ÿWPCý 1[O²JÄܶËå ¡ëk?Á„W€¬H¬AVçç˜7„’óß} È]™ëdÛ½•딟Îý„V¹9tĺ.-õOëØh¦ ª{À›ü@â%Ö§¤¢Or…;>ƒ/ÿ³?º0ù¼¤j¿jýS ÔnA•ys$ Ž»TG/‹üx¼€¬š;•O1?;4_`¦¡ÌZ̆€ñx×VúHH‘th¨.¼ûL¶pFVè³~¯¤ì#Åo:{R*¯m÷f6³ÐߌxdC¤i·ó’+ZÉoï¶êcWƒž#Ío+93´+&|F;OͲĶ‹l1kûí´ó:basÇ´ëô—aÉç ÷²ìñý±þvÁ:Å][{&¯Èw^Ê.#Á„UNE %“ 0:™U>Ó^ w4!5D mF 0 ]U*sU@ 1uÝ 72R 00„ N´ ™¶ O 0VW W U/@­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ ­ 0Fí 0¦3 0&Ù 1Uÿ 0*T 0û~ 0ûy 0øt 0õl 0òa 0ïS 0ìB 0é. 0æ˜HP LaserJet 4250 PCL 6ÈÈÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,Ôô\  `&Times New RomanÔxÄ8s *—>8Ã8ëdBackup3|x&ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ<cwÿÿ:envelope retÑ  ÑÔ‡ôôôÔÔ?‡ %ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÑ  Ñ%ä2¼A`‹Arial(ÖÃ9 Z(Times New Roman 3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i):q…ÿÿ8Body Text 2Ñ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ‡XXXÔÔ?‡ %ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔó óÑ  Ñ Ý ƒ½Þ)ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ôà@ëëëìàò òPage€Ú  Ú1Ú  Ú€of€Ú  Ú38Ú  Úó ó (.3½Þ$©©Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ý(ÀÊO Z‹(Times New Roman 6~ …ÿÿ4heading 1Ñ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ‡XXXÔÔ?‡ %ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔó óÑ  Ñ0;;ÿÿ.headerÑ  ÑÓ °°ÀÐ ÓÔ‡XXXÔÑ  ÑÓ °°ÀÐ ÓÔ‡XXXÔ6n‚ÿÿ4Body TextÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÔ‡ôôôÔÔ?‡ %ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÑ  Ñ$ÿÿ359=AEIMQ111111111:n‚ÿÿ8Body Text 3Ñ  ÑÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔ?‡ %ä2¼A`‹Arial?ÔÓ  ÓÔ‡XXXÔÔS‡ô\  `‹&Times New RomanSÔÑ  Ñ<G+M ÿÿ:Outline001_1Ó ¨ý ÓÓ ° ÓÓ/%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ ¨ý Ó<G+M ÿÿ:Outline001_2Ó Ôþ ÓÓ Ü ÓÓ/%Œ Œ ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ /ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ Ôþ Ó<D+M ÿÿ:Outline001_3Ó jÿ ÓÓ 4 ÓÓ,"ä ä hÀpÈ xÐ ,ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ jÿ Ó<A+M ÿÿ:Outline001_4Ó Ôþ ÓÓ Œ ÓÓ)< <hÀpÈ xÐ )ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ Ôþ Ó<>+M ÿÿ:Outline001_5Ó Ôþ ÓÓ ä ÓÓ&””ÀpÈ xÐ &ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ Ôþ Ó<;+M ÿÿ:Outline001_6Ó jÿ ÓÓ < ÓÓ#ììpÈ xÐ #ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ jÿ Ó<8+M ÿÿ:Outline001_7Ó Ôþ ÓÓ ” ÓÓ DDpÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ Ôþ Ó<5+M ÿÿ:Outline001_8Ó Ôþ ÓÓ ì ÓÓœœÈ xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ Ôþ Ó<2+M ÿÿ:Outline001_9Ó jÿ ÓÓ D ÓÓôô xÐ ÓÔ2ÔÔ3  Ôà..àÓ  ÓÓ5+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ 5ÓÓ jÿ ÓÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÖ€ÿÿÖÑ  Ñò òÓ  ÓFEBRUARY€2008€MARYLAND€BAR€EXAMINATIONÐ ° ÐÌQUESTIONS€AND€REPRESENTATIVE€GOOD€ANSWERSÐ ˆØ ÐÌQUESTION€1Ð `° ÐÌÑ  Ñó óÓ  Óà  àAt€2:00€a.m.€Ace€opened€the€back€door€of€Diamonds€Are€Forever,€a€retail€store€in€a€shoppingÐ 8 ˆ Ðcenter€in€Charles€County,€Maryland.€€The€back€door€was€closed,€but€had€been€left€unlockedÐ $ t Ðintentionally€by€Bob,€a€store€employee,€who€was€also€Aceððs€partner€in€crime.€€Ace€went€into€theÐ  ` Ðshowroom€and€emptied€the€contents€of€the€diamond€display€case,€worth€more€than€$50,000,€into€aÐ ü L  Ðbag€and€exited€with€the€bag€through€the€same€back€door,€closing€it€behind€him.€€No€damage€wasÐ è 8  Ðdone€to€the€back€door€at€any€time.€Ace€walked€to€his€car,€which€was€parked€one€hundred€yards€fromÐ Ô$  ÐDiamonds€Are€Forever.€€He€stored€the€bag€of€diamonds€in€the€trunk€of€the€car,€and€retrieved€aÐ À  Ðhandgun€that€he€had€left€in€the€trunk€of€the€car,€and€walked€away€from€the€car,€intending€to€returnÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€next€morning€and€pick€up€the€car.Ð ˜è  ÐÓ XÓÐ „Ô  ÐA€shopping€center€security€guard€observed€Ace€walking€away€from€the€parked€car€andÐ pÀ Ðfollowed€Ace€for€several€hundred€yards.€€The€security€guard€then€yelled€ð ðStop€where€you€are.€I€haveÐ \¬ Ða€gun€and€Iððll€shoot.ðð€€Ace€turned€and€fired€a€single€shot€at€the€figure€in€the€dark,€killing€the€securityÐ H˜ Ðguard.Ð 4„ ÐÐ  p ÐAce€has€been€indicted€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Charles€County€for€burglary,€theft€and€murder.Ð  \ Ðò òÐ øH ÐWhat€are€the€issues,€based€on€these€facts,€€regarding€Aceððs€potential€conviction€on€theÐ à0 Ðcharges€of€burglary,€theft€and€murder?€€Explain€your€answer€fully.Ð Ì ÐÑ  ÑÓ XÓÓ  ÓÌREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð ¤ô ÐÓ ”Óó óÓ  ÓÓ xÓà Ø àÌòòBurglary€ð!ð€Second€Degreeóó€is€the€breaking€and€entering€a€store€of€another€with€the€intentÐ |Ì Ðto€commit€a€crime€therein.€€Here,€Ace€opened€the€back€door€of€Diamonds€Are€Forever,€whichÐ h¸ Ðconstitutes€a€breaking€and€entering€a€retail€store€of€another€with€the€intent€to€commit€a€theft€ofÐ T ¤ Ðthe€contents€of€the€diamond€display€case.€The€fact€that€Ace's€co„conspirator,€Bob,€left€the€backÐ @! Ðdoor€unlocked€intentionally,€or€that€there€was€no€damage€to€the€door,€does€not€remove€theÐ ,"|  Ðbreaking€and€entering€element€of€Ace's€burglary,€especially€since€the€door€was€closed.€Ace€willÐ #h! Ðnot€be€charged€or€convicted€of€€òòFirst€Degree€Burglaryóó€because€Diamonds€Are€Forever€was€not€aÐ $T" Ðdwelling€house,€Under€Common€Law,€a€burglary€was€required€to€take€place€at€night,€and€whileÐ ð$@ # ÐAce's€actions€occurred€at€2:00€am.,€the€night€element€was€not€a€requirement€for€Ace€to€beÐ Ü%,!$ Ðcharged€with€2nd€degree€burglary.€Therefore,€Ace€will€likely€be€convicted€of€2nd€DegreeÐ È&"% ÐBurglary.Ð ´'#& Ðà Ø àÌòòTheftóó€(larceny€form)€is€the€trespassory€taking€and€carrying€away€the€personal€propertyÐ Œ)Ü$( Ðâ âof€another€with€the€specific€intent€to€permanently€deprive.€Here,€Ace€emptied€the€contents€Ô_ÔofÐ x*È%) Ðthe€diamond€display€case,€worth€more€than€$50,000,€into€a€bag€and€Ô#bbddÔexited€with€the€bag.Ð ° ÐTherefore,€Ace€will€be€charged€and€likely€convicted€of€felony€theft.Ô#ddbbÔÐ œì Ðâ âà Ø àÌòòFelony€Murderóó€(1st€degree€murder)€is€the€killing€of€a€human€while€in€the€commissionÐ tÄ Ðof€an€enumerated€felony,€which€includes€burglary.€Here,€while€Ace€Ô#eeddÔkilled€Ô#ddeeÔthe€shopping€centerÐ `° Ðsecurity€guard€following€a€burglary,€the€killing€was€not€in€the€commission€of€the€burglary.Ð L œ ÐFollowing€the€commission€of€the€crime,€Ace€walked€to€his€car,€which€was€parked€one€hundredÐ 8 ˆ Ðyards€from€Diamonds€Are€Forever,€stored€the€bag€of€diamonds€in€the€trunk€of€the€car,€andÐ $ t Ðretrieved€a€handgun€that€he€left€in€the€trunk€of€the€car,€walked€away€from€the€car,€intending€toÐ  ` Ðreturn€the€next€morning€and€pick€up€the€car.€These€facts€indicate€that€Ace's€commission€of€theÐ ü L  Ðcrime€was€complete,€and€he€had€reached€safety.Ð è 8  ÐÓ <”ÓÓ ´xÓÓ ,Óà ¼ àÌà ¼ àòòFirst€Degree€(Premeditated)€Murderóó€is€the€intentional€killing€of€a€human€being,Ð À  Ðwithout€excuse,€provocation€or€mitigation,€and€with€premeditation€and€deliberation.€Here,Ð ¬ü  Ðwhile€Ace€intentionally€turned€and€fired€a€single€shot€at€the€figure€in€the€dark,€killing€theÐ ˜è  Ðsecurity€guard,€this€action,€while€responding€to€an€unknown€figure€yelling€ð ðStop€where€youÐ „Ô  Ðare.€I€have€a€gun€and€I`ll€shoot"€will€not€be€deemed€premeditated€or€deliberate.Ð pÀ ÐÓ ”<ÓÓ x´ÓÓ ð,ÓòòÐ \¬ ÐSecondóó€òòDecreeóó€òòMurderóó€is€the€intentional€killing€of€a€human€being,€without€excuse,Ð H˜ Ðprovocation€or€mitigation,€but€not€with€premeditation€or€deliberation.€Here,€Ð 4„ ÐÓ ”Óthe€facts€discussed€above€will€likely€lead€to€a€conviction€of€Ace€for€2nd€DegreeÐ  p Ðnon-premeditated€murder.Ð  \ ÐÓ ”ÓòòÐ øH ÐSelf„Defense.óó€Here,€Ace€will€attempt€to€use€self„defense€as€a€defense€to€murderÐ ä4 Ðsince€he€was€responding€to€a€figure€in€the€dark€yelling€"I€have€a€gun€and€I'll€shoot."€This€is€aÐ Ð  Ðquestion€for€the€finder€of€fact,€and€seems€possible€but€unlikely.Ð ¼  ÐÓ ”ÓÓ xÓÓ ðÓà  àÌà  à€€€òòVoluntary€Manslaughter.óó€Here,€Ace€may€attempt,€and€be€successful€in€attempting€toÐ ”ä Ðmitigate€this€charge€to€manslaughter€on€an€òòimperfect€self„defenseóó€claim,€since€he€responded€to€ð ðIÐ €Ð Ðhave€a€gun€and€I'll€shoot."€This€is€unlikely€because€if€self„defense€is€found,€then€Ace€will€mostÐ l¼ Ðlikely€be€completely€cleared€of€the€killing.Ð X ¨ ÐÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ 0"€  Ðà  àÌà  àBurglary€in€Maryland€occurs€when€there€is€a€breaking€and€entering€of€a€dwelling€at€nightÐ $X" Ðwith€the€intent€to€commit€a€theft€or€crime€of€violence.€€Under€these€facts,€a€òòbreaking€has€occurredóóÐ ô$D # Ðeven€though€the€door€was€unlocked.€€The€mere€act€of€opening€the€closed€door€and€entering€theÐ à%0!$ Ðstore€constitutes€breaking.€€Ace,€when€he€entered€the€store€at€2:00€a.m.€as€a€result€of€his€ð ðpartnerÐ Ì&"% Ðin€crimeðð€leaving€the€door€open€had€the€òòintent€to€steal€óóthe€jewelry,€manifested€by€his€plan€withÐ ¸'#& ÐBob.€€€The€mere€act€of€breaking€and€entering€with€the€intent€to€steal€the€jewelry€will€likely€beÐ ¤(ô#' Ðsufficient€to€sustain€a€charge€of€burglary.€€The€fact€that€there€was€no€damage€done€to€the€door€isÐ )à$( Ðirrelevant€in€our€burglary€analysis€because€one€need€not€cause€actual€damage€to€commit€burglary.Ð |*Ì%) Ðà  àÐ h+¸&* Ðà  àTheft€occurs€when€a€person€has€the€intent€to€permanently€deprive€another€of€property.€Ð ° ÐHere,€because€of€the€value€of€the€jewelry,€Aceððs€plan€to€sneak€into€the€store,€knowing€of€theÐ œì Ðvaluables€therein,€and€his€subsequent€€taking€of€the€valuables€and€removing€them€to€the€trunk€ofÐ ˆØ Ðhis€car€will€satisfy€the€elements€required€for€theft.€€Because€of€the€value€of€the€items€taken€(overÐ tÄ Ð$500),€the€most€severe€degree€of€theft€will€be€charged.€€In€order€to€defend€against€a€€theft€action,Ð `° ÐAce€will€have€to€show€that€he€did€not€intend€to€permanently€deprive€the€store€of€the€jewelry€atÐ L œ Ðthe€time€of€the€taking.€€This€defense€will€likely€fail.Ð 8 ˆ Ðà  àÌà  àMurder€is€the€killing€of€another€with€the€malice€aforethought.€€€The€issue€here€is€whetherÐ  ` ÐAce€should€be€charged€with€first€degree€premeditated€murder€and€felony€murder.€€Felony€murderÐ ü L  Ðoccurs€when€a€felon,€during€the€commission€of€an€enumerated€felony€(burglary€included),€killsÐ è 8  Ðanother€in€òòò òfurtherance€of€the€felonyó ó.óó€€The€test€to€determine€whether€the€killing€occurred€withinÐ Ô$  Ðthe€course€of€the€felony€looks€at€the€Ô_ÔforeseeabilityÔ_Ô€of€the€victim€as€well€as€whether€the€crime€wasÐ Ä  Ðstill€being€committed.€€Under€these€facts,€there€is€a€clear€case€of€burglary,€an€enumerated€felony.€Ð °  ÐIt€is€a€question€of€fact€whether€the€burglary€was€over€when€Ace€was€walking€away€from€the€car.€Ð œì  ÐHe€was€not€a€fleeing€felon€necessarily,€and€it€can€be€argued€that€the€burglary€was€over€once€heÐ ˆØ  Ðleft€the€car.€€However,€possession€of€a€handgun€in€the€commission€of€felon€is€a€felony€in€and€ofÐ tÄ Ðitself,€so€this€may€keep€Ace€on€the€hook€for€felony€murder.€€Ace€will€defend€based€on€selfÐ `° Ðdefense,€asserting€that€the€security€card€did€not€identify€himself,€that€he€threatened€serious€bodilyÐ Lœ Ðharm€or€death€(as€the€facts€indicate),€and€that€Ace€himself€may€have€thought€he€was€beingÐ 8ˆ Ðrobbed.€€However,€self„defense€to€murder€or€even€the€reduction€of€murder€to€voluntaryÐ $t Ðmanslaughter€required€a€reasonable€belief€(objective€standard)€that€deadly€force€was€threatenedÐ ` Ðand€the€only€way€to€prevent€that€was€to€use€deadly€force.€€However,€Maryland€also€follows€theÐ üL Ðð ðduty€to€retreatðð€doctrine€which€Ace€may€be€held€to€if€he€had€a€clear€path€of€escape€and€couldÐ è8 Ðavoid€shooting€the€security€guard.€€Ace€will€likely€be€unsuccessful€in€defending€against€theÐ Ô$ Ðmurder€charge.€€For€the€most€part,€the€culpability€of€his€conduct€when€the€murder€occurredÐ À Ð(burglary,€theft€&€possession€of€a€handgun)€will€likely€lead€to€his€conviction€for€murder.Ð ¬ü ÐÐ  ˜è ÐÔ€XäŒXXXÔÓ  ÓÓ€Óò òòŒòQUESTION€2€Ð ° ÐóŒóó óÓ  ÓÓ€ÓÝ‚ ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€ô­òXXäŒÔÔ€ô­òòô­ÔÔ€ôÝ@òòô­ÔÔ€ ôðóòòôÝ@ÔÝ  ÝÝ‚ ÿÿÿ¹*ÝÝ  Ý݃ ÿÿ¹*\+݌̌Ô€ X+Xò ôðóÔÔ€ X+XX X+ÔÔ€XäŒXX X+ÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÓ  Óà  àOn€June€21,€2007€Amos€entered€into€a€written€contract€with€John€to€sell€his€10„acre€parcelÐ Ð  Ðof€land€in€Carroll€County,€Maryland€known€as€ð ðÔ_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ôðð€for€$200,000.€€As€required€by€theÐ ¼  Ðcontract,€John€paid€$10,000€toward€the€purchase€price€with€the€balance€to€be€paid€at€closing€onÐ ¨ø ÐAugust€21,€2007.€€The€contract€required€Amos€to€convey€good€and€marketable€title€to€John€atÐ ” ä Ðclosing.€Ð € Ð ÐÌà  àOn€August€15,€2007€Amos€and€John€executed€a€written€amendment€to€the€contract€extendingÐ X ¨  Ðthe€closing€date€to€October€1,€2007.€€The€amendment€recited€that€Johnððs€lender,€Peoples€Saving€&Ð D ”  ÐLoan€Assoc.,€as€a€matter€of€policy,€required€a€current€survey€of€any€property,€the€recordedÐ 0€  Ðdescription€of€which€was€more€than€60€years€old,€to€assure€that€the€grantor€could€convey€good€andÐ l  Ðmarketable€title€to€the€grantee.€Ð X  ÐÌà  àAmos€died€testate€on€September€10,€2007.€€On€that€date€the€required€survey€had€not€beenÐ à0  Ðcompleted.€Ð Ì ÐÌà  àHis€will,€dated€March€10,€2000,€bequeathed€all€of€his€personal€property€and€ð ðð8ðany€moniesÐ ¤ô ÐI€may€have€at€the€time€of€my€deathðð€to€his€housekeeper,€Alice.€Amos€devised€and€bequeathedÐ à Ðð ðÔ_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ôðð€and€the€remainder€of€his€estate€equally€to€his€children€Betty€and€Dale.€€His€willÐ |Ì Ðreferred€specifically€to€the€recorded€deed€by€which€Amos€obtained€title€to€Ô_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ô€on€FebruaryÐ h¸ Ð1,€1942.€€Alice€was€appointed€personal€representative€of€his€estate.€€Ð T¤ ÐÌà  àThe€survey€of€Ô_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ô€was€completed€on€September€15,€2007€and€confirmed€theÐ ,| Ðaccuracy€of€the€description€of€the€1942€deed.€Ð h ÐÌà  àAlice,€as€personal€representative,€conveyed€ð ðÔ_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ôðð€to€John€on€the€scheduled€closingÐ ð@ Ðdate,€October€1,€2007.Ð Ü, ÐÌà  àSection€1.301,€Estates€and€Trusts€Article,€Maryland€Code,€provides€that€all€property€of€aÐ ´ Ðdecedent€passes€directly€to€the€personal€representative€who€shall€hold€title€for€administration€andÐ   ð Ðdistribution.Ð Œ!Ü  ÐÌà  àSection€7„401(v)€provides€that€a€personal€representative€may€perform€the€contracts€of€theÐ d#´" Ðdecedent€that€continue€as€obligations€of€the€estate,€and€execute€and€deliver€deeds€and€otherÐ P$ # Ðdocuments€under€circumstances€as€the€contract€may€provide.Ð <%Œ $ ÐÌà  àò òWho€is€entitled€to€the€proceeds€of€the€sale€of€Ô_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ô?€Ð 'd"& ÐÑ  ÑÌòŒòòŒòà  àWhy?Ð ì(<$( ÐÝ‚ ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€ô­òXXäŒÔÔ€ô­òòô­ÔÔ€ôÝ@òòô­ÔÔ€ ôðóòòôÝ@ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ X+Xò ôðóÔÔ€Xn½ XX X+ÔÝ‚ ÿÿÿ8ÝÝ  ÝòŒòóŒóóŒóóŒóó ó݃ ÿÿ8ñ8݌̌Ô€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒX XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ‚ ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€ô­òXXäŒÔÔ€ô­òòô­ÔÔ€ôÝ@òòô­ÔÔ€ ôðóòòôÝ@ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ X+Xò ôðóÔÔ€Xn½ XX X+ÔÝ‚ ÿÿÿÌ9ÝÝ  Ý݃ ÿÿÌ9­:݌̌Ô€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒX XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÝ‚ ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€ô­òXXäŒÔÔ€ô­òòô­ÔÔ€ôÝ@òòô­ÔÔ€ ôðóòòôÝ@ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ X+Xò ôðóÔÔ€Xn½ XX X+ÔÝ‚ ÿÿÿy;ÝÝ  ÝÓ  Óò ò݃ ÿÿy;Z<݌Р¤+ô&+ ЌԀXn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒX XXn½ÔÑ  ÑÝ  ÝREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1€Ð ° ÐÌòŒòóŒóó óÓ  Óà  àòòDoctrine€of€Equitable€Conversionóó€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àAlice€is€entitled€to€retain€the€proceeds€of€the€sale€of€Ô_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ô€under€the€doctrine€ofÐ `° Ðequitable€conversion€because€the€bequest€to€her€uncle€Amosðð€will€provided€her€with€ð ðall€monies,ððÐ L œ Ðand€Betty€and€Dale€will€take€nothing€because€the€property€was€validly€transferred€to€John.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà  àIn€Maryland,€when€two€parties€enter€into€a€written€contract€for€the€sale€of€land€with€aÐ  ` Ðspecified€further€date€for€the€closing€of€the€sale,€the€doctrine€of€equitable€conversion€applies.€€TheÐ ü L  Ðdoctrine€of€equitable€conversion€states€that,€as€of€the€date€of€the€land€sale€contract,€the€buyer€is€theÐ è 8  Ðequitable€owner€of€the€land,€and€the€seller€is€the€equitable€owner€of€the€purchase€price.€€At€closing,Ð Ô$  Ðtitle€to€the€land€transfers€to€the€buyer,€who€is€already€the€equitable€owner€of€the€land,€and€the€buyerÐ À  Ðnow€becomes€the€legal€owner€of€the€land€upon€lawful€execution€and€delivery€of€the€deed.€€The€sellerÐ ¬ü  Ðthen€obtains€legal€title€to€the€purchase€monies,€which€he€already€equitable€owned€under€the€doctrineÐ ˜è  Ðof€equitable€conversion.€Ð „Ô  ÐÌà  àWhen€land€is€sold€in€Maryland,€the€seller€makes€two€promises€to€the€buyer€at€closing.€€First,Ð \¬ Ðthat€he€will€convey€marketable€title€as€of€the€date€of€closing,€and€second,€that€there€are€noÐ H˜ Ðmisrepresentations€of€material€fact€in€the€contract€or€deed.€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àWhen€a€seller€dies€during€the€period€between€his€land€sale€contract€and€the€closing€date,€theÐ  \ Ðpersonal€administrator€becomes€the€equitable€owner€of€the€purchase€price€on€behalf€of€the€seller„Ð øH Ðdecedent.€€Once€the€personal€representative€receives€the€proceeds€of€the€sale,€the€personalÐ ä4 Ðrepresentative€is€required€to€distribute€the€funds€as€dictated€by€the€testatorððs€will.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àIn€this€case,€Amos€entered€into€the€written€contract€with€John€on€June€21,€2007,€and€on€thatÐ ¨ø Ðdate,€Amos€became€the€equitable€owner€of€the€purchase€price€and€John€became€the€equitable€ownerÐ ”ä Ðof€the€property.€€When€Amos€and€John€amended€the€contract€to€extend€the€closing€date,€theyÐ €Ð Ðcorrectly€amended€the€contract€in€writing,€as€required€by€the€Statute€of€Frauds.€Johnððs€requirementÐ l¼ Ðthat€the€property€be€surveyed€is€a€reasonable€request€as€Maryland€law€requires€that€Amos€conveyÐ X ¨ Ðmarketable€title.€€A€title€search€can€assist€the€parties€in€determining€whether€Amos€had€marketableÐ D!” Ðtitle€to€convey€to€John.€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àAlthough€Amosðð€will€is€dated€prior€to€the€sale€contract,€Amos€may€freely€alienate€any€landÐ $X" Ðthat€he€owns€in€fee€simple€absolute,€and€his€will€cannot€stop€him€from€doing€so.€€Until€Amos€dies,Ð ô$D # ÐBetty€and€Sale€do€not€have€any€interest€in€Ô_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ô€as€it€belongs€solely€to€Amos€in€fee.€€OnceÐ à%0!$ ÐAmos€signed€the€land€sale€contract,€he€effectively€transferred€equitable€ownership€of€the€land€to€JohnÐ Ì&"% Ð(as€described€above€pursuant€to€the€doctrine€of€equitable€conversion),€and€Amos€and€any€deviseesÐ ¸'#& Ðunder€his€will,€were€now€only€the€equitable€owners€of€the€purchase€price.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àAlice€acted€correctly€as€the€personal€representative€when€she€completed€the€closing€andÐ |*Ì%) Ðconveyed€the€land€to€John.€€As€personal€representative,€she€is€the€equitable€owner€of€the€proceedsÐ h+¸&* Ðfrom€the€sale€on€behalf€of€Amosðð€estate,€and€she€is€required€to€distribute€the€funds€from€the€sale€asÐ ° Ðdictated€by€Amosðð€will.€€The€facts€clearly€state€that€Amosðð€will€devised€ð ðany€monies€I€may€have€atÐ œì Ðthe€time€of€my€deathðð€to€Alice.€€Because€Amos€was€the€equitable€owner€of€the€purchase€price€at€theÐ ˆØ Ðtime€of€his€death,€the€proceeds€from€the€sale€go€to€Alice€and€Betty€and€Dale€get€nothing.€€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àTherefore,€under€the€doctrine€of€equitable€conversion,€Alice€is€entitled€to€retain€the€proceedsÐ L œ Ðof€the€sale€of€Ô_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ô€under€Amosðð€will,€and€Betty€and€Dale€are€not€entitled€to€anything.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ  ` ÐÌà  àThis€questions€regards€when€does€the€title€to€the€property€ð ðconvertðð€to€personal€property.Ð è 8  ÐWhen€two€parties€enter€into€a€contract€for€the€sale/purchase€of€real€property,€it€is€deemed€enforceableÐ Ô$  Ðfrom€the€time€the€contract€is€made,€not€the€date€of€closing.€€Thus,€the€rights€and€duties€of€the€partiesÐ À  Ðactually€change€prior€to€the€actual€physical€possession€that€occurs€after€closing.€€Here,€even€throughÐ ¬ü  Ðthere€was€an€amendment€to€the€original€contract,€that€amendment€merely€delayed€the€closing€dateÐ ˜è  Ðand€was€mutually€agreed€upon€by€both€parties.€€The€amendment€did€nothing€to€change€the€rights€andÐ „Ô  Ðobligations€of€the€parties€in€the€original€contract.€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àHere,€on€June€21,€Betty€and€Daleððs€rights€to€Cloverleaf€were€extinguished.€€The€fact€thatÐ H˜ ÐAmos€included€both€of€them€in€his€will€to€convey€Cloverleaf€is€irrelevant.€€Wills€are€only€executedÐ 4„ Ðupon€death,€and€if€the€property€that€has€been€promised€to€a€party€in€a€will€is€not€around€after€the€willÐ  p Ðis€executed€then€the€beneficiary€of€the€will€is€left€with€no€recourse.€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àAt€the€time€of€contract,€under€the€doctrine€of€equitable€conversion,€the€proceeds€of€theÐ ä4 Ðcontract€are€the€property€of€the€housekeeper,€Alice.€€Under€ðð7„401(v),€she€was€legally€obligated€toÐ Ð  Ðcontinue€forth€with€the€land€sale,€and,€according€to€the€will€dated€March€10,€2000,€proceeds€fromÐ ¼  Ða€land€sale€are€considered€personal€property.€€Alice€is€entitled€to€the€proceeds€from€the€sale€ofÐ ¨ø ÐÔ_ÔCloverwoodÔ_Ô.€€Ð ”ä Ðò òÐ  €Ð Ðà@%ìàQUESTION€3ó óˆÐ ° ÐÌÌÓ$eî-… °œX$Óà S àPhil€and€Rhonda€were€married€on€May€13,€2000.€€Rhonda€gave€birth€to€their€son,€Arlen,€onÐ tÄ ÐOctober€11,€2001.€Arlen€was€diagnosed€with€a€nerve€disorder€a€few€months€after€his€birth,€andÐ `° ÐRhonda€stopped€working€to€become€a€full„time€care€giver€and€stay„at„home€mom.€€Shortly€thereafter,Ð L œ ÐRhonda€noticed€a€change€in€Philððs€behavior.€€He€became€secretive€and€often€accused€Rhonda€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðvarious€nefarious€deeds.€€In€2005,€Phil€moved€his€things€into€the€guest€bedroom€and€would€not€haveÐ $ t Ðmarital€relations€stating€that€he€ð ðcouldnððt€stomachðð€her.€€Ð  ` ÐÌà S àRhonda€began€dreaming€of€leaving€Phil€and€purchased€lottery€tickets€weekly€in€the€hope€ofÐ è 8  Ðwinning€the€money€to€do€so.€€On€September€30,€2007,€Rhonda€won€one€million€dollars€paid€as€anÐ Ô$  Ðannuity€of€$50,000€per€year€for€20€years.€€A€few€weeks€later,€Phil€shoved€Rhonda€while€ArlenÐ À  Ðwatched€and€told€her€she€could€not€leave€him€because€he€would€get€her€money€if€she€did.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌò òà S àThe€next€day,€Rhonda,€upset€and€worried,€comes€to€you,€a€licensed€Maryland€attorney,Ð „Ô  Ðand€asks€if€there€is€any€way€to€immediately€end€her€marriage,€gain€sole€custody€of€Arlen,€forceÐ pÀ ÐPhil€to€pay€child€support,€and€deny€him€any€of€her€lottery€winnings.Ð \¬ Ðó óÐ H˜ Ðò òà S àWhat€would€you€advise€Rhonda?€€Discuss€fully.Ð 4„ ÐÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÌREPRESENTATIVEó ó€ò òANSWER€1ó óÐ øH ÐÓ}]ÓÌò òòòDivorceÐ Ô$ Ðó óóóÌà S àA€Maryland€Circuit€Court€will€have€jurisdiction€over€a€divorce€action€where€the€groundsÐ ¬ü Ðoccurred€in€Maryland€or€where€one€of€the€parties€has€been€a€resident€of€Maryland€for€at€least€oneÐ ˜è Ðyear.€€The€facts€do€not€state€whether€Rhonda€and€Phil€lived€in€Maryland€during€this€time;€however,Ð „Ô Ðif€they€did,€a€Maryland€Circuit€Court€could€hear€the€divorce€action.Ð pÀ ÐÑ  ÑÌà S àI€would€first€explain€to€Rhonda€the€difference€between€a€limited€divorce€and€an€absoluteÐ H!˜ Ðdivorce.€€A€limited€divorce€is€essentially€a€legal€separation,€where€the€parties€live€separately€and€doÐ 4"„  Ðnot€Ô_ÔcohabitateÔ_Ô€for€a€specified€amount€of€time.€€An€award€of€a€limited€divorce€will€allow€the€court€toÐ  #p! Ðaward€temporary€child€support€and€alimony€payments,€but€property€is€not€divided€and€the€divorceÐ  $\" Ðis€not€final.€€An€absolute€divorce,€on€the€other€hand,€is€a€final€and€permanent€divorce,€and€the€courtÐ ø$H # Ðawards€child€support,€alimony,€and€child€custody,€as€well€as€distributing€the€marital€and€Ô_ÔnonmaritalÔ_ÔÐ ä%4!$ Ðproperty€between€the€parties.€€In€this€situation,€Rhonda€should€obtain€an€absolute€divorce€and€notÐ Ð& "% Ða€limited€divorce.Ð ¼' #& ÐÌà S àRhonda€has€several€possible€grounds€for€an€absolute€divorce.€€Rhonda€may€file€for€anÐ ”)ä$( Ðabsolute€divorce€based€on€fault€grounds€of€cruelty,€excessively€vicious€conduct,€and€constructiveÐ €*Ð%) Ðdesertion,€or€based€on€no„fault€grounds€of€separation€for€more€than€2€years.€€If€Rhonda€files€for€anÐ l+¼&* ÐÔ_Ôabsolute€divorce€based€on€cruelty€grounds,€she€will€need€to€show€that€Phil€accused€Rhonda€ofÐ ° Ðnefarious€deeds.€€The€grounds€of€excessively€vicious€conduct€can€be€shown€by€Philððs€pushingÐ œì ÐRhonda€in€front€of€their€child.€€However,€because€the€shove€only€occurred€once,€this€will€not€likelyÐ ˆØ Ðbe€considered€ð ðexcessivelyðð€vicious,€and€would€better€qualify€as€grounds€of€ð ðcruelty.ðð€€When€PhilÐ tÄ Ðmoved€his€belongings€into€the€guest€bedroom€and€ceased€having€marital€relations€with€Rhonda,Ð `° ÐPhilððs€actions€constituted€constructive€desertion.€€Constructive€desertion€exists€where€one€spouseÐ L œ Ðrefuses€to€have€marital€relations€with€the€other€spouse€and€attempts€to€cease€cohabitation.€€AlthoughÐ 8 ˆ ÐPhil€and€Rhonda€live€under€the€same€roof,€Phil€has€constructively€deserted€Rhonda.€€Furthermore,Ð $ t ÐPhilððs€moving€into€the€guest€bedroom€in€2005could€be€considered€the€beginning€of€a€separation;Ð  ` Ðhowever,€the€court€usually€does€not€consider€a€couple€to€be€ð ðliving€separatelyðð€where€the€couple€isÐ ü L  Ðsimply€residing€in€separate€bedrooms€under€the€same€roof.Ð è 8  ÐÌÑ  Ñà S àTherefore,€Rhondaððs€best€grounds€for€obtaining€an€absolute€divorce€are€cruelty€andÐ À  Ðconstructive€desertion.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌò òòòChild€CustodyÐ „Ô  Ðó óóóÌà S àRhonda€will€probably€be€able€to€obtain€physical€and€legal€custody€of€Arlen.Ð \¬ ÐÑ  ÑÌà S àIn€Maryland,€the€court€awards€custody€based€on€a€ð ðbest€interests€of€the€childðð€standard.€€ThisÐ 4„ Ðstandard€includes€factors€such€as:€the€childððs€preference€(provided€the€child€is€old€enough€to€stateÐ  p Ða€preference),€the€environment€of€each€home,€the€parenting€ability€of€each€parent,€the€age€of€theÐ  \ Ðchild,€and€any€other€factors€the€court€deems€relevant€to€providing€a€stable€and€safe€home€for€theÐ øH Ðchild.Ð ä4 ÐÌà S àIn€this€case,€Phil€shoved€Rhonda€in€front€of€Arlen,€which€shows€that€he€does€not€have€goodÐ ¼  Ðparenting€skills.€€Furthermore,€Rhonda€has€been€the€main€caretaker€for€Arlen€in€his€disabled€stateÐ ¨ø Ðfor€his€entire€life.€€Arlen€if€now€7.5€years€old,€and€likely€to€be€able€to€express€a€preference€for€whichÐ ”ä Ðparent€he€would€like€to€live€with.€€Rhonda€is€better€aware€of€Arlenððs€medical€needs€and€more€capableÐ €Ð Ðof€providing€him€with€a€stable€and€safe€environment.Ð l¼ ÐÌà S àBecause€Rhondaððs€custody€of€Arlen€is€a€better€fit€with€the€ð ðbest€interests€of€the€childððÐ D!” Ðstandard,€Rhonda€will€likely€obtain€physical€and€legal€custody€of€Arlen€based€on€these€factors.Ð 0"€  ÐÌÌÑ  Ñò òòòChild€Support€Ð ô$D # Ðó óóóÌà S àRhonda€will€probably€be€able€to€obtain€a€child€support€payment€from€Phil.Ð Ì&"% ÐÑ  ÑÌà S àThe€court€also€awards€child€support€based€on€a€ð ðbest€interests€of€the€childðð€standard,€andÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€court€takes€into€account€an€ð ðincome€sharesðð€ratio€when€determining€child€support€payments.€€PhilÐ )à$( Ðwas€the€familyððs€breadwinner€while€Rhonda€stayed€home,€and€the€court€will€award€Rhonda€a€childÐ |*Ì%) Ðsupport€payment€to€keep€Arlen€at€the€same€standard€of€living€that€he€had€during€the€marriage.€€PhilÐ h+¸&* Ðwill€be€required€to€provide€payments€for€Arlenððs€food,€shelter,€clothing,€and€medical€care,€andÐ ° Ðbecause€Arlen€is€disabled,€the€court€may€award€child€support€payments€even€after€Arlen€turns€18,Ð œì Ðfor€his€continued€maintenance.Ð ˆØ ÐÌÑ  Ñò òòòProperty€DistributionÐ `° Ðó óóóÌà S àRhonda€probably€will€not€be€able€to€keep€Phil€from€getting€any€of€her€lottery€winningsÐ 8 ˆ Ðbecause€they€will€be€considered€marital€property€and€divided€between€the€spouses.Ð $ t ÐÑ  ÑÌà S àMaryland€uses€a€system€of€ð ðequitable€distributionðð€to€classify€and€divide€marital€propertyÐ ü L  Ðbetween€the€spouses.€€Marital€property€is€defined€as€any€property€that€was€brought€in€by€eitherÐ è 8  Ðspouse€during€the€marriage.€€Non„marital€property€includes€any€gift€or€bequest€to€a€single€spouse,Ð Ô$  Ðor€stocks€and€bonds€that€appreciated€without€any€active€maintenance€by€the€spouse€during€theÐ À  Ðmarriage.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà S àIn€this€case,€the€court€will€classify€Rhondaððs€lottery€annuity€as€marital€property,€because€sheÐ „Ô  Ðpurchased€the€lottery€tickets€during€the€marriage.€€Furthermore,€because€Rhonda€was€a€stay€at€homeÐ pÀ Ðmom,€she€must€have€bought€the€lottery€tickets€with€Philððs€salary,€because€Rhonda€did€not€bring€inÐ \¬ Ðany€salary€for€the€family.€€The€court€will€classify€Rhondaððs€winnings€as€marital€property€and€willÐ H˜ Ðevaluate€this€property€in€its€equitable€distribution€between€the€spouses.€€Because€Rhonda€does€notÐ 4„ Ðwork,€the€court€will€likely€provide€her€with€pendent€elite,€or€temporary,€alimony€payments€from€Phil,Ð  p Ðto€allow€her€time€to€obtain€skills€and€find€a€job.€€Rhondaððs€entitlement€to€alimony€may€be€partiallyÐ  \ Ðoffset€by€the€portion€of€lottery€winnings€to€which€she€is€entitled€under€equitable€distribution.Ð øH ÐÌò òòòSeparation€AgreementÐ Ð  Ðó óóóÌà S àIn€order€to€avoid€having€the€court€classify€her€property€as€marital€property€and€divide€it€withÐ ¨ø ÐPhil,€Rhonda€should€consider€entering€into€a€separation€agreement€with€Phil.€€A€separationÐ ”ä Ðagreement€that€is€merged€into€the€divorce€award€is€presumed€valid,€and€Rhonda€could€offer€to€takeÐ €Ð Ðzero€alimony€in€return€for€being€able€to€keep€her€entire€lottery€annuity.€€Phil€will€need€separateÐ l¼ Ðcounsel€in€order€to€review€and€sign€a€separation€agreement,€as€I€would€be€conflicted€out€ofÐ X ¨ Ðrepresenting€both€Phil€and€Rhonda,€since€they€have€opposite€interests€in€this€matter.€€A€separationÐ D!” Ðagreement€can€save€both€parties€time€and€money.€€Any€child€support€in€a€separation€agreement€mayÐ 0"€  Ðalways€be€modified€upon€petition€to€the€court.Ð #l! ÐÌà S àI€would€advise€Rhonda€(R)€of€the€following€issues:Ð ô$D # ÐÌÑ  Ñò òòòGrounds€for€DivorceÐ Ì&"% Ðó óóóÌòòLimited€Divorceóó€ð!ð€is€a€separation€but€does€not€end€the€marriage.€€The€grounds€include:€cruelty,Ð ¤(ô#' Ðexcessively€vicious€conduct,€desertion,€voluntary€separation.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÑ  ÑÐ |*Ì%) ÐÑ  ÑòòCrueltyóó€ð!ð€Here€R,€has€grounds€for€a€limited€divorce€because€Philððs€(P)€behavior€toward€her€is€cruel.€Ð ° Ðâ âHe€made€accusations€of€nefarious€deeds,€he€moved€out€of€the€marital€bedroom,€he€refused€to€haveÐ œì Ðmarital€relations,€and€told€R€he€ð ðcouldnððt€stomach€her.ððÐ ˆØ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòExcessively€Vicious€Conductóó€ð!ð€Conduct€which€threatens€the€physical€and€emotional€safety€of€aÐ `° Ðspouse€such€that€it€makes€continuing€the€marriage€impossible.€€Here€R€has€grounds€because€P€shovedÐ L œ Ðher,€which€is€physical€abuse,€in€front€of€their€son,€Arlen€and€threatened€her€when€he€said€ð ðshe€couldÐ 8 ˆ Ðleave€him€because€he€would€get€her€money€if€she€did.ðð€Ð $ t ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòAbsolute€Divorceóó€ð!ð€òòCruelty€and€Excessively€Vicious€Conductóó€are€also€ground€for€an€immediate€andÐ ü L  Ðabsolute€divorce.€€R€Should€be€able€to€end€her€marriage€with€P€immediately€based€upon€the€aboveÐ è 8  Ðdescribed€acts€by€P.Ð Ô$  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑOther€Grounds€ð!ð€there€is€no€evidence€that€O€has€committed€òòadulteryóó.€€He€hasnððt€òòdeserted€óóthe€familyÐ ¬ü  Ðbecause€he€is€still€living€in€the€house.€€òòVoluntary€Separationóó€has€not€occurred€because€P€hasÐ ˜è  Ðthreatened€R€that€she€canððt€leave€him€and€they€are€not€living€separate€and€apart.€€The€grounds€for€aÐ „Ô  Ðòò2€year€involuntary€separationóó€do€not€begin€to€accrue€until€the€parties€are€living€in€separate€houses€andÐ pÀ Ðapart€without€cohabitation.€€Here,€R€and€P€are€still€living€in€the€same€house.€Ð \¬ ÐòòSole€Custodyóó€ð!ð€the€custody€of€children€is€measured€by€what€is€in€the€best€interest€of€the€child.€€Here,Ð H˜ Ðit€may€be€Arlenððs€best€interest€for€his€mother€R€to€have€sole€custody€for€the€following€reasons:€ArlenÐ 4„ Ðis€handicapped€potentially€making€it€difficult€for€him€to€travel€easily€between€two€homes.€€R€hasÐ  p Ðbeen€his€primary€care€taker€since€he€became€disabled€a€few€months€after€his€birth€when€she€gave€upÐ  \ Ðworking€at€became€his€full„time€caretaker€and€a€homemaker.€€Philððs€character€makes€him€suitableÐ øH Ðto€have€joint€or€sole€custody.€€He€is€unable€to€communicate€civilly€with€R.€€He€was€physicallyÐ ä4 Ðabusive€to€her€when€he€pushed€her.€€He€is€secretive€and€emotionally€abusive.€€These€characteristicsÐ Ð  Ðwould€make€him€an€unsuitable€candidate€for€sole€or€joint€custody.Ð ¼  ÐÑ  ÑÌÌÑ  ÑòòChild€Supportóó€ð!ð€both€parents€have€a€duty€to€jointly€and€severally€support€their€children,€usually€untilÐ €Ð Ð18,€or€if€in€high€school,€until€graduation,€unless€the€child€is€emancipated.€€In€the€case€of€disabledÐ l¼ Ðchildren,€support€can€continue€until€the€adult€child€if€self„supporting.€€Here,€P€and€R€are€bothÐ X ¨ Ðresponsible€for€the€support€of€Arlen.€€MD€child€enforcement€guidelines€must€be€applied€by€the€judge.€Ð D!” ÐAdjustments€between€the€parents€depending€upon€who€has€custody€and€the€needs€of€the€child.€€Here,Ð 0"€  ÐR€will€have€sole€custody,€so€P€is€responsible€for€a€greater€share€of€the€child€support.€Ð #l! ÐÑ  ÑÌÌÑ  ÑòòMarital€Propertyóó€ð!ð€is€all€property€acquired€by€one€or€both€parties€during€the€marriage€regardless€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðtitle.€€Its€division€is€a€three€step€process:€òòclassification€what€is€and€isnððt€marital€property,€its€valueÐ Ì&"% Ðand€an€equitable€distribution.óó€€Here,€the€òòlottery€ticketóó€was€bought€by€R€during€the€marriage€withÐ ¸'#& Ðmarital€assets,€therefore€it€is€marital€property.€€Its€value€will€be€assessed€at€the€time€of€the€divorceÐ ¤(ô#' Ðdecree,€so€any€interest€will€be€included.€€R€should€be€entitled€a€greater€share€of€the€distribution,Ð )à$( Ðbecause€factors€such€as€relative€needs€of€the€parties,€each€parties€ability€to€be€self„supporting,€andÐ |*Ì%) Ðthe€events€leading€up€to€the€divorce€are€taken€into€account.€€Here,€R€was€a€stay€at€home€mom€withoutÐ h+¸&* Ðincome€of€her€own,€she€is€unable€to€be€self„supporting€while€she€stays€home€to€care€for€a€disabledÐ ° Ðchild.€€Finally,€it€was€Pððs€vicious€and€cruel€behavior€which€lead€to€the€divorce.€€While€he€will€getÐ œì Ðsome€of€the€winnings,€it€will€be€less€that€50%.€€Ð ˆØ ÐÑ  ÑÌÌÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Ð L œ Ðó óÓ  ÓÌà S àI€would€advise€Rhonda€(R)€of€the€following€issues:Ð $ t ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñò òòòGrounds€for€DivorceÐ ü L  Ðó óóóÌòòLimited€Divorceóó€ð!ð€is€a€separation€but€does€not€end€the€marriage.€€The€grounds€include:€cruelty,Ð Ô$  Ðexcessively€vicious€conduct,€desertion,€voluntary€separation.Ð À  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòCrueltyóó€ð!ð€Here€R,€has€grounds€for€a€limited€divorce€because€Philððs€(P)€behavior€toward€her€isÐ ˜è  Ðcruel.€€He€made€accusations€of€nefarious€deeds,€he€moved€out€of€the€marital€bedroom,€he€refusedÐ „Ô  Ðto€have€marital€relations,€and€told€R€he€ð ðcouldnððt€stomach€her.ððÐ pÀ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòExcessively€Vicious€Conductóó€ð!ð€Conduct€which€threatens€the€physical€and€emotional€safety€of€aÐ H˜ Ðspouse€such€that€it€makes€continuing€the€marriage€impossible.€€Here€R€has€grounds€because€PÐ 4„ Ðshoved€her,€which€is€physical€abuse,€in€front€of€their€son,€Arlen€and€threatened€her€when€he€saidÐ  p Ðð ðshe€could€leave€him€because€he€would€get€her€money€if€she€did.ðð€Ð  \ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑòòAbsolute€Divorceóó€ð!ð€òòCruelty€and€Excessively€Vicious€Conductóó€are€also€ground€for€an€immediateÐ ä4 Ðand€absolute€divorce.€€R€Should€be€able€to€end€her€marriage€with€P€immediately€based€upon€theÐ Ð  Ðabove€described€acts€by€P.Ð ¼  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑOther€Grounds€ð!ð€there€is€no€evidence€that€O€has€committed€òòadulteryóó.€€He€hasnððt€òòdeserted€óótheÐ ”ä Ðfamily€because€he€is€still€living€in€the€house.€€òòVoluntary€Separationóó€has€not€occurred€because€PÐ €Ð Ðhas€threatened€R€that€she€canððt€leave€him€and€they€are€not€living€separate€and€apart.€€The€groundsÐ l¼ Ðfor€a€òò2€year€involuntary€separationóó€do€not€begin€to€accrue€until€the€parties€are€living€in€separateÐ X ¨ Ðhouses€and€apart€without€cohabitation.€€Here,€R€and€P€are€still€living€in€the€same€house.€Ð D!” ÐòòÌSole€Custodyóó€ð!ð€the€custody€of€children€is€measured€by€what€is€in€the€best€interest€of€the€child.€Ð #l! ÐHere,€it€may€be€Arlenððs€best€interest€for€his€mother€R€to€have€sole€custody€for€the€followingÐ $X" Ðreasons:€Arlen€is€handicapped€potentially€making€it€difficult€for€him€to€travel€easily€between€twoÐ ô$D # Ðhomes.€€R€has€been€his€primary€care€taker€since€he€became€disabled€a€few€months€after€his€birthÐ à%0!$ Ðwhen€she€gave€up€working€at€became€his€full„time€caretaker€and€a€homemaker.€€Philððs€characterÐ Ì&"% Ðmakes€him€suitable€to€have€joint€or€sole€custody.€€He€is€unable€to€communicate€civilly€with€R.€Ð ¸'#& ÐHe€was€physically€abusive€to€her€when€he€pushed€her.€€He€is€secretive€and€emotionally€abusive.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐThese€characteristics€would€make€him€an€unsuitable€candidate€for€sole€or€joint€custody.Ð )à$( Ðâ âÐ |*Ì%) ÐòòChild€Supportóó€ð!ð€both€parents€have€a€duty€to€jointly€and€severally€support€their€children,€usuallyÐ ° Ðâ âuntil€18,€or€if€in€high€school,€until€graduation,€unless€the€child€is€emancipated.€€In€the€case€ofÐ œì Ðdisabled€children,€support€can€continue€until€the€adult€child€is€self„supporting.€€Here,€P€and€R€areÐ ˆØ Ðboth€responsible€for€the€support€of€Arlen.€€MD€child€enforcement€guidelines€must€be€applied€byÐ tÄ Ðthe€judge.€€Adjustments€between€the€parents€are€made€depending€upon€who€has€custody€and€theÐ `° Ðneeds€of€the€child.€€Here,€R€will€have€sole€custody,€so€P€is€responsible€for€a€greater€share€of€theÐ L œ Ðchild€support.€Ð 8 ˆ ÐÌòòMarital€Propertyóó€ð!ð€is€all€property€acquired€by€one€or€both€parties€during€the€marriage€regardlessÐ  ` Ðof€title.€€Its€division€is€a€three€step€process:€òòclassification€what€is€and€isnððt€marital€property,€itsÐ ü L  Ðvalue€and€an€equitable€distribution.óó€€Here,€the€òòlottery€ticketóó€was€bought€by€R€during€the€marriageÐ è 8  Ðwith€marital€assets,€therefore€it€is€marital€property.€€Its€value€will€be€assessed€at€the€time€of€theÐ Ô$  Ðdivorce€decree,€so€any€interest€will€be€included.€€R€should€be€entitled€a€greater€share€of€theÐ À  Ðdistribution,€because€factors€such€as€relative€needs€of€the€parties,€each€parties€ability€to€be€self„Ð ¬ü  Ðsupporting,€and€the€events€leading€up€to€the€divorce€are€taken€into€account.€€Here,€R€was€a€stay€atÐ ˜è  Ðhome€mom€without€income€of€her€own,€she€is€unable€to€be€self„supporting€while€she€stays€homeÐ „Ô  Ðto€care€for€a€disabled€child.€€Finally,€it€was€Pððs€vicious€and€cruel€behavior€which€lead€to€theÐ pÀ Ðdivorce.€€While€he€will€get€some€of€the€winnings,€it€will€be€less€that€50%.€€Ð  \¬ Ðà@%ìàò òQUESTION€4ó óˆÐ ° ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€Paula€Plaintiff's€Labrador€retriever,€Old€Yeller,€won€"Best€In€Show"€at€the€NorthministerÐ ˆØ ÐDog€Show€for€the€third€consecutive€year.€€Plaintiff,€a€resident€of€the€State€of€Westover,€wasÐ tÄ Ðtraveling€home€through€Maryland€with€her€pet€when€she€noticed€that€Old€Yeller€seemed€unwell.€Ð `° ÐShe€stopped€at€the€Maryland€office€of€Dan€Defendant,€a€veterinarian,€who€diagnosed€Old€YellerÐ L œ Ðas€suffering€from€fatigue.€€Defendant's€diagnosis€was€incorrect.€€Three€days€later,€in€Westover,Ð 8 ˆ ÐOld€Yeller€died€of€an€ailment€which,€if€properly€diagnosed,€would€have€been€easily€cured.€€Ð $ t ÐÌPlaintiff€filed€suit€against€Defendant€in€the€Circuit€Court€in€Westover€alleging€that€DefendantÐ ü L  Ðwas€negligent€in€his€care€and€treatment€of€Old€Yeller.€€Plaintiff€arranged€for€the€summons€andÐ è 8  Ðcomplaint€to€be€served€on€Defendant€by€Sam,€a€private€process€server.€€Sam€took€the€summons€toÐ Ô$  ÐDefendant's€office,€found€it€closed€and€left€the€documents€at€the€front€door.€€Sam€filed€a€return€ofÐ À  Ðprocess€in€the€Westover€Circuit€Court€stating€that€he€had€delivered€the€summons€and€complaintÐ ¬ü  Ðto€Defendant's€place€of€business,€found€it€closed€and€left€the€documents€there.€€Defendant€did€notÐ ˜è  Ðfile€an€answer€and,€on€May€1,€2007,€the€Westover€Circuit€Court€entered€a€judgment€by€defaultÐ „Ô  Ðagainst€him€for€$35,000.Ð pÀ ÐÌOn€June€1,€2007,€Plaintiff€filed€a€properly€authenticated€copy€of€the€judgment€against€DefendantÐ H˜ Ðin€the€Circuit€Court€for€Baltimore€County,€where€Defendant€resides€and€has€his€place€of€business.€Ð 4„ ÐDefendant€has€retained€you,€an€attorney€practicing€in€Maryland,€to€prevent€the€judgment€fromÐ  p Ðbeing€enforced€against€him.€€Ð  \ ÐÌDefendant€was€aware€of€the€lawsuit€pending€against€him€in€Westover,€but€took€no€steps€toÐ ä4 Ðdefend€himself.€€Defendant's€parents€reside€in€Westover€and€he€visits€them€on€a€monthly€basis.€Ð Ð  ÐHe€is€not€licensed€as€a€veterinarian€in€Westover€nor€does€he€practice€there,€although€he€advertisesÐ ¼  Ðin€several€regional€publications€that€are€distributed€in€Maryland,€Westover€and€surroundingÐ ¨ø Ðstates.€€€Ð ”ä ÐÌò òBased€on€these€facts,€what€steps€would€you€take€on€Defendant's€behalf?€€Describe€theÐ l¼ Ðgrounds€for€each€step.€€How€is€the€court€likely€to€rule?€€Explain€your€answer€thoroughly.Ð X ¨ Ðó óÌASSUME€THAT€THE€PROCEDURAL€AND€SUBSTANTIVE€LAW€OF€WESTOVER€ISÐ 0"€  ÐIDENTICAL€TO€THAT€OF€MARYLAND.€Ð #l! ÐÌÓ  Óà @ àò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð ô$D # Ðó óÓ²Óà S àÌÌStep€1:€I€would€attempt€to€vacate€the€default€judgment€on€the€basis€of€improper€and€defectiveÐ ¸'#& Ðservice.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌI€would€draft€a€motion€to€vacate€stating€that€Sam,€the€process€server,€had€incorrectly€tried€toÐ |*Ì%) Ðserve€my€client€and€thus€service€was€improper€and€ineffective€€Rule€2-535.€€In€accordance€withÐ h+¸&* ÐRule€2-121,€process€may€be€made€by€serving€the€defendant€personally,€or€by€leaving€a€copy€at€hisÐ ° Ðhome€with€the€defendant€or€a€person€of€suitable€age,€or€by€mailing€a€certified€copy€of€theÐ œì Ðsummons€and€complaint.€€Sam€did€not€comply€with€Rule€2-121,€as€he€just€nailed€and€posted€theÐ ˆØ Ðdocuments€to€Dan€Defendant's€workplace€door.€€Sam€did€not€try€to€serve€Dan€personally€at€hisÐ tÄ Ðhome.€€Service€was€thus€defective.€€I€would€also€ask€Dan€Defendant€when€and€how€he€found€outÐ `° Ðabout€the€pending€lawsuit.€€It€may€be€that€Dan€Defendant€has€never€received€a€full€set€of€theÐ L œ Ðsummons,€complaint€and€papers,€and€thus€has€not€had€a€full,€proper€opportunity€to€respond€andÐ 8 ˆ Ðhas€also€been€deprived€of€his€statutory€time€to€answer€the€complaint.Ð $ t ÐÌStep€2:€I€would€also€file€a€motion,€on€Dan€Defendant's€behalf,€stating€that€Westover€does€notÐ ü L  Ðhave€personal€jurisdiction€over€this€defendant€and€the€suit€should€thus€be€dismissed.€€InÐ è 8  Ðaccordance€with€Rule€6-103€of€Personal€Jurisdiction,€jurisdiction€may€be€obtained€in€Westover€ifÐ Ô$  Ðthe€act€that€allegedly€causes€the€tortious€injury€occurred€in€Westover.Ð À  ÐÌIf€the€"act"€occurred€outside€Westover,€Plaintiff€must€prove€that€the€defendant€has€a€sufficientÐ ˜è  Ðpersonal€nexus€to€Westover,€as€described€in€Rule€6-103.€€Here,€defendant€is€a€veterinarian€inÐ „Ô  ÐMaryland€and€is€not€even€licensed€to€practice€as€a€vet€in€Westover,€nor€does€he€practice€there.Ð pÀ ÐWhile€Plaintiff€may€argue€that€personal€jurisdiction€exists€because€Defendant€advertises€inÐ \¬ ÐWestover,€I€would€argue€that€mere€public€advertisements€do€not€establish€a€sufficient€nexus€toÐ H˜ ÐWestover€to€establish€personal€jurisdiction.€This€is€not€an€example€of€a€"persistent€course€ofÐ 4„ Ðconduct"€to€solidly€tie€Dan€to€Westover.€€Rule€6-103.Ð  p ÐÌAs€part€of€my€motion€for€lack€of€personal€jurisdiction,€I€would€argue€that€the€Defendant,€due€toÐ øH Ðineffective€and€improper€service€has€not€been€given€an€opportunity€to€respond€on€the€merits.€Ð ä4 ÐCourts€are€inclined€to€vacate€defaults€so€that€the€defendant€may€be€heard€in€Court€and€the€matterÐ Ð  Ðmay€be€tried€on€the€merits.Ð ¼  ÐÌI€would€not€argue€that€the€Westover€judgment€is€somehow€invalid,€as€foreign€judgments€areÐ ”ä Ðentitled€to€full€faith€and€credit€as€long€as€they€are€properly€enrolled€and€authenticated.Ð €Ð ÐÌÓ  Óà @ àò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ X ¨ ÐÓ†¾ÓÌRule€2-535€on€a€motion,€will€allow€Dan€(Defendant€party)€to€ask€the€court€to€exercise€its€revisoryÐ 0"€  Ðpower€and€control€over€the€Westover€Circuit€Court€default€judgment€against€Dan€for€$35,000.00.€Ð #l! ÐBecause€the€default€judgment€was€entered€on€May€1,€2007€and€after€30€days€Paula€(Plaintiff)€onÐ $X" ÐJune€1,€2007€filed€a€properly€authenticated€copy€of€the€judgment€against€Dan€in€the€Circuit€CourtÐ ô$D # Ðof€Baltimore€County,€as€counsel€for€Dan,€counsel€should€file€a€motion€under€Rule€2-535(b)€toÐ à%0!$ Ðpray€the€court€to€exercise€revisory€power€and€control€over€the€default€judgment€in€case€of€fraud,Ð Ì&"% Ðmistake,€or€irregularity€because€this€motion€can€be€filed€at€any€time,€and€not€30€days€as€otherwiseÐ ¸'#& Ðrequired€under€2-535(a).Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌDan€has€grounds€to€assert€that€Paula€lacked€personal€jurisdiction€(6-103)€over€Dan€since€DanÐ |*Ì%) Ðresides€and€has€his€place€of€business€in€Baltimore€county,€Maryland€and€not€in€the€StateÐ h+¸&* ÐWestover.€€Dan's€veterinary€office€is€in€Maryland€where€he€diagnosed€Old€Yeller.€€Rule€6-103Ð ° ÐMaryland's€long-arm€statute€states€that€jurisdiction€over€a€person€may€be€had€if€defendant€causesÐ œì Ðtortious€injury€in€the€State€or€outside€the€State€by€an€act€or€omission€outside€the€State€if€heÐ ˆØ Ðregularly€does€or€solicits€business,€engages€in€any€other€persistent€course€of€conduct€in€the€stateÐ tÄ Ðor€derives€substantial€revenue€from€goods,€food,€services,€or€manufactured€products€used€in€orÐ `° Ðconsumed€in€the€State€(6-103(4)).€€Maryland€courts€definitely€have€jurisdiction€over€Dan€becauseÐ L œ Ðhe€resides€and€principally€operates€his€vet€business€in€Maryland.€€The€issue€is€whether€the€StateÐ 8 ˆ Ðof€Westover€can€exercise€personal€jurisdiction€if€the€alleged€tortious€act€of€mis-diagnosis€alsoÐ $ t Ðoccurred€in€Maryland.€€While€Dan's€parents€reside€in€Westover€and€he€visits€them€on€a€monthlyÐ  ` Ðbasis,€he€is€nonetheless€not€licensed€as€a€veterinarian€in€Westover€nor€does€he€practice€there€toÐ ü L  Ðgive€Westover€personal€jurisdiction€over€Dan.€€Moreover,€while€Dan€advertises€in€Westover,€aÐ è 8  Ðcourt€will€likely€find€that€the€advertisement€does€not€rise€to€deriving€substantial€business€toÐ Ô$  Ðwarrant€jurisdiction.€€Thus,€due€to€lack€of€personal€jurisdiction€a€court€may€exercise€its€revisoryÐ À  Ðpower€under€2-535€for€mistake.€€Also,€Dan's€counsel€can€make€a€motion€to€stay€the€enforcementÐ ¬ü  Ðof€foreign€judgment€while€a€court€reviews€whether€service€of€process€was€adequate€and€sufficientÐ ˜è  Ðto€give€Dan€notice€and€sufficient€time€to€answer€Paula's€complaint€in€a€timely€manner€under€RuleÐ „Ô  Ð11-804€and€Rules€2-121€and€2-126.€€Paula€had€Sam,€a€private€process€server€serve€Dan€whoÐ pÀ Ðnever€got€the€service€personally€or€was€not€left€by€an€agent€of€requisite€age.€€Sam€left€theÐ \¬ Ðdocuments€at€the€front€door.€€Also,€Dan's€business€was€closed€when€the€documents€were€left.€Ð H˜ ÐAlthough€Dan€was€aware€of€the€lawsuit€pending,€the€insufficient€process€of€service€is€likely€to€beÐ 4„ Ðfound€by€a€court€to€warrant€its€exercise€of€revisory€power€and€stay€the€default€judgment€in€favorÐ  p Ðof€Dan.€€Ð  \ ÐÐ  øH Ðà@%ìàò òQUESTION€5ó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà S àOn€December€14,€2006,€an€insert€in€a€Baltimore€City€daily€newspaper€announced€thatÐ ˆØ ÐBig€Box,€a€national€retailer,€would€make€available€a€limited€number€of€approximately€600€MX3Ð tÄ ÐGame€Pods€at€its€Baltimore€store€beginning€at€7:30€AM€on€December€20,€2006,€limited€to€oneÐ `° Ðper€customer.Ð L œ ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ*eî-… eî-X*Óà S àThe€MX3€is€the€yearððs€most€coveted€Christmas€gift€and€is€virtually€impossible€to€find€at€anyÐ $ t Ðprice.€Ð  ` ÐÌà S àAnticipating€a€large€crowd,€Pam€arrived€at€Big€Box€at€5:30€AM€on€the€designated€date€toÐ è 8  Ðfind€more€than€200€customers€standing€in€the€rain€in€line€ahead€of€her€at€the€only€entrance€madeÐ Ô$  Ðavailable€by€Big€Box.€€At€7:00€AM,€more€than€300€people€were€awaiting€entry.€Ð À  ÐÌà S àAlso€anticipating€a€large€crowd,€Big€Box€posted€conspicuous€signs€both€outside€and€withinÐ ˜è  Ðthe€store€which€read:€€ð ðPlease€enter€in€groups€of€20€as€directed€by€your€host.€Walk,€do€not€run€uponÐ „Ô  Ðentry.ðð€€It€also€assigned€two€host€employees€to€maintain€crowd€control.Ð pÀ ÐÌObserving€the€large€crowd,€Sam,€one€of€the€designated€host€employees,€decided€to€open€the€entranceÐ H˜ Ðdoors€fifteen€minutes€early€in€violation€of€the€store€managerððs€specific€instructions€to€the€contrary.€Ð 4„ ÐWhen€the€doors€were€opened€the€line€rushed€in,€ignoring€the€caution€signs€and€overwhelming€theÐ  p Ðhost€employees.€€In€the€crush€that€followed€Pam€tripped€and€fell,€starting€a€chain€reaction€of€fallingÐ  \ Ðcustomers.€€She€suffered€a€broken€leg€and€head€trauma.€Ð øH ÐÌà S àPamððs€broken€leg€did€not€heal€properly€and€doctors€have€recommended€that€it€be€refracturedÐ Ð  Ðand€straightened€to€correct€an€otherwise€permanent€limp.€€Pam€has€refused€to€undergo€additionalÐ ¼  Ðsurgery.€Ð ¨ø ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÝ‚ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€X-¼ XXXäŒÔÔ€ X+X XX-¼ÔÝ  ÝÔ€Xn½ XX X+ÔÝ‚ÿÿÿdÕÝÝ  Ýà S àWhat€cause€or€causes€of€action€does€Pam€have,€if€any,€against€Big€Box€and€Sam?€ÝƒÿÿdÕ5Ö݌Р€Ð ÐŒÓ  ÓÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒX XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔó óÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÓ  Óò òÌÓ XÓWhat€defense(s)€would€you€expect€to€be€raised€in€this€action?€€Explain€your€answersÐ T ¤ Ðfully.€Ð @! ÐÓ XÓÌÌó óÓ  ÓÔ& Ô ÔÝ‚ ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€X-¼ XXXäŒÔÔ€ X+X XX-¼ÔÔ  ÔÝ  ÝÔ€Xn½ XX X+ÔÝ‚ ÿÿÿLØÝÝ  ÝREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1€Ýƒ ÿÿLØ*ÙÝÔ Ý óØÔŒÐ $T" ÐŒÓ  ÓÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒX XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔó óÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÔ'Ô$@ØÔÌà S àPam€would€have€a€cause€of€action€for€negligence€against€both€Sam€and€Big€Box.€€Ð Ø%(!$ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  Óà S àFor€Pamððs€cause€of€action€against€Sam,€Pam€would€have€to€show€that€Sam€failed€to€actÐ °'#& Ðwith€due€care€for€the€safety€of€Pam€when€he€opened€the€doors€to€the€Big€Box€store€fifteenÐ œ(ì#' Ðminutes€earlier€than€the€posted€time€and€that€this€failure€was€the€proximate€cause€of€PamððsÐ ˆ)Ø$( Ðinjuries.€€From€the€given€facts,€it€does€not€appear€that€this€claim€would€be€successful€because€itÐ t*Ä%) Ðwould€be€very€difficult€to€establish€that€Samððs€early€opening€of€the€doors€had€any€effect€on€whatÐ `+°&* Ðthe€crowd€was€going€to€do€(it€was€going€to€rush€for€the€game€systems€at€7:15€or€7:30)€and,Ð ° Ðtherefore,€Samððs€actions€were€not€the€proximate€cause€of€Pamððs€injuries.€Ð œì ÐÓ  ÓÌà S àPam€has€two€independent€theories€of€recovery€against€Big€Box.€€The€first€is€that€Big€BoxÐ tÄ Ðwould€be€vicariously€liable€for€Samððs€negligence€under€the€theory€of€respondeat€superior€becauseÐ `° ÐSam€is€an€employee€and€was€performing€duties€within€his€scope€of€employment€(even€though€he€wasÐ L œ Ðdisobeying€instructions).€€Big€Box€might€argue€that€Samððs€decision€not€to€obey€took€him€outside€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðhis€scope€of€employment,€but€that€argument€would€not€be€successful€because€it€is€ultimately€BigÐ $ t ÐBoxðð€responsibility€to€exercise€control€over€Sam.Ð  ` ÐÑ  ÑÌà S àThe€more€promising€theory€of€recovery€against€Big€Box€is€that€Big€Box€was€negligent€inÐ è 8  Ðits€own€right€for€failing€to€take€adequate€measures€to€control€the€crowd.€€Big€Box€has€a€duty€to€takeÐ Ô$  Ðreasonable€care€at€all€times€for€the€safety€of€others,€particularly€those€who€come€to€its€stores€forÐ À  Ðbusiness€purposes.€€Big€Box€knew€that€these€game€systems€would€create€a€huge€amount€of€interestÐ ¬ü  Ðand€that€significant€numbers€of€persons€would€come€to€the€store€frenzied€to€get€one.€€The€signs€andÐ ˜è  Ðtwo€ð ðhostsðð€it€used€to€attempt€to€control€the€crowd€that€appeared€on€its€doorstep€were€inadequate€toÐ „Ô  Ðcontrol€the€crowd€and€it€was€foreseeable€that€injuries€such€as€the€ones€that€Pam€suffered€would€resultÐ pÀ Ðwhen€Big€Box€opened€its€doors.€Ð \¬ ÐÌà S àBoth€Big€Box€and€Sam€might€argue€that€Pam€was€contributorily€negligent€in€that€sheÐ 4„ Ðcontributed€to€her€own€injuries€by€being€part€of€the€crowd.€€All€persons€have€a€duty€to€take€due€careÐ  p Ðfor€their€own€safety.€€From€the€given€facts,€however,€it€appears€that€Pam€could€have€been€reasonablyÐ  \ Ðrelying€upon€Big€Box€to€control€the€entry€of€the€crowd€into€the€store€in€such€a€way€that€a€mass€rushÐ øH Ðdid€not€occur.€€Therefore,€this€defense€will€probably€not€succeed.€Ð ä4 ÐÌà S àBoth€Big€Box€and€Sam€would€have€a€defense€against€at€least€one€potential€element€of€PamððsÐ ¼  Ðdamages,€however.€€If€Pam€asserts€a€claim€for€a€permanent€disability€as€a€result€of€her€limp,€Big€BoxÐ ¨ø Ðand€Sam€would€be€able€to€argue€that€this€disability€is€only€a€result€of€Pamððs€failure€to€mitigateÐ ”ä Ðdamages€because€she€refuses€to€undergo€the€surgery.€€Therefore,€Big€Box€and€Sam€would€not€beÐ €Ð Ðliable€for€that€disability€if€they€could€establish€to€a€reasonable€degree€of€certainty€that€the€surgeryÐ l¼ Ðwould€remove€the€disability.€Ð X ¨ ÐÌÑ  ÑÓ  ÓÔ& Ô ÔÝ‚ ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€X-¼ XXXäŒÔÔ€ X+X XX-¼ÔÔ  ÔÝ  ÝÔ€Xn½ XX X+ÔÝ‚ ÿÿÿ<éÝÝ  ÝREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2€€Ýƒ ÿÿ<éêÝÔ Ý ãéԌР0"€  ÐŒÓ  ÓÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€Xn½ X XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒX XXn½ÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔó óÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÔ'Ô0"0éÔÌÓ  Óà S àCause/Causes€of€action€that€Pam€has€against€Big€Box€and€Sam:€Ð $T" ÐÓ  ÓÌà S àPam€could€sue€Big€Box€on€a€theory€of€negligence€for€failing€to€warn€of€a€hazardousÐ Ü%,!$ Ðcondition€to€an€invited€guest€and€for€failing€to€safeguard€against€that€condition€which€it€created.€€ForÐ È&"% Ðnegligence€to€be€proven€one€must€prove€a€duty€existed,€the€duty€was€breached,€the€actual€cause€ofÐ ´'#& Ðthe€breach€and€the€proximate€cause€of€the€breach,€and€damages.€€Here,€Big€Box€was€the€possessorÐ  (ð#' Ðof€the€property€on€which€Pam€was€injured.€€Furthermore,€Pam€and€the€others€were€invited€guests€ofÐ Œ)Ü$( ÐBig€Box€for€the€purpose€of€purchasing€the€gaming€system.€€When€someone€holds€out€his€store€toÐ x*È%) Ðinvited€guests€he€has€a€duty€to€provide€an€area€free€from€hazardous€conditions€or€to€adequately€andÐ d+´&* Ðconspicuously€warn€of€dangerous€conditions€to€the€invited€guests€and€take€adequate€safeguardsÐ ° Ðagainst€those€conditions€injuring€the€guests.€€Big€Box€was€aware€of€this€danger€that€it€created€itselfÐ œì Ð(another€requirement€for€this€theory€of€negligence)€or€should€have€been€aware€because€it€didÐ ˆØ Ðanticipate€such€a€large€crowd€and€did€post€some€warnings.€€Thus€Big€Box€had€a€duty.Ð tÄ ÐÌà S àBig€Box€breached€that€duty€in€a€few€ways.€First,€Big€Box€did€post€warnings,€however,€theÐ L œ Ðwarnings€were€not€adequate€enough€to€warn€of€the€dangers€such€a€large€crowd€could€create.€€TheÐ 8 ˆ Ðwarnings€merely€asked€patrons€to€walk€and€not€run€and€asked€people€to€enter€in€groups€of€20€asÐ $ t Ðdirected€by€the€host.€€Furthermore,€not€all€of€the€warnings€were€outside€where€they€should€have€beenÐ  ` Ð(because€if€Big€Box€wanted€people€to€know€that€they€were€to€enter€in€groups€of€20,€it€is€pointless€toÐ ü L  Ðadvise€of€this€after€the€people€have€already€entered€the€store).€€Ð è 8  ÐÌà S àThe€warnings€were€conspicuous€in€that€they€were€easily€seen,€but€they€were€inadequateÐ À  Ðbecause€they€didnððt€allow€the€invited€guests€to€fully€appreciate€the€dangers€involved.€€The€factualÐ ¬ü  Ðcause€of€Big€Boxððs€breach€was€that€it€did€not€adequately€warn€of€the€dangers€and€in€this€case€it€isÐ ˜è  Ðalso€the€legal/proximate€cause€of€the€breach€because€of€the€description€above.€€The€damages€wouldÐ „Ô  Ðbe€awarded€based€upon€what€Pam€suffered€and€had€to€pay€medically€ð!ð€basically,€what€amount€wouldÐ pÀ Ðmake€Pam€whole€again.€Another€way€Big€Box€may€have€breached€the€duty€was€that€it€provided€onlyÐ \¬ Ð2€employees€to€control€such€a€large€crowed.€€More€were€obviously€needed€and€such€knowledgeÐ H˜ Ðwould€be€imputed€upon€Big€Box€in€such€a€case€as€a€business€open€to€the€public.€€Ð 4„ Ðà S àÌà S àRegarding€Sam€ð!ð€Big€Box€would€be€vicariously€liable€for€any€negligent€action€on€the€partÐ  \ Ðof€Sam€if€it€was€found€to€cause€or€be€a€cause€of€the€injuries€suffered.€€Sam€was€an€employee€of€BigÐ øH ÐBox€and€was€acting€in€his€employment€capacity€for€the€benefit€of€his€employer€(Big€Box)€at€the€timeÐ ä4 Ðthat€he€opened€the€doors€earlier€than€allowed.€€Therefore,€even€though€he€was€acting€against€hisÐ Ð  Ðsupervisorððs€instructions€to€the€contrary,€Samððs€actions€were€taken€and€were€reasonably€foreseeableÐ ¼  Ðto€be€taken€given€the€size€of€the€crowd€and€the€forewarning€Big€Box€had€of€such€a€large€crowdÐ ¨ø Ðoccurring.€€Furthermore,€it€appears€that€Sam€was€negligent€in€not€limiting€20€people€at€a€time.€Ð ”ä ÐAlthough€further€knowledge€would€be€required,€it€would€appear€that€Sam€could€have€acted€betterÐ €Ð Ðhad€he€taken€steps€to€limit€it€to€20€people€at€a€time€in€such€a€way€as€to€prevent€the€employees€fromÐ l¼ Ðbeing€overwhelmed.€Ð X ¨ ÐÌDefense(s)€I€would€expect€to€be€raised€in€this€action:€€Ð 0"€  ÐÌÓ€ #%&'()*+,-(ÿÿ03ÓÝ"‚%ÿÿ"ÝÓ ¨ýÓÓ °ÓÓ?%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ eî-X?ÓÝ  ÝÝ‚%ÿÿNüÝÔ2ÿÿÔÚ  Ú1Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà ` àÝ  ÝPam€had€adequate€knowledge€from€the€conspicuous€in€that€she€anticipated€such€aÐ $X" Ðlarge€crowd€and€the€potential€for€a€rush€when€she€arrived€at€5:30€AM.݃%ÿÿNüÖü݌Рô$D # ÐŒÓ °ÓÓ$eî-X` ` ŠX$ÓÓ ¨ýÓÝ  ÝÓE+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ eî-XEÓÌÝ"‚%ÿÿ"ÝÓ ¨ýÓÓ °ÓÓ9%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °°ŒX9ÓÝ  ÝÝ‚%ÿÿ—þÝÔ2ÿÿÔÚ  Ú2Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà ` àÝ  ÝPam€was€contributorily€negligent€by€entering€such€a€large€crowd€that€she€should€haveÐ Ì&"% Ðforeseen€would€have€reacted€in€such€a€way.€€If€this€held€up€then€Pam€could€notÐ ¸'#& Ðrecover€any€damages€in€Maryland.€Ýƒ%ÿÿ—þÿ݌Р¤(ô#' ÐŒÓ °ÓÓ °°ŒX` ` ŠXÓÓ ¨ýÓÝ  ÝÓ?+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °°ŒX?ÓÌÝ"‚%ÿÿ"ÝÓ ¨ýÓÓ °ÓÓ9%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °°ŒX9ÓÝ  ÝÝ‚%ÿÿÝÔ2ÿÿÔÚ  Ú3Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà ` àÝ  ÝPam€cannot€recover€for€all€of€her€medical€expenses€because€she€has€ampleÐ |*Ì%) Ðopportunity€to€correct€her€permanent€limp€and€has€chosen€not€to€do€so€ð!ð€therefore,Ð h+¸&* ÐPam€should€only€recover€for€medical€expenses€incurred€to€heal€the€bone€to€its€currentÐ ° Ðstate€and€not€for€anything€above€that€amount.€Ýƒ%ÿÿ•݌Рœì ÐŒÓ °ÓÓ °°ŒX` ` ŠXÓÓ ¨ýÓÝ  ÝÓ?+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °°ŒX?ÓÌÝ"‚%ÿÿ"ÝÓ ¨ýÓÓ °ÓÓ9%` ` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °°ŒX9ÓÝ  ÝÝ‚%ÿÿÝÔ2ÿÿÔÚ  Ú4Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà ` àÝ  ÝSam€violated€company€policy€by€opening€the€doors€early€and,€therefore,€Big€BoxÐ tÄ Ðcould€not€be€liable.€Ýƒ%ÿÿƒÝŒÐ `° ÐŒÓ °ÓÓ °°ŒX` ` ŠXÓÓ ¨ýÓÝ  Ýà@ìì*ìàˆÐ  L œ Ðà@%ìàò òQUESTION€6ó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àHurricane€Bob€created€such€damage€to€the€Maryland€crabbing€industry€that€the€MarylandÐ ˆØ ÐState€General€Assembly€passed€legislation€stating€that€effective€in€January€2005€and€until€furtherÐ tÄ Ðnotice,€there€will€be€a€limit€on€crabbing€in€Maryland€waters.€€The€law€included€the€followingÐ `° Ðpenalties:€€$2,500€fine,€loss€of€crabbing€license,€and€forfeiture€of€any€instrumentality€used€to€assistÐ L œ Ðin€crabbing.€€The€law€limited€the€number€of€crabbing€licenses€to€one€per€family€residing€in€Maryland,Ð 8 ˆ Ðand€it€limited€crabbing€activities€to€only€Saturdays€and€Sundays.Ð $ t ÐÌÓ XÓBy€the€time€crabbing€season€arrived€in€June€of€2007,€the€crab€population€was€stable€inÐ ü L  ÐMaryland€but€the€General€Assembly€did€not€bother€to€amend€the€law.€€The€professional€crabbersÐ è 8  Ðattempted€to€get€the€law€repealed,€indicating€that€their€livelihood€was€being€hurt.€€However,€theÐ Ô$  Ðeffect€of€the€law€was€an€increase€in€state€revenues,€so€the€law€remained€in€effect.Ð À  ÐÓ XÓÌò òYou€are€employed€as€counsel€to€the€Maryland€General€Assembly€and€the€Speaker€of€the€HouseÐ ˜è  Ðasks€you€to€advise€them€as€to€what€challenges€might€be€raised€to€the€law.€€What€would€youÐ „Ô  Ðadvise?€€Discuss€fully.ó óÐ pÀ ÐÌò òÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ H˜ ÐÓ¿ ÓÌThe€follow€challenges€might€be€raised€to€the€law:Ð  p ÐÌà  àòòStandingóó€requires€actual€or€potential€harm€that€is€fairly€traceable€to€government€action.€€Here,Ð øH Ðthe€ð ðprofessional€crabbersðð€say€their€ð ðlivelihood€was€being€hurtðð€as€a€result€of€state€law,€so€they€haveÐ ä4 Ðstanding.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€òòProcedural€Due€Process€Clause€of€the€14òòthóó€Amendmentóó€prohibits€deprivation€of€freedomÐ ¨ø Ðor€property€without€notice€and€a€hearing.€€Here,€the€law€provides€for€ð ðloss€of€crabbing€license,ððÐ ”ä Ðwhich€is€deprivation€of€property.€€ð ðForfeiture€of€any€instrumentalityðð€is€also€deprivation€of€property.€Ð €Ð ÐThe€law€itself€provides€notice,€but€there€must€be€a€hearing.Ð l¼ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àThe€òòEighth€Amendmentóó€and€similar€òòMaryland€common€lawóó€prohibit€excessive€punishment.€Ð D!” ÐA€$2,500€fine€may€be€excessive€punishment,€especially€in€light€of€the€fact€there€is€no€longerÐ 0"€  Ðinstability€in€the€crab€population.Ð #l! ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àThe€òòFifth€Amendmentóó,€incorporated€to€the€States€through€the€14òòthóó€Amendment,€prohibitsÐ ô$D # Ðgovernment€taking€of€property€for€public€purposes€without€just€compensation.€€Here,€ð ðforfeiture€ofÐ à%0!$ Ðany€instrumentalityðð€is€not€a€taking€for€public€purposes€so€the€Fifth€Amendment€is€not€implicated.Ð Ì&"% ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àThe€Substantive€òòDue€Process€Clause€of€the€14òòthóó€Amendmentóó€limits€the€governmentððs€abilityÐ ¤(ô#' Ðto€regulate€citizenððs€rights.€€Here€the€government€is€regulating€the€right€to€engage€in€a€livelihood€ofÐ )à$( Ðcrabbing.€€The€right€to€engage€in€a€livelihood€is€not€a€fundamental€right€so€a€rational€basis€testÐ |*Ì%) Ðapplies.Ð h+¸&* ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àUnder€a€òòrational€basis€testóó€a€law€is€valid€if€it€rationally€relates€to€a€legitimate€governmentÐ œì Ðinterest,€even€if€it€is€over€or€underbroad.€€Here€the€state€had€a€legitimate€interest€in€stabilizing€theÐ ˆØ Ðcrabbing€industry€but€the€crab€population€has€since€stabilized.€€Also€there€is€no€rational€relationshipÐ tÄ Ðbetween€saving€the€ð ðcrabbing€industryðð€and€limiting€crabbing€to€recreational€times€of€Saturdays€andÐ `° ÐSundays,€which€further€hinders€professionalsðð€ability€to€crab.Ð L œ ÐÑ  ÑÌà  àHowever,€the€current€interest€of€increasing€state€revenues€is€still€a€legitimate€interest€and€theÐ $ t Ðlaw€is€rationally€related€because€it€generates€state€revenue,€so€it€is€valid€under€a€rational€basis€test.Ð  ` ÐÌÑ  Ñà  àThe€òòcontracts€clauseóó€of€the€US€Constitution€prohibits€states€from€interfering€with€existingÐ è 8  Ðcontracts.€€Here€if€the€professional€crabbers€had€existing€contracts,€this€law€may€be€implicated.Ð Ô$  ÐÑ  ÑÌà  àIf€any€of€the€crabbers€are€out€of€state,€they€can€bring€additional€challenges.€€MarylandÐ ¬ü  Ðcrabbers€will€not€have€such€standing,€but€as€the€Assembly€has€asked€about€possible€challenges,€I€willÐ ˜è  Ðadvise€them€as€to€these€possible€challenges€also:Ð „Ô  ÐÑ  ÑÌà  àThe€òòCommerce€Clause€of€the€US€Constitutionóó€provides€that€Congress€has€plenary€power€toÐ \¬ Ðregulate€interstate€commerce.€€Therefore€states€cannot€enact€laws€that€òòsubstantially€burdenóó€interstateÐ H˜ Ðcommerce€without€an€òòimportant€government€interestóó.€€Here,€licenses€are€limited€to€ð ðfamil[ies]Ð 4„ Ðresiding€in€Maryland,€ð ðthereby€burdening€interstate€commerce€because€out€of€staters€cannot€getÐ  p Ðlicenses.€€Stabilizing€the€crab€population€and€crabbing€industry€are€an€important€state€interest,€butÐ  \ Ðthe€population€is€now€stable,€so€the€only€interest€left€is€to€get€additional€revenue,€which€is€notÐ øH Ðimportant€enough€to€burden€interstate€commerce.Ð ä4 ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àFurthermore,€when€a€state€law€òòfacially€geographically€discriminatesóó,€there€must€be€a€non„Ð ¼  Ðdiscriminatory€alternative.€€Here€the€law€is€facially€geographically€discriminatory€because€of€the€limitÐ ¨ø Ðto€ð ðMarylandðð€families.€€There€is€a€non„discriminatory€alternative:€€to€limit€crabbing€overall.€€TheÐ ”ä Ðlaw€limits€crabbing€to€Saturdays€and€Sundays;€such€a€restriction€but€without€the€limit€to€MarylandÐ €Ð Ðfamilies€could€be€effective.€€Also€if€the€idea€is€to€save€the€industry,€it€would€make€more€sense€toÐ l¼ Ðlimit€the€window€could€be€further€narrowed,€but€a€license€could€be€granted€to€anyone.€€So€it€isÐ X ¨ Ðinvalid€under€the€negative€implications€of€the€commerce€clause.Ð D!” ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àThe€òòPrivileges€and€Immunities€Clause€of€Article€4óó€prohibits€a€state€from€treating€out€ofÐ #l! Ðstaters€differently€in€terms€of€basic€rights€of€citizenship,€such€as€right€to€contract€or€do€business.€€OutÐ $X" Ðof€state€crabbers€cannot€get€contracts€and€continue€crabbing.€€That€is€a€violation€of€the€clause.Ð ô$D # ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àThe€òòEqual€Protection€Clause€of€the€14òòthóó€Amendmentóó€limits€the€governmentððs€ability€toÐ Ì&"% Ðpurposefully€discriminate.€€Here,€out€of€state€crabbers€cannot€get€licenses€whereas€in€state€crabbersÐ ¸'#& Ðcan.€€That€is€discrimination.€€Crabbers€are€not€a€suspect€class€so€a€rational€basis€test€applies.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àUnder€a€òòrational€basis€testóó€a€law€is€valid€if€it€rationally€relates€to€a€legitimate€governmentÐ |*Ì%) Ðinterest,€even€if€it€is€over€or€underbroad.€€Here€the€state€had€a€legitimate€interest€in€stabilizing€theÐ h+¸&* Ðcrab€population€but€as€mentioned,€that€interest€is€no€longer€present.€€Also€if€it€were,€there€would€beÐ ° Ðno€rational€relationship€between€saving€the€ð ðcrabbing€industryðð€and€limiting€crabbing€to€recreationalÐ œì Ðtimes€of€Saturdays€and€Sundays.€€However,€increasing€state€revenues€is€still€a€legitimate€interest€andÐ ˆØ Ðthe€law€is€rationally€related€because€it€generates€state€revenue,€so€it€is€valid€under€a€rational€basisÐ tÄ Ðtest.Ð `° ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2òòÐ $ t Ðó óÓy&ÓÌóóò òCrab€License€Legislationó ó.Ð ü L  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑAs€counsel€to€the€Maryland€General€Assembly€and€Speaker€of€the€House€I€would€advise€themÐ Ø(  Ðthat€challenges€may€be€made€based€on€U.S.€Constitutional€Commerce€Clause,€Privileges€andÐ Ä  ÐImmunities€Clause€under€Art.€IV,€procedural€due€process,€substantive€due€process,€equalÐ °  Ðprotection,€1òòstóó€Amendment€right€of€expression,€and€taxing€authority.Ð œì  ÐÑ  ÑÌò òCommerce€Clauseó ó.€€The€federal€government€may€legislate€instrumentalities,€channels,€andÐ tÄ Ðproducts€in€interstate€commerce.€€When€the€federal€government€fails€to€legislate€same,€states€mayÐ d´ Ðlegislate€so€long€as€Congress€did€not€intend€to€occupy€the€field.€€Here€the€General€AssemblyÐ P  Ðpassed€legislation€limiting€crabbing€in€Maryland€waters.€€Crabs€are€products€used€in€commerce.€Ð <Œ ÐStates€may€not€discriminate€against€out€of€state€residents€unless€on€balance€the€burden€onÐ (x Ðinterstate€commerce€does€not€outweigh€the€legitimate€state€interest.€€The€state€is€not€a€marketÐ d Ðparticipant.€€Here€the€law€limits€licenses€to€one€per€family€residing€in€Maryland.€€MarylandÐ P Ðwishes€to€preserve€their€natural€resources,€but€the€crab€population€is€now€stable.€€Therefore,€theÐ ì< Ðneed€to€preserve€no€longer€exists.€€As€a€result,€a€court€will€find€that€discrimination€against€out€ofÐ Ø( Ðstate€residents€violates€the€dormant€commerce€clause.€€The€crabbing€population€is€stable,€thusÐ Ä Ðnegating€any€need€to€discriminate€against€out€of€state€residents.Ð ° ÐÌò òPrivileges€and€immunities€under€Art.€IV.ó ó€€Under€this€clause€states€may€not€interfere€with€outÐ ˆØ Ðof€state€residents€to€obtain€employment€and€interstate€travel.€€Crabbing€activities€are,€however,Ð xÈ Ðnot€a€fundamental€right,€therefore€a€court€will€likely€find€against€any€claim€based€on€PrivilegesÐ d ´ Ðand€immunities€clause.Ð P!  ÐÌò òProcedural€Due€Processó ó.€€Under€5òòthóó€Amendment,€extended€to€the€states€via€the€14òòthóóÐ (#x! ÐAmendment,€states€may€not€deprive€a€person€of€life,€liberty,€or€property€without€due€process€ofÐ $h" Ðlaw.€€If€the€law€affects€a€protected€liberty€interest,€then€states€must€show€the€law€is€narrowlyÐ %T # Ðtailored€to€meet€a€compelling€state€interest.€€Here€the€law€has€a€penalty€of€$2500,€loss€of€crabbingÐ ð%@!$ Ðlicense,€and€forfeiture€of€any€instrumentality€used€to€assist€in€crabbing.€€Employment€is€aÐ Ü&,"% Ðprotected€liberty€interest€that€requires€sufficient€minimal€process€necessary€to€meet€due€processÐ È'#& Ðrequirements.€€Because€no€procedure€is€established€for€alleged€violators,€this€law€violatesÐ ´($' Ðprocedural€due€process.Ð  )ð$( Ðâ âÐ Œ*Ü%) ÐÑ  Ñò òSubstantive€Due€Processó ó.€€Under€the€5òòthóó€Amendment,€extended€to€the€states€via€the€14òòthóóÐ ° Ðâ âAmendment,€states€may€not€act€arbitrarily€without€justification.€€If€the€law€pertains€to€aÐ  ð Ðfundamental€right,€then€states€must€show€the€law€is€narrowly€tailored€to€meet€a€compelling€stateÐ ŒÜ Ðinterest.€€Again,€employment€is€a€fundamental€right€requiring€strict€scrutiny.€€As€demonstratedÐ xÈ Ðabove,€states€will€be€unable€to€show€a€compelling€need€restricting€employment€when€the€crabÐ d´ Ðpopulation€has€stabilized.Ð P   ÐÑ  ÑÌò òEqual€Protectionó ó.€€Under€the€5òòthóó€Amendment,€extended€to€the€states€via€the€14òòthóó€AmendmentÐ ( x Ðstates€may€not€discriminate€against€groups€without€justification.€€If€the€law€affects€a€suspect€classÐ  h Ðor€fundamental€right,€states€must€show€the€law€is€narrowly€tailored€to€meet€a€compelling€stateÐ  T  Ðinterest.€€Again,€employment€is€a€fundamental€right€requiring€strict€scrutiny.€€As€demonstratedÐ ð @  Ðabove,€states€will€be€unable€to€show€a€compelling€need€restricting€employment€when€the€crabÐ Ü,  Ðpopulation€has€stabilized.Ð È  ÐÌò òTaxing€authorityó ó.€€Government€may€tax€for€general€welfare€so€long€as€the€tax€will€reasonablyÐ  ð  Ðraise€revenue.€€Here€the€effect€of€the€law€if€is€that€states€revenues€have€increased.€€Therefore,€aÐ à  Ðplaintiff€would€lose€under€this€argument.Ð |Ì Ðò òòòóóÐ  h¸ Ðà@%ìàQUESTION€7ˆÐ ° ÐÌÓ hÓó óÓ  ÓÓúÓà  àDonald€inherited€an€antique€map€of€Europe€("Map").€Donald€met€with€Louis€Lawyer,€aÐ ˆØ Ðmember€of€the€Maryland€Bar,€in€Annapolis,€Maryland.€Donald€asked€Louis€to€represent€him€in€aÐ ‚Ò Ðtransaction€for€the€sale€of€the€Map.€On€April€16,€2007,€he€gave€Louis€a€copy€of€an€independentÐ |Ì Ðappraisal€of€value,€and€he€asked€that€Louis€keep€confidential€the€Map€and€the€original€independentÐ v Æ Ðappraisal€of€value€so€that€Donald€could€find€an€appropriate€buyer.€Immediately€upon€Donald'sÐ p À Ðdeparture,€Louis€put€the€items€into€a€file€on€top€of€a€bookshelf€in€his€office.Ð j º ÐÐ d ´ ÐOn€June€15,€2007,€government€officials€announced€that€an€early€summer€hurricane€wasÐ ^ ®  Ðdeveloping€and€threatened€to€hit€the€Atlantic€seaboard€in€a€few€days.€As€managing€partner€of€his€lawÐ X¨  Ðfirm,€Louis€closed€the€office€immediately€so€that€everyone€could€protect€their€homes.Ð R¢  ÐÐ Lœ  ÐAs€a€result€of€the€damage€caused€by€the€hurricane,€Louis€was€unable€to€locate€any€of€the€filesÐ F–  Ðthat€he€had€kept€in€his€office.€Several€days€later,€Donald€found€a€buyer€for€the€Map,€signed€a€contractÐ @  Ðand€advised€Louis€to€bring€the€Map€and€appraisal€to€the€closing€of€the€sale€on€July€16,€2007.Ð :Š ÐÐ 4„ ÐAt€closing,€Louis€told€Donald€that€he€could€not€find€either€the€Map€or€the€appròòaióósal.€DonaldÐ .~ Ðbecame€angry,€and€he€told€Louis€that€he€would€be€hearing€from€another€lawyer€about€the€mess€thatÐ (x ÐLouis€caused.Ð "r ÐÐ l ÐLouis€is€anxious€about€Donald's€threat.€He€comes€to€you,€a€Maryland€lawyer,€to€advise€him€ofÐ f Ðthe€possible€ethical€violations€that€he€may€have€committed.Ð ` ÐÐ  Z ÐÓ  ÓÓúÓò òWhat€advice€would€you€give€to€Louis€regarding€his€possible€ethical€violations?Ð T ÐÑ  ÑÓ hÓÓÓòòÌÓ  ÓÌóóREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð à0 Ðó óòòÌóóÓ  Óà  àThis€question€is€governed€by€the€òòMaryland€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct.óó€I€would€adviseÐ ¸  ÐLouis€that€he€may€face€the€following€ethical€violations:Ð ¤!ô ÐÌà  àòòDuty€of€Confidentiality.óó€A€lawyer€owes€a€duty€of€confidentiality€to€its€client€in€all€mattersÐ |#Ì  Ðassociated€with€the€representation.€Here,€when€Louis€was€asked€by€Donald€to€represent€him€andÐ h$¸! ÐDonald€asked€that€Louis€keep€confidential€the€Map€and€the€original€appraisal,€Louis€was€under€thisÐ T%¤ " Ðduty€not€to€disclose.€This€duty€was€never€intentionally€violated€by€Louis;€however,€by€the€loss€of€theÐ @&!# ÐMPA,€Louis€may€be€deemed€to€have€violated€this€duty.€Ð ,'|"$ ÐÌà  àòòDuty€to€Keep€Secure/Protect€Clientððs€Possessions.óó€€A€lawyer€has€a€duty€to€protect€and€ensureÐ )T$& Ðthe€safety€of€a€clientððs€possessions€if€the€client€entrusts€the€lawyer.€Here,€when€Donald€granted€LouisÐ ð)@%' Ðpossession€of€Map€and€the€appraisal,€he€was€under€this€duty.€By€placing€items€in€a€file€on€top€of€aÐ Ü*,&( Ðbookshelf€in€his€office€and€leaving€them€there€while€a€hurricane€was€due€to€hit€the€area,€LouisÐ È+') Ðviolated€his€duty€to€protect€Donaldððs€possessions.€A€more€appropriate€method€would€have€been€toÐ ° Ðplace€the€clientððs€items€in€a€secure€safe.€The€fact€that€a€superseding€hurricane€was€the€cause€of€theÐ œì Ðfiles€being€missing€will€not€excuse€Louis€of€his€violations.€Ð ˆØ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àòòDuty€of€Communication.óó€A€lawyer€owes€a€duty€to€keep€his€client€clearly€and€fully€informedÐ `° Ðwith€matters€concerning€their€representation.€Here,€once€Louis€returned€and€was€unable€to€locate€anyÐ L œ Ðof€the€files€that€he€had€kept€in€his€office,€he€should€have€contacted€Donald€and€told€him€of€thisÐ 8 ˆ Ðdevelopment.€Following€the€hurricane,€Donald€ð ðseveral€days€laterðð€found€a€buyer€and€advised€LouisÐ $ t Ðto€bring€the€Map€and€appraisal€to€the€closing,€At€no€time€did€Louis€inform€Donald€that€the€itemsÐ  ` Ðwere€missing.€Therefore,€Louis€violated€his€duty€to€communicate€information€to€Donald.€Ð ü L  ÐÌà  àòòDuty€of€Diligence.óó€A€lawyer€also€owes€a€duty€of€diligent€representation€to€his€client.€Here,Ð Ô$  Ðby€waiting€ð ðseveral€daysðð€to€inform€Donald€that€the€items€were€lost,€Louis€violated€his€duty€toÐ À  Ðrepresent€Donald€with€diligent€service.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àòòDuty€Upon€Discharge.óó€Following€a€discharge,€a€lawyer€must€protect€his€clientððs€interests,Ð „Ô  Ðallow€the€client€to€obtain€independent€counsel,€and€return€all€property€belonging€to€the€client.€Here,Ð pÀ Ðthe€property€is€already€lost,€but€Louis€must€protect€any€remaining€interests€Donald€may€have,€andÐ \¬ Ðshould€assist€in€Donaldððs€obtaining€of€another€attorney.€Ð H˜ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  Ñà  àI€would€also€advise€Louis€that€he€must€fully€comply€with€the€òòMaryland€Attorney€GrievanceÐ  p ÐCommissionððsóó€investigation,€and€must€respond€immediately€to€any€correspondence€he€may€receiveÐ  \ Ðby€the€AGC.€Ð øH ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Ð Ð  ÐÌó óÓ  Óà  àLouis€has,€in€fact,€violated€numerous€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct.€First€of€all,€LouisÐ ¨ø Ðapparently€agreed€to€represent€Donald€in€the€sale€of€an€antique€map.€Donald€requested€that€LouisÐ ”ä Ðkeep€safe€the€map€and€the€independent€appraisal€value.€Donald€further€requested€that€Louis€keepÐ €Ð Ðthese€confidential.€In€response€to€these€requests,€Louis€put€the€items€in€a€file€on€top€of€his€bookshelfÐ l¼ Ðin€his€office.€This€is€arguably€not€a€confidential€or€safe€area.€The€file€should€have€been€placed€underÐ X ¨ Ðlock€and€key€(and€Louis€may€argue€that€he€keeps€his€office€locked€at€all€times€but€the€facts€do€notÐ D!” Ðsuggest€this).€The€file€should€also€be€placed€somewhere€safe€from€the€elements.€A€file€cabinet€mayÐ 0"€  Ðhave€sufficed,€but€clearly€not€on€top€of€a€bookshelf.€Ð #l! ÐÌà  àLouis,€as€a€Maryland€attorney,€has€a€duty€to€zealously€represent€his€clients.€This€includesÐ ô$D # Ðmaking€sure€that€all€files€and€information€are€safe€from€harm.€When€Louis€closed€his€office€and€sentÐ à%0!$ Ðeveryone€home,€he€should€have€made€sure€his€office€was€as€safe€from€harm€as€possible.€From€theÐ Ì&"% Ðfacts€it€sounds€as€if€he€kept€many€files€in€his€office.€Those€files€should€have€all€been€kept€safe€in€aÐ ¸'#& Ðsolid,€locked,€file€cabinet.€Louis€breached€his€duty€to€zealously€represent€Donald€by€losing€his€file.€Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€Louis€has€a€duty€to€remain€in€contact€with€his€clients€and€inform€them€ofÐ |*Ì%) Ðanything€with€regard€to€their€cases.€Louis€did€not€contact€Donald€from€April€16òòthóó€to€July€16òòthóó,€the€dayÐ h+¸&* Ðof€closing.€In€fact,€Donald€contacted€Louis€regarding€having€a€buyer,€and€at€that€time,€Louis€shouldÐ ° Ðhave€come€clean€regarding€having€misplaced€his€file.€Louis€did€not.€After€the€hurricane,€LouisÐ œì Ðshould€have€contacted€Donald€regarding€the€missing€file,€Louis€did€not.€Louis€breached€his€duty€toÐ ˆØ Ðkeep€the€lines€of€communication€open€between€him€and€his€clients.€Ð tÄ ÐÌà  àLouis€never€should€have€let€the€closing€day€arrive€before€telling€Donald€that€the€closing€couldÐ L œ Ðnot€occur€because€the€file€was€missing.€By€waiting€until€this€point,€he€breached€the€duty€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðcommunication€and€his€duty€to€diligently€represent€his€client.€Ð $ t ÐÌà  àLouis€is€the€managing€partner€of€his€law€firm,€therefore,€I€would€advise€him€he€is€held€to€aÐ ü L  Ðhigh€standard€of€conduct€and€his€ethical€violations€could€impact€his€law€firm.€The€fact€that€theÐ è 8  Ðgovernment€officials€warned€of€a€hurricane€that€wasnððt€even€going€to€hit€for€a€few€days€shows€thatÐ Ô$  ÐLouis€had€plenty€of€time€to€secure€all€files€in€his€office.€He€chose€not€to.€He€should€have€supervisedÐ À  Ðthe€other€lawyers€in€his€law€firm€to€protect€as€was€reasonably€possible,€the€interests€of€the€clients.Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àIf€Louis€was€truly€representing€his€clients€properly€he€would€not€have€shut€the€office€downÐ „Ô  Ðfor€two€days€and€spent€that€time€securing€all€confidential€legal€documents.€Because€Louis€acted€withÐ pÀ Ðsuch€haste€and€disregard€for€his€clientððs€property,€he€is€in€violation€of€the€rules€of€ethics.€Ð \¬ ÐÓ  ÓÐ  H˜ ÐÓ  Óò òQUESTION€8Ð ° ÐòòÌÓ ,Óó óóóÓ  ÓÓúÓMisty€Moore€and€Julie€Brown€decided€to€open€a€tanning€salon€in€Mt.€Airy,€Maryland,€and€theyÐ ˆØ Ðsigned€an€agreement€that€provided€for€three€matters:€(i)€each€of€them€must€contribute€$10,000€to€theÐ ‚Ò Ðnew€business€and€each€would€own€a€fifty€percent€(50%)€interest,€(ii)€Julie€would€be€a€limited€partner,Ð |Ì Ðand€(iii)€Misty€would€serve€as€the€general€partner.€A€certificate€of€limited€partnership€for€MysticÐ v Æ ÐTans€LP€("Salon")€was€signed€by€Misty€as€the€general€partner,€and€it€was€filed€and€accepted€by€theÐ p À ÐState€Department€of€Assessments€and€Taxation€in€August€2007.Ð j º ÐÐ d ´ ÐAfter€deciding€on€the€location,€Misty€and€Julie€both€signed€a€five€year€lease€on€a€property€in€theÐ ^ ®  Ðname€of€"Mystic€Tans,"€and€opened€the€Salon€for€business.€As€business€increased,€they€hired€AnneÐ X¨  Ðto€work€in€the€Salon€part€time.Ð R¢  ÐÐ Lœ  ÐIn€November€2007,€a€new€customer€entered€the€Salon,€and€demanded€that€Anne€immediatelyÐ F–  Ðhang€up€the€telephone.€Anne€was€upset€by€the€customer's€arrogant€and€discourteous€attitude.Ð @  ÐHowever,€she€assisted€the€customer€and€set€the€timer€on€the€customer's€tanning€booth.€Later,€theÐ :Š Ðcustomer€emerged€from€the€booth€injured€as€a€result€of€excessive€exposure.€Anne€had€set€theÐ 4„ Ðcustomer's€timer€for€three€times€the€amount€of€tanning€that€is€customarily€given€to€first€time€users.Ð .~ ÐÐ (x ÐÑ  ÑÓ  ÓThe€customer€complained€to€a€reporter€of€the€local€newspaper,€and€the€newspaper€publishedÐ "r Ðan€unfavorable€article€about€the€Salon.Ð l ÐÐ f ÐÓ  ÓAs€a€result,€Julie€wants€to€withdraw€from€the€Salon,€and€she€consults€with€you,€a€MarylandÐ ` Ðlawyer,€to€advise€her€on€whether€she€is€responsible€for€(i)€any€future€unpaid€rent€for€the€Salon,€andÐ  Z Ð(ii)€the€damages€that€the€customer€sustained€from€the€burn.€She€also€wants€advice€on€the€likelihoodÐ T Ðof€obtaining€the€return€of€her€investment€in€the€Salon.Ð þN ÐÐ øH ÐÓ ,ÓÓ  ÓÓ ,ÓÓ?+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °°ŒX?ÓÓ"úÓò òWhat€advice€would€you€give€to€Julie?€Explain€the€reasons€for€the€advice€fully.Ð òB ÐÓ ,ÓÓ  ÓÓB+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ÜÜ‹XBÓÓ"ÓòòÌÌóóREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð ì!< ÐÌÑ  Ñó óÓ  Óà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àÌà  àAs€stated,€Misty€and€Julie€formed€a€valid€limited€partnership.€The€partnership€is€thus€a€validÐ °$ ! Ðentity€unto€itself,€able€to€contract€and€own€property,€and€commit€torts.€The€partners€will€share€in€theÐ œ%ì " Ðprofits€of€the€limited€partnership€in€accordance€with€their€respective€capital€contributions.€In€general,Ð ˆ&Ø!# Ðthe€limited€partners€(Julie,€in€this€case)€are€shielded€from€liability€for€the€acts€and€omissions€of€theÐ t'Ä"$ Ðpartnership€that€occur€within€the€scope€of€the€partnership.€However,€in€a€limited€partnership,€theÐ `(°#% Ðgeneral€partner€is€supposed€to€manage€and€run€the€business,€with€the€authority€as€the€agent€of€theÐ L)œ$& Ðpartnership€to€bind€the€partnership,€while€the€limited€partners€are€not€supposed€to€manage€or€haveÐ 8*ˆ%' Ðthe€authority€to€bind.Ð $+t&( ÐÐ ,`') Їà  àA€problem€here€is€that€both€Misty€(the€general€partner)€and€Julie€signed€the€five„year€leaseÐ ° Ðin€the€name€of€ð ðMystic€Tans.ðð€In€so€doing,€Julie€has€probably€incurred€personal€liability€for€the€leaseÐ œì Ðbecause,€absent€any€apparent€representations€to€the€contrary,€the€landlord€was€under€the€impressionÐ ˆØ Ðthat€he€was€dealing€with€individuals€signing€on€behalf€of€a€partnership.€Thus,€she€is€personally€liableÐ tÄ Ðfor€the€leasehold€contract.€Ð `° ÐÌ(i)à  àTherefore,€Julie€may€be€held€personally€responsible€for€any€future€unpaid€rent.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ ,ÓAs€for€the€allegedly€tortious€conduct€on€the€part€of€employee€Anne,€Julie€will€fare€better.Ð  ` ÐAssuming€Julie€did€not€personally€engage€Anne€to€work€personally€for€herself€(Julie),€Anne€will€beÐ ü L  Ðdeemed€to€be€an€employee€of€the€limited€partnership,€Mystic€Tans€LP.€The€facts€suggest€that€AnneÐ è 8  Ðwas€working€within€the€scope€of€her€employment€at€the€time€of€her€allegedly€tortious€conduct,€soÐ Ô$  Ðboth€Anne€and€the€master,€Mystic€Tans€LP,€will€be€liable€in€tort€(the€master€on€the€theory€ofÐ À  Ðrespondeat€superior).€However,€because€Julie€is€a€limited€partner€and€not€responsible€for€theÐ ¬ü  Ðmanagement€of€the€limited€partnershipð"ðincluding€hiring€and€employee€supervisionð"ðshe€will€beÐ ˜è  Ðshielded€from€tort€liability€because€of€her€status€as€limited€partner.€Unless€evidence€is€introduced€thatÐ „Ô  ÐJulie€was€personally€responsible€for€the€hiring€or€supervision€of€Anne,€which€might€lead€to€a€causeÐ pÀ Ðof€action€for€negligent€hiring€or€negligent€supervision,€Julie€should€be€off€the€hook€for€the€burnedÐ \¬ Ðcustomer.€Ð H˜ ÐÓ ,ÓÓ ,ÓÓ?+Ü Ü` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ °°ŒX?ÓÌÓ ,ÓÓB+° °` ¸ hÀpÈ xÐ ÜÜ‹XBÓ(ii)à  àTherefore,€Julie€is€probably€not€liable€for€the€damages€sustained€by€the€customer.Ð  p ÐÌà  àA€limited€partner€may€not€withdraw€from€a€partnership€until€after€it€is€dissolved€and€theÐ øH Ðwinding€up€of€its€affairs.Ð ä4 ÐÑ  ÑÌà  àIf€Julie€seeks€to€dissolve€the€partnership,€she€would€normally€be€entitled€to€her€pro„rata€shareÐ ¼  Ðof€the€assets€after€winding€up,€meaning€after€the€liquidating€of€assets€and€paying€of€creditors.€Ð ¨ø ÐÌ(iii)à  àDissolve€the€partnership€now€by€filing€with€SDAT.€Get€your€pro„rata€share€of€the€assetsÐ €Ð Ð(which€is€fifty€percent,€as€given)€after€the€payment€of€all€debts€of€the€limited€partnership.€Find€a€newÐ l¼ Ðtenant€for€the€building€and€sublease€or€be€prepared€to€pay€the€rent€until€the€five€years€are€up€becauseÐ X ¨ Ðin€Maryland,€commercial€landlords€have€no€duty€to€mitigate€by€reletting.€Ð D!” ÐÌÌÑ  ÑÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Ð $X" ÐÌÌó óÓ  ÓòòLiability€for€Future€RentÐ Ì&"% ÐÌÓ XÓóóGenerally,€a€limited€partner€in€a€partnership€that€has€complied€with€the€filingÐ ¤(ô#' Ðrequirements€under€the€laws€of€the€State€of€Maryland€is€not€personally€liable€for€claims€againstÐ )à$( Ðthe€partnership€beyond€the€limited€partnerððs€initial€investment€(or€subscription)€of€capital.€Here,Ð |*Ì%) ÐJulie€is€a€purported€limited€partner€and€a€certificate€of€limited€partnership€was€validly€issued€byÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€SDAT.€Consequently,€Julieððs€liability€is€normally€limited€to€her€initial€$10,000€investment€ofÐ ° Ðcapital€and€nothing€more.€However,€the€facts€here€indicate€that€they€both€signed€a€five„year€leaseÐ œì Ðon€the€property.€A€limited€partner€historically€is€not€permitted€to€be€involved€in€the€actualÐ ˆØ Ðoperations€and€management€of€a€limited€partnership.€This€includes€such€actions€as€signing€theÐ tÄ Ðlease.€However,€some€courts€have€indicated€a€willingness€to€expand€the€role€that€a€limitedÐ `° Ðpartner€may€play.€Maryland€courts€thus€far€stick€to€the€traditional€rule.€Further,€the€lease€wasÐ L œ Ðmade€to€ð ðMystic€Tansðð€without€indication€of€the€limited€status€of€the€partnership.Ð 8 ˆ ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓBecause€Julie€has€acted€inconsistently€with€the€status€of€a€limited€partner€and€the€lessorÐ  ` Ðwas€not€given€any€notice€of€the€limited€nature€of€the€partnership,€Julie€will€be€joint€and€severallyÐ ü L  Ðliable€with€Misty€as€to€future€rent€payments.€Ð è 8  ÐÓ XÓÌòòLiability€for€Agentððs€TortsÐ À  ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ XÓóóAn€employee€is€an€agent€of€the€employer.€When€an€agent€is€acting€within€the€scope€ofÐ ˜è  Ðemployment€and€commits€an€unintentional€tort,€the€agentððs€employer€will€be€held€liable€under€theÐ „Ô  Ðdoctrine€of€respondeat€superior€(a/k/a€vicarious€liability).€Here,€Anne€was€working€as€anÐ pÀ Ðemployee€of€the€tanning€salon.€Consequently,€Anne€was€an€agent.€If€Julie€and€Misty€bothÐ \¬ Ðparticipated€in€the€hiring€of€Anne,€it€is€very€likely€that€Julie€again€acted€inconsistently€with€theÐ H˜ Ðstatus€of€a€limited€partner.€Consequently,€a€court€may€find€that€Anne€was€the€agent€of€both€JulieÐ 4„ Ðand€Misty€as€general€partners,€resulting€in€Julie€being€vicariously€liable€for€unintentional€torts€ofÐ  p ÐAnne€(within€the€scope€of€employment).€If,€however,€it€is€determined€that€Anne€was€hired€byÐ  \ ÐMystic€Tans€LP€by€Misty€acting€as€a€general€partner,€then€Anne€is€an€agent€of€Mystic€Tans€LP.Ð øH ÐWhen€it€is€determined€that€Anne€is€an€agent€of€the€limited€partnership,€Julie,€its€limited€partner,Ð ä4 Ðis€not€personally€liable€for€the€torts€(beyond€the€amount€of€her€initial€investment€of€capital.)Ð Ð  ÐÓ XÓÌòòReturn€of€Capital€Ð ¨ø ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ XÓóóAs€a€general€rule,€partnership€may€be€terminated€at€any€time€by€the€withdrawal€of€aÐ €Ð Ðpartner.€As€Mystic€Tans€LP,€limited€partnership€agreement€is€silent€as€to€a€right€to€withdrawal,Ð l¼ Ðdefault€statutory€(and€case€law)€rules€will€fill€the€gaps€in€their€agreement.€Even€when€there€areÐ X ¨ Ðlimitations€on€the€right€to€withdrawal,€a€partner€may€usually€withdraw€nonetheless,€but€be€subjectÐ D!” Ðto€a€breach€of€contract€action.€Withdrawal€does€not,€however,€mean€that€Julie€will€automaticallyÐ 0"€  Ðreceive€her€capital€investment€back.€A€partnership€may€survive€the€withdrawal€of€a€partner€uponÐ #l! Ðthe€agreement€of€the€remaining€partners.€Here,€however,€Misty€would€be€the€only€survivingÐ $X" Ðpartner€after€the€withdrawal€of€Julie.€A€partnership€cannot€exist€without€2€or€more€partners.Ð ô$D # ÐConsequently,€Julieððs€withdrawal€will€force€the€termination€of€the€partnership.€Misty,€as€generalÐ à%0!$ Ðpartner,€would€have€to€begin€the€process€of€winding€up€the€partnership€(selling€off€the€assets€andÐ Ì&"% Ðperforming€an€accounting€of€the€property€subject€to€payment€to€creditors€and€distributionÐ ¸'#& Ðaccording€to€their€respective€interests).€Consequently,€Julie€would€be€entitled€to€receive€50%€ofÐ ¤(ô#' Ðthe€net€liquidation€assets€of€the€partnership€after€termination.€Because€the€business€has€been€soÐ )à$( Ðsuccessful,€there€may€be€net€assets€greater€than€her€investment.€If€so,€Julie€would€be€entitled€toÐ |*Ì%) Ðher€pro„rata€share.€However,€as€there€is€the€risk€of€pending€litigation€between€the€limitedÐ h+¸&* Ðpartnership€and€the€customer,€Misty,€as€general€partner,€may€be€entitled€to€hold€back€a€reasonableÐ ° Ðreserve€from€Julieððs€share€or€to€late€seek€contribution€for€any€money€damages€paid€to€theÐ œì Ðcustomer.€If€Misty€seeks€contribution,€Julie€will€be€forced€to€pay€up€to€the€amount€of€her€originalÐ ˆØ Ðcapital€contribution€(unless€Julie€is€deemed€a€general€partner€per€above,€resulting€in€her€beingÐ tÄ Ðjoint€and€severally€liable€with€Misty€for€all€damages).Ð `° ÐÓ XÓòòLLCsÐ L œ ÐÑ  ÑÌÑ  ÑÓ XÓóóThis€problem€illustrates€the€more€versatile€approach€of€LLCs,€where€members€may€beÐ $ t Ðactive€in€the€management€without€sacrificing€their€limited€liability€status€by€virtue€of€that€activeÐ  ` Ðmanagement.€Ð ü L  ÐÐ  è 8  Ðò òÓ  ÓQUESTION€9ó óÐ ° ÐÓˆÓÐ œì ÐJones€obtained€a€civil€judgment€against€Mary€for€$45,000€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€TalbotÐ ˆØ ÐCounty.€€On€January€3,€2007,€after€it€became€final,€the€judgment€was€properly€indexed€andÐ tÄ Ðrecorded€by€the€Clerk's€Office€for€Talbot€County.Ð `° ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓOn€March€1,€2007€Mary€purchased€a€home€in€Talbot€County€for€$225,000.€€MaryÐ 8 ˆ Ðfinanced€$210,000€of€the€purchase€price€with€a€loan€from€the€Bank.€€The€Bank€secured€its€loanÐ $ t Ðwith€a€deed€of€trust€lien€(the€"Deed€of€Trust").€€The€Deed€of€Trust€stated€that€it€was€a€purchaseÐ  ` Ðmoney€deed€of€trust.€€Mary€paid€the€balance€of€the€purchase€price€in€cash.€€On€March€5,€2007,€theÐ ü L  ÐDeed€of€Trust€was€properly€recorded€among€the€Land€Records€of€Talbot€County,€Maryland.€Ð è 8  ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓMary€was€unable€to€make€her€payments€to€the€Bank.€€The€Bank€initiated€foreclosureÐ À  Ðproceedings€in€July,€2007.€€Jones€learned€of€the€foreclosure€action€and,€on€July€10,€2007,€filed€aÐ ¬ü  Ðlegally€sufficient€motion€in€the€foreclosure€proceeding€challenging€the€validity€of€the€Deed€ofÐ ˜è  ÐTrust€on€the€grounds€that€it€was€improperly€signed,€acknowledged€and€notarized.€Ð „Ô  ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓThe€Deed€of€Trust€is€valid€in€every€respect,€except€that€Mary's€signature€was€not€properlyÐ \¬ Ðnotarized.€€Mary€has€no€other€creditors.€€The€Circuit€Court€has€stayed€further€proceedings€in€theÐ H˜ Ðforeclosure€action€pending€its€determination€of€the€validity€of€the€deed€of€trust€and€the€rights€ofÐ 4„ Ðthe€parties.Ð  p ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓò òa.€€€What€rights€does€the€Bank€have€to€enforce€the€Deed€of€Trust?€€Ð øH ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓb.€€€Does€the€judgment€of€Jones€take€priority€over€the€Deed€of€Trust?€€Ð Ð  ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓPlease€explain€your€answers€fully.ó óÐ ¨ø ÐÓ XÓÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ €Ð ÐÓ˜ÓÌÓ XÓRegarding€the€Bank's€rights€to€enforce€the€Deed€of€Trust,€the€grant€from€Mary€to€BankÐ X ¨ Ðwas€defective.€€Pursuant€to€4-109€of€the€Maryland€Code,€the€failure€to€include€a€notary€sealÐ D!” Ðrenders€the€grant€defective€if€it€is€challenged€in€a€judicial€proceeding€within€six€months€after€it€isÐ 0"€  Ðrecorded.€€In€this€case,€the€facts€indicate€that€the€Deed€of€Trust€was€valid€except€that€Mary'sÐ #l! Ðsignature€was€not€notarized.€€Further,€the€Deed€of€Trust€was€recorded€on€March€5,€2007€andÐ $X" ÐJones€filed€a€motion€challenging€the€validity€of€the€Deed€of€Trust€on€July€10,€2007,€within€6Ð ô$D # Ðmonths€after€the€deed€is€recorded.€€Although€the€Deed€of€Trust€as€filed€was€defective€becauseÐ à%0!$ ÐMary's€signature€was€not€notarized,€the€Court€may€invoke€its€equitable€power€and€regard€as€doneÐ Ì&"% Ðwhat€ought€to€be€done€in€order€to€provide€the€Bank€with€the€ability€to€enforce€its€properlyÐ ¸'#& Ðattached€and€perfected€security€interest.€€This€would€then€allow€the€Bank€to€go€forward€with€itsÐ ¤(ô#' Ðforeclosure€proceedings€and€allow€both€parties€to€receive€monies€due€and€owed€at€the€foreclosureÐ )à$( Ðsale.€€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÓ XÓÐ h+¸&* ÐÓ XÓRegarding€whether€Jones'€judgment€takes€priority€over€the€Deed€of€Trust,€the€Court€willÐ ° Ðhave€to€make€a€determination€whether€the€grant€to€the€Bank€is€defective€due€to€its€failure€toÐ œì Ðinclude€a€notarized€signature.€Under€7-104€of€the€Maryland€Code,€the€Bank€had€a€properlyÐ ˆØ Ðattached€and€perfected€purchase€money€mortgage€or€deed€of€trust€which€afforded€its€superiority.€Ð tÄ ÐJones,€on€the€other€hand,€was€a€judgment€lien€creditor.€€Under€ordinary€circumstances€if€the€deedÐ `° Ðwas€not€found€defective,€the€Bank€would€have€priority€as€a€purchase€money€mortgage€holderÐ L œ Ðover€Jones'€judgment€lien.€€The€Bank€may€further€be€able€to€rely€upon€Code€Section€4-101Ð 8 ˆ Ðregarding€sufficiency€of€deeds€in€order€to€argue€that€the€deed€of€trust€is€valid€and€contains€aÐ $ t Ðminor€defect.€€Bank€can€further€argue€that€the€deed€was€valid€to€provide€notice€to€the€world€of€itsÐ  ` Ðinterest.€€The€Court€should€determine€that€Bank€will€maintain€its€priority€status€and€not€allowÐ ü L  ÐJones€to€take€priority.€€Bank€has€fulfilled€its€obligations€in€all€major€respects€regardingÐ è 8  Ðattachment€and€perfection.€€Therefore,€Bank€still€has€priority€over€Jones.Ð Ô$  ÐÓ XÓÌà  àò òÌÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ ˜è  ÐÓü¢ÓÌòòò òBank's€rights€to€enforceó óóóÐ pÀ ÐÌÓ XÓBank€has€the€right€to€foreclose€on€the€property.€€When€a€mortgagor€defaults€on€aÐ H˜ Ðmortgage,€the€mortgagee€has€the€right€to€foreclose€to€satisfy€their€debt.€€With€a€mortgage€in€MD,Ð 4„ Ðthe€mortgagee€holds€title€to€the€property€that€is€covered€in€the€mortgage.€€As€such,€it€can€sell€theÐ  p Ðproperty€to€satisfy€its€debts.Ð  \ ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓUnder€4-101€the€deed€is€sufficient.€€It€contained€Mary€and€the€Bank's€name,€described€theÐ ä4 Ðland,€the€interest€to€be€granted€(a€mortgage)€and€was€signed€and€recorded.€€Because€BankÐ Ð  Ðfulfilled€these€requirements€the€mortgage€is€valid€and€they€can€foreclose€when€Mary€does€notÐ ¼  Ðpay.Ð ¨ø ÐUnder€4-109,€where€there€is€the€omission€of€a€notary€seal€and€the€deed€is€challengedÐ ”ä Ðwithin€6€months€of€its€recordation,€the€grant€may€be€defective.€€Here€Mary's€signature€was€notÐ €Ð Ðproperly€notarized.€€The€recording€was€on€March€5,€2007€and€Jones€challenged€it€on€July€10,Ð l¼ Ð2007.€€So€the€failure€to€comply€with€4-109€by€not€having€a€notarized€signature€may€make€itÐ X ¨ Ðdefective€if€that€is€what€the€court€decides€when€its€challenged.€€Most€likely,€the€court€will€findÐ D!” Ðthat€under€principles€of€equity,€the€mortgage€was€valid.€€Bank€paid€$210,000.00,€a€considerableÐ 0"€  Ðsum.€€It€would€not€be€fair€to€now€tell€the€Bank€that€the€contract€with€Mary€was€void.Ð #l! ÐÐ $X" ÐÑ  ÑÓ XÓòòò òJones's€Priorityó óóóÐ ô$D # ÐÌÓ XÓBank€has€priority€over€Jones€in€this€case€as€it€is€a€Purchase€Money€Mortgagor€whoÐ Ì&"% Ðrecorded,€under€7-104€where€a€purchaser€gives€a€deed€or€mortgage€to€secure€partial€payment€ofÐ ¸'#& Ðthe€purchase€money€(or€purchase€price€of€the€home),€the€mortgage€shall€be€preferred€to€anyÐ ¤(ô#' Ðprevious€judgment€or€decree€for€payment€of€money.€€As€required,€the€deed€must€recite€sumÐ )à$( Ðreceived€is€part€purchase€money.€€The€facts€state€that€the€deed€was€valid€and€therefore,€it€mustÐ |*Ì%) Ðhave€stated€the€sum€received€for€purchase€money.€€Ð h+¸&* ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓAlthough€Jones€obtained€a€judgment€against€Mary€on€January€3,€2007,€it€is€secondary€toÐ œì ÐBank's€purchase€money€security€interest.€€Judgment€creditors€are€subordinate€to€purchase€moneyÐ ˆØ Ðmortgagees€who€recorded.Ð tÄ ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓIn€the€foreclosure€action,€any€proceeds€will€first€pay€off€debt€of€Bank€and€then€pay€JonesÐ L œ Ðif€money€is€remaining.€€If€it€is€not€enough€to€pay€Bank's€debt€they€may€bring€an€action€inÐ 8 ˆ Ðpersonam€against€money€for€the€deficiency.€€€€Ð $ t ÐÓ XÓÐ   ` ÐÓ  Óò òQUESTION€10ó óÐ ° ÐÓ¯ÓÌÓ  Óà  àAl€was€properly€charged€in€Montgomery€County,€Maryland,€with€rape€and€various€other€sexÐ ˆØ Ðoffenses€stemming€from€an€encounter€with€Beth.€At€trial€Beth€testified€Al€forced€her€to€have€sexÐ tÄ Ðwith€him.€Al€claimed€that€the€sex€was€consensual.Ð `° Ðà  àÌà  àAt€trial,€Beth€testified€Al€had€stopped€her€on€the€street€on€November€1,€2006,€and€asked€forÐ 8 ˆ Ðdirections.€Al€suggested€Beth€get€in€his€car€and€show€him€how€to€find€his€destination.€Beth€obliged.Ð $ t ÐBeth€testified€Al€then€locked€the€doors,€took€her€to€a€wooded€area;€said€he€had€a€knife€but€would€notÐ  ` Ðhurt€her€if€she€complied€with€his€directions€and€forced€Beth€to€have€vaginal€intercourse.€BethÐ ü L  Ðtestified€Al€then€dropped€her€off€at€a€nearby€gas€station.Ð è 8  Ðà  àÌà  àIn€his€testimony,€Al€denied€any€threat€or€force€and€denied€stating€he€had€a€knife.€HeÐ À  Ðmaintained€the€sexual€activity€was€consensual.Ð ¬ü  ÐÑ  ÑÝ‚!ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝÝ‚!ÿÿÿ¤³ÝÝ  Ýà  à݃!ÿÿ¤³ ´݌̌Ñ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  Ýà  àThe€prosecutor€at€Alððs€jury€trial,€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Montgomery€County,€called€CarolÐ „Ô  Ðas€a€rebuttal€witness.€Alððs€attorney€asked€for€a€proffer€of€Carolððs€testimony€out€of€the€presence€of€theÐ pÀ Ðjury.€The€prosecutor€made€the€following€proffer€as€to€Carolððs€testimony:€Carol€would€testify€that€inÐ \¬ Ð1990,€Al€had€approached€her€in€Montgomery€County,€Maryland,€asking€for€directions.€After€CarolÐ H˜ Ðtold€him€she€was€unable€to€provide€him€with€directions,€Al€told€her€he€had€a€knife€in€his€pocket.€€HeÐ 4„ Ðforced€Carol€to€get€into€her€car€and€then€forced€his€way€into€the€car.€€€Carol€said€Al€stated€Ð  p ÐÝ‚!ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝÝ‚!ÿÿÿ·ÝÝ  Ýeverything€would€be€alright€if€she€did€what€she€was€told€and€Carol€would€further€say€that€Al€rapedÐ  \ Ðher.€Al€then€had€Carol€drop€him€off.€The€prosecutor€also€proffered€that€Al€had€pled€Ýƒ!ÿÿ·æ·ÝŒÐ øH ÐŒÑ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  Ýguilty€to€Second€Degree€sex€offense€with€respect€to€the€incident€in€1990.Ð ä4 Ðà  àÌà  àAfter€hearing€the€proffer,€Alððs€attorney€objected€to€the€prosecutorððs€effort€to€have€CarolÐ ¼  Ðtestify.Ð ¨ø Ðà  àÌà  à€ò òa.€€State€the€arguments€Alððs€attorney€would€reasonably€give€in€support€of€his€Ð €Ð Ðà  àà ` àobjection.Ð pÀ Ðà  àÌà  à€b.€€€€How€should€the€prosecutor€respond?Ð H!˜ ÐÑ  Ñà  àÌà  à€c.€€€€How€should€the€Judge€rule€on€the€objection€and€why?Ð  #p! ÐÌÓ  ÓÌREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð ä%4!$ ÐÓ  Óà  àÌà  àó óAlððs€Defenses€Against€Admissibility€of€this€EvidenceÐ ¼' #& Ðà  àÌà  àAlððs€attorney€should€argue€that€for€testimony€to€be€admissible,€it€must€first€be€relevant,Ð ”)ä$( Ðand€this€proffered€testimony€is€not.€€Relevant€information€should€tend€to€prove€or€disprove€someÐ €*Ð%) Ðmaterial€fact€that€is€in€controversy.€€Here,€the€fact€that€is€controversy€is€not€whether€Al€and€BethÐ l+¼&* Ðhad€sex,€but€whether€the€sex€was€consensual.€€Any€relevant€testimony€then€should€tend€to€proveÐ ° Ðor€disprove€that€Beth€consented€to€the€intercourse.€€Ð œì Ðà  àÌà  àUnder€the€facts€given,€the€proffered€testimony€would€not.€€Whether€Al€forced€CarolÐ tÄ Ðsixteen€years€ago€to€submit€to€nonconsensual€sex€does€not€help€a€fact€finder€determine€whetherÐ `° ÐBeth€gave€consent,€so€it€is€not€relevant.Ð L œ Ðà  àÌà  àEven€though€the€facts€of€the€proferred€testimony€closely€resemble€what€Beth€alleges,€theyÐ $ t Ðare€not€so€close€as€to€fall€within€an€exception€such€as€the€ððsignatureðð€exception€where€crimesÐ  ` Ðcommitted€are€done€by€a€substantially€similar€and€very€unique€manner.€€The€testimony€is€furtherÐ ü L  Ðbarred€as€evidence€of€a€prior€bad€act€that€may€unduly€prejudice€Al.€€The€fact€finder,€upon€hearingÐ è 8  Ðof€the€prior€incident€may€decide€Al€has€a€bad€character.€€They€may€then€convict€him€because€theyÐ Ô$  Ðdo€not€like€him,€rather€than€because€they€are€convinced€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€he€did€inÐ À  Ðfact€force€Beth€to€commit€to€sexual€intercourse€against€her€will.€€The€possible€prejudice€of€thisÐ ¬ü  Ðtestimony€would€far€outweigh€its€probative€value,€and€must€be€deemed€inadmissible.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€the€event€with€Carol€that€resulted€in€his€conviction€for€second€degree€sexualÐ pÀ Ðoffense€was€very€remote€in€time,€having€happened€sixteen€years€before€the€incident€with€Beth.€ItÐ \¬ Ðis€too€old€to€be€admitted€as€a€prior€conviction.€For€all€these€reasons,€the€proferred€testimonyÐ H˜ Ðshould€not€be€admitted.Ð 4„ ÐÝ‚!ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝÝ‚!ÿÿÿ:ÅÝÝ  Ý݃!ÿÿ:ÅŸÅ݌̌Ñ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝProsecutor's€Responses:Ð  \ ÐÔxpÀøHÔà  àThe€prosecutor€should€respond€that€the€events€are€in€fact€very€similar€in€nature€„€in€both,Ð pÀ ÐAl€used€the€ruse€that€he€was€in€need€of€directions.€He€used€the€threat€of€having€a€knife€to€obtainÐ \¬ Ðcompliance€from€his€victims,€and€also€assured€them€he€would€not€hurt€them€as€long€as€Ô#ooddÔtheyòò€óódid.Ð H˜ ÐÔ#kkooÔBoth€Ô#ddkkÔwere€then€forced€to€have€intercourseòò.€óóIn€1990€he€was€convicted€for€this€act,€A€prosecutorÐ 4„ Ðmay€assert€that€his€eliciting€sex€from€a€stranger€in€a€òòvehicle€óóÔ#eeddÔwith€Ô#ddeeÔa€knife€after€asking€forÐ  p Ðdirections€showed€a€modus€operandi€for€rape,€andòò€óóthat€the€conviction€should€have€given€him€anÐ  \ Ðawareness€of€the€error€of€his€acts€so€that€he€could€not€claim€he€believed€Beth€would€haveÐ øH Ðconsented.Ð ä4 ÐÔxH!˜Ð ÔRulingÐ H!˜ ÐÔR"¢4"„ÔÓ ,ÓÓ <Óà  àÌà  àThe€judge€should€bar€all€of€Carol's€testimony.€Al's€counsel€is€correct€that€the€probativeÐ >#Ž  Ðvalue€Ô#ssddÔof€theòò€óóÔ#ddssÔtestimony€is€far€outweighed€by€its€potential€unfair€prejudice.€As€a€prior€bad€act,Ð *$z! Ðthis€is€only€impermissible€character€evidence.€Whether€Carol€consented€has€no€real€bearing€onÐ %f " Ðwhether€Beth€did;€Carol's€actions€cannot€predict€Beth's.€It€falls€within€no€exception.Ð &R!# ÐAdditionally,€Ô#ooddÔthe€Ô#ddooÔconviction€is€too€remote€to€be€admitted,€even€if€Ô#ooddÔthe€Ô#ddooÔinformation€given€wasÐ î&>"$ Ðlimited€just€to€disclosing€that€he€was€convicted€of€a€second€degree€sexual€offense.Ð Ú'*#% Ðâ âÑ  ÑÓ <ÓÓ ,ÓÓ  Óò òÐ Æ($& ÐÔ& „ Ôâ ââ âREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Ð ° ÐÌÓ –Óó óÓ  Ó€€Part€A€=€Al's€Objectionsò òÐ ˆØ ÐÓ K–Óó óÐ tÄ ÐGenerally,€all€òòrelevantóó€evidence€is€admissible,€unless€Ô#``ddÔotherwise€excludable€onÔ#dd``Ô€Ô#bbddÔother€grounds.Ð \¬ ÐHere,€the€testimony€of€Carol€as€to€an€encounter€with€Al€that€mimics€the€encounterÔ'„°ÎÔ€with€the€victimÐ H ˜ Ðin€this€present€trial€is€relevant€to€the€issue€of€whether€Al€committed€the€same€crime€against€Beth.Ð 4 „ ÐHowever,€Ô#iibbÔthere€Ô#ddiiÔare€other€issues€with€this€evidence,€as€explained€below:Ð  p ÐÔx„ Ô \ÔòòObjections€to€Carol's€TestimonyÐ „ Ô ÐÔ–V p ÀÔóóÓ hÓIn€a€criminal€trial,€òòcharacter€conformity€evidenceóó€is€inadmissible€to€show€that€the€defendantÐ V  Ðhas€a€propensity€to€commit€bad€acts.€Here,€Carol's€testimony€is€being€used€to€show€that€Al€isÐ òB  Ða€"bad€man"€who€commits€bad€acts,€and€is€therefore€inadmissible€at€trial.A€very€narrowÐ Þ.  Ðexception€to€this€rule€applies€in€the€case€of€the€òòMIMIC€exception.óó€If€the€proffered€characterÐ Ê  Ðevidence€is€not€being€used€to€show€character,€but€rather€to€show,inter€alia,€identity€of€crimeÐ ¶  Ðor€intent,€such€evidence€may€be€admitted€òòonly€ifóó€the€Ô#bbddÔjudge€finds€byÔ#ddbbÔ€òòÔ#bbddÔclear€and€convincingÐ ¢ò  Ðevidenceóó€thatÔ#ddbbÔ€Ô#bbddÔthe€"prior€bad€act"€in€fact€occurred,Ô#ddbbÔ€òòÔ#bbddÔandóó€if€theÔ#ddbbÔ€òòprejudicial€effect€of€such€evidenceÐ ŽÞ Ðdoes€not€outweigh€its€probative€value.óó€€Here,€òòÔ#``ddÔAl's€attorney€will€argue€that€there€is€no€"identity"Ð zÊ ÐMIMIC€exception€to€which€Carol'sóó€Ô#dd``Ôòòtestimony€applies.óó€Although€there€are€some€similaritiesÐ f¶ Ðbetween€the€1990€incident€with€Carol,€and€the€2006€incident€with€Beth€(Al€asking€forÐ R¢ Ðdirections,€saying€he€had€a€knife€in€his€pocket,€indicating€he€would€not€hurt€the€victim€if€sheÐ >Ž Ð"did€what€she€was€told"€or€ð ðcomplied€with€his€directionsðð),€there€are€enough€differences€toÐ *z Ðrender€the€identity€MIMIC€exception€inapplicable.€€In€the€1990€incident,€Al€approachedÐ f Ðsomeone€with€a€car.€€In€the€2006€incident,€Al€had€his€own€car.€€The€mere€coincidence€ofÐ R Ðthreatening€language€or€a€knife€is€commonality€amongst€many€sex€offenders€and€does€notÐ î> Ðindicate€sufficient€identity€of€crime€to€justify€this€exception.Ð Ú* ÐÐ Æ ÐIf€the€judge€finds€that€Carolððs€testimony€does€fit€within€the€ð ðidentityðð€of€crime€MIMICÐ ² Ðexception,€òòthe€judge€may€find€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€the€1990€incidentÐ žî Ðoccurred€in€light€of€the€fact€that€Al€pled€guilty€to€2òòndóó€degree€sex€offense€with€respect€to€theÐ ŠÚ Ðincident.Ð v Æ ÐóóÐ b!² ÐHowever,€òòAlððs€attorney€could€argue€that€the€prejudicial€effect€of€such€evidence€substantiallyÐ N"ž Ðoutweighs€its€probative€value.óó€€Here,€as€explained€above,€there€are€sufficient€differencesÐ :#Š  Ðbetween€the€two€crimes€to€raise€doubts€and€concerns€about€whether€this€is€in€fact€anÐ &$v! Ðð ðidentical€crime,ðð€but€the€jury€will€be€so€persuaded€and€prejudiced€by€the€idea€that€Al€is€aÐ %b " Ðð ðbad€manðð€that€it€will€give€undue€weigh€to€such€evidence,€particularly€in€light€of€theÐ þ%N!# Ðemotionally€charged€responses€to€accusations€of€sex€offenses.€€Because€this€may€deny€AlððsÐ ê&:"$ Ðright€to€a€fair€trial,€it€should€be€excluded.òò€€Hearsay€óóis€an€out€of€court€statement€used€for€itsÐ Ö'&#% Ðtruth,€and€is€generally€inadmissible€unless€an€exception€applies.€€Here,€Carol€would€testify€asÐ Â($& Ðto€what€Al€said€to€her€in€the€1990€incident,€constituting€hearsay.€€However,€under€theÐ ®)þ$' Ðòòstatement€of€a€party€opponent€exceptionóó,€statements€of€a€party€opponent€offered€by€theÐ š*ê%( Ðadverse€party,€that€are€adverse€to€the€partyððs€opponentððs€interest€at€the€time€of€trial,€areÐ †+Ö&) Ðadmissible€as€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule.€€Here,€Alððs€statements€indicating€force€orÐ ° Ðthreat€of€force€against€Al€are€admissible€since€they€are€offered€by€the€State€and€adverse€toÐ œì ÐAlððs€interests€at€trial.Ð ˆØ ÐòòÐ tÄ ÐObjections€to€the€Evidence€of€the€1990€Guilty€PleaÐ `° ÐóóÐ L œ ÐThe€guilty€plea€is€also€òòhearsayóó€because€it€is€an€admission€out€of€court€by€Al€as€to€hisÐ 8 ˆ Ðinvolvement€in€the€sex€offense.€€However,€a€òòfinal€guilty€pleaóó€in€Maryland€is€not€excludableÐ $ t Ðon€òòpublic€policy€groundsóó,€and€can€come€in€under€the€òòstatement€of€party€opponent€exceptionóóÐ  ` Ð(see€above).€€Therefore,€there€are€no€valid€objections€to€this€guilty€plea€coming€in.Ð ü L  ÐÝ‚!ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÝ‚!ÿÿÿãÝÝ  Ý݃!ÿÿãŒã݌Рè 8  ÐŒÑ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝòòPart€B€=€Prosecutorððs€Response€to€Alððs€Objectionsóó€Ð Ô$  ÐÐ À  ÐòòCarolððs€TestimonyóóÐ ¬ü  ÐÐ ˜è  ÐòòMIMICóó.€€Although€character€evidence€generally€is€inadmissible€to€show€propensity€to€commitÐ „Ô  Ðbad€acts,€this€evidence€falls€within€the€òòMIMIC€exceptionóó€to€the€rule.€First,€there€is€sufficientÐ pÀ Ðòòidentity€óóbetween€the€1990€and€2006€incident.€€Al€used€the€same€general€common€scheme€toÐ \¬ Ðperpetrate€the€sex€offense€(approaching€a€single€woman,€asking€for€directions,€using€a€car€as€anÐ H˜ Ðinstrumentality€of€the€crime,€giving€the€same€sorts€of€threats,€using€the€same€weapon€(a€knife)).€Ð 4„ ÐSecond,€this€prior€bad€act€occurred€by€òòclear€and€convincing€evidenceóó€(see€above).€€Third,€òòtheÐ  p Ðprobative€value€outweighs€the€prejudicial€valueóó.€€Here,€Alððs€defense€is€that€sex€was€consensual,€Ð  \ Ðthat€he€did€not€use€force,€and€that€he€did€not€state€that€he€had€a€knife.€€Alððs€testimony€is€centralÐ øH Ðto€the€defense€theory€of€the€case,€and€there€are€no€eyewitnesses€to€the€crime€against€Beth.€Ð ä4 ÐParticularly€in€sex€offense€cases,€where€there€is€an€identity€of€crime,€that€identity€is€extremelyÐ Ð  Ðrelevant€and€probative€as€to€a€pattern€of€sex€offense€conduct,€and€any€prejudice€to€Al€can€beÐ ¼  Ðmitigated€by€Alððs€cross„examination€of€Carol.Ð ¨ø ÐòòÐ ”ä ÐHearsayÐ €Ð ÐóóÐ l¼ ÐFor€the€reasons€stated€in€Part€A,€any€objections€by€Al€to€either€Carolððs€testimony€or€the€guiltyÐ X ¨ Ðplea€on€hearsay€grounds€are€inapplicable€in€light€of€the€òòstatement€of€party€opponentóó€exceptionÐ D!” Ðto€the€hearsay€rule,€and€the€fact€that€the€1990€plea€is€a€finally€entered€guilty€plea€(i.,e.,€no€publicÐ 0"€  Ðpolicy€objections).Ð #l! ÐÔ%f $XÔòòImpeachmentÐ %f " ÐóóÐ &R!# ÐThe€Prosecutor€might€further€argue€in€this€case€that€because€Al€testified€in€this€case,€that€theÐ î&>"$ ÐState€ought€to€be€allowed€to€òòimpeach€his€credibility€by€evidence€of€a€prioróó€òòcriminal€conviction.óóÐ Ú'*#% ÐHowever,€this€argument€would€fail€because€the€time€for€using€such€a€conviction€forÐ Æ($& Ðimpeachment€purposes€has€passed.€While€a€guilty€plea€may€be€considered€a€prior€conviction,Ð ²)%' Ðthe€conviction€can€only€be€used€in€a€later€trial€òòwithin€15óó€òòyears€of€the€conviction,óó€Here,€Al€pledÐ ž*î%( Ðguilty€in€1990,€but€this€is€now€a€2008€trial,€rendering€this€beyond€15€years€and€inadmissible.òòÐ Š+Ú&) ÐóóFurthermore,€any€other€impeachment€uses€of€this€evidence€(impeachment€by€character€for€truthÐ ° Ðand€veracity€by€specific€instance€of€conduct,€for€example)€could€only€be€accomplished€onÐ œì Ðintrinsic,€cross€examination€of€Al,€and€the€prosecutor€would€be€stuck€with€the€answer€(i.e.,€can'tÐ ˆØ Ðbring€in€Carol's€extrinsic€evidence€to€impeach€by€a€specific€instance€of€conduct).Ð tÄ ÐÝ‚!ÿÿÿÝÑ  ÑÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝÝ‚!ÿÿÿîðÝÝ  Ýòò݃!ÿÿîðSñ݌Р`° ÐŒÑ  ÑÓ! °°ÀÐ °°ŒX!ÓÔ€XäŒXXXäŒÔÝ  ÝPart€C€òò€óóJudge€RulingóóÐ L œ ÐÐ 8 ˆ ÐFor€the€Ô#nnddÔreasons€Ô#ddnnÔstated€above,€the€court€should€òòallow€Carol's€testimonyóó€on€the€basis€of€theÐ $ t ÐMIMIC€arguments€raised€by€the€State,€and€òòdeny€any€MIMIC€or€hearsay€objectionsóó€òòÔ#nnddÔby€Ô#ddnnÔtheÐ  ` Ðdefense.óó€The€court€should€not€grant€the€Ô#ssddÔuse€of€Ô#ddssÔthe€testimony€on€impeachment€grounds€raisedÐ ü L  Ðby€the€prosecutor,€as€those€grounds€are€inapplicable.€The€Court€may,€Ô#bbddÔin€its€discretion€and€at€theÐ è 8  Ðrequest€of€Defendant,€give€aÔ#ddbbÔ€òòÔ#bbddÔlimiting€instructionóó€to€the€jury€toÔ#ddbbÔ€instruct€them€as€to€the€limitedÐ Ô$  Ðpurpose€of€MIMIC€Ô#nnddÔtestimony€(i.e.,€it€is€Ô#ddnnÔnot€to€be€considered€òò"óópropensity"€evidence)€and€limitÐ À  ÐÔ#kkddÔany€Ô#ddkkÔundue€prejudice€to€Al.ò òÐ ¬ü  Ðó ó