ÿWPCÜ ÷árL£®Uo…壙óñ.˜ô¸ûVo…»œþšTæi¯$ëÉ"ùÃÿ²§m“-úç£SrDÛ¸ÝzÒ1ñYªb TrŒör÷ÙÄw|7Z™<éÝ=‚Œ¯`ÃQð5üKþñƒ¼4®>ÏäöhÔ Ú]Î/Iدhªÿ÷þÓw¶8S‰ â;æ¯OŽªÀr¦X—¥ç.š&Ó°h‰¾§©IÔkYzä–ÙšcÎГü´Ã¹³ió…Y~†ƒ±2æerï RæÎK¶œI%rN./rÅšö½£ý,h³‹í‰%.rèMÑ) /ç'^’Ñ<Ã=’ ªÏVÖñ÷½Ê&ùùŒÿ®ß"l.¼¶/É5™٠ž ìöwfÞŠô‘¤Ìx£M«½d?î0Ú§²µ^µáySãA 0V$$$U@z"º<þ6X9`(Courier«<þ6X9`(CourierXôxþ6X@ɹ`7ûX@X' Ñ 9BAREX14C 2BAREX  0 .   3|x ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL$,,,,$0!(üœ$¡¡ÔUSUS.,ÔUq†+â m„Q+  3ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman  (¦ÙCEMU]emu}AutoList1(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i)(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à Ñ À ÑÑ À Ñ(¶ÙCEMU]emu}AutoList2(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(ÆÙCEMU]emu}AutoList3(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)ô\  `*Times New RomanTT Ñ H ÑÑ H Ñ"ÞB è 0*Times New RomanTT<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT(-2†ö$©©Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ýô\  `‹&Times New Roman ÙÝ ƒ †ö)ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€&X=ÙXXXÔà@R R ìàò òQuestions€and€Representative€Answers€Page€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó€ò òof€Ú  Ú31Ú  Úó ó(.3½þ$§§Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ý(ÖÃ9 Z(Times New Roman  Ñ Ð ÑÑ Ð ÑÝ ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÓ  ÓÑ€sQÑÖ€"ÿÿÖà@ìàÔ€X´[XXXÔò òJULY€2001€BAR€EXAMINATIONˆÐ ° Ðà@™ ™ ìàQUESTIONS€AND€REPRESENTATIVE€GOOD€ANSWERSó ó€ˆÐ xÈ ÐÌà@%ìàò òQUESTION€1ó óˆÐ  Z ÐÌà  àAnne€and€Bob€Green€were€born€and€raised€in€Pennsylvania.€€The€couple€met€and€residedÐ šê Ðtogether€as€husband€and€wife€for€approximately€ten€(10)€years€before€coming€to€Maryland.€€They€hadÐ b ² Ðtwo€children,€Caroline,€who€is€twelve,€and€David€who€is€ten.Ð * z ÐÌà  àIn€1998,€Bob€came€to€Maryland€and€found€employment€as€a€biochemist€with€an€annual€salaryÐ º   Ðof€$250,000.€€€Anne€and€the€children€followed€Bob€and€arrived€later€that€same€year.Ð ‚ Ò  ÐÌà  àThey€purchased€a€home€in€Roland€Park€in€Baltimore€City€which€is€titled€in€their€joint€namesÐ b  Ðas€tenants€by€the€entireties.€€At€Bobððs€request,€Anne,€who€has€a€bachelorððs€degree€in€education,€didÐ Ú*  Ðnot€seek€employment,€but€stayed€home€to€care€for€the€children.€€The€parties€decided€that€the€childrenÐ ¢ò  Ðwould€be€home€schooled€until€the€eighth€grade€when€they€would€enter€private€school.€€The€estimatedÐ jº  Ðtuition€for€the€private€school€was€$25,000€per€year,€per€child.Ð 2‚  ÐÌà  àDuring€December€of€2000,€Anne€noticed€that€their€relationship€was€beginning€to€change.€Ð  ÐBob€began€staying€out€late€with€the€explanation€that€he€was€working.€€The€parties€argued€frequently,Ð ŠÚ Ðand€Anne€began€to€feel€abandoned.Ð R¢ ÐÌà  àOne€evening€after€Bob€had€called€to€say€he€was€working€late,€Anne€happened€to€see€himÐ â2 Ðleaving€a€restaurant€with€another€woman.€€She€had€no€previous€evidence€that€he€had€been€unfaithfulÐ ªú Ðto€her,€but€now€believes€that€he€is€having€an€affair.Ð r ÐÌà  àAnne€has€come€to€you€for€legal€advice.€€She€informs€you€that€she€wants€to€obtain€a€divorceÐ R Ðand€return€to€Pennsylvania€with€the€children.€€She€also€informs€you€that€they€do€not€have€a€MarriageÐ Ê ÐCertificate€because€they€never€participated€in€a€marriage€ceremony.€€However,€she€correctly€statesÐ ’â Ðthat€common€law€marriages€are€valid€in€Pennsylvania.Ð Zª ÐÌò òà  àWhat€advice€do€you€give€Anne€about€her€rights€to€obtain€a€divorce€in€Maryland€andÐ ê: Ðto€legally€move€to€Pennsylvania€with€the€children?€€Include€in€your€advice€to€Anne€a€discussionÐ ²  Ðof€the€financial€and€property€implications€of€a€divorce.ó óÐ zÊ! ÐÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ  Z# ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àò òIs€There€a€Valid€Marriageó ó?€€The€State€of€Maryland€does€not€recognize€common€lawÐ š!ê% Ðmarriages.€€Common€law€marriages€entered€into€in€states€that€acknowledge€such€marriages,€however,Ð d"´& Ðwill€be€recognized€under€the€Full€Faith€and€Credit€clause€of€the€U.S.€Constitution.€€PennsylvaniaÐ ,#|' Ðrecognizes€common€law€marriages.€€Anne€and€Bob€lived€together€for€10€years.€€Although€they€mayÐ ô#D( Ðnot€have€had€a€ceremony,€they€have€clearly€cohabited€(have€2€children)€and€established€an€economicÐ ¼$ ) Ðpartnership.€€Furthermore,€it€appears€that€they€hold€each€other€out€as€husband€and€wife.à Ð àÐ „%Ô * ÐÌà  àò òDivorce€in€Marylandó ó.€€Both€Anne€and€Bob€currently€live€in€Maryland€and€have€lived€thereÐ 'd", Ðfor€10€years,€and€so€they€satisfy€the€year€residency€requirement€for€divorces.€€Additionally,€theÐ Þ'.#- Ðreasons€for€the€divorce€arose€in€Maryland.€Since€the€amount€in€controversy€is€likely€to€be€overÐ ¦(ö#. Ð$25,000,€Cir.€Court€will€have€jurisdiction.Ð n)¾$/ ÐÌÌÐ Æ+'2 Ðà  àò òType€of€Divorceó ó.€€Anne€can€pursue€an€absolute€divorce€based€on€desertion€or€adultery.€€InÐ ° Ðorder€to€succeed€on€the€grounds€of€desertion,€she€will€be€required€to€show€that€Bob€has€abandonedÐ zÊ Ðher€for€12€months€with€the€intention€of€leaving€the€marriage.€€Anne€will€have€to€show€more€than€justÐ B’ Ðfrequent€arguments€or€that€Bob€is€working€a€lot.€€If€her€suspicions€that€Bob€is€cheating€are€true€sheÐ  Z Ðmay€be€better€off€pursuing€an€absolute€divorce€on€those€grounds.€€Evidence€of€adultery€will€includeÐ Ò" Ðopportunity€„€that€Bob€had€the€time€to€be€with€another€woman,€probably€more€than€just€a€sightingÐ šê Ðof€him€leaving€a€restaurant€„€and€disposition€circumstances€that€support€this€allegation€„€his€claimsÐ b ² Ðthat€he's€working€late,€but€he's€not€really€at€work,€perhaps€evidence€of€phone€calls€or€gifts€to€the€otherÐ * z Ðwoman.€€Anne€will€need€somebody€to€corroborate€her€story.€€She€must€also€remember€that€adulteryÐ ò B Ðis€a€crime€in€Maryland€and€Bob€will€be€able€to€plead€the€5th€„€his€right€against€self„incrimination.Ð º   ÐÌò ò(2)ó óà  àò òWho€Will€Get€The€Kidsó ó?€€Custody€will€depend€on€the€best€interests€of€the€child.€€Since€theÐ J š  Ðtwo€children€are€12€and€10,€the€court€will€take€their€views€under€consideration.€€Usually,€the€primaryÐ d  Ðcare€giver€gets€custody.€€Anne€is€likely€to€be€considered€the€primary€care€giver€since€she€stayed€homeÐ Ü,  Ðwith€the€kids€while€Bob€worked.€€Her€interest€in€leaving€for€Pennsylvania,€however,€affects€theÐ ¤ô  Ðoutcome.€€Again,€it€will€depend€on€what€the€court€determines€to€be€in€the€best€interests€of€theÐ l¼  Ðchildren.€The€court€may€grant€Bob€visitation€rights€and€Anne€legal,€physical€custody€or€maybe€evenÐ 4„  Ðjoint€custody€if€they€can€get€along€and€Anne€ultimately€decides€to€stay€in€Maryland.Ð üL  ÐÌò ò(3)ó óà  àò òFinancial€Implicationsó ó.€€Anne€should€be€entitled€to€alimony.€€And,€the€court€will€probablyÐ ŒÜ Ðorder€alimony€pendente€lite€during€litigation.€€She€stayed€home€so€Bob€could€work€and€took€care€ofÐ V¦ Ðthe€kids.€€Since€she€does€have€an€education,€however,€the€court€may€give€her€rehabilitative€alimony€„Ð n Ðuntil€she€finds€a€job€and€gets€back€on€her€feet.€€If€their€lifestyles€will€be€disproportionate,€the€courtÐ æ6 Ðmay€still€award€permanent€alimony.Ð ®þ ÐÌò ò(4)ó óà  àò òPropertyó ó.€€Any€property€the€couple€attained€after€their€marriage,€like€the€house,€will€beÐ >Ž Ðpartitioned.€€Whoever€gets€custody€of€the€children€will€get€to€€live€there€for€3€years€as€part€of€aÐ X Ðtransition€period,€but€then€it€will€be€sold.Ð Ð  ÐÌÓ€ (ÆÙ83ÓØ! !Øò ò(5)ó óà  àò òCosts€of€Raising€Childrenó ó.€€Both€parents€will€have€to€contribute€to€costs€regarding€raisingÐ `° Ðthe€children€according€to€their€capabilities.€€Since€Bob€makes€more,€he€will€have€to€contribute€more.€Ð *z ÐThis€award€may€be€modified€according€to€the€changing€circumstances€of€the€respective€parents'Ð òB Ðfinancial€situations.Ð º   ÐÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ Jš" ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àò òObtaining€a€Divorceó ó.€€In€Maryland,€common€law€marriages€are€not€recognized.€€However,Ð Ú *$ Ðthe€Maryland€courts€generally€will€recognize€a€common„law€marriage€if€the€parties€lived€in€aÐ ¤!ô% Ðjurisdiction/state€that€does€legally€recognize€it.€€Maryland€does€not€have€to€recognize€any€marriageÐ l"¼& Ðthat€is€contrary€to€public€policy.€€Anne's€common„law€marriage€was€valid€in€Pennsylvania€and€wouldÐ 4#„' Ðmost€likely€be€considered€a€valid€marriage€here.€€The€second€issue€is€residency€requirements.€Ð ü#L( ÐMaryland€requests€that€either€the€circumstances€giving€rise€to€the€divorce€occur€in€Maryland€or€thatÐ Ä$ ) Ðthe€party€be€a€resident€for€one€year.€€Anne€meets€both.Ð Œ%Ü * ÐÌà  àFirst,€I€would€discuss€with€Anne€the€difference€between€a€fault€and€no€fault€divorce.€€SheÐ 'l", Ðcould€secure€a€divorce€in€a€shorter€time€based€on€fault.€€Adultery€is€one€of€the€criteria€under€whichÐ ä'4#- Ðshe€can€seek€a€divorce.€€However,€her€case€is€basically€her€word€against€Bob's.€€But€a€judge€couldÐ ¬(ü#. Ðmake€the€inference€from€the€coming€home€late€and€Anne€seeing€him€with€a€woman€in€a€restaurant.€Ð t)Ä$/ ÐIf€she€could€subpoena€Bob's€boss,€supervisor€or€co„worker€who€may€know€whether€or€not€he€worksÐ <*Œ%0 Ðlate,€that€would€help€create€a€stronger€inference.Ð +T&1 ÐÐ Ì+'2 Їà  àOtherwise,€Anne€will€have€to€seek€a€no„fault€divorce€requiring€either€a€voluntary,€agreed„Ð ° Ðupon€separation€from€Bob€for€one„year€(no€cohabitation)€or€a€non„voluntary€separation€for€2€yearsÐ xÈ Ð(no€cohabitation).Ð @ Ðà  àÌò ò(2)ó óà  àò òMove€to€Pennsylvaniaó ó.€€If€Bob€does€not€object,€Anne€and€the€kids€can€return€toÐ Ð  ÐPennsylvania€so€long€as€Bob€has€a€visitation€schedule€with€the€children.€€If€Bob€does€not€agree,€AnneÐ šê Ðwill€most€likely€need€to€make€a€motion€to€allow€her€to€have€primary€custody€of€the€children€andÐ b ² Ðallow€her€to€take€them€to€Pennsylvania.€€The€court€will€consider€the€best€interests€of€the€children€inÐ * z Ðdetermining€whether€or€not€to€grant€Anne's€motion.€€It€will€consider€such€factors€as€each€party'sÐ ò B Ðrelationship€with€the€children,€each€party's€age€and€health€and€each€party's€ability€to€care€for€them.€Ð º   ÐWhile€being€a€mother€is€not€a€dispositive€factor,€the€court€will€place€weight€on€the€parent€who€hasÐ ‚ Ò  Ðbeen€the€primary€care€giver.€€Anne€has€been€a€stay„at„home€mother€while€Bob€has€been€the€mainÐ J š  Ðfinancial€supporter€of€the€family.€€The€court€will€also€probably€look€at€whether€Anne€and€the€childrenÐ b  Ðhave€family€in€Pennsylvania.Ð Ú*  ÐÌò ò(3)ó óà  àò òFinancial€Aspectsó ó.€€Pending€a€divorce€and€during€the€period€of€separation,€Anne€can€seekÐ jº  Ðpendente€lite€support€for€herself€and€the€children.€€Generally,€the€parent€who€will€primarily€be€caringÐ 4„  Ðfor€the€children€will€be€allowed€to€stay€in€the€family€home€as€that€is€usually€in€the€children's€bestÐ üL  Ðinterests.€€As€a€part€of€the€divorce,€Anne€can€also€seek€primary€custody,€alimony€and€child€support.€Ð Ä ÐAlimony€is€usually€awarded€as€an€aid€to€the€non€or€lesser€income€earning€spouse€for€a€period€of€timeÐ ŒÜ Ðnecessary€to€get€that€spouse€back€on€his/her€feet.€€In€Anne's€case,€she€has€been€unemployed€for€nearlyÐ T¤ Ð3€years.€€It€will€take€her€a€while€to€get€another€job.€€If€Bob€and€Anne€still€want€the€children€home„Ð l Ðschooled,€she€will€be€unemployed€for€a€while€longer.€€Additionally,€she€and€the€children€haveÐ ä4 Ðbecome€accustomed€to€a€lifestyle€that€$250,000€per€year€can€offer.€€While€Anne€and€the€kids€are€notÐ ¬ü Ðnecessarily€entitled€to€exactly€the€same€amenities,€they€should€be€able€to€obtain€somethingÐ tÄ Ðcomparable.Ð <Œ ÐÌà  àAs€to€Anne€and€Bob's€house,€if€Maryland€recognizes€their€common„law€marriage,€then€theÐ Ì Ðcourt€will€probably€honor€their€ownership€as€tenants€by€the€entirety.€€Anne€is€entitled€to€one„half€theÐ ”ä Ðvalue€of€the€home€in€the€form€of€a€judgement€or€proceeds€from€a€sale.€€If€she€stays€in€Maryland,€sheÐ \¬ Ðis€likely€to€be€awarded€the€home€or€possessions€for€up€to€3€years€as€she€will€likely€have€custody.€€InÐ $t Ðany€case,€the€value€of€the€home€may€be€balanced€against€the€value€of€all€of€their€other€property€suchÐ ì< Ðas€retirement€or€investment€accounts€and€distributed€between€Anne€and€Bob€as€equitably€as€possible.€Ð ´  ÐÌÌà  àChild€support€is€determined€by€taking€the€gross€monthly€income€of€each€spouse,€adding€themÐ  \# Ðtogether€and€using€a€scaled€chart€comparing€income€and€the€number€of€children.€€Alimony,€day€careÐ Ô $$ Ðand€health€insurance€are€also€factored€in.€€If€Bob€insists€that€the€children€attend€private€school,€thenÐ œ!ì% Ðhe€will€most€likely€be€responsible€for€paying€for€that€additionally.€€The€child€support€will€continueÐ d"´& Ðuntil€the€children€reach€18,€die,€marry€or€emancipate.Ð ,#|' ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ Ä+'2 Ðà@%ìàò òQUESTION€2ˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àó óAs€a€newly€licensed€Maryland€attorney,€you€meet€with€your€very€first€client.€€She€was€injuredÐ @ Ðin€a€motor€vehicle€accident€and€wishes€you€to€handle€her€personal€injury€claim.€€After€interviewingÐ X Ðher,€you€determine€that€she€was€not€at€fault€in€the€accident€and€that€it€was€caused€by€the€other€driver.€Ð Ð  ÐYou€also€determine€that€both€drivers€have€liability€insurance€and€that€your€clientððs€insurance€hasÐ ˜è Ðpersonal€injury€protection€coverage€which€will€pay€medical€bills€and€lost€wages€up€to€$5,000€withoutÐ ` ° Ðregard€to€fault.Ð ( x ÐÌà  àYou€and€your€client€execute€a€contingency€fee€agreement.€€The€agreement€establishes€the€factÐ ¸   Ðof€your€representation,€fees€and€costs€to€be€charged€to€the€client,€and€your€appointment€as€attorney„Ð € Ð  Ðin„fact€for€the€client.€€It€also€authorizes€you€to€receive€settlement€funds,€pay€medical€providers€andÐ H ˜  Ðdeposit€any€settlement€funds€collected€into€your€escrow€account€until€they€are€disbursed.Ð `  ÐÌà  àYour€client€also€executes€letters€of€protection€prepared€by€you€allowing€you€to€collect€andÐ  ð  Ðreceive€any€and€all€medical€reports€and€bills€associated€with€her€treatment€from€her€medicalÐ h¸  Ðproviders€and€agreeing€to€pay€those€providers€from€the€proceeds€of€any€settlement.€€These€letters€areÐ 0€  Ðsent€to€all€of€the€providers.Ð øH  ÐÌà  àYour€client€incurs€medical€costs€of€$4500.€€The€bills€are€forwarded€to€you€with€the€providerððsÐ ˆØ Ðdemands€for€payment.€€You€present€the€bills€to€your€clientððs€insurer€under€the€personal€injuryÐ P  Ðprotection€coverage€and€promptly€receive€a€check€made€payable€to€your€client€in€the€amount€ofÐ h Ð$4500.€€You€have€also€received€a€check€for€the€settlement€proceeds€of€$15,000€made€payable€to€youÐ à0 Ðand€your€client,€jointly.Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àYou€phone€the€client€and€inform€her€that€you€have€the€checks€and€that€you€intend€to€depositÐ 8ˆ Ðthem€into€your€escrow€account,€deduct€your€fee,€pay€the€outstanding€medical€bills€and€pay€theÐ P Ðbalance€to€her.€€She€advises€you€that€she€is€having€financial€difficulties€and€instructs€you€to€deductÐ È Ðyour€fee€and€send€her€the€balance€and€not€pay€the€medical€bills,€and€that€she€will€make€her€ownÐ à Ðarrangements€to€pay€them.Ð X¨ ÐÌà  àò òWhat€are€the€risks€to€you€and€your€client€if€you€agree€with€her€demand?€€Explain€fully.ó óÐ è8 ÐÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ xÈ! ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àò òDuty€of€Loyaltyó ó.€€An€attorney€is€an€agent€of€his/her€client€and€the€first€duty€is€that€of€loyaltyÐ  X# Ðto€the€client.€€However,€part€of€that€duty€is€to€disclose€and€notify€the€process€and€obligations€theÐ Ò "$ Ðclient€will€be€undertaking.€€Here,€my€client€has€been€given€full€disclosure€of€the€risks€and€processÐ š!ê% Ðinvolved€in€the€recovery€of€funds.€€She€knows€and€has€authorized€me€to€receive€finds€on€her€behalf.€Ð b"²& ÐShe€has€been€informed€that€I€will€deposit€proceeds€into€my€escrow€account.€€She€understands€I€willÐ *#z' Ðfirst€pay€providers,€then€will€disburse€the€remaining€funds€to€her.€€There€are€also€letters€of€protectionÐ ò#B( Ðmy€client€has€signed€to€ensure€that€the€medical€providers€get€paid.Ð º$ ) ÐÌò ò(2)ó óà  àò òDuty€as€a€Suretyó ó.€€In€obtaining€my€client's€promise€early€in€the€case,€to€pay€the€medicalÐ J&š!+ Ðproviders,€I€am€practically€speaking€and€acting€as€a€guarantee€to€the€medical€people€that€they€willÐ 'd", Ðget€paid.€€I€now€have€an€obligation€to€see€to€it€that€my€client€does€what€she€promised€to€do.Ð Ü',#- ÐÌò ò(3)ó óà  àò òConclusionó ó.€€I€must€explain€to€my€client€that€I€cannot€comply€with€her€demand€withoutÐ l)¼$/ Ðmaking€both€her€and€me€liable€to€the€medical€providers.€€I€will€review€the€documents€she€signed€andÐ 6*†%0 Ðexplain€the€impact€of€her€promise€and€my€guaranty€to€pay€the€doctors.€€If€she€still€insists€on€receivingÐ þ*N&1 Ðthe€full€amount,€I€would€give€her€a€full€statement€of€costs,€expenses,€and€disbursements,€as€agreedÐ Æ+'2 ÐÑsQÑâ âÑÀ°ÑÑÀ°Ñâ âÑ  Ñto€by€the€retainer€agreements.€€I€would€suggest€that€she€might€wish€to€retain€another€attorney€toÐ À Ðadvise€her€as€to€our€dispute.€€I€would€let€the€providers€know€that€there€might€be€a€delay€in€receivingÐ ˆÈ Ðtheir€funds.€€If€there€was€still€no€agreements,€I€would€request€intervention€by€a€court„appointedÐ P Ðmediator.€€The€one€thing€I€would€not€do€is€release€the€funds€until€I€had€some€authoritative€findingÐ X Ðon€the€correct€manner€in€which€to€proceed.€€In€the€meantime,€the€funds€€would€remain€in€my€escrowÐ à  Ðaccount€until€the€matter€was€resolved.Ð ¨è ÐÌà  àI€would€try€to€help€my€client€understand€that€by€signing€the€letters€of€protection€for€theÐ 8 x Ðdoctors,€she€had€made€them€third„party€beneficiaries€of€her€agreement€with€me,€and€that€she€wasÐ  @ Ðobligated€to€honor€her€promise€to€pay€them.€€Since€they€relied€on€both€her€promise€and€mine,€sinceÐ È   Ðshe€knew€about€the€process€and€agreed€to€it€from€the€beginning.€€I€could€not€agree€with€her€proposalÐ  Ð  Ðto€release€the€funds€to€her€without€paying€to€doctors€first.Ð X ˜  ÐÌà@<<ìàòòóóò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ è (  ÐÌà  àThe€answer€to€this€question€depends€to€some€extent€on€the€exact€nature€of€the€notices€sentÐ x¸  Ðto€medical€providers€agreeing€to€pay€them€from€the€settlement.€€From€the€facts,€it€doesn't€appear€toÐ @€  Ðbe€in€the€nature€of€a€contract€or€surety€by€which€I€(the€attorney)€guaranteed€payment.€€Rather,€itÐ H  Ðseems€it€was€just€a€notice€of€the€pending€litigation€and€an€agreement€to€pay€the€providers€from€theÐ Ð Ðsettlement,€if€any.Ð ˜Ø ÐÌà  àThere€is€no€problem€with€the€client€recovering€$15,000€in€the€settlement€even€though€she€hasÐ (h Ðalso€recovered€$4,500€from€her€insurance€company.€€The€rule€is€that€a€defendant€is€not€entitled€toÐ ð0 Ðan€offset€for€any€amounts€already€covered€by€the€plaintiff's€insurance.€€However,€the€insuranceÐ ¸ø Ðcompany€may€be€subrogated€to€the€rights€of€the€plaintiff,€meaning€they€will€be€entitled€to€aÐ €À Ðreimbursement€from€the€settlement€proceeds€of€any€amounts€paid€out€on€plaintiff's€behalf.€€TheÐ Hˆ Ðinsurance€company€must€be€notified€of€the€settlement.Ð P ÐÌà  àThe€insurance€check€is€made€payable€solely€to€the€client,€so€she€will€have€to€indorse€it€beforeÐ  à Ðit€can€be€deposited.€€The€settlement€check€will€have€to€be€indorsed€by€both€the€attorney€and€theÐ h¨ Ðclient.€€Overall,€the€attorney€should€comply€with€the€client's€request€to€send€her€the€proceeds€(afterÐ 0p Ðpayment€of€fees).€€The€client€retains€a€significant€amount€of€control€over€decisions€regardingÐ ø8 Ðsettlement€of€claims.€€The€attorney€should€have€the€client€indorse€the€checks,€then€deposit€them€intoÐ À  Ðthe€escrow€account,€then€write€a€check€to€the€attorney's€account€for€fees€and€costs.€€the€client€shouldÐ ˆÈ! Ðbe€provided€with€a€complete€accounting€of€the€settlement€proceeds,€and€should€be€advised€of€herÐ P" Ðliability€to€pay€her€medical€bills.Ð X# ÐÌà  àIf€a€client€makes€a€decision€that€the€attorney€feels€is€unconscionable€(such€as€not€paying€herÐ ¨ è% Ðmedical€bills)€the€attorney€should€counsel€the€client€as€to€the€possible€consequences€(being€sued,Ð p!°& Ðhaving€her€credit€damaged,€etc.)€but€should€abide€by€her€decision.€€Withdrawal€is€not€really€an€optionÐ 8"x' Ðat€this€point€because€the€case€is€over.Ð #@( ÐÌà  àIf€failing€to€notify€the€insurance€company€and/or€failing€to€pay€the€medical€providers€wouldÐ $Ð * Ðconstitute€fraud€then€the€attorney€must€not€participate.€€This€may€subject€the€attorney€to€disciplinaryÐ X%˜!+ Ðsanctions.€€One€option€might€be€to€file€an€impleader€and€deposit€the€money€with€the€court€so€that€theÐ  &`", Ðattorney€doesn't€get€caught€in€a€legal€conflict€between€the€client€and€her€creditors.Ð è&(#- ÐÌà  àAlthough€the€contingency€fee€agreement€authorized€the€attorney€to€pay€medical€expenses,Ð x(¸$/ ÐI€think€the€client's€verbal€instructions€to€the€contrary€probably€trump€the€agreement€because€theÐ @)€%0 Ðagreement€was€a€mere€authorization,€not€a€binding€agreement€with€regard€to€payment€of€medicalÐ *H&1 Ðexpenses,€so€the€client's€withdrawal€of€that€authorization€is€probably€effective.Ð Ð*'2 ÐÌÌÐ (-h)5 Ðà  àIn€conclusion,€unless€failure€to€pay€the€medical€providers€or€notify€the€insurance€companyÐ À Ðwould€constitute€fraud,€or€some€other€crime,€the€attorney€should€follow€the€client's€instructions.€Ð ˆÈ ÐThere€is€no€way€for€the€attorney€to€know€that€the€client€won't€pay€her€bills.€€In€fact,€she€promised€toÐ P Ð"make€her€own€arrangements€to€pay€them."€€The€attorney€should,€however,€counsel€the€clientÐ X Ðregarding€the€consequences€of€not€paying€her€bills.Ð à  ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ (-h)5 Ðà@%ìàò òQUESTION€3ó óˆÐ À ÐÌÌÌà  àAble,€Baker,€Carr€and€Davis€are€fully€licensed€Maryland€dentists€practicing€together€as€ABC,€Ð à  ÐP.A.€in€La€Plata,€Maryland.€€Each€owns€one€share€of€stock€in€the€corporation€but€only€A,€B€and€CÐ ¨è Ðserve€on€its€board€of€directors.€€Each€dentist€is€experienced€and€well„respected€and€their€practice€isÐ p° Ðthriving.€€In€May,€2001,€Max€Probity,€the€president€of€Probity,€P.A.,€told€Able€that€Probity,€P.A.Ð 8 x Ðwished€to€open€an€office€in€La€Plata€and€to€that€end,€proposed€that€the€two€corporations€combineÐ  @ Ðoperations.€€Probity,€P.A.€is€a€large€dental€practice€which€has€multiple€offices€throughout€Maryland.Ð È   ÐÌà  àAble€discussed€the€matter€with€Baker,€Carr€and€Davis.€€Baker€and€Carr€were€enthusiasticÐ X ˜  Ðabout€the€proposal€but€Davis€was€opposed.€€After€further€negotiations,€Able€signed€a€mergerÐ  `  Ðagreement€whereby€ABC,€P.A.€would€merge€into€Probity,€P.A.€and€the€ABC€shareholders€wouldÐ è (  Ðreceive€Probity€stock€in€return€for€their€ABC€shares.€€The€agreement€also€provided€that€Able€wouldÐ °ð  Ðbe€named€to€Probity's€Board€of€Directors€with€an€annual€fee€of€$25,000€in€addition€to€her€otherÐ x¸  Ðcompensation€from€the€firm.€€Davis€wrote€a€letter€to€the€other€shareholders€explaining€his€objections;Ð @€  Ðnonetheless€the€merger€agreement€was€approved€by€Able,€Baker€and€Carr€as€directors€andÐ H  Ðshareholders.€€Davis€voted€against€the€merger€at€the€shareholders'€meeting.€€Ð Ð ÐÌà  àLater€that€day,€Davis€consulted€with€you,€a€Maryland€lawyer.€€Davis€feels€that€Able€has€"soldÐ `  Ðout"€for€the€chance€to€earn€more€money€and€that€Baker€and€Carr€are€acting€very€foolishly.€€DavisÐ (h Ðbelieves€the€merger€agreement€is€unfair€because€it€grossly€undervalues€ABC,€P.A.'s€assets€and€thatÐ ð0 ÐProbity,€P.A.€will€not€be€profitable€in€the€future€because€of€heavy€advertising€expenses.€€He€wouldÐ ¸ø Ðlike€to€file€an€immediate€lawsuit€on€behalf€of€himself€and€or€ABC,€P.A.€against€Able,€Baker€and€CarrÐ €À Ðfor€breach€of€their€duties€of€care€and€loyalty.€€He€asks€you€for€your€analysis€and€advice.Ð Hˆ ÐÌà  àò òWhat€advice€would€you€give€Dr.€Davis?€€Explain€your€answer€thoroughly.ó óÐ Ø ÐÌà@##ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ h¨ ÐÌà  àI€would€advise€Dr.€Davis€(D)€that€he€may€have€some€actions€against€ABC.€P.A.€and€theÐ ø8 Ðdirectors€and€shareholders,€but€it€is€going€to€be€an€uphill€battle€to€get€anything€other€than€the€fairÐ À  Ðvalue€of€his€shares€under€his€appraisal€rights.Ð ˆÈ! ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àò òBreach€of€Duty€ó ó„€D€may€act€on€behalf€of€the€corporation€if€he€requests€action€by€the€corpÐ X# Ðand€upon€denial€or€inaction,€may€sue€on€behalf€by€naming€it€as€a€defendant.€€In€this€case,€this€mayÐ â"$ Ðbe€unnecessary€as€it€is€unlikely€Able€(A),€Baker€(B),€and€Carr€(C)€will€bring€suit€against€themselves.€Ð ª ê% ÐD€may€derivatively€sue€A€for€unauthorized€contract€authority€(breach€of€care)€and€for€€failing,€alongÐ r!²& Ðwith€B€and€C,€to€observe€their€duty€of€care€to€the€corporation€in€agreeing€on€the€merger.€€AsÐ :"z' Ðdirectors,€A,€B,€and€C€owed€a€duty€to€act€in€good€faith,€with€a€reasonable€belief€they€were€acting€inÐ #B( Ðthe€best€interest€of€the€corporation,€using€the€standard€of€care€a€reasonably€prudent€person€wouldÐ Ê# ) Ðunder€similar€circumstances.€€Here,€A€may€have€breached€this€duty€by€signing€an€agreement€to€mergeÐ ’$Ò * Ðwithout€board€and€2/3€shareholder€approval.€€However,€by€having€a€majority€of€the€board€of€directorsÐ Z%š!+ Ðapprove,€along€with€3€out€of€4€shareholders,€such€action€was€most€likely€ratified.Ð "&b", Ðà  àÌà  àAdditionally,€D€can€argue€that€by€grossly€undervaluing€ABC,€P.A.,€they€breached€their€dutyÐ ²'ò#. Ðof€care€by€accepting€an€unfair€price,€and€failing€to€consider€subsequent€unprofitability€as€part€of€theÐ z(º$/ Ðmerged€corporation.€€However,€the€directors€are€shielded€under€the€business€judgment€rule€„€whereÐ B)‚%0 Ða€court€will€not€second€guess€the€actions€of€the€directors€if€the€business€decision€was€made€in€anÐ  *J&1 Ðinformed€manner,€in€good€faith€and€supported€by€a€reasonable€basis.€€If€A,€B€and€C€did€theirÐ Ò*'2 Ðresearch,€they€may€be€shielded.Ð š+Ú'3 ÐÌÐ *-j)5 Ðò ò(2)ó óà  àò òDuty€of€Loyaltyó 󀄀D€may€also€sue€A€for€his€breach€of€his€duty€of€loyalty€for€waste€and€forÐ À Ðacting€as€an€interested€party€to€the€transaction.€€D€can€claim€that€by€paying€himself€an€additionalÐ ŠÊ Ð$25,000€to€be€on€Probity€board€of€directors,€he€was€acting€in€his€own€best€interest€and€not€that€of€theÐ R’ Ðcorporations.€€However,€if€the€transaction€is€fair€(which€it€may€be€since€A€is€taking€on€extra€duties),Ð Z Ðthe€transaction€is€shielded.€€Likewise,€if€the€transaction€is€disclosed€and€approved€by€a€majority€ofÐ â" Ðdisinterested€directors€or€shareholders,€the€taint€of€self„dealing€may€be€removed.€€Here€B€and€CÐ ªê Ðapproved€the€action,€a€majority€of€the€disinterested€Directors,€therefore€the€transaction€is€probablyÐ r² Ðvalid.Ð : z ÐÌò ò(3)à  àRight€by€Appraisal€ó ó„€D€may€sue€directly€to€enforce€his€appraisal€rights.€€Under€a€merger,Ð Ê   Ðdirector€approval€plus€2/3€of€shareholder€approval€is€necessary€for€the€acquired€(merged)€entity€toÐ ” Ô  Ðapprove€the€transaction.€€Here,€a€majority€of€the€board€approved€the€merger,€as€well€as€75%€of€theÐ \ œ  Ðshareholders.€€However,€by€disseminating€D€reserved€his€appraisal€rights€and€may€demand€that€ABC,Ð $ d  ÐP.A.€pay€him€for€fair€value€for€his€shares.€€If€they€refuse,€the€court€may€decide€the€value€upon€DððsÐ ì ,  Ðfiling€of€a€suit.€€Ð ´ô  ÐÌà  àLikewise,€D€may€sue€for€dissolution,€but€this€is€unlikely€because€the€ABC€entity€has€mergedÐ D„  Ðwith€Probity€and€no€longer€exists.€€Therefore,€appraisal€is€the€only€personal€remedy.Ð  L  ÐÌà@##ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ œÜ ÐÌà  àDavis€would€bring€a€shareholders€derivative€action€against€A,€B€and€C€asserting€severalÐ ,l Ðclaims€of€actions.€€ABC€is€a€close€corp€because€according€to€the€fact€pattern,€nothing€has€indicatedÐ ô4 Ðthat€they€are€on€a€national€stock€exchange€nor€do€they€have€at€least€500€shares€of€stock.€€Each€party,Ð ¼ü ÐA,€B,€C€and€D€own€one€share€of€stock€a€piece.€€Also€in€a€close€corporation€the€stockholders€areÐ „Ä Ðusually€the€directors€as€they€are€here€with€A,€B€and€C€being€the€directors€able€to€take€action.Ð LŒ ÐÌà  àD€would€bring€a€cause€of€action€against€A,€B,€C€by€making€a€òòdemandóó€on€the€officers€that€theyÐ Ü Ðreevaluate€their€course€of€action.€€If€the€directors€choose€not€to€change€their€action,€D€would€bringÐ ¤ä Ðsuit€in€MD€Circuit€Court.€€(The€case€would€not€be€able€to€be€settled€without€court€authorization€atÐ l¬ Ðthat€point).Ð 4t ÐÌà  àThe€cause€of€action€that€D€would€bring€is€a€breach€of€duty,€breach€of€loyalty€or€right€ofÐ Ä  Ðappraisal.Ð ŒÌ! ÐÌÓ€ (¦Ù88Óò ò(1)ó óà  à€€ò òBreach€of€Dutyó ó.€€He€would€need€to€argue€that€the€directors€were€not€acting€in€good€faithÐ \# Ðwhen€dealing€with€the€company.€€He€would€also€claim€that€they€were€acting€in€òòmalfeasanceóó€€€in€thatÐ æ&$ Ðthey€were€making€a€move€for€the€company€that€would€cause€him€to€loose€money.€€However,€I€wouldÐ ® î% Ðtell€D€that€this€is€a€difficult€claim€to€prove€because€ABC€would€argue€the€òòBusiness€Judgment€RuleóóÐ v!¶& Ðin€that€at€the€time€of€the€transaction€they€believed€they€were€making€the€best€possible€decision€forÐ >"~' Ðthe€company.€€Maryland€courts€usually€find€this€to€be€a€winning,€viable€argument.Ð #F( ÐÌò ò(2)ó óà  àò òDuty€of€Loyaltyó ó.€€ABC€could€do€this€in€three€ways.€€1)€Interested€director€transaction.€€HowÐ –$Ö * ÐAble€was€offered€$25,000€and€a€place€on€the€directors€with€Probity,€in€addition€to€her€ownÐ `% !+ Ðcompensation€with€the€firm.€€A€would€probably€claim€anyone€because€she€told€everyone€about€thisÐ (&h", Ðtransaction,€that€it€was€not€a€problem€especially€since€everyone€agreed.Ð ð&0#- ÐÌà  àD€could€also€argue€that€as€a€stockholder€in€the€company,€that€A€was€making€an€interestedÐ €(À$/ Ðstockholders€transaction.€€In€this,€a€stockholder€may€not€have€interested€stockholder/corpÐ H)ˆ%0 Ðcombination€without€80%€of€the€directors€appearing€and€2/3€of€the€stockholders€and€it€cannot€beÐ *P&1 Ðwithin€5€years€of€becoming€a€stockholder.€€A€would€argue€that€100%€of€the€directors€agreed€to€theÐ Ø*'2 Ðtransaction€and€that€3/4€of€the€stockholders€agreed€to€the€transaction€so€this€should€be€okay.Ð  +à'3 Ð(Additionally€we€donððt€know€how€long€she€has€been€a€stockholder).Ð h,¨(4 ÐÐ 0-p)5 Ðà  àNext€D€would€argue€that€this€is€a€òòmergeróó,€as€such,€is€a€òòfundamental€corporateóó€change€andÐ À Ðshould€not€be€approved€unless€there€is€a€majority€of€the€directors€and€at€least€2/3€of€the€stockholdersÐ ˆÈ Ðin€agreement.€€ABC€would€argue€that€the€majority€of€the€Board€has€approved€the€merger€and€3/4€ofÐ P Ðthe€directors€have€approved€the€merger€so€there€is€no€cause€of€action€here.Ð X ÐÌÌò ò(3)ó óà  àò òRight€by€Appraisaló ó.€€Here€he€would€be€bought€out€by€the€corporation€if€he€does€not€agreeÐ p° Ðwith€the€changes€that€it€has€made.€€Here€it€is€good€that€he€dissented€in€writing€within€24€hours.€€ThisÐ : z Ðwill€go€towards€evidence€in€court€of€his€right€to€be€bought€out.Ð  B ÐÌà  àI€would€advise€D€that€he€probably€does€not€have€a€very€good€claim,€but€he€does€have€a€rightÐ ’ Ò  Ðto€appraisal€and€that€is€probably€his€best€choice€at€the€moment.€Ð Z š  ÐÌÐ  ê *  ÐÑ€ƒAÑÑ€'‚SÑà@%ìàò òQUESTION€4ó óˆÐ À Ðò òó óà@ìì*ìàˆÌà  àOn€June€1,€1999,€Ma€and€Pa€Kettle€lent€$100,000€to€their€son,€Sonny,€and€his€businessÐ P Ðpartner,€Partner.€€In€return,€Sonny€and€Partner€executed€and€delivered€a€promissory€note€to€theÐ X ÐKettles.€€The€note€read€as€follows:Ð à  ÐÌà8  à"For€value€received,€we€will€pay€the€sum€of€$100,000€plus€10%€annual€interest€to€MaÐ p° Ðand€Pa€Kettle€on€or€before€June€1,€2000."Ð8 xÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€note€was€signed€and€dated€by€both€Sonny€and€Partner.€€The€loan€proceeds€were€used€byÐ È   ÐSonny€and€Partner€to€fund€their€start„up€Internet€company.Ð  Ð  ÐÌThe€Internet€venture€soon€failed.€€On€December€1,€1999,€Partner€wrote€the€Kettles€saying:Ð  `  ÐÌà8  à"Sonny€and€I€discussed€your€loan€to€us€and€we€have€agreed€that€each€will€beÐ °ð  Ðresponsible€for€one„half€of€the€amount€due.€€Enclosed€is€my€check€for€$50,000€plusÐ x¸  Ðone€half€of€the€interest€now€due."Ð@€ Ð Ð  ÐÌPartner€wrote€the€following€on€the€"memo"€portion€of€the€check:€€"payment€in€full€of€my€obligationÐ Ð Ðunder€the€note."€€The€Kettles€negotiated€the€check.Ð ˜Ø ÐÌà  àIn€May,€2000,€Irene€Ingenuous€purchased€the€note€for€value€and€in€good€faith€from€theÐ (h ÐKettles,€who€told€her€that€no€money€had€been€paid€on€it.€€Ingenuous€had€no€reason€to€doubt€theÐ ð0 ÐKettles's€statement.€€As€part€of€this€transaction,€the€Kettles€indorsed€the€note,€without€recourse,€toÐ ¸ø ÐIngenuous.€€About€the€same€time,€Sonny€moved€to€Australia€and€became€destitute.€€Ð €À ÐÌà  àIn€July€2000,€Ingenuous€filed€suit€to€collect€$110,000€from€Partner.€€In€his€response,€PartnerÐ P Ðraised€the€following€defenses:Ð Ø ÐÌà  à1.€€The€Kettlesðð€acceptance€of€his€payment€in€December€released€him€from€further€liability;Ð h¨ ÐÌà  à2.€€When€the€note€was€signed€the€Kettles€orally€assured€him€that€they€would€never€transferÐ ø8 Ðthe€note€and,€without€that€promise,€he€would€not€have€signed€the€note;€andÐ À  ÐÌà  à3.€€He€has€already€paid€$52,250.€€Ð P" ÐÌà  àò òHow€will€the€Court€rule€on€his€defenses?€€Explain€your€answer€thoroughly.Ð à $ ÐÌà@<<ìàREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ p!°& ÐÌà  àIrene€Ingenuous€holds€the€coveted€status€in€commercial€paper€law€„€that€of€a€Holder€in€dueÐ #@( Ðcourse.€€Pursuant€to€ðð3„302€a€holder€in€due€course€takes€an€instrument€for€value,€in€good€faith,€withÐ È# ) Ðno€notice€of€the€type€contained€in€ðð3„302(a)(2).€€It€should€be€noted€that€in€order€to€be€a€holder€oneÐ $Ð * Ðmust€have€good€title,€which€in€this€case€would€be€possession€of€the€note€and€in€this€case,€theÐ X%˜!+ Ðnecessary€indorsement.€€Irene€took€the€note€in€good€faith,€for€value€without€notice€and€she€is€byÐ  &`", Ðdefinition€a€holder.€€The€underlying€note€must€also€be€negotiable€which€this€one€is€because€it€isÐ è&(#- Ðindorsed€to€Ingenuous,€is€payable€at€a€definite€time€and€for€a€fixed€amount.Ð °'ð#. ÐÌà  àBecause€Irene€Ingenuous€is€in€fact€a€holder€in€due€course,€it€will€be€very€difficult€forÐ @)€%0 Ðdefendant€to€succeed€on€her€claim.€€This€is€because€the€only€defenses€which€can€be€used€against€aÐ *H&1 Ðholder€in€due€course€to€defeat€them€is€one€of€the€real€defenses.€€The€real€defenses€include€fraud€inÐ Ð*'2 Ðthe€factum,€forgery,€alteration,€adjudicated€incapacity,€illegality,€infancy,€duress,€discharge€inÐ ˜+Ø'3 Ðinsolvency,€surety€ship,€and€the€statue€of€limitations€has€run.Ð `, (4 ÐÐ (-h)5 Ðà  àAs€such,€Partner€will€be€held€jointly€and€severally€liable€on€the€note€pursuant€to€ðð3„116Ð À Ðunless€he€can€assert€one€of€the€real€defenses.Ð ˆÈ ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àPartnerððs€first€defense€is€that€the€Kettlesðð€acceptance€of€payment€released€him€from€furtherÐ X Ðliability.€€In€essence,€Partner€is€claiming€the€payment€discharged€him€from€liability€on€the€note.€€ThisÐ â" Ðdefense€is€a€personal€defense€and€as€such€cannot€be€used€to€defeat€a€holder€in€due€course.€€SinceÐ ªê ÐIrene€had€no€notice€of€the€discharge,€the€instrument€is€still€effective€against€partner.€€The€courtÐ r² Ðshould€rule€that€this€defense€is€not€applicable,€not€viable€as€to€Ireneððs€claim€because€it€is€not€a€realÐ : z Ðdefense.Ð  B ÐÌò ò(2)ó óà  àPartnerððs€second€defense€is€also€a€personal€defense.€€Only€fraud€in€factum€can€be€used€as€aÐ ’ Ò  Ðbasis€for€a€defense€in€order€to€defeat€the€claim€of€a€holder€in€due€course.€€Fraud€in€the€factumÐ \ œ  Ðrequires€that€the€maker€of€the€note€did€not€understand€or€know€the€character€or€essential€terms€of€theÐ $ d  Ðnote.€€Clearly,€Partner€knew€that€he€was€signing€a€promissory€note.€€Even€if€the€Kettles€orallyÐ ì ,  Ðpromised€him€that€they€would€never€transfer€the€note€and€that€was€the€only€reason€for€Partner€to€signÐ ´ô  Ðthe€note,€such€actions€only€amount€to€fraud€in€the€inducement.€€Fraud€in€the€inducement€is€a€personalÐ |¼  Ðdefense€and€will€not€defeat€a€holder€in€due€course.€€The€court€will€not€sustain€this€defense€as€aÐ D„  Ðground€against€Ireneððs€claim.Ð  L  ÐÌò ò(3)ó óà  àLastly,€Partner€attempts€to€defend€against€the€note€on€the€basis€that€he€has€already€paid€ðð€ofÐ œÜ Ðits€face€value.€€Again,€this€is€a€personal€defense.€€Although€such€a€claim€would€survive€as€againstÐ f¦ Ðthe€Kettles€as€it€falls€nicely€into€ðð3„311,€the€discharge€of€a€note€is€not€effective€against€a€person€whoÐ .n Ðacquires€the€rights€of€a€holder€in€due€course.€€Because€Irene€is€a€holder€in€due€course,€it€wouldnððtÐ ö6 Ðmatter€if€Partner€could€prove€that€he€tendered€a€check€to€the€Kettles€in€full€satisfaction€of€the€claimÐ ¾þ Ðwhich€was€evidenced€by€his€letter€of€12/1/99€and€that€the€claim€was€unliquidated.€€These€actions€doÐ †Æ Ðamount€to€discharge,€but€discharge€is€not€a€real€defense.Ð NŽ ÐÌà  àIf€these€were€the€only€defenses€asserted€against€Irene,€the€court€should€enter€a€verdict€forÐ Þ ÐIrene€and€order€Partner€to€pay.€€He€may€be€able€to€seek€contribution€from€Sonny€at€a€later€time.Ð ¦æ ÐÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ 6v Ðà@ìì*ìàˆÌÌà  àLet€us€take€up€Partners€defenses€in€order.Ð ŽÎ! ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àFirst,€the€check€from€December.€€Under€ðð3„116€all€makers€or€drawers,€which€includesÐ ^# Ðpartners,€are€jointly€and€severally€liable.€€Both€Sonny€and€Partner€have€responsibility€to€cover€theÐ è($ Ðnote.€€Moreover€under€ðð3„311€for€the€ð ðpayment€in€fullðð€memo€to€be€effective€the€claim€must€beÐ ° ð% Ðunliquidated€or€subject€to€a€bonafide€dispute.€€We€have€no€such€issue€before€us.€€Thus€that€defenseÐ x!¸& Ðis€ineffective.€€Any€indemnification€or€arrangements€between€Sonny€and€Partner€do€not€bind€thirdÐ @"€' Ðparties€or€change€the€responsibilities€of€a€maker.Ð #H( ÐÌò ò(2)ó óà  àSecond,€the€oral€agreement€with€the€Kettles.€€The€note€is€negotiable€on€its€face€and€IngeniousÐ ˜$Ø * Ðis€a€holder€in€due€course,€having€purchased€the€note€in€good€faith,€for€value€and€without€notice€ofÐ b%¢!+ Ðany€such€agreement.€€This€may€be€effective€as€an€offset€against€the€Kettles,€but€not€against€a€holderÐ *&j", Ðin€due€course€under€ðð3„302.€€Furthermore€it€is€not€material€who€receives€the€$110,000€due€under€theÐ ò&2#- Ðnote.€€Contracts€are€presumed€freely€assignable€and€parol€evidence€rules€bar€contradicting€the€plainÐ º'ú#. Ðface€of€the€instrument€to€Ingenuousðð€detriment.Ð ‚(Â$/ ÐÌò ò(3)ó óà  àThe€third€defense€is€most€interesting€as€it€is€undisputed€that€Partner€did€pay€$52,250€to€theÐ *R&1 ÐKettles.€€There€is€no€real€dispute€that€the€Kettles€misinformed€Ingenuous.€€Also€under€ðð3„305(a)(2)Ð Ü*'2 Ðthe€obligor€has€defenses€as€if€against€the€original€payee€has€the€right€to€consider€the€$52,250€alreadyÐ ¤+ä'3 Ðpaid€except€that€3„305(b)€bars€it.Ð l,¬(4 ÐÐ 4-t)5 ÐуA Ñâ âÑHÀÑÑHÀÑâ âÑ  Ñà  àI€would€rule€against€Partner€on€all€three€defenses€but€point€out€that€he€has€potential€claimsÐ H Ðagainst€both€Sonny€(as€a€partner)€and€the€Kettles€(for€the€funds€received).Ð È ÐÌà  àðð3„305(a)(3)€is€not€available€to€Partner€because€this€did€not€arise€from€the€original€transactionÐ  X Ðbut€rather€out€of€subsequent€ones.Ð h  Ðò òó óÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ x-0*6 Ðà@%ìàò òQUESTION€5ó óˆÐ H ÐÌà  àLeslie€entered€into€an€agreement€with€Home€Renewal,€Inc.,€(ð ðHome€Renewalðð)€a€properlyÐ Ø Ðlicensed€Maryland€builder,€to€construct€a€new€house€in€Dorchester€County,€Maryland.€€TheÐ  X Ðagreement€was€signed€on€December€15,€1999,€and€required€Home€Renewal€to€complete€the€workÐ h  Ðby€June€15,€2000€at€a€cost€of€€$400,000.€€The€agreement€specified€that:€1)€time€was€of€the€essence,Ð 0è Ðand€2)€all€requests€for€time€extensions€and€price€increases€must€be€submitted€in€writing€by€HomeÐ ø° ÐRenewal€within€30€days€of€any€event€causing€a€delay€or€for€any€change€that€required€an€increase€inÐ Àx Ðthe€price€of€the€work.Ð ˆ @ ÐÌà  àOn€June€1,€2000,€Home€Renewal€sent€a€written€request€to€Leslie€for€a€120€day€timeÐ  Ð  Ðextension,€claiming€that€Home€Renewalððs€resources€were€over€extended€on€other€contracts€inÐ à ˜  ÐJanuary€and€February€2000.€€Home€Renewal€also€requested€an€additional€$50,000.00€for€extra€laborÐ ¨ `  Ðand€supplies€to€finish€Leslieððs€house.€€Leslie€denied€both€requests€as€unjustified€and€untimely.Ð p (  ÐÌà  àOn€June€16,€2000,€the€house€was€only€75%€complete,€and€Home€Renewal€had€been€paidÐ ¸  Ð$300,000€by€Leslie.€€On€that€date,€Leslie€terminated€the€agreement€with€Home€Renewal€for€breachРȀ  Ðof€contract.€€Leslie€hired€and€paid€Oakley€Contractors€to€complete€the€work.Ð H  ÐÌà  àHome€Renewal€sued€Leslie€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Dorchester€County,€seeking€the€recoveryÐ  Ø Ðof€$100,000€as€final€payment€under€the€agreement€and€$50,000€for€the€extra€labor€and€suppliesÐ è  Ðprovided€to€the€house€prior€to€termination.Ð °h ÐÌÒ9°Òà  àò òAnalyze€the€possibility€of€recovery€by€Home€Renewal€for€(a)€breach€of€contract€(b)€unjustÐ @ø Ðenrichment€and€(c)€quantum€meruit.Ô‡ôÜòXX=ÙÔó óÐ À ÐÌò òà@÷÷!§àÔ#†X=ÙXòôÜê±#ÔREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ v. ÐÌà  àRights€of€the€parties€are€determined€under€the€common€law€of€contracts.Ð ¾ ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àThe€contract€between€Leslie€and€Home€Renewal€indicated€that€time€was€of€the€essence€and€theÐ –N Ðcompletion€date€was€to€be€June€15,€2000.€€Home€Renewal€did€not€make€a€timely€request€for€an€extensionÐ ` Ðor€an€increased€price.€€They€made€their€requests€on€June€1,€2000€claiming€over€extended€resources€fromÐ (à  ÐJanuary€and€February,€2000€contracts.€€This€was€not€a€timely€request€as€the€contract€provided€that€theÐ ð¨! Ðrequest€be€made€within€30€days€of€the€event€causing€delay.Ð ¸p" ÐÌà  àTherefore,€on€June€16,€2000€when€the€house€was€not€complete,€Home€Renewal€was€in€breach€ofÐ H$ Ðthe€contract.€€Leslie€was€justified€in€terminating€her€agreement€with€Home€Renewal€as€they€knew€timeÐ  È% Ðwas€of€the€essence€and€they€were€the€ones€in€breach,€not€Leslie:Ð Ø & Ðà0  àà0` Ÿ$Ÿ$àà  àÐ ` Ÿ$` Ÿ$ Ðò ò(2)ó óà  àHome€Renewal€is€also€not€likely€to€recover€under€an€unjust€enrichment€theory.€€Unjust€enrichmentÐ h" ( Ðis€when€the€party€relies€on€the€other€in€the€absence€of€a€contract€and€performs€for€the€benefit€of€the€otherÐ 2#ê) Ðparty.€€Unjust€enrichment€allows€recovery€by€the€party€who€performed€to€prevent€an€unfair€ð!ð€unjustÐ ú#² * Ðenrichment€to€the€other€party€who€has€done€nothing.€€This€would€not€apply€here.€€Leslie€and€HomeÐ Â$z!+ ÐRenewal€had€a€written€contract.€€Home€Renewal€had€been€paid€$300,000€which€was€75%€of€the€totalÐ Š%B", Ðagreed€price€and€there€was€only€75%€of€the€work€completed.€€The€Court€is€unlikely€to€find€any€unjustÐ R& #- Ðenrichment.Ð 'Ò#. Ðà0  àà0` Ÿ$Ÿ$àà  àÐ ` Ÿ$` Ÿ$ Ðò ò(3)ó óà  àQuantum€meruit€is€a€quasi„contract€theory€in€which€one€party€can€seek€to€recover€for€hisÐ ª(b%0 Ðperformance€in€the€absence€of€a€contract.€€On€June€1òòstóó,€Home€Renewal€was€aware€that€Leslie€did€not€agreeÐ t),&1 Ðto€the€time€extension€or€price€increase.€€They€apparently€continued€to€work€until€June€16,€2000€whenÐ <*ô&2 ÐLeslie€terminated€the€agreement.€€They€will€not€recover€under€quantum€meruit.€€Leslie€had€to€hire€andÐ +¼'3 Ðpay€Oakley€Contractors€to€complete€the€work.Ð Ì+„(4 ÐÌÐ \-*6 Ðà  àThe€purpose€of€contract€damages€is€to€place€the€non„breaching€party€in€the€same€position€that€theyÐ H Ðwould€have€been€in€had€it€not€been€for€the€breach.€€Home€Renewal€was€the€breaching€party€and€notÐ È Ðentitled€to€the€$100,000€final€payment€or€$50,000€extra€labor€costs.Ð Ø ÐÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ h  ÐÓ  ÓÌò ò(1)ó óà  àHome€Renewal€will€fail€in€its€claims€for€breach€of€contract,€unjust€enrichment€and€quantumÐ ø° Ðmeruit.€€Leslie€rightfully€terminated€the€contract€on€June€16,€2000€because€the€work€was€notÐ Âz Ðcompleted,€resulting€in€Home€Renewal€being€in€breach.€€Normally€service€contracts€are€allowed€to€beÐ Š B Ðcompleted€in€a€reasonable€time€after€the€date€stated€in€the€contract.€€However,€this€contract€expresslyÐ R   Ðstated€that€time€was€of€the€essence.€€Because€Home€Renewal€was€not€completed€with€its€work€on€JuneÐ  Ò  Ð15òòthóó€and€because€time€was€of€the€essence,€Home€Renewal€was€in€breach.€€Leslie€never€agreed€to€anyÐ â š  Ðtime€extension€and€the€delay€was€caused€by€Home€Renewal€overextending€itself€on€other€contracts.€€Ð ª b  Ðà  àÌò ò(2)ó óà  àHome€Renewal€cannot€be€excused€from€failing€to€complete€its€work€on€time.€€Home€RenewalÐ :ò  Ðbreached€the€contract€first€so€Leslie€is€excused€from€her€remaining€performance,€and€could€rightfullyÐ ¼  Ðterminate€the€contract.€€Home€Renewalððs€claim€under€the€theory€of€unjust€enrichment€will€also€fail.€Ð Ì„  ÐLeslie€has€not€been€unjustly€enriched.€€Leslie€has€paid€three€quarters€of€the€contract€price€and€threeÐ ”L  Ðquarters€of€the€work€has€been€performed,€as€under€the€contract.€€Leslie€has€not€been€unjustly€enriched,Ð \ Ðin€fact€Leslie€may€have€suffered€consequential€damages€as€a€result€of€Home€Renewal€failing€to€meetÐ $Ü Ðthe€deadline.Ð ì¤ Ðà  àÌò ò(3)ó óà  àHome€Renewalððs€claim€in€quantum€meruit€will€also€fail.€€Quantum€meruit€is€used€by€a€courtÐ |4 Ðas€an€equitable€remedy€when€no€contract€was€formed,€but€the€court€finds€a€quasi„contract.€€In€thisÐ Fþ Ðcase,€Home€Renewal€and€Leslie€have€an€actual€contract.€€The€extensions€and€price€increasesÐ Æ Ðsuggested€by€Home€Renewal€were€rejected€by€Leslie€and€there€is€nothing€to€warrant€the€court€findingÐ ÖŽ Ða€quasi„contract.€€Therefore,€along€with€its€claims€for€breach€of€contract€and€unjust€enrichment,€HomeÐ žV ÐRenewalððs€claim€in€quantum€meruit€will€also€fail.Ð f ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ ~-6*6 ÐÑ'‚SÑâ 'âÑÐHÑÑÐHÑâ 'âÑ  ÑÒ°9ÒÓ  Óò òQUESTION€6ó óÐ Ð ÐÌÓ  Óà  àOn€May€5,€1999,€Pat€entered€the€lobby€of€a€motel€in€Garrett€County,€Maryland,€and€toldÐ ` Ðthe€clerk€that€her€bungalow€was€on€fire.€€The€clerk€called€the€fire€department.€€Inside€the€room,€Ð (X Ðfirefighters€found€the€partially€burned€body€of€Patððs€husband,€Tony,€in€one€of€the€beds,€and€aÐ ð  Ðpartially€burned€cigar€near€his€body.Ð ¸è ÐÌà  àThe€suspicious€nature€of€the€fire€caused€officials€to€investigate€Tonyððs€death.€€The€policeÐ Hx Ðlearned€the€following:€Pat,€a€nurse,€and€Tony,€an€architect,€had€been€married€for€10€years.€€PatÐ  @ Ðwas€bored€with€her€marriage€and€became€infatuated€with€Ned.€€Pat€told€some€of€her€coworkersÐ Ø   Ðthat€she€planned€to€kill€Tony,€make€it€look€like€an€accident,€and€take€his€life€insurance€money€toÐ   Ð  Ðstart€a€new€life€with€Ned.€€Pat€worked€in€an€operating€room€at€Garrett€Hospital€on€April€29,€1999.€Ð h ˜  ÐHospital€records€contained€a€statement€that€two€bottles€of€a€paralytic€drug,€which€is€used€forÐ 0 `  Ðcertain€heart/lung€surgeries€and€leaves€no€trace€in€the€body,€were€missing€from€the€anesthesia€cartÐ ø (  Ðat€the€end€of€Patððs€shift€on€April€29,€1999.Ð À ð  ÐÌà  àFire€investigators€determined€that€Tony€was€not€a€smoker,€and€that€the€fire€wasÐ P€  Ðdeliberately€set.€€The€local€medical€examiner,€Dr.€Scheiner,€who€has€conducted€hundreds€ofÐ H  Ðautopsies€and€testified€in€more€than€one€hundred€trials,€conducted€an€autopsy€on€Tonyððs€body.€Ð à ÐThe€autopsy€showed€that€there€was€no€soot€in€Tonyððs€lungs,€indicating€that€Tony€was€notÐ ¨Ø Ðbreathing€òòbeforeóó€the€fire€was€set.€€Dr.€Scheiner€found€no€abnormalities€in€any€vital€organs€inÐ p  ÐTonyððs€body.€€Chemical€tests€conducted€on€Tonyððs€body€did€not€reveal€the€presence€of€anyÐ 8h Ðpoisons.Ð 0 ÐÌà  àPat€was€arrested€for€the€first€degree€murder€of€Tony.€€Trial€was€held€in€the€Circuit€CourtÐ À Ðfor€Garrett€County,€Maryland.Ð Xˆ ÐÌà  àDuring€Patððs€trial,€the€Court€allowed€testimony€by€the€Stateððs€four€witnesses,€over€theÐ è Ðtimely€objections€of€defense€counsel,€as€follows:€Ð °à ÐÌà0  àà0` (#(#àà  à(a)à ` àNed€testified€that€Pat€told€him€that€ð ðthey€will€never€be€able€to€figure€it€out€and€thatÐ @p Ðthe€drug€I€gave€him€is€not€traceable.ððÐ8` (#` (# Ðà0  àà0` (#(#àà  à(b)à ` àThe€owner€of€a€tobacco€store€testified€that€one€of€his€clerks€told€him€that€the€clerkÐ Ð  Ðsold€a€package€of€cigars€to€Pat€in€late€April€1999.ИÈ!` (#` (# Ðà0  àà0` (#(#àà  à(c)à ` àTrooper€Jones€testified€that€he€reviewed€a€hospital€record€that€showed€on€AprilÐ `" Ð29,€1999,€Pat€worked€in€the€operating€room€from€which€the€bottles€of€a€paralyticÐ (X# Ðdrug€were€missing.Ðð $` (#` (# Ðà0  àà0` (#(#àà  à(d)à ` àDr.€Scheiner€testified€that,€in€his€expert€opinion,€Tony€died€of€poisoning€by€anÐ ¸è% Ðundetermined€agent.Ѐ °&` (#` (# ÐÌà  àò òDid€the€Circuit€Court€correctly€overrule€each€objection?€€Explain€the€reason€forÐ "@( Ðeach€answer.€Ð Ø" ) ÐÓÙÇÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óÐ  #Ð * ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àGenerally,€all€evidence€that€is€relevant€and€reliable€is€admissible€with€a€few€exceptions.Ð 0%`", ÐÌò ò(a)ó óà  àNedððs€testimony€is€hearsay,€which€is€an€out€of€court€statement€offered€to€show€the€truth€ofÐ À&ð#. Ða€matter€asserted.€€Pat€made€the€statement€to€Ned€out€of€court€and€it€is€being€offered€to€showÐ Š'º$/ Ðculpability€that€she€gave€Tony€the€drug.€€Although€hearsay€is€generally€inadmissible,€this€fallsÐ R(‚%0 Ðwith€in€an€exception€as€a€statement€of€party€opponent.Ð )J&1 Ðà  àÌò ò(b)ó óà  àThe€testimony€of€the€tobacco€store€owner€is€also€hearsay€not€within€one€of€the€recognizedÐ ª*Ú'3 Ðexceptions.€€Although€the€clerk€can€testify€as€to€what€she€has€personal€knowledge€of,€the€ownerÐ t+¤(4 Ðwas€not€the€one€who€sold€the€cigars€to€Pat.€€Thus,€he€cannot€testify€to€the€clerkððs€statements.€€TheÐ <,l)5 Ðgovernment€can€argue€that€the€statement€is€evidence€of€a€prior€identification,€but€since€the€clerkÐ -4*6 Ðdoes€not€appear€to€be€available,€based€on€the€facts,€it€still€lacks€reliability.Ð Ì-ü*7 ЇÌò ò(c)ó óà  àAlthough€medical€records€may€be€admissible€under€the€business€record€exception€to€theÐ ˜È ÐòòHearsayóó€rule€that€allows€records€taken€in€the€regular€course€of€business€by€one€who€has€personalÐ b’ Ðknowledge€to€be€admissible€because€they€are€likely€to€be€accurate.€€Thus,€if€the€hospital€regularlyÐ *Z Ðtakes€inventory€of€the€carts€after€each€shift,€such€a€record€would€be€admissible.€€However,€thisÐ ò" Ðtestimony€is€still€hearsay€because€the€€police€officer€is€not€a€hospital€employee€with€knowledge.€Ð ºê ÐHe€is€testifying€as€to€what€the€record€contained.€€Thus,€the€officer€neither€had€personalÐ ‚² Ðknowledge€of€the€accuracy€of€the€record€at€the€time€it€was€made€nor€was€he€the€custodian€of€theÐ Jz Ðrecords.Ð  B Ðà  àÌò ò(d)ó óà  àExperts€are€permitted€to€make€opinions€based€on€reliable€scientific€methods€generallyÐ ¢ Ò  Ðaccepted€in€the€field.€€These€opinions,€may€not,€however,€pertain€to€an€ultimate€fact,€such€as€thatÐ l œ  ÐPat€killed€Tony.€€Here,€Dr.€Ô_ÔScheinerÔ_Ô€is€likely€to€qualify€as€an€expert€based€on€his€experience€inÐ 4 d  Ð100+€autopsies€and€the€personal€autopsy€of€Tony.Ð ü ,  Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àThere€are€no€facts€to€show€the€autopsy€or€chemical€tests€deviated€from€generally€acceptedÐ Œ¼  Ðprinciples.€€Thus,€as€an€expert,€Ô_ÔScheinerÔ_Ô€is€permitted€to€testify€as€to€those€facts€he€has€personalÐ T„  Ðknowledge€of€1)€Tony€was€dead€before€the€fire;€2)€no€abnormalities€in€vital€organs€to€explainÐ L  Ðdeath;€3)€no€detectable€poisons€were€revealed.€€Since€Ô_ÔScheinerÔ_Ô€is€available€for€cross„examination,Ð ä ÐPatððs€attorney€may€question€him€regarding€the€accuracy€of€such€testing€and€whether€other€causesÐ ¬Ü Ðare€possible.Ð t¤ Ðà  àÌà  àThus,€parts€(a)€and€(d)€were€properly€overruled€but€parts€(b)€and€(c)€are€hearsay€not€withÐ 4 Ðany€exception.Ð Ìü ÐÌÓ  Óò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óÐ \Œ ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àTestimony€(evidence)€is€relevant€if€it€tends€to€make€a€fact€in€issue€more€or€less€probableÐ ì Ðthan€it€would€be€without€the€evidence.€€The€testimony€of€each€of€the€stateððs€four€witnesses€isÐ ´ä Ðrelevant.Ð |¬ ÐÌò ò(a)ó óà  àNedððs€testimony€that€Pat€told€him€ð ðthey€will€never€be€able€to€figure€it€out€and€that€theÐ  < Ðdrug€she€gave€him€is€not€traceableðð€is€hearsay.€€Hearsay€is€an€out€of€court€statement€by€theÐ Ö  Ðdeclarant€offered€in€court€to€prove€the€truth€of€the€matter€asserted.€€Hearsay€is€generally€notÐ žÎ! Ðadmissible€unless€it€falls€under€a€recognized€exception.€€This€statement€by€Pat€would€beÐ f–" Ðcharacterized€as€an€admission€which€is€a€statement€offered€against€a€party.€€It€could€also€come€inÐ .^# Ðto€evidence€as€a€declaration€against€Patððs€penal€interest,€but€it€requires€that€she€be€unavailable.€Ð ö&$ ÐAlthough€she€is€available€at€trial,€if€she€refuses€to€testify,€then€her€refusal€could€constituteÐ ¾î% Ðunavailability.€€This€evidence€was€properly€admitted.Ð † ¶& ÐÌò ò(b)ó óà  àOwner€of€the€tobacco€Storeððs€testimony€that€one€of€his€clerkððs€told€him€that€the€clerk€soldÐ "F( Ða€package€of€cigars€to€Pat€in€late€April€1999€is€hearsay.€€It€is€a€statement€made€by€the€clerk€nowÐ à" ) Ðbeing€repeated€by€the€owner.€€As€it€is€hearsay,€an€out€of€court€statement,€repeated€in€court€for€theÐ ¨#Ø * Ðtruth€and€there€is€no€exception€for€this€hearsay,€the€evidence€was€improperly€admitted.Ð p$ !+ ÐÌÌò ò(c)ó óà  àTrooper€Jonesðð€testimony€regarding€the€hospital€record€showed€that€on€April€29,€1999,Ð È&ø#. ÐPat€worked€in€the€operating€room€from€which€the€bottles€of€a€paralytic€drug€were€missing€is€alsoÐ ’'Â$/ Ðhearsay.€€However,€if€the€record€were€being€admitted€to€prove€its€contents€under€the€originalÐ Z(Š%0 Ðwriting€rule€(best€evidence€rule)€the€original€must€be€produced€unless€a€reasonable€explanation€isÐ ")R&1 Ðgiven€for€its€absence.Ð ê)'2 ÐÌà  àIt€could€also€be€admitted€as€a€business€record€if€it€is€proved€to€be€properly€authenticatedÐ z+ª(4 Ðby€a€records€custodian€and€is€deemed€to€be€germane€to€the€business€of€running€the€hospital€orÐ B,r)5 Ðoperating€room.€€Absent€production€of€the€original,€unless€the€trooper€had€first€hand€knowledgeÐ  -:*6 Ðof€the€contents€which€cannot€be€gained€simply€from€reading€the€document€and€there€is€noÐ Ò-+7 Ðreasonable€explanation€for€its€absence,€the€testimony€was€improperly€admitted€under€the€originalÐ Ð Ðwriting€rule.€€Likewise,€if€it€was€not€properly€authenticated€as€a€business€record€exception€to€theÐ ˜È Ðhearsay€rule€it€was€improperly€admitted.Ð ` ÐÌò ò(d)ó óà  àDr.€Scheinerððs€testimony€was€that€of€an€expert€witness.€€An€expert€can€testify€regardingÐ ð  Ðhis€opinion€if€he€is€qualified€by€education€or€experience,€the€subject€matter€is€appropriate€toÐ ºê Ðassist€the€jury€and€the€expert€has€personal€knowledge€of€the€facts;€such€knowledge€can€comeÐ ‚² Ðfrom€the€facts€provided€before€or€during€trial€or€from€independent€documents€relied€on€by€theÐ Jz Ðexpert.Ð  B ÐÌà  àHere,€Dr.€Scheiner€based€his€opinions€on€an€autopsy€he€personally€conducted€on€TonyððsÐ ¢ Ò  Ðbody.€€He€must€testify€that€he€can€say€to€a€high€degree€of€certainty€or€probability€that€the€cause€ofÐ j š  ÐTonyððs€death€was€due€to€poisoning€of€an€undetermined€agent.€€His€opinion€canððt€be€based€onÐ 2 b  Ðmere€guess€work€or€speculation.Ð ú *  ÐÌà  àIn€Maryland,€the€judge€determines€if€the€subject€matter€is€appropriate€and€an€expert€canÐ Šº  Ðsometimes€be€required€to€have€obtained€a€Maryland€license€in€his€field.Ð R‚  ÐÌà  àHere,€Dr.€Scheiner€is€a€medical€examiner€who€has€conducted€hundreds€of€autopsies€andÐ â Ðtestified€in€more€than€one€hundred€trials.€€It€appears€that€he€would€qualify€as€an€expert€based€onÐ ªÚ Ðexperience,€and€therefore,€his€testimony€was€properly€admitted€into€evidence.Ð r¢ ÐÌÌÌÔ#†X´[XXX=Ùq©#ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ Ê-ú*7 ЇÔ‡XŠÿ XXX´[Ôà@%ìàò òà@@%ìàQUESTION€7ó óˆà p àÐ Ð ÐÌà  àAndy€made€application€to€Bank€for€purchase€money€loan€with€which€to€buy€improvedÐ ` Ðproperty€located€€in€Wicomico€County€from€Bill.€€Andyððs€written€contract€with€Bill€required€that,Ð (X Ðat€closing,€Bill€deliver€to€Andy,€by€deed,€a€good€and€marketable€fee€simple€title€to€the€property,Ð ð  Ðfree€and€clear€of€liens€and€encumbrances.€Bank€has€asked€you,€a€practicing€attorney€in€WicomicoÐ ¸è ÐCounty,€concentrating€on€real€estate€law,€to€examine€the€title€and€provide€it€with€a€certificate€ofÐ €° Ðgood€title.Ð Hx ÐÌà  àIn€examining€the€€land€records,€you€find€in€the€chain€of€title€to€the€property€two€trustÐ Ø   Ðdeeds€describing€Billððs€property,€both€dated€March€10,€1960;€the€first€is€from€Clyde€to€Dan€in€feeÐ   Ð  Ðsimple,€in€trust,€for€the€purpose€of€immediately€reconveying€it€to€Clyde€&€Wilda,€his€wife;€theÐ h ˜  Ðsecond€from€Dan€to€Clyde€&€Wilda€recorded€immediately€after€the€first€contains€the€followingÐ 0 `  Ðgranting€clause:Ð ø (  ÐÌÓ  Óà8  àð ð...does€hereby€give,€grant,€and€convey€to€Clyde€&€Wilda,€as€tenants€by€the€entiretiesÐ ˆ¸  Ðfor€the€term€of€their€lives€with€full,€absolute€and€unqualified€power€to€sell,€conveyÐ P€  Ðor€otherwise€dispose€in€their€lifetime€of€the€entire€estate€without€the€joinder€in€theÐ H  Ðdeed€of€the€hereinafter€mentioned€remaindermen,€and€immediately€after€their€deathÐ à Ðto€Sid€&€Donna,€€Clydeððs€children,€as€joint€tenants.ððà È àШØÐ Ð  ÐÓ5úÓÌThe€trustee€deed€also€contained€the€following€provision:Ð 8h ÐÌÓ  Óà8  àð ð...to€have€and€to€hold€the€said€lot€of€land€so€described€and€hereby€intended€to€beÐ Èø Ðconveyed,€together€with€the€rights€and€privileges€thereunto€belonging€unto€Clyde€&Ð À ÐWilda,€for€the€term€of€their€natural€lives,€as€tenants€by€the€entireties,€and€immediatelyÐ Xˆ Ðafter€their€death€to€Sid€and€Donna€as€joint€tenants,€their€heirs€and€assigns€in€feeÐ  P Ðsimple€forever.ðð€€à  àÐèÐ Ð  ÐÓ»üÓà  àà ` àÌà  àThe€land€records€disclose€a€subsequent€deed€from€Wilda€to€Bill€which€recites€ClydeððsÐ x¨ Ðprior€death€in€1996,€and€an€examination€of€the€records€in€the€Register€of€Wills€office€shows€thatÐ @p ÐClyde€was€also€survived€by€Sid€&€Donna,€his€children€by€a€prior€marriage.€€Ð 8 ÐÌò òà  àUnder€these€facts€would€you€advise€Bank€that€Bill€has€a€good€and€marketable€title?€Ð ˜È! ÐExplain€your€conclusion€fully.ó óÐ `" ÐÌÔ‡ôm¼ ò XXŠÿÔò òà@<<ìàÔ#†XŠÿ X òôm¼á#ÔREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ô‡ôm¼ ò XXŠÿÔó óˆÐ ð $ ÐÔ#†XŠÿ X òôm¼O#ÔÔ‡&Œ % XXŠÿÔÌÔ#†XŠÿ X %&Œª#Ôà  àMy€findings€raise€several€potential€issues€of€which€I€should€inform€the€Bank€before€itÐ p  & Ðmakes€its€loan€to€Andy.Ð 8!h' ÐÌà  àThe€first€host€deed€conveys€land€from€Clyde€to€Dan€in€fee€simple,€for€purpose€ofÐ È"ø) Ðimmediate€conveyance€to€Clyde€&€Wilma.€€First,€I€should€be€certain€that€Clydeððs€chain€of€titleÐ #À * Ðwas€clear€at€the€time€of€this€conveyance.€Assuming€that€Clyde€had€a€fee€simple€to€convey,€thisÐ X$ˆ!+ Ðtrust€deed€is€valid,€as€a€conveyance€to€Dan€for€immediate€re„conveyance€to€Clyde€and€Wilma.€Ð  %P", ÐAlthough€the€conveyance€does€not€indicate€what€form€of€fee€should€be€conveyed€to€Clyde€andÐ è%#- ÐWilma,€it€can€be€inferred€from€the€nature€of€the€conveyance€that€Clyde€intended€to€create€aÐ °&à#. Ðtenancy€by€the€entirety.€€This€raises€no€problems€for€title,€yet.Ð x'¨$/ ÐÌà  àSecond€Deed:€€The€second€host€deed€complies€with€the€marketable€provisions€of€the€firstÐ )8&1 Ðdeed€in€that€Dan€conveyed€the€property€back€to€Clyde€and€Wilma€on€the€same€day,€March€10,Ð Ð)'2 Ð1960.€€(note€that€for€chain€of€title€purposes,€it€would€be€helpful€if€the€deeds€indicated€which€oneÐ ˜*È'3 Ðcame€first,€but€based€on€the€grantorððs€intent€evident€in€the€first€from€Clyde€to€Dan,€it€wouldÐ `+(4 Ðappear€the€deed€from€Dan€to€Clyde€and€Wilma€followed€it.)Ð (,X)5 ÐÔ‡&Œ % XXŠÿÔÌÔ#†XŠÿ X %&Œ´#ÔÐ ¨-Ø*7 Ðà  àInitial€Contradictions:€€The€second€deed€contains€two€apparently€conflicting€provisions.€Ð Ð ÐIt€provides€in€one€part€that€the€property€being€conveyed€to€Clyde€and€Wilma€was€a€tenancy€by€theÐ ˜È Ðentireties€for€life€with€the€power€to€sell€without€joinder€of€the€remaindermen€who€are€named€asÐ ` ÐClydeððs€children.€The€second€provision€provides€for€a€conveyance€ð ðto€have€and€to€holdðð€to€ClydeÐ (X Ðand€Wilma€for€life,€with€€the€remainder€to€the€children,€Sid€and€Donna€as€joint€tenants.€€TheÐ ð  Ðterms€are€consistent€to€the€extent€that€the€deed€evidences€an€intent€to€grant€a€tenancy€by€theÐ ¸è Ðentireties€for€Clyde€and€Wilmaððs€life,€with€the€remainder€to€Sid€and€Donna€as€joint€tenants.€€ThisÐ €° Ðis€a€valid€conveyance.€€The€provisions,€however,€are€inconsistent€on€the€question€of€whetherÐ Hx ÐClyde€and€Wilma€can€transfer€the€property€without€joining€Sid€and€Donna.Ô‡&Œ % XXŠÿÔÐ  @ ÐÌà  àGrantorððs€intent:€€Ô#†XŠÿ X %&Œ #ÔIn€interpreting€a€deed,€the€guiding€principle€is€the€grantorððs€intent.€Ð  À  ÐFurther,€conveyance€Ô  ÔòòlanguageóóÔ  ÔÔ  Ô€is€given€priority€over€òòð ðto€have€and€to€holdððóó€language,€and€thereforeÐ X ˆ  Ða€court€is€likely€to€give€preference€to€the€first€provision,€allowing€for€transfer€without€joinder€ofÐ  P  ÐSid€and€Donna.€€Additionally,€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔòòspecificóóÔ  ÔÔ  Ô€language€is€preferred€over€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔòògeneralóóÔ  ÔÔ  Ô€language,€and€a€court€isÐ è   Ðlikely€to€give€€the€òòð ðunqualified€power€to€sell€languageððóó€priority€for€this€reason.Ð ° à  ÐÌà  àCounter:€€The€remaindermen€have€a€vested€interest€in€the€property,€which€cannot€beÐ @p  Ðwaived€by€the€deedððs€language.€€Clyde€and€Wilma€only€have€life€estates,€and€Sid€and€Donna€mustÐ 8  Ðbe€joined€in€any€conveyance€of€a€fee€simple;€otherwise,€the€conveyance€is€only€that€of€the€lifeÐ Ð Ðestate.Ð ˜È ÐÌÌà  àConclusion:€€Interpretation€of€the€deeds€conflicting€provisions€by€a€court€is€likely€to€resultÐ ð  Ðin€a€finding€that€Wilda€held€the€property€as€sole€owner€after€Clyde€died,€obtaining€his€shareÐ ¸è Ðthrough€òòright€of€survivorshipóó,€and€that€she€had€the€power€(pursuant€to€the€first€clause€of€theÐ €° Ðsecond€deed)€to€convey€fee€simple,€without€the€remaindermen€of€Clyde€&€Wilma,€even€thoughÐ Hx Ðshe€herself€only€held€a€life€estate.€€Courtððs€favor€the€free€alien€ability€of€land,€so€thus€outcome€isÐ @ Ðlikely.€Ð Ø ÐÌÔ‡ôm¼ ò XXŠÿÔò òà@<<ìàÔ#†XŠÿ X òôm¼I#ÔREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ h˜ ÐÌà  àBillððs€title€is€good€and€marketable.Ð ø( ÐÌà  àOn€these€facts,€I€feel€confident€advising€the€Bank€that€Bill€has,€and€can€therefore€conveyÐ ˆ¸! Ðgood€and€marketable€title€in€fee€simple,€to€Andy.€€As€such,€I€see€no€impediment€in€the€chain€ofÐ P€" Ðtitle€to€approving€a€purchase€money€loan.Ð H# ÐÌà  àClyde€initially€€owned€the€property€himself.€€Clyde€conveyed€the€property€to€Dan€throughÐ ¨Ø% Ða€Deed€of€Trust€so€that€Dan€could€then€reconvey€the€property€to€Clyde€and€Wilda€as€tenants€byÐ p  & Ðthe€entireties.€€Ð 8!h' ÐÌà  àThis€straw€man€transaction€was€done€in€order€that€Clyde€and€Wilda€would€have€the€fiveÐ È"ø) Ðunities€of€title€necessary€to€hold€property€as€tenants€in€common:€€€€(1)€€Time€„€both€take€at€theÐ #À * Ðsame€time;€€(2)€€Title€„€both€take€the€same€title;€€(3)€€Interest€„€both€take€the€same€interest;€€(4)€Ð X$ˆ!+ ÐPossession€„€both€take€possession;€€and€the€fifth€unity€of€title€is€marriage.€€Only€married€peopleÐ  %P", Ðmay€hold€property€as€tenants€by€the€entireties.Ð è%#- ÐÌà  àAfter€Dan€conveyed€the€property,€Clyde€and€Wilda€held€it€as€a€tenancy€by€the€entireties€inÐ x'¨$/ Ðfee€simple.€€Ð @(p%0 ÐÌà  àThere€are€two€clauses€in€the€grant€from€Dan€to€Clyde€&€Wilda€that€seem€to€be€at€oddsÐ Ð)'2 Ðwith€each€other.€€In€fact,€the€first€clause€appears€to€even€be€at€odds€with€itself.€Ð ˜*È'3 ÐÌà  àA€court€would€construe€the€first€clause€as€a€fee€simple€grant€to€Clyde€&€Wilda€because€itÐ (,X)5 Ðsays€that€they€take€with€ð ðfull,€absolute€and€unqualified€power€to€sell,€convey€or€otherwise€disposeÐ ð, *6 Ðin€their€lifetime€of€the€entire€estate€without€the€joinder€in€the€deed€of€the€ð ðremaindermen.ðð€€If,€asÐ ¸-è*7 Ðit€appears€at€first€blush,€Clyde€&€Wilda€were€merely€life€tenants€and€would€not€have€the€right€orÐ Ð Ðpower€to€convey€the€entire€estate.€€For€that€reason,€this€clause€would€be€construed€such€that€theÐ ˜È Ðgrant€is€in€fee€simple€absolute.Ð ` ÐÌà  àThe€second€clause€is€in€conflict€with€the€first€clause.€It€clearly€appears€that€Clyde€Ð ð  Ðintended€to€give€his€children€from€a€prior€marriage€a€remainder€estate€in€the€property.€€ThisÐ ¸è Ðattempt€failed€because€the€land€was€granted€in€fee€simple€to€Clyde€&€Wilda€as€tenants€by€theÐ €° Ðentireties.€€Tenants€by€the€entireties€have€a€right€of€survivorship,€meaning€that€when€one€tenantÐ Hx Ðdies,€the€other€takes€the€interest€that€the€two€together€formerly€held.€€Because€Clyde€and€WildaÐ  @ Ðheld€the€property€in€fee€simple€as€tenants€by€the€entireties,€on€Clydeððs€death€Wilda€thereafter€heldÐ Ø   Ðthe€property€in€fee€simple.Ð   Ð  ÐÔ‡&Œ % XXŠÿÔÌà  àÔ#†XŠÿ X %&Œ‚#ÔBeing€the€fee€simple€owner€of€the€property,€Wilda€had€every€right€to€sell€the€property€toÐ  P  Ðwhomever€she€chose,€in€this€case,€Bill.Ð è   ÐÌà  àHaving€no€defects€in€title€in€his€chain€of€ownership,€Bill€holds€the€property€€in€fee€simpleÐ x¨  Ðand€can€convey€good€and€marketable€title€to€Andy.Ô‡&Œ % XXŠÿÔÐ @p  ÐÌÔ#†XŠÿ X %&Œ*!#ÔÔ‡ôm¼ ò XXŠÿÔò òà@ìì*ìàˆÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ î-+? ЇÔ#†XŠÿ X òôm¼‚!#ÔÔ#†X´[X XXŠÿSõ#ÔÔ‡XŠÿ XXX´[ÔÔ‡ôm¼ ò XXŠÿÔà@%ìàÔ#†XŠÿ X òôm¼_"#ÔQUESTION€8ó óÔ‡&Œ % XXŠÿÔòòóóˆÐ Ð ÐÌÔ#†XŠÿ X %&ŒÀ"#Ôà  àOn€July€1,€1999,€Bart€moved€to€Howard€County€,€Maryland€to€begin€a€new€business.€€BartÐ P€ Ðentered€into€a€lease€with€Arnold€to€lease€Arnoldððs€commercially€zoned€property€to€operate€aÐ H Ðbusiness€known€as€Bartððs€Tires€and€Lube.€€Arnold€leased€the€property€to€Bart€ð ðas€isðð€and€inÐ à Ðresponse€to€Bartððs€questions€informed€him€that€the€premises€were€previously€operated€byÐ ¨Ø ÐCheapgasco€as€a€service€station€for€a€period€of€approximately€10€years.òòóóÐ p  ÐÌà  àBart€also€purchased€a€home€directly€behind€the€former€service€station€so€that€he€couldÐ  0 Ðwalk€to€work.€€The€home€was€located€in€a€residential€subdivision€which€abutted€the€commercialÐ È ø  Ðstrip€along€the€highway.Ð  À  ÐÌà  àBart€decided€to€employ€a€structural€consultant€to€identity€any€problems€he€might€haveÐ  P  Ðwith€an€outbuilding€he€planned€to€construct€on€the€commercial€property.€€In€the€course€of€itsÐ è   Ðstudy,€the€structural€consultant€reported€a€very€strong€ð ðhydrocarbon€odorðð€from€water€and€soilÐ ° à  Ðsamples€taken€from€the€property.€€Following€the€structural€consultantððs€advice,€Bart€then€orderedÐ x¨  Ðan€environmental€study€which€revealed€hydrocarbon€contamination€of€both€the€leased€propertyÐ @p  Ðand€the€home€property€Bart€had€recently€purchased.€€Thus,€Bart€was€unable€to€occupy€the€homeÐ 8  Ðbecause€of€the€hydrocarbon€contamination.Ð Ð ÐÌà  àThe€Maryland€Department€of€the€Environment€determined€that€the€contamination€was€aÐ ` Ðviolation€of€Maryland€law€and€issued€a€Violation€Notice€to€Cheapgasco€and€ordered€it€to€performÐ (X Ða€€hydro€geological€study€and€subsequent€remediation€to€remove€the€problem.€€€CheapgascoÐ ð  Ðcooperated€but€the€remediation€was€still€ongoing€one€year€after€Bart€began€paying€rent€to€Arnold.€Ð ¸è ÐMeanwhile,€Bartððs€bank€withdrew€its€financing€from€the€project,€in€part,€because€of€theÐ €° Ðcontamination€of€the€property.€€Thus,€Bart€was€unable€to€start€his€business€and€unable€to€occupyÐ Hx Ðthe€home€he€had€purchased.Ð @ ÐÌà  àBart€then€filed€suit€against€Cheapgasco€for€the€contamination€to€the€leased€property€€asÐ  Ð Ðwell€as€to€the€home€property.€€His€complaint€contained,€among€other€things,€counts€in€ð ðstrictÐ h˜ Ðliabilityðð€and€ð ðnegligence.ððÐ 0` ÐÌà  àò òAs€an€experienced€Maryland€practitioner€in€tort€law,€how€would€you€defendÐ Àð  ÐCheapgasco€in€this€action?€€Explain€fully.ó óÐ ˆ¸! ÐÌÌò òà@<<ìàREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ à$ ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àStrict€Liability:€€To€be€strictly€liable,€the€defendantððs€liability€must€arise€from€(1)€aÐ p  & Ðdefective€product,€€(2)€an€ultra€hazardous€activity,€or€(3)€a€wild€animal.€€The€only€category€whichÐ :!j' ÐBart€could€argue€here€is€ultra€hazardous€activity€(storage€of€gasoline).€€Ð "2( ÐÌI€would€defend€first€based€on€Bartððs€failure€to€make€out€a€prima€facie€case€of€strict€liability.€€InÐ ’# * Ðorder€for€defendant€to€be€liable,€Bart€must€prove€that€it€was€engaged€in€an€ultra€hazardousÐ Z$Š!+ Ðactivity,€uncommon€for€the€area,€that€could€not€be€made€safe€through€precautions.€€Here,€I€wouldÐ "%R", Ðsay€that€the€storage€of€gasoline€may€have€some€risks,€but€overall€it€is€not€an€ð ðultraðð€hazardousÐ ê%#- Ðsubstance.€€Additionally,€gas€stations€are€common€in€every€community€and€the€storage€ofÐ ²&â#. Ðgasoline€can€be€made€safe€through€precautions.€€Therefore,€defendant€is€not€strictly€liable€for€theÐ z'ª$/ Ðcontamination.Ð B(r%0 ÐÌà  àIf€that€doesnððt€work,€I€would€argue€that€Bart€assumed€the€risk€(the€only€defense€to€strictÐ Ò)'2 Ðliability)€because€he€had€actual€knowledge€of€the€former€use€of€the€land€by€defendant€(ArnoldÐ š*Ê'3 Ðtold€him)€and€being€in€the€automotive€business€himself€(tires€&€lube)€he€had€knowledge€of€theÐ b+’(4 Ðrisk€of€contamination.€€Armed€with€that€knowledge,€Bart€nonetheless€decided€to€lease€theÐ *,Z)5 Ðcommercial€premises€ð ðas€isðð€and€purchase€a€home€without€prior€investigation€or€studies.€€BartÐ ò,"*6 Ðassumed€the€risk.Ð º-ê*7 Їò ò(2)ó óà  àNegligence:€€To€prevail,€Bart€must€prove€that€defendant€(1)€owed€him€a€duty,€(2)Ð Ð Ðbreached€the€duty,€(3)€the€breach€was€the€actual€and€proximate€cause€of€harm,€and€(4)€BartÐ šÊ Ðsuffered€damages.Ð b’ ÐÌà  àI€would€argue€that€defendant€did€not€owe€Bart€a€duty€because€he€was€a€mere€lessee€of€theÐ ò" Ðland.€€This€is€not€a€strong€argument€because€duties€are€owed€to€lessees€as€well,€and€Bart€ownedÐ ºê Ðhis€home.€€I€would€also€argue€no€breach€of€duty€because€defendant€acted€reasonably€inÐ ‚² Ðmaintaining€its€service€station€10€years€ago.€Bart€will€argue€that€there€was€a€per€se€breach€of€dutyÐ Jz Ðas€evidenced€by€the€Department€of€Environment€violation€notice.€€However,€in€Maryland,Ð  B Ðstatutory€violations€are€not€determinative€on€this€issue€but€are€merely€some€evidence€of€breach€ifÐ Ú   Ðplaintiff€satisfies€the€class€of€person/class€of€risk€test€(which€Bart€probably€does€because€theÐ ¢ Ò  Ðstatute€was€designed€to€protect€people€and€property€from€such€contamination).€€Ð j š  ÐÌà  àThere€are€no€good€arguments€to€be€made€on€the€causation€of€damages€issue€since€theÐ ú *  Ðcontamination€is€the€Ô#†X´[X XXŠÿ@"#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[Ôð ðÔ#†X´[X XXË[:#ÔÔ‡XŠÿ XXX´[Ôbut€forððÔ#†X´[X XXŠÿ¡:#ÔÔ‡XŠÿ XXX´[Ô€and€foreseeable€proximate€cause€and€Bart€has€suffered€economicÐ  ò  Ðdamages.Ð ”Ä  ÐÌà  àI€would€also€defend€the€negligence€claim€based€on€statute€of€limitation€(SOL)€grounds.€Ð $T  ÐThe€general€SOL€period€is€3€years.€€Defendant€sold€the€property€to€Arnold€10€years€ago.€€TheÐ ì Ðcause€of€action€accrued€when€Arnold€discovered€or€should€have€discovered€the€damage.€Ð ´ä ÐArguably,€he€should€have€had€the€well€tested€long€ago.€€Thus,€the€3„year€SOL€has€run€and€theÐ |¬ Ðlease€to€Bart€does€not€start€the€period€running€again.Ð Dt ÐÌI€would€also€defend€based€on€assumption€of€risk€(same€argument€as€in€strict€liability),€andÐ Ô Ðcontributory€negligence€which€in€Maryland€is€a€complete€bar€to€recovery.€€Ð œÌ ÐÌò òà@<<ìàREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ ,\ ÐÌò ò(1)ó óà  àStrict€Liability:€€I€would€argue€on€behalf€of€Cheapgasco€that€they€are€not€strictly€liable€forÐ ¼ì Ðthe€hydrocarbon€contamination.Ð †¶ ÐÌà  àRunning€a€service€station,€presumably€with€gasoline€pumps,€is€not€an€ultra€hazardousÐ F Ðactivity€which€would€sound€in€strict€liability.€€A€service€station€is€common€place,€found€in€manyÐ Þ  Ðareas€which€are€commercial€and€residential,€and€is€a€safe€business€made€safer€by€the€safetyÐ ¦Ö! Ðprecautions€in€place€(e.g.,€pump€cutoffs€to€avoid€explosions),€thus€it€is€not€an€ultra€hazardousÐ nž" Ðactivity.Ð 6f# ÐÌà  àA€service€station€nor€its€products€are€defective.€€Gasoline€did€not€leave€the€refinery€soÐ Æö% Ðdangerous€as€to€be€handled€under€strict€liability€theory.€€There€is€no€inherent€defect€in€anyÐ Ž ¾& Ðproducts€at€the€service€station€that€would€result€in€a€finding€of€strict€liability.€€Cheapgasco€is€notÐ V!†' Ðstrictly€liable€for€damages€Bart€may€have€suffered.Ð "N( ÐÌò ò(2)ó óà  àNegligence:€€I€would€argue€that€Bart€will€not€meet€his€burden€of€showing€(2)€duty€owedÐ ®#Þ * Ðto€Bart;€(2)€breach€of€that€duty;€(3)€€€€€causation€„€that€but€for€Cheapgascoððs€breach€Bart€wouldÐ x$¨!+ Ðnot€be€hurt€(factual€causation),€and€that€it€is€fair€to€hold€Cheapgasco€liable€(legal€causation);€andÐ @%p", Ð(4)€that€Bart€suffered€damages.Ð &8#- ÐÌà  à1.€€Duty€owed€to€Bart:€€€Cheapgasco€owes€no€duty€of€reasonable€care€to€Bart.€€Bart,€aÐ ˜'È$/ Ðsubsequent€land€occupier€and€a€renter€of€a€house€in€a€neighboring€community,€is€Ô  ÔÔ  Ôòònot€óóÔ  ÔÔ  ÔaÐ `(%0 Ðforeseeable€plaintiff.€€If€Bart€is€not€a€foreseeable€plaintiff,€Cheapgasco€owed€no€duty€to€him.€Ð ()X&1 ÐBart€and€Cheapgasco€have€no€relationship€that€would€make€it€reasonable€for€Cheapgasco€to€oweÐ ð) '2 ÐBart€a€duty.€€Bart€came€on€to€land€after€Cheapgasco€and€via€Arnold,€the€land€owner.€€BartððsÐ ¸*è'3 Ðresidence€in€an€abutting€residential€neighborhood€after€Cheapgasco€left€the€area€does€not€giveÐ €+°(4 Ðrise€to€a€duty€of€care€owed€to€Bart.€€I€would€argue€the€court€should€dismiss€the€action€because€noÐ H,x)5 Ðduty€of€care€is€owed.€€Ð -@*6 ÐÐ Ø-+7 ЇÌà  à2.€€Breach:€€Cheapgasco€didnÔ#†X´[X XXŠÿî:#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXËH#ÔÔ‡XŠÿ XXX´[Ôt€breach€the€duty€of€care.€€They€operated€their€business€in€aÐ ˜È Ðnormal€fashion€and€have€no€idea€how€the€land€was€contaminated.€€Violation€of€the€MarylandÐ jš ÐEnvironmental€Law€is€not€negligence€per€se;€it€is€only€evidence€of€negligence.€€Further,Ð 2b ÐCheapgascoððs€cleanup€is€not€an€admission€(subsequent€remedial€measures€not€admissibleÐ ú* Ðevidence€to€show€negligence€or€feasibility€of€precautions).Ð Âò ÐÌà  à3.€€Causation:€€Other€service€stations€could€have€also€contributed€to€the€contamination.Ð R‚ ÐÌÌà  à4.€€Damages:€€Bart€could€have€limited€his€damages€(limit€foreseeable€consequences)€byÐ ª Ú  Ðcarefully€inspecting€the€land.€€He€took€it€ð ðas€isðð€and€thus€put€himself€at€risk€of€loss.€€He€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔòòassumedÐ r ¢  Ðthe€riskóóÔ  ÔÔ  Ô€of€property€leased€ð ðas€isðð€and€in€the€alternative,€he€was€Ô  ÔÔ  Ôòòcontributorily€negligentóóÔ  ÔÔ  Ô€by€failingÐ : j  Ðto€inspect€prior€to€signing€the€lease€on€his€business€and€home€properties.Ð  2  ÐÌà  àI€would€also€examine€the€statute€of€limitations€for€tort€actions€of€this€kind.€€I€would€hopeÐ ’  Ðit€would€be€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations,€but€if€not€I€would€assert€the€defenses€discussedÐ ZŠ  Ðabove.€€Ð "R  ÐÔ‡&Œ % XXŠÿÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÔ#†&©s % %&ŒÕH#ÔÔ#†X´[X %&©s­N#ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ .2+9 Їò òÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôà@%ìàQUESTION€9ó óˆÐ Ð ÐÓ  ÓÌÌà@ìì*ìàˆÌà  àAl,€fifteen€years€old,€his€adult€brother,€Bob€and€their€friend€Chris€planned€to€break€intoÐ ð  ÐDarlaÔ#†X´[XXX=ÙRO#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXËkP#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€residence€in€Prince€GeorgeÔ#†X´[XXX=Ù±P#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXËQ#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€County,€Maryland.€€Al€knocked€on€the€door€of€the€residenceÐ ¸è Ðto€make€sure€no€one€was€home.€€After€no€one€answered,€all€three€broke€into€DarlaÔ#†X´[XXX=ÙUQ#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË8R#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€€home€andÐ Šº Ðbegan€searching€for€valuables€to€steal.€€While€Al€remained€in€the€house,€Bob€and€Chris€went€to€theÐ \Œ Ðdetached€garage€twenty€yards€away€to€continue€their€search.Ð $ T ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà  àDarla€arrived€home€at€that€time.€€After€Darla€parked€her€car€in€the€garage,€Bob€and€ChrisÐ ´ ä  Ðaccosted€her.€€Bob€then€raped€her€and€strangled€her€to€death.€€Bob€then€shot€and€killed€Chris€withÐ | ¬  Ðthe€handgun€he€normally€carried€with€him€so€that€there€would€be€no€witness€to€his€actions.Ð D t  ÐÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà  àAl€and€Bob€were€subsequently€arrested.€€You€have€been€assigned€as€a€public€defender€toÐ Ô   Ðrepresent€Al,€who€has€no€prior€record,€with€respect€to€the€first€degree€murder€indictment€that€hasÐ œÌ  Ðbeen€returned€against€him€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Prince€GeorgeÔ#†X´[XXX=Ù~R#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXËgV#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€County.Ð d”  ÐÌà  àò ò(A)à ` àWhat€is€AlÔ#†X´[XXX=Ù­V#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË6W#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€culpability€for€€a€conviction€of€first€degree€murder€of€Darla€andÐ þ. ÐChris?€€Provide€a€thorough€analysis.Ð Ô ÐÌà  à(B)à ` àWhat€Motion€should€you€file€initially€in€AlÔ#†X´[XXX=Ù|W#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË–X#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€defense€to€limit€his€exposure€toÐ d” Ðincarceration?à ¸ àó óÐ :j ÐÌÔ& ¼ ÔÓ  ÓòòÔ  Ôóóò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ð Êú ÐòòÔ Ý €YÔóóó óÌÓ  Óò ò(A)ó óà  àIn€Maryland,€first€degree€murder€is€premeditated€murder€and€homicide€during€theÐ ZŠ Ðcommission€of€a€felony.€€Here,€the€indictment€must€be€for€felony€murder,€as€Al€clearly€had€notÐ $T Ðplanned€to€murder€Darla.€€All€three€had€planned€to€break€into€DarlaÔ#†X´[XXX=ÙÜX#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË:[#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€home€while€Darla€was€notÐ ì Ðhome.Ô'¼ÊeYÔÐ ¾î ÐÌò òó óà  àAs€an€accomplice€co„conspirator€of€burglary€(breaking€and€entering€with€intent€to€steal),€AlÐ N~ Ðmay€be€convicted€of€any€crime€committed€by€co„felons€occurring€during€the€commission€of€theÐ F  Ðfelony.€€Therefore,€Al€might€be€accused€of€first€degree€murder€of€Darla€and€Chris€if€burglary€is€aÐ Þ! Ðfelony,€even€though€the€actual€killings€were€done€by€Bob.Ð ¦Ö" Ðà  àÌà  àAl€can€defend€by€saying€that€rape€and€murder€of€Darla€and€the€murder€of€Chris€were€beyondÐ 6f$ Ðthe€scope€of€the€crime€as€contemplated.€€Factors€are€going€to€show,€this€includes€the€fact€that€AlÐ þ.% Ðknocked€to€make€sure€Darla€wasnÔ#†X´[XXX=Ù€[#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXËô^#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôt€home,€and€that€Bob€and€Chris€were€off€in€the€garage.€€However,Ð Æ ö& Ðif€Al€knew€that€Bob€normally€carried€a€handgun€with€him,€the€prosecution€will€argue€that€theÐ ˜!È' Ðmurders€were€not€so€far€from€contemplation.€€In€this€argument,€BobÔ#†X´[XXX=Ù:_#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË„`#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€killing€of€Darla€was€closerÐ `"( Ðto€being€foreseeable€than€the€murder€of€Chris.Ð 2#b ) Ðà  àÌà  àOn€€these€facts,€Al€may€escape€culpability€as€to€first€degree€murder€unless€the€prosecutionÐ Â$ò!+ Ðproves€beyond€reasonable€doubt€that€the€murders€were€reasonably€contemplated€scope€of€theÐ Š%º", Ðburglary.Ð R&‚#- Ðà  àÌò ò(B)ó óà  àI€€should€file€a€motion€to€try€Al€as€a€minor€to€limit€his€exposure€to€incarceration.€€At€fifteenÐ â'%/ Ðyears€old,€with€no€prior€conviction€should€not€be€tried€as€an€adult€for€his€adult€brotherððsÐ ¬(Ü%0 Ðuncontemplated€crime€of€violence.Ð t)¤&1 ÐÓ  ÓòòÔ  Ôóóò òÌÌÌÌÌÐ $.T+7 ÐREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2òòÔ Ý ÂcÔóóó óÐ Ð ÐÌÓ  Óò ò(A)ó óà  àòò1.óó€€AlÔ#†X´[XXX=ÙÊ`#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXˈd#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€culpability€with€respect€to€Darla€for€a€conviction€of€first€degree€murder,€the€StateÐ ` Ðmust€prove€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt€that€Al€had€the€specific€intent€to€deliberately€kill€Darla€or€thatÐ 4d ÐAl€is€guilty€under€the€felony€murder€rules.€€Since€there€is€no€proof€of€any€intent,€felony€murder€is€theÐ ü, Ðonly€chance.€€It€is€probably€not€possible€for€Al€to€be€convicted€of€felony€murder€of€Darla.€€Al,€BobÐ Äô Ðand€Chris€entered€into€a€conspiracy€to€break€into€Darlaððs€house.€€Because€€burglary€is€an€infamousÐ Œ¼ Ðcrime€under€felony€murder€rules,€Al€is€guilty€of€any€murder€by€a€co„conspirator€in€furtherance€of€theÐ T„ Ðcrime.€€It€is€arguable€that€Al€cannot€be€guilty€of€Darlaððs€murder.€€The€murder€of€Darla€was€not€reallyÐ  L Ðin€furtherance€of€the€breaking€into€the€house.€€AlÔ#†X´[XXX=ÙÎd#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË‘h#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€intent€was€to€burglarize€the€house,€not€a€garageÐ ä   Ðthat€was€20€feet€away.€€Furthermore,€it€appears€Bob€shot€Darla€to€keep€her€quiet€about€the€rape,€notÐ ¶ æ  Ðto€further€the€burglary.€€On€the€other€hand,€Al€probably€knew€that€his€brother€carried€a€handgun,€andÐ ~ ®  Ðit€is€foreseeable€in€a€burglary€that€a€co„conspirator€may€kill€the€homeowner€if€the€homeowner€arrives.€Ð F v  ÐAlÔ#†X´[XXX=Ù×h#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXËÑj#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€culpability€here€is€definitely€a€jury€question.Ð  >  ÐÌò òó óà  à€òò2.óó€€Murder€of€Chris:€€Al€should€not€be€guilty€of€Chrisðð€murder.€€A€conspirator€is€usually€notÐ ¨Ø  Ðguilty€of€the€death€of€a€co„conspirator€shot€by€a€victim€or€police€during€the€commission€of€the€crime.€Ð p   ÐHere,€however,€Chris€was€shot€by€Bob,€not€Darla.€€However,€the€murder€of€Bob€was€not€inÐ 8h  Ðfurtherance€of€the€burglary,€but€€to€keep€him€quiet€about€the€rape€and€murder€of€Darla.€€Because€AlÐ 0 Ðdid€not€conspire€to€rape/murder€Darla,€he€did€not€have€the€requisite€mental€state€to€be€guilty€of€ChrisððÐ Èø Ðdeath.€€Ð À Ðò ò(B)ó óà  àI€would€immediately€file€a€motion€in€the€Circuit€Court€to€have€Al€transferred€and€tried€inÐ Xˆ ÐJuvenile€Court.€€Because€of€the€age€of€Al€and€the€seriousness€of€the€charge,€the€Circuit€Court€hasÐ "R Ðjurisdiction€unless€they€decide€to€transfer€to€Juvenile€Court.€€I€would€argue€to€the€Circuit€Court,€thatÐ ê Ðdespite€the€seriousness€of€the€charge,€Al€did€not€intend€to€do€anything€but€burglarize€an€empty€house.€Ð ²â ÐHe€is€more€properly€tried€in€the€Juvenile€Court€as€he€did€not€kill€anyone,€want€to€kill€anyone,€orÐ zª Ðforesee€that€anyone€would€be€killed.Ð Br ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ ê-+7 ЇÓ  Óò òQUESTION€10ó óÐ Ð ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àAbel€is€talking€on€his€mobile€phone€while€parked€on€the€eastbound€shoulder€of€MarylandÐ ` ÐRoute€6,€a€public€highway€in€Charles€County,€Maryland,€next€to€a€State€Highway€AdministrationÐ (X Ðsign€which€states:€€NO€PARKING€OR€STANDING.€€Baker€is€traveling€eastbound€on€Route€6€at€aÐ ð  Ðspeed€of€80€miles€per€hour.€€The€posted€speed€limit€at€all€points€on€Route€6€is€50€miles€per€hour.€Ð ¸è ÐCharlie€is€traveling€westbound€on€Route€6€and,€while€adjusting€his€radio,€crosses€the€center€line€intoÐ €° Ðthe€eastbound€lane€and€into€the€path€of€BakerÔ#†X´[XXX=Ùk#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË·s#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€vehicle,€causing€Baker€to€veer€onto€the€shoulderÐ Hx Ðwhere€BakerÔ#†X´[XXX=Ùýs#ÔÔ‡XË XXX´[ÔððÔ#†X´[X XXË‘t#ÔÔ‡X=ÙXXX´[Ôs€vehicle€strike€the€rear€of€Abelððs€vehicle.€€Abel€and€Baker€are€both€seriously€injured.Ð  J ÐÌà  àAbel€files€a€legally€sufficient€Complaint€against€Baker€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€CharlesÐ ´ ä  ÐCounty€seeking€damages€for€his€injuries€from€the€collision€and€properly€serves€the€Complaint.Ð | ¬  ÐÌà  àò òWhat€other€pleadings€and€related€papers€(other€than€discovery)€should€be€filed€andÐ  <  Ðserved€by€Abel,€Baker€and€Charlie,€stating€in€your€answer€the€purpose€of€each€pleading€andÐ Ô   Ðthe€time€frame€for€the€filing€of€each€pleading?€€Assume€that€all€process€and€service€of€processÐ œÌ  Ðis€sufficient€and€all€service€of€process€occurs€in€the€State€of€Maryland.ó óÐ d”  ÐÌò òÔ&  Ôòòóóà@<<ìàÔ  ÔREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Ô Ý 5xÔó óˆÐ ô$ ÐÔ'ôxÔÌà  àOnce€Abel€files€a€Complaint€against€Baker,€Baker€must€file€an€Answer€to€the€ComplaintÐ „´ Ðwithin€thirty€days.€€Under€the€facts€of€this€case,€Baker€may€want€to€assert€a€counterclaim€againstÐ L| ÐAbel€for€his€own€injuries€arising€out€of€Abel€being€improperly€parked€on€the€roadway.€€TheÐ D Ðcounterclaim€can€be€filed€with€the€Answer,€or€within€thirty€days€thereafter.€€If€a€counterclaim€is€filed,Ð Ü  ÐAbel€will€be€required€to€file€an€Answer€to€the€counterclaim.Ð ¤Ô ÐÌ€€€€€€€€à  àWithin€thirty€days€of€the€Answer,€Baker€will€also€want€to€file€a€third€party€claim€impleadingÐ 4d ÐCharlie,€whose€negligence€was€a€contributory€cause€(if€not€the€main€cause)€of€the€occurrence.€€BakerÐ ü, Ðmay€also€want€to€file€a€cross„claim€against€Charlie€for€his€own€injuries.Ð Äô ÐÌà  àOnce€the€third€party€claim€is€filed€(and/or€any€subsequent€cross„claim),€Charlie€will€haveÐ T„ Ðthirty€days€to€file€an€answer€to€the€third€party€claim.Ð L ÐÌà  àOnce€Charlie€is€impleaded,€Plaintiff,€Abel,€will€also€want€to€file€an€amended€Complaint€toÐ ¬Ü! Ðassert€any€cause€of€action€Abel€may€wish€to€assert€against€Charlie.€€If€Abel€failed€to€assert€this€claim,Ð t¤" Ðhe€would€not€be€able€to€file€a€subsequent€action€against€Charlie€arising€out€of€this€occurrence.Ð <l# ÐÌà  àIf€Abel€does€file€an€amended€complaint€asserting€his€claims€against€Charlie,€both€Charlie€andÐ Ìü% ÐBaker€will€have€fifteen€days€to€file€an€answer€to€the€amended€complaint.Ð ” Ä& ÐÌÔ&  ÔÓ  ÓòòÔ  Ôóóò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óòòÔ Ý QÔóóÐ $"T( ÐÔ'$"6ÔÌÓ  Óà  àBaker€(B)€should€file€a€counterclaim€against€Abel€(A)€asserting€damages€he€suffered€inÐ ´#ä * Ðthe€accident.€€This€should€be€filed€within€thirty€days€of€filing€an€answer.€€Abel€should€respondÐ |$¬!+ Ðwithin€seven€days€of€service€of€counterclaim.€€Bakerððs€answer€to€Abelððs€complaint€should€beÐ D%t", Ðfiled€within€thirty€days€of€receiving€service€of€the€complaint.€€Bakerððs€answer€should€include€allÐ  &<#- Ðthe€defenses€relevant€under€MD€Annotated€Code€2„323(f)€and€(g),€especially€contributoryÐ Ô&$. Ðnegligence.€€In€addition,€Baker€may€also€want€to€file€a€preliminary€motion€to€dismiss€for€failureÐ œ'Ì$/ Ðto€join€a€required€party€(Charlie)€prior€to€filing€the€answer.€€Abel€must€file€a€response€to€theÐ d(”%0 Ðmotion€within€fifteen€days€of€service€of€the€motion.€Ð ,)\&1 ÐÌÓ  Óà  àBaker€may€also€wish€to€file€a€third€party€complaint€against€Charlie€(C)€alleging€negligence.€Ð ¼*ì'3 Ðwhen€Charlie€was€playing€with€his€radio,€he€was€not€acting€reasonably€and€is€liable€to€Baker€for€allÐ „+´(4 Ðor€part€of€Abelððs€claim€against€Baker€(2„332(a)).€€Charlie€should€then€file€a€response€assertingÐ L,|)5 Ðdefenses€to€Bakerððs€claim€and€may€counterclaim€Baker€if€Charlie€suffered€injury€(no€facts€to€suggestÐ -D*6 Ðthis).€€This€response€to€the€third€party€complaint€must€be€filed€within€thirty€days€of€service€of€theÐ Ü- +7 Ðthird€party€complaint.€€In€addition,€Abel€must€assert€claims€against€Charlie€as€a€third€party€arisingÐ Ð Ðout€of€the€same€transaction€or€risk€having€such€claims€waived€(see€2„332(c)).€€Charlieððs€answer€toÐ ˜È Ðthe€third€party€complaint€may€assert€the€same€defenses€against€Abel,€as€the€Plaintiff,€that€Baker€canÐ ` Ðassert€against€A.Ð (X ÐÌà  àSince€Maryland€is€a€contributory€negligence€state,€both€Baker€and€Charlie€should€assert€thisÐ ¸è Ðaffirmative€defense€in€their€answers.Ð €° ÐÌà  àIn€addition,€Baker€should€file€a€cross„claim€against€Charlie€for€his€(Bakerððs)€injuriesÐ  @ Ðsustained€in€the€accident€in€the€event€Bakerððs€counterclaim€against€Abel€fails.Ð Ø   ÐÌà  àAll€of€these€claims€should€be€made€in€order€to€avoid€claim€preclusion€(€res€judicata)€and/orÐ h ˜  Ðissue€preclusion€(collateral€estoppel)€problems.Ô‡º¿¹XX=ÙÔÔ#†ºIã¹¹º¿×t#ÔÔ‡º¿¹¹ºIãÔÐ 0 `  ÐÓ  ÓÔ#†X=ÙX¹º¿˜‰#ÔÔ‡™…L—XX=ÙÔÔ#†™Ìd——™…LÚ‰#ÔÔ‡™…L——™ÌdÔò òó óÌÓ  ÓÔ#†X=ÙX—™…L=Š#ÔÔ‡º¿¹XX=ÙÔÔ#†ºIã¹¹º¿Š#ÔÔ‡º¿¹¹ºIãÔÌÔ#†ºIã¹¹º¿‹#ÔÔ#†X´[X¹ºIãÔŠ#ÔÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ ª-Ú*7 ÐÔ‡!X´[XXX´[Ôà@^^%ìàò òQUESTION€11ó óˆÐ Ð ÐÌÌà  àA€Maryland€County€duly€enacted€a€law€that€permits€adult€uses€only€in€industrial€zones.€Ð (X Ðð ðAdult€Usesðð€are€defined€as€ð ðthose€whose€primary€purpose€is€the€sale€of€titillating€and€tantalizingÐ ð  Ðmaterial€of€a€sexual€nature.ðð€€All€industrially€zoned€land€within€the€County€is€concentrated€in€tenÐ ¸è Ðacres€located€in€an€isolated€portion€of€the€County.Ð €° ÐÌà  àAll€businesses€must€first€secure€a€use€and€occupancy€permit€prior€to€operating.€€Adult€usesÐ  @ Ðalso€require€a€special€permit€prior€to€operating.€€These€permits€are€routinely€reviewed€by€the€planningÐ Ø   Ðdepartment,€the€Permits€Department,€the€Health€Department€and€the€Fire€Department.€€The€reviewÐ   Ð  Ðis€usually€completed€within€thirty€days.€€Failure€to€obtain€a€use€and€occupancy€permit€and€a€specialÐ h ˜  Ðpermit€prior€to€operating€may€result€in€the€imposition€of€a€reasonable€fine€on€the€owner€of€theÐ 0 `  Ðbusiness€as€well€as€closure€of€the€business.Ð ø (  ÐÌà  àThe€ð ðFun€Stuffðð€movie€rental€store,€a€national€chain,€rented€space€in€a€strip€shopping€centerÐ ˆ¸  Ðon€industrially€zoned€land€in€the€County.€€It€hired€Harry€Flynn€to€manage€the€store.€€Harry€Flynn€filedÐ P€  Ðfor€a€use€and€occupancy€permit€and€a€special€permit€on€January€1,€2001,€to€operate€an€adult€use€inÐ H  Ðan€industrial€zone.€€On€March€15,€2001,€after€pressure€from€headquarters€to€start€making€a€profit,Ð à ÐHarry€Flynn€opened€the€store€without€having€received€either€permit.€€The€Permit€DepartmentÐ ¨Ø Ðimmediately€served€Fun€Stuff€and€Harry€Flynn€with€a€violation€notice€that€ordered€the€closing€of€theÐ p  Ðstore€until€permits€are€issued.Ð 8h ÐÌà  àOn€March€20,€2001,€the€County€was€granted€a€hearing€on€its€request€for€an€injunction€by€theÐ Èø ÐCircuit€Court€for€the€County.€€Harry€Flynn€and€an€attorney€from€the€Countyððs€Office€of€LawÐ À Ðappeared€at€the€hearing.€€The€Court€ruled€in€the€Countyððs€favor€and€ordered€Harry€Flynn€to€ceaseÐ Xˆ Ðoperation€until€the€store€receives€all€necessary€permits,€and€imposed€a€fine€of€$1,000.€€Flynn€statedÐ  P Ðthat€he€could€not€pay€the€fine€and€wished€to€appeal€the€Courtððs€order.€€The€court€immediatelyÐ è Ðdetained€Flynn€until€he€could€pay€the€fine.€€He€remained€in€the€local€correctional€facility€until€MarchÐ °à Ð21,€2001,€when€he€was€able€to€pay€the€fine.Ð x¨ ÐÌà  àFlynn€and€the€authorized€representatives€of€the€national€chain€contact€you,€a€duly€licensedÐ 8 ÐMaryland€attorney,€and€ask€you€to€challenge€the€Countyððs€law,€the€fine€and€any€other€matter€arisingÐ Ð  Ðfrom€the€Courtððs€hearing.Ð ˜È! Ðò òÌà  àWhat€legal€challenges€might€you€bring,€and€why?€€Discuss€fully.ó óÐ (X# ÐÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óˆÐ ¸è% ÐÌà  àFlynn€has€standing€because€he€has€been€fined.€€This€case€raises€issues€concerning€the€1òòstóóÐ H!x' ÐAmendment€as€to€the€governmentððs€ability€to€regulate€speech.€The€licensing€scheme€is€overbroadÐ "@( Ðand€vague€and€substantially€impairs€substantive€due€process€and€the€equal€protection€rights€ofÐ Ø" ) Ðcitizens.Ð  #Ð * ÐÌà  àFlynn,€pursuant€to€the€statute,€filed€for€a€license€that€would€permit€his€movie€rental€franchiseÐ 0%`", Ðto€operate€a€Government€does€have€the€power€to€regulate€obscene€speech.€€Obscene€speech€is€thatÐ ø%(#- Ðwhich€stimulates€the€prurient€interest€based€on€a€community€standard€and€which€is€without€artistic,Ð À&ð#. Ðetc.,€merit€to€a€rational€person.€€It€is€unclear€from€the€statute€what€is€€ð ðtitillating€and€tantalizingðð,€butÐ ˆ'¸$/ Ðit€clearly€has€nothing€to€do€with€obscenity.€€Accordingly,€we€will€challenge€the€statute€as€vague€andÐ P(€%0 Ðoverbroad€in€that€it€does€not€present€clear€standards€which€provide€a€clear€notice€to€Mr.€Flynn€(orÐ )H&1 Ðthe€national€chain)€what€it€should€do€to€comply€other€than€wait€for€the€license€approval.€€When€aÐ à)'2 Ðstatute€is€poorly€crafted€it€can€be€held€unenforceable€and€void,€and€an€individual€may€go€forwardÐ ¨*Ø'3 Ð(i.e.,€no€injunction€is€viable).€€This€also€raises€the€issue€of€prior€restraint€in€that€there€is€no€situationÐ p+ (4 Ðhere€that€warrants€the€imposition€of€these€prior€restraints€on€Flynnððs€business€operation.Ð 8,h)5 ÐÌà  àThis€law€violates€the€Equal€Protection€provision€because€it€unfairly€discriminates€againstÐ È-ø*7 ÐFlynn€in€that€his€business€is€forced€to€situate€itself€in€a€gulag€in€the€industrial€zone€because€of€theÐ Ð Ðso„called€adult€use€provision.€€Other€similar€video€enterprises€are€not€required€to€do€so.Ð ˜È ÐÌThere€is€also€a€commerce€clause€challenge€in€that€the€restriction€impacts€on€the€national€chainððsÐ (X Ðbusiness€operations€and€unfairly€burdens€them€and€others€like€them.€€Ð ð  ÐÌà  àThe€Due€Process€violation€challenge€could€also€be€mounted€since€the€statute€is€so€vague€andÐ €° Ðoverbroad.€€Also,€the€process€used€to€enforce€the€statute€(jailing€Flynn)€was€improper,€and€FlynnÐ Hx Ðdeserves€the€chance€to€appeal€or€have€it€reconsidered.Ð  @ ÐÔ#†X´[XX!X´[¹‹#ÔÔ‡!X´[XXX´[ÔÌà@<<ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆÐ   Ð  ÐÌà  àFun€Stuff€can€challenge€the€law€on€Equal€Protection€grounds.€€The€clause€is€imputed€to€theÐ 0 `  Ðstates€through€the€14òòthóó€Amendment.€€Fun€Stuff€will€argue€that€the€County€law€treats€businesses€withÐ ø (  Ðadult€uses€differently€than€other€commercial€businesses€because€it€requires€adult€use€businesses€toÐ À ð  Ðobtain€a€special€permit€prior€to€operating.€€When€analyzing€a€claim€under€Equal€Protection€I€wouldÐ ˆ¸  Ðfirst€look€to€determine€if€the€scrutiny€standard€is€strict€and€here€the€only€fundamental€right€would€beÐ P€  Ðfree€speech€and€Fun€Stuff€would€have€to€argue€that€opening€their€store€is€a€matter€of€free€speech€toÐ H  Ðsell€video€and€magazine€products€and€is€protected.€€The€legislation€must€be€content€specific€on€itsÐ à Ðface.€€Fun€Stuff€will€argue€that€it€is€content€based€because€it€strictly€regulates€adult€use€material€only.€Ð ¨Ø ÐFun€Stuff€will€assert€that€the€legislation€is€not€narrowly€tailored€to€reach€a€specific€state€interest€andÐ p  Ðit€is€not€the€least€restrictive€means€of€addressing€any€state€interest.€€The€time,€place€and€mannerÐ 8h Ðrestrictions€are€sufficiently€satisfied€by€requiring€the€adult€use€stores€to€operate€in€the€industriallyÐ 0 Ðzoned€areas€concentrated€on€ten€acres€in€an€isolated€portion€of€the€County,€however.€€€If€the€FunÐ Èø ÐStuff€store€cannot€successfully€argue€a€free€speech€violation,€the€court€will€apply€the€rational€basisÐ À Ðstandard€and€the€county€need€only€show€a€rational€basis€for€the€requirements€and€the€County€willÐ Xˆ Ðlikely€prevail.€€They€will€likely€be€able€to€assert€some€public€policy€reason€to€require€special€permits,Ð  P Ðsuch€as€the€control€of€illicit€sex€acts€or€sexual€offenses€against€women€and€children.€€Ð è ÐÌà  àFun€Stuff€may€also€challenge€the€statute€on€the€5th€Amendmentððs€Takings€Clause€becauseÐ x¨ Ðby€closing€the€store€the€County€is€depriving€Fun€Stuff€of€the€ability€to€make€money€and€make€fullÐ @p Ðuse€of€their€property€for€which€they€obtained€the€lease.€€Here€it€says€the€permit€review€usually€takesÐ 8 Ð30€days€and€it€has€taken€almost€4€months.€€It€is€an€unreasonable€deprivation€of€property.€Ð Ð  Ѐ€Ð ˜È! Ðà  àThe€fine€can€be€challenged€as€a€violation€of€the€8òòthóó€Amendment€because€it€is€excessive.€€AÐ `" Ð$1,000€fine€for€5€days€of€operation€is€excessive,€especially€since€the€store€had€already€waited€3€ððÐ (X# Ðmonths€for€the€permit€to€be€processed.€€The€County€will€likely€assert€that€the€fines€are€necessary€toÐ ð $ Ðdeter€violation€of€the€statute€and€that€the€statute€clearly€notifies€businesses€of€the€possible€fine.€€TheÐ ¸è% Ðcourt€will€determine€the€reasonableness€and€here€it€seems€excessive.€€The€incarceration€of€Flynn€isÐ € °& Ða€violation€of€his€rights.€€He€should€not€be€jailed€for€failure€to€pay€a€company€debt.€€His€due€processÐ H!x' Ðrights€were€violated€since€he€was€not€given€a€hearing€to€determine€if€he€was€personally€liable.€€HeÐ "@( Ðwas€not€given€a€6òòthóó€Amendment€right€to€counsel€prior€to€being€sentenced.Ð Ø" ) ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÐ È-ø*7 Ðà@^^%ìàò òQUESTION€12ó óˆÐ Ð ÐÌÌà  àIn€1994,€Trash€Company,€Inc.€(ð ðTCIðð)€entered€into€an€exclusive€10„year€agreement€withÐ (X ÐMontgomery€County,€Maryland,€to€engage€in€the€pick€up€and€disposal€of€all€residential€trash.€Ð ð  ÐCentral€to€the€terms€and€pricing€of€the€agreement€is€that€TCI€deposit€all€trash€in€the€MontgomeryÐ ¸è ÐCounty€landfill.€€TCI€owns€all€of€its€trash€trucks€free€and€clear€of€any€liens,€and€purchased€them€asÐ €° Ða€result€of€its€10„year€contract€with€Montgomery€County.€€TCI€also€has€a€contract€to€provide€theÐ Hx Ðsame€trash€services€for€Fairfax€County,€Virginia.€€The€trash€that€it€hauls€for€Fairfax€County€is€alsoÐ  @ Ðdeposited€in€the€Montgomery€County€landfill.Ð Ø   ÐÌÓ XÓMontgomery€County€environmentalists€lobbied€the€Maryland€General€Assembly€to€stopÐ h ˜  Ðlandfills€and€require€more€recycling.€€The€Maryland€General€Assembly€decided€to€act.€€It€firstÐ 0 `  Ðconstructed€a€state„run€recycling€and€incineration€facility€in€Montgomery€County.€€Next,€it€enactedÐ ø (  Ða€local€law€for€Montgomery€County€that€states€in€part€as€follows:Ð À ð  ÐÓ XÓÌÓ XÓÓ XÓà0 ` àEffective€August€1,€2001,€all€residential€trash€in€Montgomery€County€willÐ P€  Ðeither€be€recycled€or€burned€in€an€incinerator.€€No€trash€originating€outsideÐ H  Ðof€Montgomery€County€will€be€accepted.€€No€trash,€regardless€of€origin,€willÐ à Ðbe€deposited€in€a€landfill.ШØ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÓ XÓÓ XÓÌà  àFinally,€the€laws€stated€that€only€state„of€the€art€environmentally€sensitive€trash€trucks€orÐ 8h Ðpersonal€vehicles€will€be€allowed€to€access€the€State€recycling€and€incineration€facility.Ð 0 ÐÌÓ XÓThe€owner€of€TCI€comes€to€you,€an€experienced€Maryland€attorney,€and€informs€you€that€thisÐ À Ðlegislation€will€put€TCI€out€of€business€since€it€will€cost€over€one€million€dollars€to€retrofit€her€trucksÐ Xˆ Ðand€she€has€nowhere€to€deposit€the€trash€taken€from€Fairfax€County.€€She€asked€that€you€challengeÐ  P Ðthe€law€on€her€behalf.Ð è ÐÓ XÓÌÔ#†X´[XX!X´[H¢#ÔÔ‡!X´[XXX´[Ôò òWhat€challenges€might€you€raise€on€her€behalf€as€to€the€validity€of€the€law€and€why?€DiscussÐ x¨ Ðfully.ó óÐ @p ÐÌà@  ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1€€ó óˆÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThe€Commerce€Clause€of€the€U.S.€Constitution€delegates€to€Congress€the€sole€authority€toÐ `" Ðregulate€interstate€commerce,€and€the€states€may€not€substantially€burden€interstate€commerce.€€Here,Ð (X# Ðthe€law€gives€TCI€standing€to€challenge€its€validity,€since€it€was€a€state€act€that€adversely€affectedÐ ð $ Ðits€rights€under€the€constitution.€€€€The€law€enacted€here€prevents€the€acceptance€of€trash€originatingÐ ¸è% Ðoutside€of€Montgomery€County.€€This€prevents€any€out€of€state€trash,€whether€hauled€by€MarylandersÐ € °& Ðor€not,€to€be€placed€in€the€County€incinerator.€€This€may€be€seen€as€a€facially€discriminatory€lawÐ H!x' Ðsince€it€does€discriminate€against€out€of€state/county€haulers€who€take€trash€into€Maryland€landfills.€Ð "@( ÐÌà  àSince€it€is€most€likely€facially€discriminatory,€the€law€has€to€be€necessary€for€a€compellingÐ  #Ð * Ðgovernmental€interest.€€Here,€the€governmental€interest€is€to€protect€the€county/state€environment,Ð h$˜!+ Ðbut€the€law€as€written€is€most€likely€not€necessary€for€that€interest.€€€The€government€also€has€toÐ 0%`", Ðprovide€a€least€restrictive€alternative,€like€charging€more€for€the€use€of€the€incinerator.€€NoÐ ø%(#- Ðalternatives€were€mentioned€here.€€€The€one€issue€facing€this€challenge€to€the€law€is€that€the€CountyÐ À&ð#. Ðmay€be€acting€as€a€market€participant,€and€as€such,€may€be€exempt€from€scrutiny,€since€the€recyclingÐ ˆ'¸$/ Ðand€incinerator€facility€here€is€state€run.Ð P(€%0 Ѐ€€€€Ð )H&1 Ðà  àTCI€can€also€challenge€the€law€based€on€an€Equal€Protection€challenge,€since€the€law€restrictsÐ à)'2 Ðany€vehicles€that€are€not€state€of€the€art€and€environmentally€sensitive.€€Here,€it€would€cost€TCI€overÐ ¨*Ø'3 Ðone€million€dollars€to€fix€the€trucks.€€Additionally,€she€has€ð ðnowhere€to€deposit€her€trash€fromÐ p+ (4 ÐFairfax€County.ðð€€The€law€must€be€substantially€related€to€an€important€governmental€interest€to€beÐ 8,h)5 Ðconstitutional.€€As€such,€an€Equal€Protection€challenge€may€be€successful€since€the€law€does€not€treatÐ -0*6 Ðeveryone€equally.€Ð È-ø*7 Їà  àTCI€may€additionally€challenge€the€law€as€a€violation€of€TCIððs€due€process€rights€since€itÐ Ð Ðbasically€takes€away€TCIððs€right€to€participate€in€a€business€for€profit€without€due€process€of€the€law.€Ð ˜È ÐTCI€would€not€be€able€to€continue€its€business€if€it€had€to€retrofit€its€trucks,€and€find€another€placeÐ ` Ðto€take€its€trash€from€Fairfax.Ð (X ЀÌà  àThe€Contracts€Clause€of€the€Constitution€also€prevents€states€from€rescinding€on€theirÐ ¸è Ðobligations€by€passing€laws€to€allow€them€to€escape€that€obligation.€TCI€had€a€contract€with€theÐ €° ÐCounty€which€held€that€ð ðall€trash€be€deposited€in€the€landfillðð€and€since€the€law€was€enacted€afterÐ Hx Ðthe€contract€it€canððt€be€retroactively€applied€to€that€contract.€The€contract€is€good€until€2004.€€TCIÐ  @ Ðhas€the€right€to€continue€until€then.Ð Ø   ÐÌà@##ìàò òREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€€2ó óˆÐ h ˜  ÐÌà  àStanding€holds€one€must€have€injury€and€nexus.€€Here,€TCI,€a€Maryland€Company,€will€beÐ ø (  Ðhurt€by€the€new€law€that€holds€that€ð ðno€trash€originating€outside€of€Montgomery€County€will€beÐ À ð  Ðacceptedðð€in€the€new€state€run€facility.€€Ripeness€holds€that€an€issue€may€not€be€brought€if€it€is€notÐ ˆ¸  Ðan€issue€yet.€€Given€that€the€law€will€become€effective€August€1,€2001€(a€few€days€away),€this€caseÐ P€  Ðis€ripe.€€€Ð H  ÐÌà  àThe€Commerce€Clause€of€the€Constitution€grants€Congress€sole€authority€to€regulateÐ ¨Ø Ðinterstate€commerce€and€no€state€shall€substantially€burden€interstate€commerce.€€€€State€law€basedÐ p  Ðon€geography€will€be€subject€to€strict€scrutiny€where€the€state€has€the€burden€of€proof.€€Here€the€newÐ 8h ÐMontgomery€County€law€holds€that€the€State€bar€trash€originating€from€outside€Montgomery€CountyÐ 0 Ðand€holds€no€trash€will€be€deposited€in€a€landfill.€€Here,€TCI€would€be€hurt€as€it€deposits€all€trash€inÐ Èø Ða€landfill€and€some€of€its€trash€comes€from€Fairfax€County.€€€This€law€must€pass€the€strict€scrutinyÐ À Ðtest€holding€it€to€be€compelling€for€a€necessary€governmental€interest€and€be€the€least€restrictive/non„Ð Xˆ Ðdiscriminatory€alternative.€€Here,€the€only€governmental€interest€is€that€of€environmentalistsððÐ  P Ðlobbying€for€more€recycling.€€This€is€not€a€compelling,€necessary€governmental€interest.€€€Further,Ð è Ðthis€law€could€have€been€achieved€with€a€non„discriminatory€less€restrictive€alternative€such€as€taxÐ °à Ðbreaks€for€those€using€Montgomery€Countyððs€incinerator.Ð x¨ Ѐ€€Ð @p Ðà  àThe€Contracts€Clause€holds€that€no€state€shall€interfere€with€the€contracts€of€its€citizens.€Here,Ð 8 ÐTCI€has€a€contract€with€Montgomery€County€for€10€years€to€engage€in€the€pick€up€and€removal€ofÐ Ð  Ðtrash€in€the€County.€€This€law€would€clearly€be€seen€as€contractual€interference€and€a€violation€of€theÐ ˜È! ÐContracts€Clause.€Ð `" Ѐ€€Ð (X# Ðà  àTherefore,€I€would€seek€an€injunction€and€declaratory€judgment€against€the€law.Ð ð $ ÐÔ#†X´[XX!X´[¹#Ô