€Here€we€have€an€ordinance€which€appearsÐ pÀ Ðto€have€the€purpose€of€reducing€adverse€impact€of€development€on€the€river.€€But€under€the€secondÐ \¬ Ðprong,€by€exempting€property€owned€by€churches€the€County€is€advancing€religion€by€allowing€themÐ H˜ Ðto€keep€this€land.€€There€does€not€appear€to€be€substantial€government€entanglement€because€onceÐ 4„ Ðexempt€the€government€does€not€have€to€deal€with€churches.€€The€property€does€however€violate€theÐ  p Ðsecond€prong€and€this€would€violate€the€Establishment€Clause.Ð  \ ÐÓžéÓÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓEqual€ProtectionÐ ä4 ÐÓfíÓòòÌóóÓ  ÓThe€14òòthóó€Amendment€protection€is€provided€to€individualððs€facing€discrimination€by€governmentÐ ¼  Ðaction€if€they€are€in€a€suspect€or€quasi„suspect€class.€€Marvin€is€not€in€a€suspect€or€quasi„suspectÐ ¨ø Ðclass.€€Although€this€law€is€discriminating€against€non„religious€property€that€is€in€excess€of€1€acreÐ ”ä Ðthis€group€is€not€a€suspect€class.€€Therefore€the€law€will€only€be€viewed€under€the€rational€basis€testÐ €Ð Ðand€it€needs€to€be€rationally€related€to€a€legitimate€government€interest€with€the€burden€on€MarvinÐ l¼ Ðto€show€there€is€no€legitimate€interest.€€The€government€almost€always€wins€under€this€test.€€MarvinÐ X ¨ Ðcan€attempt€to€argue€that€reducing€adverse€impact€from€the€development€is€not€a€legitimate€reasonÐ D!” Ðto€take€ðð€acre€of€his€property.€€However,€under€its€police€power€government€has€broad€discretionÐ 0"€  Ðand€protecting€the€river€will€most€likely€be€upheld€as€a€legitimate€reason.Ð #l! ÐÓ®íÓÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ ô$D # ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓProcedural€Due€Process:€€Procedural€Due€Process€requires€a€party€who€has€a€property,€liberty€or€lifeÐ Ì&"% Ðinterest€to€receive€notice€and€a€hearing€before€they€are€deprived€of€that€interest.€€Here,€MarvinÐ ¸'#& Ðpurchased€6€acres€of€land€with€the€intent€of€developing€the€property€into€3€homes€with€2€acres€each.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐHe€purchased€the€land€in€April€2002.€On€March€22,€2003€the€County€enacted€the€statute€that€requiredÐ )à$( Ðall€property€in€excess€of€1€acre€located€within€5€miles€of€the€Mason€Dixon€River€to€dedicate€ðð€acre.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐIt€had€been€approximately€one€year€since€Marvin€bought€the€property€before€the€County€enacted€theÐ h+¸&* Ðlaw.€€Marvin€should€have€received€notice€and€the€opportunity€for€a€hearing€before€potentiallyÐ ° Ðdepriving€him€of€his€land.Ð œì ÐÑ  ÑÌSubstantive€Due€Process:€Under€the€Substantive€Due€Process€Clause€the€state€shall€not€infringe€uponÐ tÄ Ða€personððs€life,€liberty€or€property€without€a€compelling€reason.€€Here€we€are€dealing€with€a€lawÐ `° Ðrequiring€Marvin€to€give€up€ðð€acre€of€land€for€every€acre€in€excess€of€2€acres.€€The€County€mustÐ L œ Ðhave€a€compelling€reason€to€deprive€him€of€his€property€for€the€law€to€be€constitutional.€€The€courtsÐ 8 ˆ Ðapply€the€compelling€interest€test.€€The€facts€indicate€the€purpose€for€the€statute€was€to€minimize€theÐ $ t Ðadverse€impact€of€development€on€the€river.€€Certainly€the€County€is€concerned€about€the€impact€ofÐ  ` Ðdevelopment€and€the€preservation€of€water,€so€this€could€satisfy€as€a€compelling€interest.€€However,Ð ü L  Ðthe€compelling€interest€test€also€stipulates€it€must€be€the€least€restrictive€means€in€obtaining€theÐ è 8  Ðcompelling€interest.€€Depriving€someone€of€their€property€for€this€purpose€is€not€the€least€restrictiveÐ Ô$  Ðmeans.€€Ð À  ÐÑ  ÑÌTakings:€If€a€county€government€plans€to€deprive€a€party€of€their€property,€the€government€mustÐ ˜è  Ðprovide€just€compensation€to€the€property€owner.Ð „Ô  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑEqual€Protection:€The€Equal€Protection€Clause€of€the€14òòthóó€Amendment€provides€that€every€personÐ \¬ Ðshall€be€treated€equally€under€the€laws€of€the€land.€€Similarly€situated€persons€are€to€be€treatedÐ H˜ Ðsimilarly.€€Here€the€law€exempts€property€owned€by€churches.€€Again,€owning€property€is€not€aÐ 4„ Ðfundamental€right.€€Therefore,€the€test€to€be€applied€is€the€rational€basis€test.€€Marvin€would€have€toÐ  p Ðprove€that€the€statute€is€not€rationally€related€to€a€legitimate€interest.Ð  \ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑEstablishment€Clause:€The€Establishment€Clause€of€the€First€Amendment€provides€that€theÐ ä4 Ðgovernment€shall€not€inhibit€or€help€religion.€€The€courts€apply€the€òòLemon€óó€test€to€determine€if€theÐ Ð  ÐEstablishment€Clause€has€been€violated.€€First,€does€the€statute€have€a€secular€purpose?€€Second,Ð ¼  Ðdoes€the€primary€effect€of€the€statute€hurt€or€help€religion?€€Third,€does€the€statute€foster€governmentÐ ¨ø Ðentanglement?€€Here€the€purpose€of€the€statute€is€secular€because€the€county€is€trying€to€minimizeÐ ”ä Ðthe€impact€of€development€on€the€Mason€Dixon€River.€€Second,€the€primary€effect€of€the€statute€isÐ €Ð Ðpreventing€churches€from€contributing€tax€dollars€which€is€helping€religion.€€Third,€it€is€a€fine€lineÐ l¼ Ðin€determining€whether€the€statute€fosters€government€entanglement€with€religion.€€The€law€isÐ X ¨ Ðenacted€by€the€government€which€means€it€will€be€required€to€monitor€and€give€notices€to€churchesÐ D!” Ðto€give€them€the€exemption.€€It€does€promote€excessive€entanglement€from€the€requirement.€Ð 0"€  ÐAlthough€it€is€required€to€satisfy€all€the€elements€of€the€òòLemonóó€test,€prongs€two€and€three€are€notÐ #l! Ðsatisfied.€€Thus,€it€is€unconstitutional€under€the€Establishment€Clause.€€To€be€constitutional€theÐ $X" ÐCounty€would€have€to€prove€that€they€have€a€compelling€interest€in€exempting€property€owned€byÐ ô$D # Ðchurches€and€must€be€the€least€restrictive€manner€in€reaching€or€satisfying€its€interest.€€As€notedÐ à%0!$ Ðabove,€its€interest€is€protecting€the€Mason€Dixon€River.€€Exempting€property€owned€by€churches€isÐ Ì&"% Ðnot€the€least€restrictive€means€nor€necessary,€and€is,€therefore,€unconstitutional.ò òÐ ¸'#& ÐÓXòÓÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ÐÑW/VÑâ WâÑX°Ñâ WâÑ  ÑÓ  ÓQUESTION€7ó óÐ ° ÐÓGÓò òó óà@ii$ìàò òCommon€Factsó óˆÐ œì Ðò òòòÓ  Óó óPart€IóóÐ ˆØ ÐÓËÓÓ  Óà  àPaul,€a€wealthy€Maryland€resident,€wishes€to€invest€in€collectable€antique€automobiles€byÐ tÄ Ðpurchasing,€restoring€and€reselling€the€vehicles€for€a€profit.€€Recognizing€he€knows€little€aboutÐ `° Ðautomobiles,€he€contacts€Dave,€an€experienced€automobile€restorer.€€Dave€agrees€to€help€PaulÐ L œ Ðrenovate€and€maintain€the€cars.€€Paul€agrees€to€pay€Dave€$25.00€an€hour€for€time€spent.€€Paul€alsoÐ 8 ˆ Ðinstructs€Dave€not€to€incur€any€expenses€related€to€the€vehicles€without€his€specific€approval.Ð $ t ÐÌà  àDave€promptly€locates€a€collection€of€potential€automobiles€owned€by€a€third€party.€€TheÐ ü L  ÐSellerððs€asking€price€is€$220,000,€but€Dave€knows€he€would€take€less.€€Dave€tells€Paul€the€price€isÐ è 8  Ð$220,000.€€€At€Paulððs€request,€Dave€spends€8€hours€inspecting€the€cars€and€tells€Paul€they€are€a€goodÐ Ô$  Ðinvestment.€€Paul€pays€Dave€$200€for€the€time€he€spent€for€inspection.€€Paul€purchases€the€cars€forÐ À  Ð$220,000.€€€The€Seller€promptly€pays€Dave€a€ð ðfeeðð€of€$20,000,€which€had€been€agreed€to€betweenÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€Seller€and€Dave.€€Dave€does€not€tell€Paul€about€the€fee.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àShortly€after€purchasing€the€automobiles,€Paul€finds€out€that€he€could€have€purchased€the€carsÐ pÀ Ðfor€only€$200,000.€€He€immediately€fires€Dave€and€demands€a€return€of€the€$20,000.Ð \¬ ÐÑ  Ñà  àDave€refuses€to€return€the€funds€claiming€the€fee€was€earned€and€would€have€been€chargedÐ H˜ Ðby€any€broker€to€handle€the€transaction.€€Dave€further€asserts€that€even€with€the€fee,€that€theÐ 4„ Ðtransaction€was€still€a€ð ðgood€dealðð€for€Paul.Ð  p Ðà  àPaul€sues€Dave€in€the€appropriate€Maryland€Court.€€He€claims€$20,000€compensatoryÐ  \ Ðdamages€plus€$100,000€punitive€damages.Ð øH ÐÑ  ÑÌà  àò òExplain€the€legal€theories€under€which€Paulððs€damage€claims€may€be€brought€andÐ Ð  Ðevaluate€Paulððs€likelihood€of€success.Ð ¼  ÐÓÓÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñòòó óÓ  ÓPart€IIò òóóó óÐ ”ä ÐÓÙÓÓ  Óà0  àà ° àA.€à  àAt€trial,€Paul€testified€that€prior€to€purchasing€the€automobiles,€Paul€asked€David€if€the€SellerÐ €Ð Ðwould€take€any€less€than€$220,000.€€Paul€then€testified,€over€objection,€that€in€response€toÐ l¼ Ðhis€question€Dave€replied,€ð ðThe€Seller€says€he€wonððt€take€anything€less.ððÐX ¨(#(# Ðà  àDaveððs€counsel€moves€to€strike€this€testimony,€claiming€it€is€ð ðhearsay€within€hearsay.ððÐ D!” Ðà  àò òHow€should€the€court€rule€on€Daveððs€objection?Ð 0"€  Ðà  àó óÌà0  àà ° àB.à  àIn€his€defense,€Daveððs€counsel€asked€him:€ð ðDave,€in€your€opinion,€what€is€the€fair€marketÐ $X" Ðvalue€of€the€cars€that€Paul€bought?ððÐô$D #(#(# ÐÑ  Ñà  àPaulððs€lawyer€objects.Ð à%0!$ ÐÑ  Ñà  àò òHow€should€the€trial€court€rule€on€Paulððs€objection?Ð Ì&"% Ðó óÓÓÌò òÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÓ/ÓÌó óÓ  ÓòòPart€IóóÐ |*Ì%) ÐÓ{ÓÓ  Óà  àIt€appears€Paul€can€bring€a€few€claims€for€damages.€€Paul€can€bring€cause€of€action€in€tortÐ h+¸&* Ðfraud/misrepresentation€based€on€Daveððs€failure€to€disclose€his€commission€and€Paulððs€known€abilityÐ T,¤'+ Ðto€obtain€the€cars€for€only€$200,000.€€€Normally,€omissions€are€not€actionable€unless€there€is€a€dutyÐ @-(, Ðto€disclose€and€the€Plaintiff€relied€on€that€duty/special€relationship.€€Here€by€contractual€agreementÐ ,.|)- ÐÑXOaÑâ XâѰXÑâ XâÑ  Ñof€privity€and€under€general€agency€principles,€Dave€owed€Paul€a€duty€to€disclose€materialÐ ° Ðinformation€and€fairly€represent€Paulððs€pecuniary€interest.€€He€knew€Paul€would€be€relying€on€hisÐ œì Ðunique€expertise€in€antique€cars,€and€dealing€with€the€seller€on€Paulððs€behalf.€€As€such,€he€owed€aÐ ˆØ Ðduty€to€disclose€to€Paul.€€Paulððs€reasonable€reliance€on€Daveððs€loyalty€(and€as€a€result€on€hisÐ tÄ Ðmisrepresentation€by€this€omission)€caused€him€to€spend€$20,000€more€than€he€would€have€had€heÐ `° Ðknown€the€true€state€of€affairs.Ð L œ ÐÌà  àPaul€can€assert€a€related€claim€against€Dave€for€breach€of€the€duty€of€good€faith/fair€dealingÐ $ t Ðand€loyalty€that€agents€owe€their€principals.€€Dave€was€paid€for€his€services€but€entered€into€anÐ  ` Ðundisclosed€dual€agency€relationship,€thereby€breaking€his€duties€to€Paul,€for€his€own€gain.€€He€isÐ ü L  Ðlike€a€promoter€who€engages€in€secret€profits€and€should€disgorge€the€gains€made€at€Paulððs€expense.€Ð è 8  ÐBecause€he€breached€these€duties,€Paul€may€be€entitled€to€punitive€damages€if€the€breach€wasÐ Ô$  Ðegregious,€but€he€seems€plainly€entitled€to€the€$20,000,€despite€Daveððs€assertion€that€the€deal€wasÐ À  Ðstill€fair.€€Fairness€would€only€be€relevant€if€the€deal€were€disclosed.Ð ¬ü  ÐÓ¸ÓÌÓ  ÓòòPart€IIóóÐ „Ô  ÐÓÁÓÓ  Óà0  àà ° àA.à  àHearsay€is€the€out€of€court€statement€of€a€Declarant€offered€for€the€purpose€of€proving€theÐ pÀ Ðtruth€of€the€matter€asserted.€€If€the€testimony€were€hearsay€within€hearsay,€an€exceptionÐ \¬ Ðwould€be€needed€for€each€level€of€hearsay.€€Here,€however,€it€appears€Paulððs€testimony€is€notÐ H˜ Ðbeing€offered€for€the€truth€of€the€matter€asserted,€but€rather€to€show€Paulððs€reliance€andÐ 4„ ÐDaveððs€fraud.€€Daveððs€statement€itself€is€an€admission/statement€by€a€party„opponent,€whichÐ  p Ðmay€be€used€against€him,€and€Sellerððs€alleged€statement€is€used€to€establish€Daveððs€state€ofÐ  \ Ðmind/intent€to€defraud€Paul.ÐøH(#(# ÐÑ  Ñà  àÌà0  àAs€such,€I€think€the€testimony€is€admissible€and€the€objection€should€be€overruled€and€notÐ Ð  Ðstricken.м (#(# Ðà0  àà ° àÐ (#(# Ðà0  àà ° àB.à  àGenerally,€lay€opinion€is€allowed€on€issues€within€the€witnessðð€knowledge€and€experienceÐ ”ä Ð(things€like€whether€a€car€was€speeding,€if€someone€was€intoxicated,€the€value€of€a€homeÐ €Ð Ðowned€by€the€witness.€€But€not€on€ultimate€legal€issues,€like€was€the€defendant€negligent.)€Ð l¼ ÐIf€Dave€were€not€an€experienced€automobile€restorer,€this€testimony€would€be€inappropriateÐ X ¨ Ðlay€witness€testimony€ð!ð€not€helpful€to€the€trier€of€fact€because€unreliable,€an€ð ðexpertðð€wouldÐ D!” Ðbe€best.€€(Dave€may€even€properly€qualify€as€an€expert€based€on€his€experience.)€€€It€seems,Ð 0"€  Ðbased€on€the€ability€of€Paul€to€cross„examine€and€Daveððs€experience€in€the€field,€thisÐ #l! Ðtestimony€would€be€proper€and€the€objection€overruled.€€€If€the€court€finds€this€testimony€isÐ $X" Ðonly€proper€from€an€expert,€Dave€may€qualify€if€the€requisite€showings€are€made€(experience,Ð ô$D # Ðtraining;€factual€probability,€permissible€basis€for€the€opinion€ð!ð€the€evidence€(basis€is€of€theÐ à%0!$ Ðtype€reasonably€reliable.)ÐÌ&"%(#(# ÐÓÿÓÌÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ÐÑY/VÑâ YâÑX°Ñâ YâÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ ° ÐÓU%ÓÌÓ  ÓòòPart€IóóÐ ˆØ ÐÓ¤%ÓÓ  Óà  àPaul€could€sue€Dave€under€theories€of€breach€of€contract,€and€misrepresentation€and€breachÐ tÄ Ðof€fiduciary€duty,€deceit.Ð `° ÐÌà  àPaul€would€argue€that€a€contract€was€created€between€Paul€and€Dave€for€Daveððs€services€asÐ 8 ˆ Ðan€automobile€restorer,€which€included€his€consulting€and€advising€Paul€on€which€cars€to€buy,€asÐ $ t Ðwell€as€providing€and€maintaining€the€cars.€€However,€the€facts€do€not€maintain€anything€about€aÐ  ` Ðclear€agreement€between€Paul€and€Dave,€for€Dave€to€find€the€cars.€€Nonetheless,€Dave€was€an€agentÐ ü L  Ðof€Paul€and€owed€Paul€a€duty€of€loyalty,€among€others.€Ð è 8  ЀÌà  àDave€breached€his€duty€of€loyalty€to€Paul€when€he€made€the€side€agreement€with€the€Seller,Ð À  Ðthat€Seller€would€pay€Dave€a€brokerððs€fee€of€$20,000.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌÑ  Ñà  àPaul€could€argue€misrepresentation€the€best,€in€that€Dave€misrepresented€the€price€andÐ „Ô  Ðpossibly€the€value€of€the€vehicles€to€Paul€by€stating€that€the€price€was€$220,000.€€€Paul€relied€onÐ pÀ ÐDaveððs€statement€and€his€skills€in€determining€that€the€cars€were€in€fact€worth€purchasing€for€theÐ \¬ Ðprice€of€$220,000.€€€€Had€Paul€known€that€the€Seller€would€take€less,€he€would€not€have€paidÐ H˜ Ð$220,000.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àAnother€possible€action€is€deceit,€that€is€probably€wrapped€up€with€the€misrepresentation€inÐ  \ Ðthat€Dave€deceived€Paul€with€the€amount€of€the€purchase€price€of€the€cars€and€pocketed€$20,000€toÐ øH Ðhis€own€benefit,€that€such€deceit€was€intentional.Ð ä4 ÐÌà  àPaul€would€recover€his€$20,000€loss,€however€to€prove€punitive€damages,€Paul€must€showÐ ¼  Ðthat€Dave€acted€with€specific€intent€to€harm,€(i.e.€malice),€or€an€extreme€disregard.€€While€someÐ ¨ø Ðwould€argue€that€such€deception€and€misrepresentation€should€warrant€punitive€damages,€MarylandÐ ”ä Ðcourts€are€very€hesitant€to€make€such€awards€without€a€clear€and€absolute€showing€of€malice.Ð €Ð ÐÓá%ÓÑ  Ñò òÌÓ  Óó óòòPart€IIóóÐ X ¨ ÐÓ¾.ÓÓ  Óà0  àà ° àA.à  àIn€order€to€get€Daveððs€statement€in,€Paulððs€attorney€would€have€to€show€that€each€part€of€theÐ D!” Ðstatement€constitutes€hearsay€in€hearsay€would€have€to€be€admissible€separately.Ð0"€ (#(# Ðà  àÌà0  àHowever,€the€statement€is€a€party€admission€and€should€be€admitted€as€such€against€Dave.€Ð $X" ÐIt€is€Daveððs€statement€to€Paul.€€Dave€is€a€party,€the€statement€constitutes€an€admission€andÐ ô$D # Ðthe€objection€should€be€denied.Ðà%0!$(#(# Ðà  àÌà0  àà ° àB.à  àThe€objection€should€be€overruled€provided€that€a€proper€foundation€has€been€laid€that€wouldÐ ¸'#& Ðenable€Dave€to€testify€about€such€opinion.€€If€Daveððs€counsel€has€established€DaveððsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðexperience€and€expertise€in€valuing€antique€automobiles€then€the€court€can€allow€Dave€toÐ )à$( Ðtestify€regarding€his€opinion.€€A€party€may€testify€on€expert€opinion€issues€provided€properÐ |*Ì%) Ðfoundations€have€been€laid€and€it€is€the€matter€in€dispute€between€the€parties.€€The€fact€finderÐ h+¸&* Ðwould€weigh€the€credibility€of€Dave€and€the€other€witnesses€and€determine€whether€or€notÐ T,¤'+ Ðto€believe€Dave.ò òÐ@-(,(#(# ÐÓÿ.ÓÐ ,.|)- ÐÑZOaÑâ ZâѰXÑâ ZâÑ  ÑÓ  ÓQUESTION€8ó óÐ ° ÐÓÀ4ÓÌÓ  Óà  àBob€Brown€went€to€Sam,€a€farm€equipment€dealer,€to€buy€a€tractor.€€Sam€showed€Brown€aÐ ˆØ Ðused€tractor€that€Sam€repeatedly€stated€ð ðis€a€2001€Everfarm€tractor€in€great€shape.ðð€Ð tÄ ЀÌà  àRelying€on€Samððs€assurances,€Brown€bought€the€tractor€from€Sam€for€$20,000€with€$5,000Ð L œ Ðdown€and€the€remaining€balance€to€be€paid€in€installments.€€Sam€and€Brown€signed€a€written€salesÐ 8 ˆ Ðcontract€which€described€the€tractor€as€ð ðEverfarm€Tractor,€Serial€No.€4L3,€ð ðAs€Is.ððÐ $ t ÐÌà  àBrown€took€delivery€of€the€tractor€on€May€15,€2003.€€On€June€1,€2003,€after€using€the€tractorÐ ü L  Ðseveral€times,€Brown€changed€oil€in€the€tractor€and€found€that€a€2001€Everfarm€oil€filter€would€notÐ è 8  Ðfit.€€Brown€contacted€Everfarm€with€the€serial€number€and€discovered€the€tractor€is€a€1999€model.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àA€1999€Everfarm€tractor€is€worth€$15,000€at€retail.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àOn€June€2,€2003,€Brown€demanded€that€Sam€take€back€the€tractor€and€return€Brownððs€downÐ „Ô  Ðpayment,€ð ðas€a€fair€adjustment.ðð€€Sam€refused,€but€offered€to€reduce€the€price€to€$15,000,€SamÐ pÀ Ðproduced€the€documents€by€which€he€acquired€the€tractor,€which€listed€it€as€a€year€2001.€€SamÐ \¬ Ðconceded€that€he€did€not€verify€the€tractorððs€model€year€when€he€acquired€it.€€Brown€has€not€madeÐ H˜ Ðany€installment€payments.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àò òBrown€comes€to€you,€a€Maryland€lawyer,€and€wants€to€know€if€he€can€make€Sam€takeÐ  \ Ðthe€tractor€back€and€get€back€his€down€payment.€€What€do€you€advise?€€Explain€your€reasons.Ð øH Ðó óÓÿ4ÓÌò òÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ Ð  ÐÓ<ÓÌÓ  Óà  àI€would€explain€that€as€a€good€movable€at€the€time€of€contract€worth€over€$500€this€sale€isÐ ¨ø Ðgoverned€by€Article€2€of€the€Uniform€Commercial€Code€(ð ðUCCðð)€as€adopted€by€Maryland.€€Next,Ð ”ä ÐI€would€explain€that€the€circumstances€under€which€he€can€force€Sam€to€take€the€tractor€back€areÐ €Ð Ðlimited.€€When€Bob€Brown€(BB)€took€delivery€of€the€tractor€on€05/15/03€he€ð ðacceptedðð€the€SellerððsÐ l¼ Ðtender€of€goods€since€he€failed€to€discover€that€Sellerððs€tractor€was€not€a€perfect€tender€(as€required)Ð X ¨ Ðunder€the€contract€in€which€they€agreed€to€exchange€a€ð ð2001€Everfarm€tractorð8ððð€€Once€the€goodsÐ D!” Ðhave€been€accepted,€ð ðrevocation€of€acceptanceðð€and€hence€BBððs€ability€to€return€the€tractor€ð!ð€willÐ 0"€  Ðgovern€his€ability€to€return.€€Under€the€UCC,€revocation€of€acceptance€is€only€permitted€where€theÐ #l! Ðgoods€have€a€substantial€defect.€€The€substantial€defect€test€is€satisfied€by€the€2€year€model€differenceÐ $X" Ðthat€the€Buyer€failed€to€discover€because€of€the€difficulty€in€discovering€the€defect€or€the€SellerððsÐ ô$D # Ðassurances€of€conformity.€€Here€both€are€present,€Sam€repeatedly€stated€ð ðthat€the€tractor€was€a€2001Ð à%0!$ ÐEverfarmðð€even€though€it€was€not€and€thus€he€assured€BB€the€goods€were€conforming.€€BB€reliedÐ Ì&"% Ðon€Samððs€assurances.€€€Also,€this€defect€is€difficult€to€discover€because,€at€least€based€on€the€factsÐ ¸'#& Ðprovided,€there€is€nothing€that€should€have€put€BB€on€notice€the€goods€were€not€conforming€to€theÐ ¤(ô#' Ðcontract.€€Because€these€facts€are€so€greatly€in€BBððs€favor€as€outlined€above,€I€would€advise€him€heÐ )à$( Ðâ âhas€a€good€chance€of€success.Ð |*Ì%) Ðà  àSamððs€attempt€to€limit€his€express€warranty(s)€that€the€tractor€was€a€ð ð2001€Everfarmðð€byÐ ° Ðâ âputting€in€the€contract€that€it€was€for€a€ð ðEverfarm€Tractor,€As€Isðð€was€not€effective.€€Under€the€UCC,Ð œì Ðlimits€to€express€warranties€must€not€only€be€express€but€they€will€be€read€as€not€conflicting€withÐ ˆØ Ðthe€express€warranty.€€Here€there€is€an€obvious€conflict€and€the€express€warranty€that€it€is€a€ð ð2001Ð tÄ ÐEverfarmðð€will€be€given€effect.Ð `° Ѐ€€Ð L œ Ðà  àOne€potential€problem€here€is€the€parol€evidence€rule€which€would€prohibit€evidence€of€aÐ 8 ˆ Ðprior€agreement€(that€the€sale€was€for€a€2001€model)€when€it€conflicts€with€the€express€terms€of€theÐ $ t Ðcontract.€€Here,€this€term€does€not€directly€contradict€the€contract€because€no€year€of€the€tractor€wasÐ  ` Ðrecorded.€€Further,€the€Rule€will€not€prohibit€evidence€of€a€parties€fraudulent€conduct.€€He€willÐ ü L  Ðrecover.Ð è 8  ÐÓj<ÓÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñò òÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Ð À  ÐÓgHÓÓ  ÓÌó óà  àThe€transaction€between€Brown€(B)€and€Sam€(S)€is€a€contract€for€the€sale€of€goods€andÐ ˜è  Ðtherefore€Article€2€of€the€UCC€applies.€€Art.€2€requires€strict€compliance€with€the€contract€in€orderÐ „Ô  Ðto€avoid€an€action€for€breach.€€In€the€case€at€bar,€S€sold€B€a€1999€Everfarm€tractor,€whereas€heÐ pÀ Ðinitially€held€it€out€as€a€2001€model.€€This€breaches€the€strict€compliance€rule.Ð \¬ ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€S€held€out€the€used€tractor€as€a€ð ð2001€Everfarm€tractor€in€great€shape.ðð€€€€ThisÐ 4„ Ðclearly€is€an€express€warranty€which€is€not€negated€by€the€sales€contract€language€ð ðas€isðð.€€€(ThisÐ  p Ðlanguage€would€negate€an€implied€warranty€of€merchantability.€€However,€because€the€facts€indicateÐ  \ Ðthat€the€tractor€functioned€properly,€there€is€no€cause€of€action€against€S€for€the€breach€of€anyÐ øH Ðimplied€warranty.€€If€S€had€known€of€any€special€purposes€for€which€B€required€a€2001€model,€thereÐ ä4 Ðwould€be€a€breach€for€an€implied€warranty€of€fitness€for€a€particular€purpose€(if€B€relied€on€SððsÐ Ð  Ðexpertise)).€Ð ¼  Ѐ€Ð ¨ø Ðà  àThe€true€issue€here€is€whether€B€can€revoke€the€contract€based€upon€Sððs€misrepresentation.€Ð ”ä ÐOnce€a€Buyer€accepts€the€goods,€he€has€a€reasonable€time€to€inspect€if€it€is€a€cash€on€deliveryÐ €Ð Ðcontract.€€Here,€B€inspected€and€then€paid.€€Therefore,€the€issue€is€one€of€revocation.€€UnfortunatelyÐ l¼ ÐB€can€only€revoke€the€contract€if€the€misrepresented€fact€materially€inhibits€the€purpose€of€theÐ X ¨ Ðcontract.€€It€does€not€appear€as€though€Bððs€use€of€a€1999€model€would€materially€inhibit€theÐ D!” Ðoperations€for€which€he€purchased€it.€€Therefore€it€appears€as€though€B€could€obtain€a€refund€of€theÐ 0"€  Ð$5,000€or€apply€that€$5,000€to€future€installment€payments.€€This€will€constitute€a€reformation€of€theÐ #l! Ðinitial€contract.€€I€would€advise€B€of€this€and€advise€him€to€make€those€arrangements€with€S.€€Ð $X" ÐHowever,€if€B€was€unwilling€to€accept€this,€I€would€advise€him€to€return€the€tractor€to€S€and€weÐ ô$D # Ðcould€file€an€action€for€breach€of€contract€(revocation)€for€Sððs€failure€to€strictly€comply€with€theÐ à%0!$ Ðterms€of€the€contract,€which€listed€the€tractor€as€a€2001€model.ò òÐ Ì&"% ÐÌÌÌÌÐ h+¸&* ЇÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔÓ  ÓQUESTION€9Ð ° ÐÔ#†XïlXX=XïlÆR#ÔÓåRÓÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔÌó óÔ#†XïlXX=XïlCS#ÔÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔWhile€driving€her€marked€police€car€in€Annapolis,€Maryland,€Officer€Walker€observed€a€vehicleÐ ˆØ Ðdriving€at€a€high€rate€of€speed€in€the€opposite€direction.€€She€also€observed€the€vehicle€run€a€red€light.€Ð tÄ ÐOfficer€Walker€made€a€U„turn€and€activated€her€emergency€equipment€and€pulled€the€vehicle€over.€Ð `° ÐThe€vehicle€was€driven€by€Earl.€€Mary€Jane€was€in€the€front€passenger€seat€while€Danny€was€in€theÐ L œ Ðbackseat.€€Officer€Walker€recognized€Danny€and€Earl€from€a€previous€encounter.€€She€informed€EarlÐ 8 ˆ Ðthat€she€had€stopped€the€vehicle€for€speeding€and€for€not€stopping€at€a€traffic€light€and€then€askedÐ $ t Ðfor€his€license€and€registration,€with€which€Earl€complied.€€Ð  ` ÐÔ#†XïlXX=Xïl‰S#ÔÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔÌWhile€Officer€Walker€ran€a€license€check,€her€partner,€Officer€Blair,€a€trained€canine€officer€and€hisÐ è 8  Ðdrug€detection€dog,€Officer€Fido,€scanned€the€vehicle.€€Fido€then€made€two€positive€alerts€for€theÐ Ô$  Ðpresence€of€drugs€between€the€front€and€rear€doors€of€the€vehicle.€€Officer€Walker€informed€theÐ À  Ðdriver€that€she€suspected€that€the€vehicle€contained€drugs€and€asked€the€occupants€to€exit€the€vehicleÐ ¬ü  Ðso€that€they€could€search€them.€€The€occupants€were€taken€out€of€the€car€one€at€a€time€and€searched.€Ð ˜è  ÐÌÑ  ÑÌOfficer€Blair€searched€Danny€first€because€he€believed€Danny€looked€nervous.€€Officer€BlairÐ \¬ Ðbelieved€his€actions€to€be€more€than€a€mere€frisk€or€pat€down€but€instead€intended€to€discoverÐ H˜ Ðanything€apparent€including€weapons€or€anything€illegal.€€During€Officer€Blair's€search€of€Danny,Ð 4„ Ðhe€felt€several€pebble„like€objects€near€Danny's€left€thigh€area,€which€he€knew€was€not€a€gun,€knifeÐ  p Ðor€other€weapon.€€Officer€Blair€handcuffed€Danny€and€told€him€that€he€was€"not€under€arrest€at€thisÐ  \ Ðtime"€and€that€he€had€handcuffed€him€for€his€and€Danny's€safety.€€At€this€time,€Danny€stated,€"I€don'tÐ øH Ðknow€how€that€stuff€got€in€there."€€Officer€Blair€then€searched€Danny's€thigh€area€again€but€the€objectÐ ä4 Ðwas€gone.€€However,€Officer€Blair€noticed€something€protruding€from€Danny's€left€pant€leg,€whichÐ Ð  Ðturned€out€to€be€a€clear€plastic€baggie€containing€several€pieces€of€cocaine.€€Danny€was€placed€underÐ ¼  Ðarrest€and€charged€with€possession€of€a€controlled€dangerous€substance€and€possession€with€theÐ ¨ø Ðintent€to€distribute€a€controlled€dangerous€substance.Ð ”ä ÐÌÑ  ÑYou€are€the€Assistant€Stateððs€Attorney€assigned€to€analyze€the€case.€€Danny's€attorney€has€filed€aÐ l¼ Ðmotion€to€suppress€all€evidence€obtained€from€Danny.€Ð X ¨ ÐÌÔ#†XïlXX=XïléV#Ôò òÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔWhat€issues€do€you€anticipate€Danny's€attorney€will€raise€in€his€suppression€motion?€€How€doÐ 0"€  Ðyou€believe€the€Court€will€rule€on€each€issue?€€Discuss€fully€and€in€detail.Ð #l! ÐÔ#†XïlXX=XïlX_#ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔÌÔ#†XïlXX=Xïlx`#ÔREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð ô$D # ÐÌó óÓ  Óà  à4òòthóó€amendment€of€the€Constitution€prohibits€warrantless€search€&€seizures€except€for€limitedÐ Ì&"% Ðcircumstances.Ð ¸'#& ÐÌ(Seizure)€òòStopping€the€vehicleóó€=€The€officer€noticed€the€car€was€at€a€high€rate€of€speed€and€run€a€redÐ )à$( Ðlight,€thus€giving€the€officers€the€right€to€pull€over€the€car.Ð |*Ì%) ÐÑ  ÑÐ h+¸&* ÐÑLp,Ñâ LâÑ‹ÈÑâ LâÑ  ÑThis€does€not€violate€the€constitution€because€it€is€for€a€brief€time€and€to€issue€a€ticket.Ð ° ÐÌÑ  Ñ(search)€€The€search€was€conducted€by€a€Government€employee.€€Here€officers.€€For€there€to€be€aÐ ˆØ Ðviolation€of€the€4òòthóó€the€person€must€have€a€reasonable€expectation€of€privacy€in€the€thing€searched.Ð tÄ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòDogóó€€one€does€not€have€an€expectation€of€privacy€in€ones€smell.€€The€dog€is€allowed€to€go€aroundÐ L œ Ðthe€car€and€sniff€for€drugs.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòProbable€Causeóó=€The€positive€reactions€the€dog€gave€gives€the€officers€probable€cause€to€do€aÐ  ` Ðwarrantless€search€of€the€car.€€This€exception€is€due€to€the€mobility€of€the€automobile.Ð ü L  ÐÌòòStep€out€of€the€caróó=€officers€are€allowed€to€ask€the€individuals€to€step€out€of€the€care€while€theyÐ Ô$  Ðconduct€a€search.Ð À  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòSearching€the€individualsóó=€while€the€individuals€step€out€of€the€car€the€officers€can€conduct€a€patÐ ˜è  Ðdown€and€look€for€weapons€or€illegal€contraband.€€They€can€not€put€hands€in€the€pockets€or€squeezeÐ „Ô  Ðthe€item.Ð pÀ ÐÑ  ÑÌThe€positive€reactions€from€the€dog€do€not€give€the€officers€the€authority€to€conduct€a€completeÐ H˜ Ðsearch€of€the€individuals.€€In€fact,€officer€Blair€believed€his€actions€to€be€more€than€a€mere€frisk€orÐ 4„ Ðpat€down.€€The€officer€knew€it€was€not€a€gun,€knife€or€weapon.€€The€pat€down€is€for€the€safety€of€theÐ  p Ðofficer€and€when€the€officer€did€not€feel€a€weapon€he€should€have€discontinued€the€search.Ð  \ ÐÌÑ  ÑòòHandcuffedóó=€the€officer€then€handcuffed€Danny€but€told€him€ð ðhe€was€not€under€arrestðð€However,Ð ä4 Ðsomeone€under€these€circumstances€would€not€feel€free€to€leave€and€feel€like€he€was€under€an€arrest.Ð Ð  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòStatementóó=€Before€the€officer€knew€what€the€object€was€Danny€said€ð ðI€donððt€know€how€that€stuffÐ ¨ø Ðgot€in€thereððÐ ”ä ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòFruit€of€the€poisonous€treeóó€=€Evidence€obtained€in€violation€of€the€4òòthóó€will€be€inadmissible.€€Here,Ð l¼ Ðthey€did€more€than€a€mere€pat€or€frisk,€handcuffed€Danny€when€the€officer€knew€it€was€not€aÐ X ¨ Ðweapon.€€The€evidence€should€be€suppressed€as€violation€of€the€4òòthóó.Ð D!” ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòSuppression€of€the€Statementóó=€The€statement€was€made€as€a€result€of€him€being€handcuffed€andÐ #l! Ðthinking€the€officer€was€going€to€continue€the€search.Ð $X" ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑThis€statement€was€made€due€to€a€violation€of€the€4òòthóó€and€thus€will€also€be€suppressed€as€fruit€of€theÐ à%0!$ Ðpoisonous€tree.Ð Ì&"% ÐÑ  ÑÌSince€the€def€has€standing€to€bring€these€defenses€both€the€evidence€(physical)€and€the€statement€willÐ ¤(ô#' Ðbe€suppressed€and€thus€inadmissible.Ð )à$( ÐÌÌÐ T,¤'+ ÐÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Ð ° ÐÌó óÓ  ÓÓ  ÓThis€question€discusses€5òòthóó€Amendment€rights€to€be€free€from€unreasonable€search€and€seizure,€Ð ˆØ Ðmade€applicable€to€the€states€via€the€14òòthóó€Amendment.Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àDanny€will€first€object€to€the€stop€of€the€car,€but€it€appears€that€the€stop€was€perfectly€legalÐ L œ Ðin€that€the€officers€had€probable€cause€to€stop€when€they€noticed€the€vehicle€speeding€and€runningÐ 8 ˆ Ða€red€light.Ð $ t ÐÌDanny€will€next€object€to€the€dog€sniffing€drugs€inside€of€the€vehicle,€however,€there€is€noÐ ü L  Ðreasonable€expectation€of€privacy€in€odors€emanating€from€a€vehicle,€thus€the€police€were€fullyÐ è 8  Ðjustified€in€their€ð ðsniff€search.ððÐ Ô$  ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€the€question€can€be€raised€if€Danny€ever€has€standing€to€object€to€the€sniffingÐ ¬ü  Ðbecause€it€was€not€Dannyððs€car€and€not€Dannyððs€right€to€claim€privacy€in€the€smells€emanating€fromÐ ˜è  Ðit.Ð „Ô  Ðà  àThe€next€objection€Danny€will€make€is€to€the€pat„down€of€him.€€He€will€state€that€the€pat„Ð pÀ Ðdown€exceeded€the€allowable€scope€of€the€pat„down€and€even€Officer€Blair€believed€he€wasÐ \¬ Ðexceeding€the€scope€of€the€pat„down.€€However,€what€Officer€Blair€believed€in€terms€of€the€scopeÐ H˜ Ðof€the€search€in€this€case€is€irrelevant,€because€he€was€well€within€his€power€to€conduct€a€pat„downÐ 4„ Ðif€he€had€a€reasonable€articulable€suspicion€as€to€Dannyððs€actions.€€Here,€the€combination€of€drugÐ  p Ðsmells€from€the€vehicle€and€the€nervous€action€of€Danny€gave€the€officer€the€authority€to€conductÐ  \ Ðhis€frisk.€Ð øH ЀÌà  àWhen€conducting€his€frisk,€the€officer€is€allowed€to€pat€down€the€clothes€of€the€individualÐ Ð  Ðto€feel€for€weapons€or€contraband,€and€that€is€exactly€what€the€officer€did.€€The€officer€did€notÐ ¼  Ðremove€the€object€he€felt€(that€felt€like€pebbles)€so€he€did€not€receive€this€item€as€a€result€of€thisÐ ¨ø Ðsearch.€€When€the€officer€finally€discovered€the€cocaine,€it€had€fallen€and€was€protruding€out€ofÐ ”ä ÐDannyððs€pant€leg€and€thus€was€in€plain€view€of€the€officer,€thus€it€was€permissible€for€him€to€seizeÐ €Ð Ðthe€evidence.€€For€the€above„stated€reasons,€the€Court€will€rule€that€the€cocaine€is€admissible€and€notÐ l¼ Ðsuppressed.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà  àHowever,€Dannyððs€statement,€ð ðI€donððt€know€how€that€stuff€got€in€there,ðð€might€not€beÐ 0"€  Ðadmissible,€and€might€be€suppressed.€€Danny€will€argue€that€the€statement€was€made€prior€to€hisÐ #l! ÐMiranda€warnings€and€thus€should€be€suppressed.Ð $X" ÐÌà  àMiranda€warnings€are€required€if€the€suspect€reasonably€believes€he€is€not€free€to€leave€andÐ à%0!$ Ðhe€is€being€interrogated€by€the€police.€€In€this€case,€a€reasonable€person€would€believe€that€they€areÐ Ì&"% Ðin€custody€and€not€free€to€leave€once€they€are€handcuffed,€despite€the€officer€saying€that€it€was€onlyÐ ¸'#& Ðð ðfor€protection.ðð€€Danny,€however,€must€also€have€been€being€questioned€at€the€time,€and€it€was€clearÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthat€the€officer€was€not€interrogating€him.€€Dannyððs€statement€was€freely€uttered,€and€thus,€will€beÐ )à$( Ðdeemed€not€suppressed€by€the€Court.ò òÐ |*Ì%) ÐÓºoÓÌÐ T,¤'+ ЇÑ  ÑÓ  ÓQUESTION€10Ð ° ÐòòÌó óóóÓ  ÓÓ  ÓJenny€Logan€owns€a€successful€chain€of€florist€shops€throughout€Maryland.€€One€of€the€stores€inÐ ˆØ ÐHarford€County,€Maryland€was€not€as€profitable,€and€she€wanted€to€sell€it.€€On€May€1,€2000,€anÐ tÄ Ðinterested€buyer€named€Sunny€Dollar€agreed€to€purchase€the€shop€for€$500,000,€after€completing€dueÐ `° Ðdiligence.€€Mr.€Dollar€paid€$100,000€in€cash€and€signed€a€promissory€note€from€his€company€DollarÐ L œ ÐFlorist,€Inc.€to€Ms.€Logan€in€the€principal€amount€of€$400,000.€€Mr.€Dollar€also€personallyÐ 8 ˆ Ðguaranteed€the€note.€€The€note€provided€for€monthly€payments€towards€the€principal€over€the€courseÐ $ t Ðof€four€years.€€Ð  ` ÐÌAlways€operating€in€an€entrepreneurial€spirit,€Jenny€decided€to€open€a€day€spa.€€She€borrowedÐ è 8  Ð$400,000€from€Pratt€S&L.€€Repayment€of€the€loan€was€secured€by€the€pledge€of€the€Dollar€FloristÐ Ô$  ÐNote€to€Pratt€Savings€and€Loan.€€On€September€1,€2000,€Ms.€Logan€executed€a€note€in€the€principalÐ À  Ðamount€of€$400,000,€a€security€agreement€covering€the€Dollar€Florist€Note,€naming€Pratt€S&L€as€aÐ ¬ü  Ðsecured€party,€and€financing€statements€for€the€Dollar€Florist€Note.€€Pratt€S&L€recorded€the€financingÐ ˜è  Ðstatements€in€the€appropriate€records€section€of€the€Maryland€State€Department€of€Assessment€andÐ „Ô  ÐTaxation.€€Pratt€S&L€never€took€possession€of€the€Dollar€Florist€Note€and€Ms.€Logan€retained€itsÐ pÀ Ðpossession.Ð \¬ ÐÑ  ÑÌDollar€Florist,€Inc.€has€not€been€profitable.€€In€fact,€sales€have€declined€drastically€during€the€lastÐ 4„ Ðquarter.€€Dollar€Florist€has€not€been€able€to€make€payments€on€the€note€to€Ms.€Logan€sinceÐ  p ÐSeptember€2002.€€Without€payments€from€Dollar€Florist,€Ms.€Logan€was€unable€to€make€the€requiredÐ  \ Ðpayments€on€the€Pratt€S&L€Note.€€As€a€result,€she€defaulted€and€the€entire€amount€became€due.€€InÐ øH ÐDecember€2002,€Pratt€S&L€demanded€payment€from€Ms.€Logan€in€the€amount€of€$150,000ð"ðtheÐ ä4 Ðremaining€balance€due€on€Pratt€S&Lððs€loan€to€her.€€Ms.€Logan€has€not€paid€Pratt€S&L€as€requested.Ð Ð  ÐÌPratt€S&L€would€like€to€collect€the€$200,000€balance€due€on€the€Dollar€Note.€€Pratt€Saving€and€LoanÐ ¨ø Ðretains€you€for€legal€advice.Ð ”ä ÐÌò òGive€a€detailed€analysis€of€any€rights€Pratt€may€have€under€Maryland€Commercial€Law€toÐ l¼ Ðenforce€the€Dollar€Note,€and€what€steps€it€must€take€to€enforce€the€note.€Ð X ¨ ÐÓ~ÓÑ  Ñó óÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð 0"€  Ðó óÓ  ÓÌPratt€is€entitled€to€enforce€the€Dollar€note€under€ðð3„301€of€MD€Comm.€Law€because€although€theyÐ $X" Ðare€not€in€possession€of€the€Dollar€note€they€have€a€security€interest€in€the€Dollar€note€and€have€theÐ ô$D # Ðsame€rights€as€the€holder,€Jenny€Logan,€has€in€the€note€to€enforce€the€instrument.€€Jenny€used€theÐ à%0!$ Ðnote€as€collateral€to€obtain€the€money€she€needed€to€open€a€day€spa.Ð Ì&"% ÐÌSince€Pratt€has€the€same€rights€as€Jenny€would€have€because€they€perfected€their€security€interest€byÐ ¤(ô#' Ðfiling€the€statements€with€SDAT,€they€are€free€to€collect€on€the€debt.Ð )à$( ÐÑ  ÑÌPratt€has€the€right€to€take€possession€of€Dollar€Florist€note€because€Jenny€has€defaulted.€€They€couldÐ h+¸&* Ðunder€ðð9„610€sell,€lease,€license€or€otherwise€dispose€of€the€florist€in€its€present€condition€orÐ T,¤'+ Ðfollowing€any€commercially€reasonable€preparation€in€order€to€get€the€monies€that€are€owed.€€If€PrattÐ ° Ðintends€to€take€possession,€Pratt€must€notify€Jenny€and€Mr.€Dollar€of€its€intent€and€give€DollarÐ œì Ðreasonable€time€to€cure€the€debt.€€If€the€debt€is€not€cured,€Pratt€may€then€use€the€court€system€by€wayÐ ˆØ Ðof€a€writ€of€execution€to€secure€Dollar€Florist,€but€if€they€choose€not€to€use€the€judicial€process€theyÐ tÄ Ðmust€secure€Dollar€Florist€without€breaching€the€peace.€€Ð `° ÐÌOnce€Pratt€has€decided€to€sell,€lease,€license€or€otherwise€dispose€of€the€property,€they€again€mustÐ 8 ˆ Ðgive€notice€to€Jenny€and€Mr.€Dollar€that€states€the€date,€time,€place,€and€manner€by€which€theÐ $ t Ðproperty€will€be€disposed€of.€€Again,€this€should€be€done€within€a€reasonable€amount€of€time€to€giveÐ  ` Ðthem€an€opportunity€to€cure€the€debt€and€redeem€the€property.€€Once€the€property€is€disposed€of€PrattÐ ü L  Ðmust€notify€Jenny€and€Mr.€Dollar€of€the€amount€that€was€received€during€the€disposal.€€If€there€isÐ è 8  Ðmoney€remaining€after€the€disposal€that€is€not€owed€to€Pratt,€Pratt€has€to€return€it€to€Jenny.€€If€duringÐ Ô$  Ðthe€disposal€there€is€a€deficiency€in€the€amount€received,€Pratt€could€file€a€civil€action€against€JennyÐ À  Ðand€Mr.€Dollar€to€get€a€judgment€in€their€favor€to€cure€the€deficiency.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌSince€Mr.€Dollar€personally€guaranteed€the€note,€Pratt€could€go€after€his€personal€assets€to€cure€theÐ „Ô  Ðdebt.€€However€Pratt€decides€to€proceed€to€enforce€the€note€under€ðð9„610€everything€must€be€doneÐ pÀ Ðin€a€way€that€is€commercially€reasonable.Ð \¬ ÐÌÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Ð 4„ Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÓ  ÓA.à0  àòòNegotiable€Instruments/EnforcementóóÐ \(#(# ÐÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔÌÔ#†XïlXX=Xïlu”#ÔIt€appears€that€the€Dollar€Note€is€a€negotiable€instrument,€and€as€such€entitlement€to€enforce€isÐ ä4 Ðcontrolled€by€3„301.€€The€note€appears€to€be€a€two„party€promise€to€pay€a€specific€amount€in€aÐ Ð  Ðdefinite€time€period€without€any€restrictions,€which€makes€it€negotiable.€€The€best€way€for€Pratt€toÐ ¼  Ðbe€able€to€enforce€the€note€would€be€to€get€possession€from€Jenny€(3„301(i)).€€It€may€also€have€rightsÐ ¨ø Ðunder€3„301(ii)€or€(iii).€€It€does€however€have€the€rights€to€get€possession€of€the€note€as€a€securedÐ ”ä Ðcreditor€due€to€Jennyððs€default.Ð €Ð ÐÓ<(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤°œX<ÓÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔÌÔ#†XïlXX=Xïlƒ—#ÔÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔB.à  àÔ#†XïlXX=XïlÆ—#ÔòòÔ‡=XïlXXXïlÔSecurity€InterestÔ#†XïlXX=Xïl˜#Ôò òÐ X ¨ ÐÌó óóóPratt€has€a€perfected€security€interest€in€the€Dollar€Note.€€The€interest€attached€when€Jenny€tookÐ 0"€  Ðpossession€of€the€$400,000€she€borrowed€from€Pratt€secured€by€the€Dollar€Note.€€Since€Pratt€did€notÐ #l! Ðtake€possession€of€the€note,€it€perfected€its€interest€when€it€filed€pursuant€to€9„312(a).Ð $X" ÐÓ<(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤ÜÜ‹X<ÓÌC.à  àòòDefaultò òÐ à%0!$ ÐÌó óóóAt€the€point€that€Jenny€defaulted€on€the€loan€with€Pratt,€Pratt€had€a€right€to€take€possession€underÐ ¸'#& Ð9„609(a)(i).€€The€options€are€to€take€matters€into€their€own€hands€and€recover€the€note€from€JennyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthemselves,€if€it€can€be€done€without€a€breach€of€the€peace€pursuant€to€9„609(b)(2).€€Alternatively,Ð )à$( Ðand€probably€the€better€choice,€they€could€get€the€note€from€Jenny€pursuant€to€judicial€process€underÐ |*Ì%) Ð9„609(b)(i).€€They€would€then€arrange€for€Jenny€to€turn€over€the€note€at€the€place€convenient€for€bothÐ h+¸&* Ðpursuant€to€9„609(c).Ð T,¤'+ ЇÓ<(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤ÜÜ‹X<ÓD.à  àòòSurplus/Deficiencyò òÐ ° ÐÌó óóóThey€would€then€try€to€enforce€the€note€either€by€collection€from€Dollar€or€by€selling€the€noteÐ ˆØ Ðpursuant€to€9„610(a).€€The€sale€would€have€to€be€commercially€reasonable€pursuant€to€9„610(b).€€IfÐ tÄ Ðthey€are€able€to€recover€more€than€their€$150,000€(plus€reasonable€expenses),€they€would€owe€JennyÐ `° Ðany€surplus€pursuant€to€9„608(4).€€Likewise,€Jenny€would€be€liable€for€any€deficiency€under€9„Ð L œ Ð608(4).Ð 8 ˆ ÐÓ”ÓÓ  ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ T,¤'+ Ðò òQUESTION€11ó óÐ ° ÐÌÓ  ÓIn€1985,€Bob€and€Carol€purchased€a€dwelling€in€Fredrick€County,€Maryland.€€Bob€and€Carol€wereÐ ˆØ Ðnot€married,€but€told€the€title€attorney€that€prepared€the€deed€that€if€one€died,€they€wanted€the€otherÐ tÄ Ðto€get€his€or€her€share.€The€title€attorney€prepared€a€deed€that€contained€the€following€language:€ð ðToÐ `° ÐBob€and€Carol€as€tenants€by€the€entirety€with€right€of€survivorship.ðð€€Ð L œ ÐÌBob€and€Carol€lived€together€in€the€home.€€After€repeated€arguments,€Bob€voluntarily€moved€out,Ð $ t Ðtelling€Carol€that€he€was€moving€to€California€ð ðto€start€a€new€lifeðð.€€Carol€continued€to€live€in€theÐ  ` Ðhome.€€In€1997,€Carol€granted€a€written€option€to€Ted€to€purchase€the€property€within€one€year.€€TedÐ ü L  Ðdid€not€exercise€the€option,€and€Carol€continued€to€occupy€the€home.Ð è 8  ÐÌIn€2002,€Carol€received€official€notification€that€Bob€had€died€that€year€in€California,€leaving€all€ofÐ À  Ðhis€property€by€will€to€his€companion,€Alice.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌÓ€ (5h88BÓÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  Ýò òÝ‚>3£°¤ÝÔ25hÔÙ ÙÚ  ÚaÚ  ÚÙ Ù.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝWhat€interest€in€the€home€does€Bobððs€estate€have,€if€any?€Ýƒ>3£°¤à¤ÝŒÐ„Ô (#(# ÐŒÝ  Ý€ÌÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£ç¥ÝÔ25hÔÙ ÙÚ  ÚbÚ  ÚÙ Ù.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝWould€your€answer€be€different€if€Carol€had€moved€out€and€leased€the€property€to€TedÐ \¬ Ðin€1997?݃>3£ç¥¦ÝŒÐH˜(#(# ÐŒÝ  Ý€€Ð 4„ ÐÝ"‚>3£"ÝÝ  ÝÝ‚>3£d§ÝÔ25hÔÙ ÙÚ  ÚcÚ  ÚÙ Ù.Ô3  Ôà0  àÝ  ÝAssume€Bob€had€executed€and€delivered€a€deed€conveying€his€interest€in€the€propertyÐ  p Ðto€himself€and€Alice€as€Tenants€in€Common€in€1997.€€What€effect,€if€any,€would€theÐ  \ Ðconveyance€have€on€the€ownership€of€the€property€after€Bobððs€death?€€Ýƒ>3£d§‘§ÝŒÐøH(#(# ÐŒÝ  ÝÑ  ÑÓ ,ÓÓ<(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ìDœôL¤ÜÜ‹X<Óà  àDiscuss€Fully.Ð ä4 ÐÓÑŸÓÓ ,Óó óÌÌò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ ¨ø ÐÌÓ  Ó(a)€Bobððs€estate€has€no€interest€in€the€property.€€Under€the€facts,€the€property€was€transferred€to€BobÐ €Ð Ð(B)€and€Carol€(C)€as€Tenants€by€the€Entireties.€€Since€they€were€not€married€at€the€time,€however,Ð l¼ Ðthey€are€not€able€to€take€the€property€in€that€form.€€However,€based€on€their€instructions€to€the€lawyerÐ X ¨ Ðthat€they€wanted€a€right€of€survivorship,€a€court€would€probably€determine€that€the€parties€intendedÐ D!” Ðto€take€the€property€with€a€right€of€survivorship€as€Joint€Tenants.€€Intent€is€the€driving€force€in€thisÐ 0"€  Ðdetermination.Ð #l! ÐÌAlthough€Carol€granted€an€option€to€Ted€to€purchase€(which€is€effectively€an€option€to€purchase€herÐ ô$D # Ððð€share),€until€that€option€is€exercised€the€joint€tenancy€is€not€severed€and€the€right€of€survivorshipÐ à%0!$ Ðremains€intact.€€Accordingly,€when€Bob€died€the€property€automatically€passes€to€Carol€in€fee€simpleÐ Ì&"% Ðand€there€is€no€interest€in€the€property€that€can€pass€to€Alice€under€his€will,€or€to€his€estate.Ð ¸'#& ÐÑ  ÑÌ(b)€Yes,€my€answer€would€change.€€If€Carol€moved€out€and€leased€the€property€she€would€haveÐ )à$( Ðgranted€a€present€possessory€estate€in€the€property€to€another,€which€would€have€severed€the€jointÐ |*Ì%) Ðtenancy.€€The€parties€would€have€then€held€the€property€as€Tenants€in€Common.€€With€no€right€ofÐ h+¸&* Ðsurvivorship€Bobððs€ðð€interest€would€pass€to€his€estate€under€his€will.Ð T,¤'+ Їðð€)€If€Bob€had€executed€a€deed€in€1997€for€his€interest€in€the€property€to€him€and€Alice€as€TenantsÐ ° Ðin€Common€this€act€would€have€severed€the€joint€tenancy€and€created€a€Tenancy€in€Common€estateÐ œì Ðheld€ðð€by€Carol,€ðð€by€Bob€and€ðð€by€Alice.€€Upon€Bobððs€death€his€1/4€interest€passed€to€his€estateÐ ˆØ Ðand€Alice€and€Carol€continue€to€hold€their€interests€respectively.€Ð tÄ ÐÓKªÓÌÑ  Ñò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ L œ ÐÌÓ  Ó(a)€Tenancy€by€the€Entireties€is€created€when€the€interests€of€time,€title,€possession,€interests€andÐ $ t Ðmarriage€exist.€€Here€as€Bob€and€Carol€were€not€married€at€the€time€of€purchase€a€Tenancy€by€theÐ  ` ÐEntireties€did€not€exist.Ð ü L  ÐÑ  ÑÌA€Joint€Tenancy€is€created€by€default€where€the€parties€indicate€an€intent€of€survivorship.€€Here€asÐ Ô$  ÐBob€and€Carol€indicated€that€if€one€died€the€other€should€receive€their€share,€such€an€intent€exists,Ð À  Ðrendering€a€joint€tenancy.€€Joint€tenancy€has€a€right€of€survivorship,€meaning€when€one€dies€theÐ ¬ü  Ðinterest€goes€to€the€remaining€survivor.€Since€Bob€died€his€estate€gets€nothing€and€Carol€gets€bothÐ ˜è  Ðinterests€in€the€house.Ð „Ô  ÐÌ(b)€Once€a€lease€occurs€during€a€joint€tenancy€it€severs€one€of€the€four€unities€required€(time,€title,Ð \¬ Ðinterest€and€possession)€rendering€a€Tenancy€in€Common.€€Here€had€Ted€leased€the€property€theÐ H˜ Ðunity€of€interest€would€have€been€severed€and€the€Tenancy€in€Common€created.€€Alice€would€thenÐ 4„ Ðhave€acquired€Bobððs€ðð€share€of€the€property€upon€his€death€since€a€Tenancy€in€Common€has€no€rightÐ  p Ðof€survivorship.Ð  \ ÐÌ(€c)€The€conveyance€of€a€deed€to€Bob€and€Alice€of€his€share€of€the€property€would€have€severed€oneÐ ä4 Ðof€the€four€unities€and€created€a€Tenancy€in€Common.€€Upon€his€death,€Alice€would€keep€her€ðð€shareÐ Ð  Ðand€Bob€could€devise€his€ðð€share€to€her.€Ð ¼  ÐÓ¬²ÓÌò òÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ T,¤'+ ЇÌQUESTION€12ó óòòóóÐ œì ÐÌÓ  Óà  àEric,€a€Maryland€attorney€with€his€office€in€Glen€Burnie,€Maryland,€represented€Wanda€inÐ tÄ Ða€dispute€over€the€termination€of€her€employment€at€Conglomerate,€Inc.€Alleging€a€breach€of€herÐ `° Ðemployment€contract,€Eric€filed€a€suit€for€Wanda€against€Conglomerate€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€AnneÐ L œ ÐArundel€County€Maryland.€Max,€a€member€of€the€District€of€Columbia€Bar,€assisted€Eric€on€theÐ 8 ˆ Ðcase.€Max€was€listed€on€Ericððs€letterhead€as€an€associate.€Max€did€not€sign€any€pleadings€in€the€case;Ð $ t Ðhis€name€was€set€forth€below€Ericððs€signature€on€the€pleadings.€Because€of€his€trial€schedule,€EricÐ  ` Ðturned€the€case€over€to€Max.€Max€attended€a€status€conference€held€in€chambers€in€the€case€whenÐ ü L  ÐEric€had€a€hearing€conflict€in€another€case€in€another€county.€€There€was€no€request€to€have€MaxÐ è 8  Ðspecially€admitted€in€the€case.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àCounsel€for€Conglomerate€filed€a€motion€for€summary€judgment€and€sent€copies€to€Eric€andÐ ¬ü  ÐMax.€Max€sent€a€copy€of€the€motion€to€Wanda€and€then€Max€told€Eric€that€he