’WPCL  ”łmbkbą3 „Õ‚ņžÉōśĆOŠWNÆLKp„Ż6\"©2 8 éŠtĮx”Įrڵ‚)ī Š ]šŲÅüt×XÆæxNQńLø>wj‰¦ā-ÄF Ūf\¾µķ*ĻE Ņõq1bŻö“ĆÄÅŖ¤/œfÓÄ=§²ŗNmˆ–%NWHš* 4ŠųrŽeąĪĪBa’ųüĢ}(öģyĀ,D«t‹»•Ó6lĮŗĶ]4äw¹^§ńŻ{UM„MŁR±zj$ww¬ŪӘ*ū<łøAŚņÓāæćMó¶½)¬ōYXüYßŲŻ_ĢźüyO ʚ…œ!škę:^€ÄGķt„懦čŖR²Ü~Q…Mxš„ĄÖe øĮ¬m±›£Īję|@:įég©†šœé‹ßˆŃP­`čYaµj‘ÖĻ&ģi¹u@ ~ N” “– ) 0V? • U@­ *ķ "9 0VAU#6—@ Ķ 0 ŹŁ 1U£ų 0z$ž³ow Ép~-@@@@@@¾IŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌIŌI AŸźI 0V‰J‰J D-ßJ 0K KĘWK˜HP LaserJet 4250 PCL 6ČČČČ0(ÖĆ9 Z‹6Times New Roman RegularX(üœ$””ŌUSUS.,Ԉ…Œ9s (ÖĆ9 Z(Times New Roman *>8hared3|x,’U‹’ĄĄĄō\  `*Times New RomanTT3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) i) Ń Ü ѳ˜kIA`‹2WP TypographicSymbols7ō\  `‹.Times New Roman TUR222’p0Style 3Ń  ŃÓJÓŌ‡XXXŌÓÓŃ  ŃŌ‡XXXŌō\  `&Times New Roman Ń ° Ń ‰Ż ƒ½Ž)ŻŌUSUS.,ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌÓ  Óņ ņPage€Ś  Ś1Ś  Ś€of€Ś  Ś44Ś  Śó ó Ń e Ń(.3½Ž$©©Ż ƒüœ!ŻŌUSUS.,ŌŻ  Ż ŃÜÜŃ(ÖĆ9 Z‹(Times New Roman  Ż ƒ½Ž'ŻŌUSUS.,ŌŻ  ŻŌ_Ōņ ņŌ‡XäŒXXXŌą@Æ Æ ģąJULY€2008€MARYLAND€BAR€EXAMINATIONˆŠ ° Šą@² ² ģąQUESTIONS€AND€REPRESENTATIVE€GOOD€ANSWERSó óŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ@#ԈŠ œģ Š Ń £ ŃŃ ‹ Ń (.3½Ž$§§Ż ƒüœ!ŻŌUSUS.,ŌŻ  Ż<ž6X9`(‹Courier New()  2LL’’0Style 2Ń  ŃÓ X ÓÓÓÓ€ÓŌ‡XXXŌÓÓŃ  ŃÓÓÓ X ÓŌ‡XXXŌ$’’359=AEIMQ111111111 Ń Ą Ń Ń ° Ń2$$’’0Style 5Ń  ŃŌ‡XXXŌŃ  ŃŌ‡XXXŌ Ń  Ń Ń  Ń’WPCw °°WMWM"51’’’398h0! !WM€°°’ž  ž "&’’’’WordMicrosoft Word  h ū¼"System ’’’’0-ūœ’@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-  2 Œ l -&’’’’  d&’’’’ó’’’ļ’’’œ ś-ü-h…  ś-šü’’’-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-ī-š-š&’’’’ ƒ ś--%~ -š-&’’’’&’’’’ĻŲeś--%ÓÓ`-š-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-¾é °ū-š-šü’’’-ś-- !š–īUs--š-Ģ%s®ū¤’¼@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-2 t® ®s$ĢWhiteacre\3).)() 2 tF®s$Ģ 1'’’ü’’’-ś-żė-š-šö¾ M- 2 MM ½öGarage rH,!-2, 2 †M ½ö .2 ‚M M ½öWhiteacre’s_2,,,!,!' 2 ‚/M ½ö .'’’ü’’’-ś-łėĢŻ-š-š×«ķ- 2 ķķŖ×Shed 82,2 2 ķżķŖ× -2 `ķŖ×BlackacrB,,3,,"2 ÓķŖ×e’sd,!' 2 ӐķŖ× .'’’ü’’’--- !š•X›ļ--š- ¹*- 2 ¹**¹ DrivewayH!2,H.0 2 ¹³*¹  .'’’ü’’’-ś-»1 ­÷-š-š˜ń Ī6- "2 Ī66Īš ˜Tenant’s House =,2,2!'H22',2 D6 6Īš ˜& Corn CropMC2!2C!22 2 DE 6Īš ˜ .'’’ü’’’--- !šˆPs--š-Mæn®- 2 q® ®n¾MBlackacre>.)3.()) 2 q7®n¾M 1'’’-WPWin 6.0/OLE 1.0 Prefix Information MarkerWPDraw30.Drawing"ŠĻą”±į>ž’ ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’ż’’’ ž’’’ ž’’’ ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’Root Entry’’’’’’’’`ž.@™™®pĄO½Óx\ÉOle ’’’’’’’’’’’’WPG20’’’’w CompObj’’’’’’’’’’’’+tž’’’  !"#$%&'()*ž’’’,ž’’’ž’’’/0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZž’’’ž’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’’2,H.0 2 ¹³*¹  .'’’WPCw °°WMWM"51’’’398h0! !WM€°°’ž  ž "&’’’’WordMicrosoft Word  h ū¼"System ’’’’0-ūœ’@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-  2 Œ l -&’’’’  d&’’’’ó’’’ļ’’’œ ś-ü-h…  ś-šü’’’-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-ī-š-š&’’’’ ƒ ś--%~ -š-&’’’’&’’’’ĻŲeś--%ÓÓ`-š-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-¾é °ū-š-šü’’’-ś-- !š–īUs--š-Ģ%s®ū¤’¼@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-2 t® ®s$ĢWhiteacre\3).)() 2 tF®s$Ģ 1'’’ü’’’-ś-żė-š-šö¾ M- 2 MM ½öGarage rH,!-2, 2 †M ½ö .2 ‚M M ½öWhiteacre’s_2,,,!,!' 2 ‚/M ½ö .'’’ü’’’-ś-łėĢŻ-š-š×«ķ- 2 ķķŖ×Shed 82,2 2 ķżķŖ× -2 `ķŖ×BlackacrB,,3,,"2 ÓķŖ×e’sd,!' 2 ӐķŖ× .'’’ü’’’--- !š•X›ļ--š- ¹*- 2 ¹**¹ DrivewayH!2,H.0 2 ¹³*¹  .'’’ü’’’-ś-»1 ­÷-š-š˜ń Ī6- "2 Ī66Īš ˜Tenant’s House =,2,2!'H22',2 D6 6Īš ˜& Corn CropMC2!2C!22 2 DE 6Īš ˜ .'’’ü’’’--- !šˆPs--š-Mæn®- 2 q® ®n¾MBlackacre>.)3.()) 2 q7®n¾M 1'’’-ž’ ’’’’`ž.@™™®pCorel Presentations 9 Drawing Embed SourceWPDraw30.Drawingō9²q’’’’’’’’¤5…"č  t "  …"¤5  BOlePart’’’’-OlePres000’’’’’’’’.* WPGExtents’’’’’’’’’’’’[ ’’’’’’’’’’’’ O  ³ļW N. &’’’’WordMicrosoft Word  h ū¼"Systemw@‡ øõwĮõw0-ūœ’@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-  2 Œ l -&’’’’  d&’’’’ó’’’ļ’’’œ ś-ü-h…  ś-šü’’’-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-ī-š-š&’’’’ ƒ ś--%~ -š-&’’’’&’’’’ĻŲeś--%ÓÓ`-š-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-¾é °ū-š-šü’’’-ś-- !š–īUs--š-Ģ%s®ū¤’¼@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-2 t® ®s$ĢWhiteacre\3).)() 2 tF®s$Ģ 1'’’ü’’’-ś-żė-š-šö¾ M- 2 MM ½öGarage H,!-2, 2 †M ½ö .2 ‚M M ½öWhiteacre’s_2,,,!,!' 2 ‚/M ½ö .'’’ü’’’-ś-łėĢŻ-š-š×«ķ- 2 ķķŖ×Shed 82,2 2 ķżķŖ× -2 `ķŖ×BlackacrB,,3,,"2 ÓķŖ×e’s,!' 2 ӐķŖ× .'’’ü’’’--- !š•X›ļ--š- ¹*- 2 ¹**¹ DrivewayH!2,H.0 2 ¹³*¹  .'’’ü’’’-ś-»1 ­÷-š-š˜ń Ī6- "2 Ī66Īš ˜Tenant’s House =,2,2!'H22',2 D6 6Īš ˜& Corn CropMC2!2C!22 2 DE 6Īš ˜ .'’’ü’’’--- !šˆPs--š-Mæn®- 2 q® ®n¾MBlackacre>.)3.()) 2 q7®n¾M 1'’’-šš ąą \ ąsNANIė@d METAFILEPICT¤5{Ż’’š ¤5…" t "  …"¤5   O  ³ļW N. &’’’’WordMicrosoft Word  h ū¼"Systemw@‡ øõwĮõw0-ūœ’@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-  2 Œ l -&’’’’  d&’’’’ó’’’ļ’’’œ ś-ü-h…  ś-šü’’’-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-ī-š-š&’’’’ ƒ ś--%~ -š-&’’’’&’’’’ĻŲeś--%ÓÓ`-š-&’’’’ü’’’-ś-¾é °ū-š-šü’’’-ś-- !š–īUs--š-Ģ%s®ū¤’¼@Times New RomanøõwĮõw0-2 t® ®s$ĢWhiteacre\3).)() 2 tF®s$Ģ 1'’’ü’’’-ś-żė-š-šö¾ M- 2 MM ½öGarage H,!-2, 2 †M ½ö .2 ‚M M ½öWhiteacre’s_2,,,!,!' 2 ‚/M ½ö .'’’ü’’’-ś-łėĢŻ-š-š×«ķ- 2 ķķŖ×Shed 82,2 2 ķżķŖ× -2 `ķŖ×BlackacrB,,3,,"2 ÓķŖ×e’s,!' 2 ӐķŖ× .'’’ü’’’--- !š•X›ļ--š- ¹*- 2 ¹**¹ DrivewayH!2,H.0 2 ¹³*¹  .'’’ü’’’-ś-»1 ­÷-š-š˜ń Ī6- "2 Ī66Īš ˜Tenant’s House =,2,2!'H22',2 D6 6Īš ˜& Corn CropMC2!2C!22 2 DE 6Īš ˜ .'’’ü’’’--- !šˆPs--š-Mæn®- 2 q® ®n¾MBlackacre>.)3.()) 2 q7®n¾M 1'’’-šš ąą \ ąs Ń ° Ń Ń ° Ń_[^]‘ I&mage <=8’’’’’’’’’’C’’ HKKKK(.3½Ö$££Ż ƒüœ!ŻŌUSUS.,ŌŻ  Ż)!ČČČČdxdx( ±ž$’’ņ ņFigure€Ś  Ś1Ś  Śó óLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Ż ƒüœ!ŻŌUSUS.,ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌÓ  ÓŌ  ŌŃ€OYŃņ ņÖ€’’ÖŃ€i"ŃŌ€XäŒXXXŌÖ€’’ÖŌ#ddŌQUESTION€1ó óŠ < ŠĢÓ  Óą  ąBiff€McNamara,€a€power€hitter€on€the€downside€of€his€career€with€the€Los€Angeles€Devils,Š  Ų Šbegan€to€use€anabolic€steroids€a€year€ago€to€salvage€his€chances€to€enter€the€Hall€of€Fame.€€His€homeŠ  Ä Šrun€production€started€to€pick€up€and€Biff€steadily€increased€the€dosage€of€steroids,€which€have€beenŠ ģ ° Šlinked€to€aberrant€mental€conditions.€€His€teammates€noticed€that€his€behavior€became€increasinglyŠ Ų œ Šobsessive.€€Biff€kept€a€journal€detailing€the€type€and€amount€of€steroids€he€used.€€Š Ä ˆ Šą  ąĢą  ąOn€an€off„day€while€in€Baltimore,€Maryland,€for€a€series€with€the€Orioles,€Biff€injectedŠ œ` Šhimself€with€the€largest€dose€of€steroids€to€date.€That€is€the€last€thing€Biff€remembers.€Shortly€afterŠ ˆL  Šsunset,€Biff€left€his€downtown€Baltimore€hotel€room€and€walked€down€the€street.€€He€broke€andŠ t8  Šentered€a€residence€while€the€residents€were€out€shopping.€€Biff€stole€from€the€residence€a€collectionŠ `$  Šof€rare€š šbobble„headšš€figures€featuring€great€home€run€hitters€and€worth€thousands€of€dollars,€andŠ L  Šreturned€to€his€hotel€room,€where€he€lined€up€the€figures€on€his€dresser.€Š 8ü  Šą  ą€Š $č  Šą  ąWhen€Biff€failed€to€board€the€team€bus€the€following€morning€for€an€afternoon€game,€theŠ Ō  Šteam€general€manager€went€to€Biffššs€room€and€found€him€seated€in€front€of€the€figurines€and€staringŠ üĄ Šinto€space.€€The€general€manager,€who€had€read€about€the€š šbobble„head€break„inšš€in€that€morningššsŠ č¬ Šnewspaper,€called€the€police€and€reported€the€situation.€€A€police€officer,€possessing€a€valid€searchŠ Ō˜ Šwarrant€setting€forth€probable€cause,€arrived€at€the€hotel€and€lawfully€arrested€a€barely„coherent€Biff.€Š Ą„ ŠWithin€a€couple€of€days€Biffššs€mental€state€was€normal,€but€he€could€offer€no€clear€account€orŠ ¬p Šexplanation€for€his€actions,€stating€that€his€mind€went€blank,€and€that€he€could€not€recall€anythingŠ ˜\ Šuntil€several€hours€after€he€was€arrested.€€Biffššs€mental€state€has€been€normal€since€then.Š „H Šą  ąĢą  ąBiff€has€been€indicted€by€a€Baltimore€City€Grand€Jury€for€common€law€burglary,€for€theŠ \  Šlesser€included€misdemeanor€offense€š šthat€he€did€break€and€enter€a€dwelling€house,šš€and€forŠ H  Šcommon€law€larceny.Š 4 ų ŠĢą  ąņ ņWhat€defenses,€if€any,€should€Biffššs€attorney€consider€and€recommend?€€Why?ó óŠ  "Š ŠĢĢņ ņÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€€ANSWER€€1ó óŠ Š$” ŠÓ§ ÓĢÓ  Óą  ą€Biffs€counsel€should€consider€and€recommend€the€following€defenses.€that€Biffs€actionsŠ Ø&l! Šdo€not€satisfy€all€of€the€elements€of€common€law€burglary€or€larceny,€involuntary€and€voluntaryŠ ”'X" Šintoxication,€temporary€insanity,€and€that€the€misdemeanor€ņņoffense€of€óóbreaking€and€enteringŠ €(D # Šmerges€with€the€common€law€burglary€offense.Š l)0!$ ŠŅü°Ņą  ąĢą  ąFirst,€Biffs€actions€do€not€satisfy€all€of€the€elements€of€either€common€law€burglary€orŠ D+#& Šlarceny.€Common€law€burglary€is€the€breaking€and€entering€of€the€dwelling€of€another€at€night€withŠ 0,ō#' Šthe€intent€to€commit€a€felony€therein.€Here,€the€facts€state€that€Biff€"broke€and€entered"€a€residence.Š < ŠThe€facts€further€state€that€he€did€this€"shortly€after€sunset."€However,€the€facts€do€not€indicate€whatŠ ( ģ ŠBiff€was€thinking€at€the€time€he€stole€the€rare€bobble„head€figures.€Indeed€the€last€thing€that€BiffŠ  Ų Šremembers€is€taking€the€largest€dose€of€steroids€he€has€ever€had.€It€is€unknown€what€Biffs€intentŠ  Ä Šwas€when€he€decided€to€break€or€enter€the€dwelling,€and€therefore€Biff€most€likely€cannot€beŠ ģ ° Šconvicted€of€common€law€burglary.€Common€law€larceny€is€the€taking€and€carrying€awayŠ Ų œ Š(asportation)€or€the€personal€property€of€another€by€trespass€with€the€intent€to€permanently€depriveŠ Ä ˆ Šthe€owner€of€possession€of€the€property.€Here,€Biff€took€and€removed€the€bobble„head€figures€fromŠ °t Šthe€dwelling.€He€took€this€personal€property€by€trespass€because€he€did€not€have€the€ownerššsŠ œ` Šconsent.€However,€as€with€common€law€burglary,€Biffs€intent€when€he€took€the€bobble„heads€isŠ ˆL  Šunknown_€Biff€cannot€remember€what€he€was€thinking.€Thus,€this€charge€also€is€unlikely€toŠ t8  Šsucceed.€In€contrast€to€the€above€crime,€Buff's€Š `$  ŠĢĢactions€do€constitute€misdemeanor€breaking€and€entering.€This€crime€is€similar€to€common€lawŠ $č  Šburglary,€except€that€the€only€elements€needed€are€breaking€and€entered.€The€facts€here€clearly€stateŠ Ō  Šthat€Biff€"broke€and€entered."Š üĄ ŠŅ°üŅą  ąĢą  ąSecond,€Biffs€counsel€should€consider€involuntary€and€voluntary€intoxication€as€potentialŠ Ō˜ Šdefenses.€Involuntary€intoxication€is€a€defense€to€any€crime,€whether€a€specific€intent€or€generalŠ Ą„ Šintent€crime.€Asserting€this€defense€would€negate€Biffs€culpability€for€all€of€the€crimes€withŠ ¬p Šwhich€he€has€been€charged.€Involuntary€intoxication€can€result€from€ingestion€of€a€substanceŠ ˜\ Šwhen€the€ingester€does€not€know€the€effects€it€will€have.€Here,€Biff€has€used€steroids€on€severalŠ „H Šoccasions€in€the€past.€However,€the€facts€do€not€indicate€that€Biff€has€ever€suffered€a€memoryŠ p4 Šlapse€as€a€result€of€his€use€of€steroids.€Therefore,€Biff€may€be€able€to€convince€the€trier€of€factŠ \  Šthat€he€did€not€know€that€takingņņ€óóthe€steroids€could€cause€him€to€lose€his€memory.€If€this€defenseŠ H  Šis€unsuccessful,€Biff's€counsel€should€also€consider€voluntary€intoxication€as€a€defense.€ThisŠ 4 ų Šdefense€only€negates€culpability€for€specific€intent€crimes.€Therefore,€it€would€only€be€a€defenseŠ  !ä Što€common€law€burglary€and€larceny,€but€not€for€the€misdemeanor€offense€of€breaking€andŠ  "Š Šentering.€Here,€Biff€voluntarily€injected€himself€with€the€largest€dose€of€steroids€he€has€everŠ ų"¼ Štaken.Š ä#Ø Šą  ąĢą  ąBiff's€counsel€should€also€consider€the€defense€of€temporary€insanity.€In€Maryland,Š ¼%€  Šinsanity€is€a€defense€if€at€the€time€the€crime€is€committed,€a€defect€in€reason€made€it€such€that€theŠ Ø&l! Šdefendant€could€not€either€appreciate€the€criminality€of€his€conduct€or€conform€his€conduct€to€theŠ ”'X" Šlaw.€Here,€Biff€does€not€remember€anything€after€he€took€the€steroids,€and€he€has€not€clearŠ €(D # Šaccount€or€explanation€for€his€actions.€Since€"his€mind€went€blank,"€Biff's€counsel€can€argue€thatŠ l)0!$ ŠBuff€didņņ€óónot€appreciate€what€he€was€doing,€and€therefore€certainly€did€not€appreciate€theŠ X*"% Šcriminality€of€his€actions.Š D+#& Šą  ąŠ 0,ō#' ŠŃOYŃā āѰ°Ńā āŃ  Ńą  ąLastly,€Biffsņņ€óócounsel€should€argue€that€the€misdemeanor€offense€of€breaking€and€enteringŠ < Šmerges€with€common€law€burglary.€Since€the€facts€state€that€breaking€and€entering€is€a€"lesserŠ ( ģ Šincluded€offense"€of€common€law€burglary,€Biff€should€only€be€charged€with€the€greater€offenseŠ  Ų Šat€trial.€Therefore,€Biff€should€only€face€prosecution€for€common€law€burglary€and€larceny.Š  Ä ŠĢĢÓ  Óņ ņŌ& œ ŌREPRESENTATIVE€€ANSWER€€2ó óŠ Ä ˆ ŠÓ ÓĢIntent€Requirements.€€The€defenses€available€to€Biff€will€be€dependent€upon€the€intentŠ œ` Šrequirement€associated€with€each€crime.€€Here,€Biff€has€been€charged€with€two€specific€intentŠ ˆL  Šcrimes€and€one€€general€intent€crime.€€Ō'œÄ  ŌŠ t8  Šą  ąĢą  ąCommon€Law€burglary€is€defined€as€the€breaking€and€entering€into€the€dwelling€ofŠ L  Šanother€at€night€with€an€intent€to€commit€a€felony€therein.€€Therefore,€common€law€burglary€is€aŠ 8ü  Šspecific€intent€crime,€and€Biff€is€entitled€to€raise€any€defenses€which€tend€to€negate€his€intent.Š $č  Šą  ąĢą  ąThe€misdemeanor€offense€of€breaking€and€entering€is€a€general€intent€crime,€as€the€mereŠ üĄ Šact€of€voluntarily€breaking€and€entering€constitutes€the€offense.€€As€a€general€intent€crime,Š č¬ Šbreaking€and€entering€is€more€limited€in€its€defense.€€Š Ō˜ Šą  ąĢą  ąCommon€law€larceny€is€defined€as€the€taking€or€carrying€away€the€personal€property€ofŠ ¬p Šanother€with€an€intent€to€permanently€deprive€the€rightful€owner€thereof.€€As€such,€common€lawŠ ˜\ Šlarceny€is€a€specific€intent€crime,€and€Biff€is€entitled€to€raise€defenses€which€negate€his€intent.Š „H ŠņņĢDefenses.óó€€The€first€defense€Biff€may€raise€the€defense€of€voluntary€intoxication.€€Here,€BiffŠ \  Šinjected€himself€with€anabolic€steroids€on€the€date€of€the€offense.€€The€facts€also€indicate€that€€€€€€Š H  Šą  ąBiff€regularly€used€steroids€and€kept€records€of€his€use,€which€demonstrates€that€he€wasŠ 4 ų Šaware€of€the€harmful€effects€of€the€drug.€€Voluntary€intoxication€may€be€a€defense€to€a€specificŠ  !ä Šintent€crime,€where€the€intoxication€prevents€him€from€forming€the€requisite€intent.€€Therefore,Š  "Š ŠBiffššs€statement€that€he€doesnššt€remember€the€events€following€his€injection€on€the€day€of€theŠ ų"¼ Šcrime€may€be€used€to€show€that€his€injection€(voluntary€intoxication)€caused€him€to€black„outŠ ä#Ø Šand€therefore€he€could€not€develop€an€intent.€€This€defense€will€negate€his€intent€to€commit€aŠ Š$” Šfelony€within€the€burglary€statute€and€his€intent€to€permanently€deprive€the€owners€of€the€š šbobbleŠ ¼%€  Šheadsšš€of€their€property.€€Biff€may€also€€raise€a€claim€of€involuntary€intoxication€if€he€wasŠ Ø&l! Šunaware€(due€to,€inter€alia,€absence€of€doctorššs€instructions)€of€the€extent€of€the€effect€of€theŠ ”'X" Šintoxicating€drugs.€€Here,€Biff€injected€himself€with€the€š šlargest€dosešš€of€steroids€to€date,Š €(D # Šindicating€that€he€may€not€have€known€it€would€cause€him€to€blackout.€€Involuntary€intoxicationŠ l)0!$ Šis€a€defense€to€all€crimes,€both€specific€and€general€intent.Š X*"% Šą  ąĢą  ąLastly,€Biff€may€raise€on€insanity€defense.€€An€insanity€defense€may€be€invoked€whenŠ 0,ō#' Šprolonged€use€of€an€intoxicating€substance€renders€a€user€insane€even€when€he€is€not€intoxicated.€Š < ŠInsanity€is€a€defense€to€all€crimes.€€Biff€must€demonstrate€that€due€to€his€mental€defect€(broughtŠ ( ģ Šabout€by€prolonged€and€consistent€drug€use),€he€was€unable€to€appreciate€the€nature€and€qualityŠ  Ų Šof€his€actions€and€conform€his€behavior€to€the€law.€€Here,€Biffššs€mental€state€was€impaired€forŠ  Ä Šdays€after€the€steroid€dose,€which€may€be€used€to€establish€the€effect€of€his€prolonged€use€evenŠ ģ ° Šwhile€not€intoxicated.Š Ų œ ŠĢĢĢņ ņÓ  ÓŃ€$OaŃŠ  ˆL  ŠŃ$OaŃā $āѰ°Ńā $āŃ  ŃQUESTION€2ó óŠ < ŠÓ/Óą  ąĢÓ XÓÓ  ÓMPES,€Inc.€is€a€Maryland€civil€engineering€firm.€€In€July,€2000,€MPES€hired€Cal€as€anŠ  Ų Šengineer.€€Cal€and€MPES€signed€an€employment€contract€(required€of€all€professional€employees)Š  Ä Šwhich€provided€in€pertinent€part:Š ģ ° ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓÓ XÓIf€Cal's€employment€with€MPES€is€terminated€for€any€reason,€Cal€agrees€that,€for€aŠ Ä ˆ Šperiod€of€three€years€after€the€date€of€such€termination,€Cal€shall€not€perform€anyŠ °t Šcivil€engineering€service€to€any€entity€within€250€miles€of€the€main€office€of€MPES.Š œ` ŠÓ XÓÓ XÓĢą  ąThe€contract€also€provided€that€the€term€of€Cal's€employment€was€two€years€and€that€MPES'sŠ t8  Šmain€office€was€in€Rockville,€Maryland.€€Š `$  ŠŃ  ŃĢŃ  ŃÓ XÓIn€2002€and€2004,€Cal€signed€employment€contracts€with€MPES,€all€containing€the€sameŠ 8ü  Šprovisions.€Cal's€performance€was€outstanding€and€he€received€increasingly€greater€responsibilitiesŠ $č  Šfor€client€relationships,€marketing€and€project€management.Š Ō  ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓIn€October€of€2005,€after€Hurricane€Katrina,€the€president€of€MPES€asked€Cal€to€start€up€aŠ č¬ Šbranch€office€in€New€Orleans.€€The€president€stated€that€if€Cal€accepted€the€position,€his€contractŠ Ō˜ Šwould€be€unchanged€except€that€his€salary€would€be€increased€and,€in€addition,€he€would€receive€aŠ Ą„ Šquarterly€bonus€equal€to€10%€of€the€net€revenue€of€the€New€Orleans€office.€€She€told€Cal€to€submitŠ ¬p Ša€bonus€request€each€quarter.€€Cal€agreed€and€promptly€departed€for€New€Orleans.€€The€changes€toŠ ˜\ ŠCal's€contract€were€not€documented.Š „H ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓCal€sent€the€president€bonus€requests€for€the€last€quarter€of€2005,€each€quarter€in€2006€andŠ \  Šfor€the€first€two€quarters€of€2007.€MPES€paid€the€bonuses.€In€June,€2006,€the€president€sent€Cal€aŠ H  Šwritten€employment€contract€for€the€period€of€July€2006€through€July,€2008.€The€contract€wasŠ 4 ų Šidentical€to€his€previous€contracts€except€that€it€contained€a€provision€reflecting€Cal's€bonusŠ  !ä Šarrangement.€Cal€did€not€sign€the€contract;€instead,€he€telephoned€the€president€and€told€her€he€hadŠ  "Š Šsome€concerns€about€its€terms.€€The€president€asked€Cal€to€provide€her€with€his€concerns€in€writing;Š ų"¼ Šhe€said€that€he€would€as€soon€as€he€could€find€the€time€to€do€so.€Cal€did€not€and€he€and€the€presidentŠ ä#Ø Šdid€not€discuss€the€contract€again.Š Š$” ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓIn€August,€2007,€Cal€sent€the€president€of€MPES€a€letter€notifying€her€that€he€was€resigningŠ Ø&l! Šso€that€he€could€move€back€to€Maryland.€€MPES€has€learned€that€Cal€intends€to€take€a€job€as€a€civilŠ ”'X" Šengineer€with€a€local€competitor€upon€his€return.Š €(D # ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓMPES€has€filed€suit€in€a€Circuit€Court€in€Maryland€with€appropriate€venue€against€Cal€toŠ X*"% Šenforce€the€non„competition€clause.Š D+#& ŠÓ XÓŠ 0,ō#' Šą  ąņ ņa.€€€€What€arguments€can€MPES€use€to€support€its€contention€that€there€is€anŠ < Šenforceable€contract?€How€is€a€court€likely€to€rule?Š ( ģ ŠŃ  ŃĢŃ  ŃӁ€ "(’’43 Óą  ąb.€€€Assuming€that€the€contract€is€enforceable,€what€rights€does€MPES€have€to€enforceŠ  Ä Šthe€non„competition€clause?ó óŠ ģ ° ŠĢŃ  ŃÓ  Óņ ņREPRESENTATIVE€€ANSWER€1Š Ä ˆ Šó óÓį>ÓĢĢą  ą(a)€MPES€arguments€that€there€is€an€enforceable€contractŠ ˆL  ŠĢą  ąAn€enforceable€contract€requires€an€offer,€an€acceptance€and€consideration.€€Here,€MPES€willŠ `$  Šargue€that€its€employment€contract€for€this€period€of€July,€2006€through€July,€2008€constituted€anŠ L  Šoffer€when€it€was€received€by€Cal.€€MPES€will€argue€that€there€was€acceptance€of€the€contract€byŠ 8ü  ŠCalššs€partial€performance€of€the€contract€when€he€worked€for€over€a€year€(from€July,€2006€to€August,Š $č  Š2007)€after€receiving€the€contract.€€Finally,€MPES€will€argue€that€the€consideration€was€the€bargainedŠ Ō  Šfor€exchange€that€Cal€would€work€for€two€years€in€exchange€for€being€paid€a€salary€and€bonus.€€Š üĄ ŠĢCal€will€respond€with€several€legitimate€defenses€that€MPES€will€have€to€overcome€in€order€toŠ Ō˜ Šenforce€the€contract.Š Ą„ ŠĢą  ąCal€will€assert€that€his€phone€call€to€the€main€office€that€he€had€concerns€about€the€contractŠ ˜\ Šconstituted€a€rejection€of€the€offer€to€employ€him€under€the€terms€of€the€contract.€€However,€CalŠ „H Šstated€that€he€would€call€back€and€never€did.€€He€continues€to€work.€€If€Cal€had€wanted€to€reject€theŠ p4 Šoffer,€he€should€have€done€so€clearly,€and€in€writing,€so€as€to€avoid€confusion€about€whether€he€wasŠ \  Šmerely€bargaining.€€Š H  ŠĢCal€will€also€assert€the€Statute€of€Frauds€as€a€defense.€€The€Statute€of€Frauds€applies€to€contracts€thatŠ  !ä Šare€not€capable€of€being€performed€within€one€year.€€Because€the€MPES€contract€is€for€two€years€ofŠ  "Š Šemployment,€it€is€not€capable€of€being€completed€within€one€year.€€Therefore,€the€contract€is€withinŠ ų"¼ Šthe€Statute€of€Frauds.Š ä#Ø ŠĢŃ  Ńą  ąCal€will€claim€that€the€statue€requires€the€contract€to€be€written,€but€MPES€shouldŠ ¼%€  Šsuccessfully€respond€that€Calššs€performance,€pursuant€to€the€contract€is€sufficient€to€satisfy€theŠ Ø&l! Šstatue.€€Indeed,€Cal€submitted€bonus€requests€for€the€second€half€of€2006€and€first€half€of€2007.€€TheŠ ”'X" Šbonuses€were€paid,€and€seem€to€be€pursuant€to€the€new€(2006„2008)€contract.€€Additionally,€CalŠ €(D # Šcontinued€to€work€in€the€New€Orleans€office.€€These€facts€are€sufficient€to€create€an€enforceableŠ l)0!$ Šcontract€pursuant€to€the€terms€of€the€2006„2008€employment€contract.€€The€remainder€of€the€termsŠ X*"% Š(those€with€which€Cal€did€not€directly€comply€through€performance)€are€likely€enforceable€due€toŠ D+#& ŠCal€and€MPESššs€course€of€dealing.Š 0,ō#' Їą  ąCourse€of€dealing€is€a€method€of€inferring€contract€terms€based€on€prior€contracts€betweenŠ < Šthe€parties.€€Cal€has€signed€several€identical€contracts€(absent€the€bonus€clause)€with€MPES€andŠ ( ģ Šworked€pursuant€to€them€in€the€past.€€The€only€modification€was€a€mutually€agreed€upon€transfer€inŠ  Ų Šexchange€for€more€money.€€This€would€not€give€Cal€reason€to€expect€that€he€was€free€to€ignore€theŠ  Ä Šterms€of€future€contracts.Š ģ ° ŠĢą  ą(b)€Enforcement€of€the€non„competition€clauseŠ Ä ˆ ŠĢą  ąA€non„competition€clause€must€be€reasonable€in€scope.€€If€the€non„competition€clause€is€inŠ œ` Šfact€part€of€the€contract,€it€is€enforceable€only€to€the€extent€that€it€is€reasonable€in€geographic€scope,Š ˆL  Štemporal€scope,€type€of€work€restricted,€and€in€consideration€of€public€policy.€€Maryland€has€adoptedŠ t8  Šthe€Blue€Pencil€rule,€allowing€it€to€strike€over€broad€terms,€but€not€to€rewrite€the€contract.Š `$  ŠĢą  ąThe€three€year€restriction€seems€to€be€overly€broad,€and€a€term€of€one€year€would€likely€beŠ 8ü  Šmore€appropriate.€€(The€terms€should€be€less€restrictive€because€Cal€did€not€bring€good€will€with€himŠ $č  Šas€part€of€his€initial€employment€agreement.€€Rather,€he€developed€clientele€at€MPES.)€€TheŠ Ō  Šgeographic€scope€would€be€more€reasonable€if€it€related€to€Calššs€New€Orleans€work€because€heŠ üĄ Šprobably€has€not€retained€new€clients€in€MD€in€several€years.€€The€restriction€on€any€civilŠ č¬ Šengineering€is€too€broad.€€The€public€is€likely€to€be€in€more€need€of€professional€engineering€servicesŠ Ō˜ Štan€others,€so€the€restrictions€should€be€scrutinized€more€closely.€Š Ą„ ŠŃ  ŃĢĢŃ  ŃÓ  Óņ ņREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óŠ „H ŠŃ  ŃĢŃ  ŃÓ  ÓĢÓ  Óą  ąa)€Even€though€the€contract€for€the€July€2006„€July€2008€term€was€not€in€writing,€MPESŠ H  Šshould€argue€that€it€is€still€an€enforceable€contract€because€it€fits€within€an€exception€to€the€StatueŠ 4 ų Šof€Frauds.Š  !ä ŠĢą  ąOrdinarily,€service€contracts€that€cannot€be€performed€in€a€year€or€less€are€subject€to€theŠ ų"¼ ŠStatute€of€Frauds€and€therefore€must€be€in€writing€and€signed€by€the€party€who€denies€the€contractŠ ä#Ø Š(here,€Cal).€€However,€there€are€several€important€exceptions€to€the€Statue€of€Frauds.€€One€is€partŠ Š$” Šperformance.€€Here,€Cal€kept€acting€as€if€there€were€a€contract€even€though€he€hadnššt€signed€one.€Š ¼%€  ŠEven€though€he€informed€the€president€that€he€wanted€to€discuss€the€terms€before€signing€it,€he€neverŠ Ø&l! Štoo€any€further€action€but€instead€kept€working€as€if€they€still€had€a€contract.€€He€waived€hisŠ ”'X" Šobjections€by€performance.Š €(D # ŠĢą  ąMPES€could€also€say€that€Cal€is€equitably€estopped€from€denying€the€that€contract€now.Š X*"% ŠĢą  ąb)€As€for€the€terms€of€the€contract,€they€should€be€the€same€terms€that€the€parties€had€beenŠ 0,ō#' Šusing€the€whole€time.€€Cal€had€signed€MEPSššs€standard€non„competition€agreement€three€timesŠ < Šbefore,€and€it€was€a€part€of€the€contract€he€never€go€around€to€signing.€€He€performed€as€if€thatŠ ( ģ Šcontract€was€valid,€and€he€accepted€benefits€under€it,€and€its€non„compete€term€was€not€surprisingŠ  Ų Što€him,€so€it€is€part€of€his€contract.Š  Ä ŠŃ  ŃĢą  ąHowever,€this€particular€non„complete€is€likely€unenforceable€as€written.€€Generally,€anŠ Ų œ Šemployer€has€the€right€to€require€its€employees€not€to€compete€if€the€employer€and€the€employeeŠ Ä ˆ Šenter€into€a€valid€non„complete€agreement€that€is€reasonable€in€time,€geography,€and€scope.€Š °t ŠMaryland€courts€sometimes€enforce€over„broad€non„competes,€but€they€blue„line€them€down€to€moreŠ œ` Šreasonable€restrictions,€striking€out€the€offensive€portions.Š ˆL  ŠĢą  ąThe€time€component€of€MPESššs€non„compete€clause€is€probably€unreasonable.€€Three€yearsŠ `$  Šis€a€long€time€for€a€person€to€be€away€from€his€profession,€though€it€might€be€ok€if€this€is€reallyŠ L  Šimportant€to€protecting€MPESššs€interests€and€MPES€will€argue€that€it€provided€Cal€with€so€manyŠ 8ü  Šopportunities€€and€inside€knowledge€that€the€three€year€non„compete€is€crucial.€€Š $č  Šą  ąAs€for€geography,€250€miles€of€the€main€office€is€probably€unreasonable,€though€it€dependsŠ Ō  Šon€the€civil€engineering€market.€€A€Maryland€court€might€blue€line€this€down€to€50€miles€or€so.Š üĄ ŠĢą  ąScope€„€any€civil€engineering€service€seems€valid€as€a€protection€of€MPESššs€interest€whileŠ Ō˜ Šstill€allowing€Cal€to€get€many€different€kinds€of€jobs€„€itššs€reasonable.Š Ą„ ŠĢŌ‡ XäŒXXXäŒŌŃܰŃÓ  Óņ ņŃ€ļWŃŃ€ßfŃŃ€WŃŃŠ  ˜\ ŠŃWŃ Ńā āŃÜÜŃā āŃ  ŃQUESTION€3ó óŠ < ŠÓ  ÓĢą  ąAble€is€the€female€pastor€of€the€Church€of€the€Spirit€in€Talbot€County,€Maryland,€and€hasŠ  Ų Šserved€in€that€position€since€1980€pursuant€to€a€contract€that€allows€her€to€serve€so€long€as€sheŠ  Ä Šespouses€the€religious€tenets€of€the€Church.€€She€was€also€hired€as€the€Executive€Director€of€theŠ ģ ° ŠChurchššs€day€care€center€(š šSpirited€Kidsšš).€€Š Ų œ ŠĢą  ąThe€Church€experienced€a€surge€in€growth€during€the€1990ššs€and€many€of€theŠ °t Šparishioners€enrolled€children€in€Spirited€Kids.€€However,€by€2005,€the€Day€Care€Center€wasŠ œ` Šlosing€money.Š ˆL  ŠĢą  ąKane€is€a€member€of€the€Board€of€Trustees€for€the€Church€and€the€Board€of€Directors€forŠ `$  ŠSpirited€Kids.€€He€is€also€a€member€of€the€Talbot€County€Council.€€He€was€instrumental€in€theŠ L  Špassage€of€a€2007€County€law€that€offered€a€$1,000€subsidy€to€those€who€enroll€their€children€inŠ 8ü  ŠSpirited€Kids€Day€Care€Center.€€In€May€2008,€Kane€convinced€the€Board€that€Able€should€beŠ $č  Šremoved€as€Pastor€and€Executive€Director€for€espousing€views€contrary€to€the€Churchššs€religiousŠ Ō  Štenets.€€Š üĄ Šą  ąĢą  ąAble€believes€she€has€fulfilled€her€contractual€duties€and€requests€that€you,€a€MarylandŠ Ō˜ Šattorney,€file€suit€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Talbot€County€seeking€reinstatement€to€both€positions.Š Ą„ Šą  ąĢņ ņą  ąa.€€Can€Able€challenge€the€terminations€and€on€what€grounds?€€What€defenses€doŠ ˜\ Šyou€expect€the€Church€to€raise?Š „H Šó óĢą  ąSeth€operates€a€private€day€care€center€in€Talbot€County.€€He€is€incensed€by€the€CountyššsŠ \  Šlaw€subsidizing€the€Spirited€Kids€day€care€center€because€he€believes€it€to€be€a€waste€ofŠ H  Šresources.€€Š 4 ų ŠĢņ ņ€ą  ąb.€€On€what€grounds€may€Seth€challenge€the€law,€and€why?Š  "Š ŠÓ  ÓĢĢREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óŠ Š$” ŠÓ  ÓĢą  ąAble€does€not€appear€to€be€in€good€position€to€challenge€the€termination.Š Ø&l! ŠņņĢņ ņContract€Liabilityó óóó:€Able€may€argue€that€the€Church€has€breached€its€contract€because€she€has€anŠ €(D # Šenforceable€contract€for€employment.€€She€will€argue€that€the€contract€is€a€simple€contract€givingŠ p)4!$ Šher€the€right€to€be€pastor€and€Executive€Director€(XD)€for€as€long€as€she€fulfills€the€condition€ofŠ \* "% ŠŃßf Ńā āŃÜÜŃā āŃ  Ńš šespousingšš€the€tenets€of€the€Church.€Without€breach€of€this€condition,€she€will€argue,€the€BoardŠ < Šhad€no€grounds€to€terminate€her,€and€thus€acted€wrongfully.Š ( ģ ŠĢą  ąThe€major€problem€with€this€argument€is€that€it€would€require€a€court€to€construe€whetherŠ  Ä Šor€not€she€had€kept€that€contract€or€whether€the€allegations€that€she€had€espoused€views€contraryŠ ģ ° Što€the€Churchššs€tenets€were€true.€€This€would€require€a€court€to€examine€both€the€statements€thatŠ Ų œ Šshe€made€and€the€doctrines€of€the€Church,€and€determine€whether€the€two€were€compatible€orŠ Ä ˆ Šincompatible.€€Such€a€course€of€action€would€raise€serious€First€Amendment€concerns.€€A€courtŠ °t Šwould€violate€the€Establishment€Clause€by€analyzing€a€sectššs€official€doctrines€and€makingŠ œ` Špronouncements€about€what€did€and€did€not€conform€to€them,€and€would€arguably€violate€theŠ ˆL  ŠFree€Exercise€Clause€as€well€by€telling€a€private€person€that€her€espoused€beliefs€wereŠ t8  Šincompatible€with€an€official€creed.Š `$  Šą  ąĢą  ąThus,€this€term€is€unenforceable€in€court€and€the€remaining€contract€will€likely€beŠ 8ü  Šconstrued€as€an€at„will€contract€for€employment€as€pastor.€€Generally,€churches€have€a€FirstŠ $č  ŠAmendment€right€to€hire€and€fire€as€they€see€fit€in€positions€which€require€conforming€to€theŠ Ō  ŠChurchššs€beliefs.€€The€pastor€position€is€certainly€such€a€provision.€We€are€not€told€in€the€factsŠ üĄ Šwhether€the€XD€of€SK€is€such€a€position€or€not,€but€we€are€given€no€reason€to€assume€thatŠ č¬ Šposition€is€anything€but€an€at„will€position,€whether€in€connection€with€the€pastor€position€orŠ Ō˜ Šindependently.Š Ą„ ŠĢą  ąFurthermore,€a€court€will€generally€only€award€damages,€not€specific€performance,€for€aŠ ˜\ Šbreach€of€an€employment€or€personal€services€contract.€€The€chances€of€a€court€ordering€anŠ „H Šorganization€to€take€back€a€discharged€employee€for€breach€of€contract€are€virtually,€if€notŠ p4 Šabsolutely,€nil.Š \  ŠĢą  ąņņņ ņTort€Liabilityó óóó:€€MD€does€recognize€a€tort€of€abusive€discharge,€the€firing€of€an€employeeŠ 4 ų Šcontrary€to€public€policy.€€No€grounds€appear€on€these€facts€which€would€sustain€an€action;€noŠ $!č Špublic€policy€is€violated€by€a€Church€firing€a€pastor€for€religious€differences;€on€the€contrary,€theŠ "Ō ŠFirst€Amendment€protects€Churchesšš€abilities€to€govern€them€in€this€manner.Š ü"Ą ŠĢą  ąSeth€may€mount€a€constitutional€challenge€to€the€subsidy,€and€will€be€successful.€€SethŠ Ō$˜ Šneeds€standing€to€challenge€it.€€He€must€show€injury€in€fact,€causation,€and€redressability.€€He€canŠ Ą%„  Šargue€that€his€daycare€loses€business€due€to€the€illegal€subsidy€(injury),€that€the€lost€business€isŠ ¬&p! Šcaused€by€the€subsidy€(causation)€and€that€the€court€can€redress€his€harm€by€striking€down€theŠ ˜'\" Šsubsidy.€€However,€he€can€also€assert€a€simpler€challenge€due€to€his€standing€as€a€taxpayer.€Š „(H # ŠWhile€the€Supreme€Court€has€limited€taxpayer€standing€under€other€clauses,€challenges€broughtŠ p)4!$ Šarguing€that€the€legislature€is€violating€the€Establishment€Clause€by€diverting€tax€dollars€toŠ \* "% Šreligious€ends€are€justifiable€in€federal€court€(though€such€challenges€are€not€allowed€toŠ < Šexecutive€spending€out€of€general€funds).€€Since€the€spending€of€county€tax€dollars€by€the€countyŠ ( ģ Šcouncil,€a€legislative€body,€violates€the€Establishment€Clause€rights€of€every€taxpayer€who€mayŠ  Ų Šbe€forced€to€pay€in€support€of€a€creed€he€opposes,€any€taxpayer€may€bring€suit€and€have€standing.€Š  Ä ŠNote€that€the€provisions€of€the€First€Amendment,€though€only€binding€on€Congress,€have€beenŠ ģ ° Šincorporated€against€the€states€through€the€Due€Process€Clause€of€the€Fourteenth€Amendment.Š Ų œ ŠĢą  ąAs€to€the€merits€of€the€challenge,€the€law€here€is€a€naked€subsidy€for€a€religious€day€careŠ °t Šcenter.€€Parents€who€send€their€children€to€a€particular€day€care€center€will€receive€a€subsidy,€orŠ œ` Šhave€costs€offset€by€the€state.€€Such€a€subsidy€is€impermissible€under€the€Establishment€Clause.€Š ˆL  ŠUnder€the€Lemon€test,€the€subsidy€has€the€direct€effect€of€advancing€religion.€€The€law€may€haveŠ t8  Šsome€secular€purpose€but€by€singling€out€one€religious€day€care€to€receive€preferential€treatment,Š `$  Šthe€council€will€have€a€difficult€time€proving€its€secular€intentions.€€While€the€law€does€notŠ L  Šappear€to€lead€to€excessive€entanglement€between€the€state€and€religion€(since€no€intrusiveŠ 8ü  Šmonitoring€provisions€are€in€place€to€ensure€the€funds€do€not€go€to€sectarian€ends),€this€is€hardlyŠ $č  Šenough€to€save€a€law€that€has€failed€another€prong€of€the€Lemon€test.Š Ō  Šą  ąA€subsidy€program€to€a€day€care€could€probably€be€constitutional€if€it€applied€to€anyŠ üĄ Šdaycare€that€qualified€under€neutral€criteria€set€by€the€state,€whether€religious€or€not.€€TheŠ č¬ ŠRehnquist€Court€held€that€a€parentššs€choice€to€use€a€neutral€school€voucher€at€a€religious€schoolŠ Ō˜ Šwas€sufficient€to€break€the€chain€of€causation€in€the€state€action€problem€of€tax€dollars€ending€upŠ Ą„ Šin€religious€hands.€€Or€a€program€of€neutral€assistance€of€secular€supplies€could€be€constitutionalŠ ¬p Šif€applied€even„handedly€to€religious€and€secular€schools.€€However,€none€of€these€situationsŠ ˜\ Šapply€to€this€law,€and€court€would€strike€it€down€under€the€federal€Constitution€on€these€facts.€€€Š „H ŠÓ  Óņ ņĢĢREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óŠ H  ŠÓ  Óą  ąĢą  ąAlthough€Able€has€standing€(she€is€directly€injured€from€the€Churchššs€conduct),€she€willŠ  !ä Šnot€be€successful€in€challenging€her€discharge€from€the€Church.€€In€Maryland,€an€at„willŠ  "Š Šemployee€can€be€fired€for€any€or€no€reason.€€Although€Able€has€worked€at€the€Church€for€almostŠ ų"¼ Šthirty€years,€it€appears€that€she€is€an€at€will€employee€(there€is€no€evidence€to€the€contrary€in€theŠ ä#Ø Šfacts).€€There€is€one€exception€to€the€rule€that€she€can€be€fired€at€any€time,€and€that€is€where€theŠ Š$” Šdischarge€violates€a€š šclear€mandate€of€public€policy.šš€€Ableššs€firing€does€not€rise€to€the€level€ofŠ ¼%€  Šš šclear€mandate€of€public€policy.šš€€Courts€find€that€there€is€a€clear€mandate€of€public€policy€whenŠ Ø&l! Šan€employee€is€fired€for€asserting€her€own€rights€or€refusing€to€violate€the€law.€€Neither€is€presentŠ ”'X" Šhere.€€Even€if€Able€is€asserting€her€own€rights€to€espouse€different€views,€she€has€no€specificŠ €(D # Šright€to€do€that€at€the€Spirit€Church.Š l)0!$ ŠŠ X*"% Šą  ąThe€Church€will€raise€the€defense€that€any€court€involvement€will€violate€theŠ < ŠEstablishment€Clause€of€the€First€Amendment,€made€applicable€to€the€states€through€theŠ ( ģ ŠFourteenth€Amendment.€€The€Church€will€argue€that€if€the€courts€get€involved,€and€for€theŠ  Ų ŠChurch€to€reinstate€Able,€that€the€will€unnecessarily€be€entangling€itself€with€religion.€€This€is€aŠ  Ä Šgood€argument€and€the€court€is€not€likely€to€hear€this€case.€€A€court€cannot€order€a€Church€how€toŠ ģ ° Šengage€in€internal,€religious€functions.Š Ų œ ŠĢą  ąSeth€can€argue€that€the€subsidy€violates€the€Establishment€Clause€of€the€FirstŠ °t ŠAmendment,€made€applicable€to€Maryland€through€the€Fourteenth€Amendment.€€In€order€to€bringŠ œ` Šthis€suit,€Seth€must€demonstrate€that€he€has€standing.€€Seth€has€two€possible€ways€to€show€that€heŠ ˆL  Šhas€standing.€€To€demonstrate€that€a€litigant€has€standing€he€must€show€that€he€(1)€is€injured€orŠ t8  Šimminently€will€be€injured€and€(2)€that€the€harm€was€caused€by€the€defendant€and€remedialŠ `$  Šactions€by€the€defendant€(and€ordered€by€the€court)€will€redress€his€injury.Š L  ŠĢą  ąFirst,€he€can€demonstrate€that€he€is€personally€injured€by€the€subsidy€to€the€Churchššs€dayŠ $č  Šcare€program€and€that€ceasing€the€subsidy€will€redress€his€harm.€€As€an€operator€of€a€competingŠ Ō  Šday€care€owner€he€likely€has€actual€or€imminent€economic€injury€as€a€result€of€such€a€generousŠ üĄ Šsubsidy.€€If€enough€clients€switch€to€the€Churchššs€day€care€program€he€will€have€no€troubleŠ č¬ Šdemonstrating€this.€€Also,€he€will€be€able€to€show€that€the€subsidy€caused€this€client€switch„overŠ Ō˜ Šand€that€ending€the€subsidy€will€redress€his€problem.€€A€court€should€easily€find€that€Seth€hasŠ Ą„ Šstanding€to€assert€his€claim.Š ¬p ŠĢą  ąSethššs€second€way€to€show€that€he€has€standing€is€through€taxpayer€standing.€€AlthoughŠ „H ŠSeth€may€be€most€upset€that€the€subsidy€is€a€waste€of€resources,€this€method€of€showing€standingŠ p4 Šwill€not€be€as€successful€as€the€first.€€Where€a€taxpayer€is€complaining€about€tax€money€beingŠ \  Šspent€on€religious€institutions,€the€courts€sometimes€grant€tax„payer€standing.€€However,€theŠ H  Šcourt€is€much€more€likely€to€find€standing€based€on€Sethššs€personal€economic€injury,€rather€thanŠ 4 ų Šhis€views€that€the€subsidy€is€a€waste€of€government€resources.Š  !ä ŠĢą  ąAfter€Seth€has€successfully€demonstrated€standing,€he€can€argue€that€the€subsidy€isŠ ų"¼ Šviolative€of€the€Establishment€Clause.€€He€will€be€successful€if€he€can€show€that€(1)€there€is€noŠ ä#Ø Šsecular€purpose€to€the€subsidy;€(2)€that€the€subsidy€advances€religion;€or€(3)€that€the€subsidyŠ Š$” Šentangles€the€government€in€religion.€€The€subsidy€likely€doesnššt€have€a€secular€purpose.€€ItŠ ¼%€  Šappears€that€a€board€member€of€the€Church€heavily€lobbied€for€the€subsidy€and€that€the€lobbyingŠ Ø&l! Šwas€motivated€by€the€fact€that€the€Center€was€losing€money.€€There€does€not€appear€to€be€aŠ ”'X" Šsituation€where€there€is€insufficient€child€care€in€the€area.€€Also,€the€subsidy€appears€to€only€go€toŠ €(D # Šā āthis€Church,€rather€than€to€similarly€situated€day€care€centers.€€The€subsidy€also€appears€toŠ l)0!$ Šadvance€religion.€€Because€Able€was€just€fired€for€espousing€different€views,€it€seems€veryŠ < Špossible€that€the€children€in€the€day€care€center€are€exposed€to€different€views.Š ( ģ Šā āĢą  ąSeth€can€also€challenge€the€law€based€on€equal€protection€grounds€because€the€SpiritedŠ  Ä ŠChurch€day€care€is€being€treated€differently€than€other€local€day€cares€in€the€area.€€There€appearsŠ ģ ° Što€be€no€rational€basis€for€this€distinction.€€Therefore,€the€subsidy€flunks€even€the€lowest€level€ofŠ Ų œ Šscrutiny€(š šrational€basisšš)€and€will€not€be€upheld.Š Ä ˆ ŠĢÓ  Óņ ņĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢŌ#†XäŒXX X䌏^#ŌŠ  ų"¼ ŠQUESTION€4ó óŠ < ŠĢÓ XÓÓ  ÓJasper€entered€into€a€written€3„year€equipment€lease€agreement€with€Poindexter.€€Under€theŠ  Ų Šterms,€Poindexter€agreed€to€select€and€provide€items€of€customized€computer€hardware€as€well€asŠ  Ä ŠŌ‡XŁXXXäŒŌAŌ#†XäŒXXXŁr™#ŌŌ‡XʄXXXäŒŌin€stockŌ#†XäŒXXXʄµ™#ŌŌ‡XŁXXXäŒŌ@Ō#†XäŒXXXŁ’™#ŌŌ‡XʄXXXäŒŌ€software€items€to€JasperŌ#†XäŒXXXʄBš#ŌŌ‡XŁXXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒXXXŁš#Ōs€place€of€business€in€Anne€Arundel€County,€Maryland.€€JasperŠ ģ ° Šagreed€to€pay€Poindexter€$90,000€over€the€3„year€period,€as€well€as€pay€the€license€fees€and€taxes;Š Ų œ Škeep€the€equipment€in€good€repair;€and€assume€the€entire€risk€of€loss€of€the€equipment.€€TheŠ Ä ˆ Šagreement€included€an€option€to€purchase€at€the€end€of€the€lease€for€a€nominal€fee.€€€The€partiesŠ °t Šprojected€that€the€customized€computer€hardware€and€the€software€would€be€out€of€date€in€threeŠ œ` Šyears.ņ ņŠ ˆL  ŠŠ t8  Ša.€€Based€on€the€given€facts,€did€this€transaction€create€a€security€interest?€€Discuss€andŠ `$  Šexplain€fully.Š L  ŠŠ 8ü  Šó óWithin€2€years,€Jasper€defaulted€on€the€agreement€and€sent€Poindexter€his€written€consentŠ $č  Što€take€the€hardware€and€software.€€The€items€of€hardware€were€retaken€by€Poindexter€who€then€sentŠ Ō  Šnotice€to€Jasper.€€The€notice€informed€Jasper€that€he€was€entitled€to€redeem€the€hardware€providedŠ üĄ Šthat€he€made€certain€payments€within€15€days€of€delivery€of€the€notice;€that€if€the€hardware€was€notŠ č¬ Šredeemed€within€that€time€the€hardware€would€be€sold€at€private€sale;€and€if€a€deficiency€arose€fromŠ Ō˜ Šthe€sale€he€would€be€liable€for€the€deficiency.€€Jasper€was€financially€unable€to€redeem.€€PoindexterŠ Ą„ Šsold€the€hardware€at€a€private€sale€resulting€in€a€deficiency€several€months€after€its€notice€to€Jasper.€Š ¬p ŠĢņ ņŠ „H Šb.€€Based€on€the€given€facts,€did€Poindexter€give€reasonable€notification€of€the€time€afterŠ l0 Šwhich€a€private€sale€of€the€items€of€hardware€was€to€be€made?€€Discuss€and€explain€fully.€Š X ŠÓ  ÓŠ D Šó óPoindexter€sought€a€deficiency€judgment€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Anne€Arundel€County,Š 0 ō ŠMaryland€against€Jasper€because€the€private€sale€proceeds€did€not€equal€the€cost€of€the€hardwareŠ !ą Šsold.€€Jasper€opposed€the€relief€sought€by€Poindexter.€€ņ ņŠ "Ģ ŠŠ ō"ø Šc.€€Will€Poindexter€prevail€in€his€deficiency€judgment€case?€€Discuss€and€explainŠ ą#¤ Šfully.Š Ģ$ ŠŠ ø%|  Šó óŠ ¤&h! ŠÓ  Óņ ņREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óŠ Œ'P" ŠÓ9¤ÓŠ x(< # ŠA.€€According€to€1„201€(37),€of€the€ņņMaryland€Commercial€Law€Article,€a€security€interestŠ d)(!$ Šis€an€interest€in€personal€property€or€fixtures€which€secures€payment€or€óóperformance€of€anŠ P*"% ŠŃļWŃā āŃeÜŃā āŃ  Ńobligation.€In€the€contract€between€Jasper€and€Poindexter,€Poindexter€ņņhad€an€interest€in€theŠ < Šcustomized€óócomputer€ņņhardware€and€"in„stock"€óósoftware€items€in€Jaspers€place€of€interest€andŠ ( ģ ŠJasper€agreed€to€pay€Poindexter€$90,000€for€that€interest€over€a€3€year€period.€Therefore,€JasperŠ  Ų Šdid€have€a€security€interest€in€the€goods€provided€by€Poindexter.Š  Ä ŠÓ Ä’Óą ` ąĢFurthermore,€1„201€(37)(a)€states€that€,€ņņwhether€a€transaction€creates€a€lease€or€securityŠ Ų œ Šinterest€is€determined€by€the€facts€of€each€case;€however,€a€transaction€creates€a€security€interestŠ Ä ˆ Šif€the€consideration€the€lessee€is€to€pay€the€lessor€for€the€right€to€possession€and€use€of€the€goodsŠ °t Šis€an€obligation€for€the€term€of€the€lease€not€subject€to€termination€by€the€lessee,€and€the€originalŠ œ` Šterm€of€the€lease€is€equal€to€or€greater€than€the€remaining€economic€life€of€the€goods€and€theŠ ˆL  Šlessee€has€an€option€to€become€the€owner€of€the€goods€for€no€additional€consideration€or€nominalŠ t8  Šadditional€consideration€upon€compliance€with€the€lease€agreement.€óóIn€this€case€Jasper€is€notŠ `$  Šgiven€the€option€to€terminate€the€lease€during€the€3€year€equipment€lease€and€the€lease€is€equal€toŠ L  Šor€greater€than€the€remaining€economic€life€of€the€goods€because€the€facts€state€the€partiesŠ 8ü  Šprojected€that€the€customized€computer€hardware€and€the€software€would€be€out€of€date€in€threeŠ $č  Šyears.€Also,€the€agreement€included€an€option€to€purchase€the€equipment€at€the€end€of€the€leaseŠ Ō  Šfor€a€nominal€fee.€So€according€to€1„201€(37)(a)€(i„iii)€looking€at€the€facts€of€this€particularŠ üĄ Šsituation€a€security€interest€is€arguably€created€in€this€situation.Š č¬ ŠÓ Ä’ÓÓ  ÓŠ Ō˜ ŠB.€€According€to€9„612(b),€of€Title€9€ņņSecured€Transactions,€óó[a]€notification€of€dispositionŠ Ą„ Šsent€after€default€and€10€days€or€more€before€the€earliest€time€of€disposition€set€forth€in€theŠ ¬p Šnotification€is€sent€within€a€reasonable€time€before€the€disposition.€Poindexter€sent€notice€to€Jasper.Š ˜\ ŠIn€that€notice€he€informed€Jasper€that€he€was€entitled€to€redeem€the€hardware€provided€that€he€madeŠ „H Šcertain€payments€within€15€days€of€delivery€of€the€notice€and€that€if€the€hardware€was€not€redeemedŠ p4 Šwithin€that€time€the€hardware€would€be€sold€at€private€sale€and€if€deficiency€arose€from€the€sale€heŠ \  Šwould€be€liable€for€the€deficiency.€Considering€the€fact€that€Poindexter€gave€Jasper€15€days€noticeŠ H  Šbefore€disposition€of€the€collateral€and€9„612(b)€only€requires€a€notice€of€disposition€10€days€or€moreŠ 4 ų Šbefore€disposition,€Poindexter€gave€reasonable€notification€of€the€time€after€which€a€private€sale€ofŠ  !ä Šthe€items€of€hardware€was€to€be€made.€It€could€be€argued€by€Jasper€that€the€notification€didn't€giveŠ  "Š Šan€exact€date€that€the€collateral€would€be€sold€at€private€auction€and€therefore,€Jasper€was€not€ableŠ ų"¼ Što€ascertain€how€much€time€he€had€to€redeem€the€collateral.€Since€a€debtors€right€to€redeem€is€anŠ ä#Ø Šimportant€right€under€the€UCC€this€is€a€good€argument€for€Jasper€to€make€and€case€law€in€MarylandŠ Š$” Šbacks€it€up.€Jasper€needs€to€be€able€to€ascertain€the€exact€date,€time€location€the€collateral€is€to€beŠ ¼%€  Šsold€at€auction€because€he€is€able€to€redeem€right€up€until€the€second€that€it€is€sold.€Therefore€it€isŠ Ø&l! Špossible€that€even€though€15€days€is€more€than€the€mandatory€10€day€notice€because€Poindexter€didŠ ”'X" Šnot€specify€any€exact€information€in€his€notice€it€isn't€reasonable,€See€9„623€right€to€redeemŠ €(D # Šcollateral.Š l)0!$ ŠÓ  ÓÓ <ÓŠ X*"% ŠÓ x<ÓC.€€Poindexter€sought€a€deficiency€judgment€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Anne€ArundelŠ D+#& ŠCounty,€Maryland€against€Jasper€because€the€private€sale€proceeds€did€not€equal€the€cost€of€theŠ 0,ō#' Šhardware€sold€and€therefore€Jasper€sought€relief€in€the€form€of€the€deficiency€judgment.€IfŠ < ŠJasper€wants€to€oppose€Poindexters€right€to€the€deficiency€ņņjudgment€he€will€have€to€establishŠ ( ģ Šthat€Poindexter€is€in€violation€of€9„625,€Remedies€for€Secured€Party`s€Failure€To€Comply€WithŠ  Ų ŠThis€Title.€óóUnder€9„625(a),€ņņif€it€is€established€that€a€secured€party€is€not€proceeding€inŠ  Ä Šaccordance€with€óóthis€ņņtitle,€óóa€court€ņņmay€order€or€restrain€óócollection,€ņņenforcement,€or€óódispositionŠ ģ ° Šņņof€collateral€óóon€ņņappropriate€terms€and€conditions.€óóJasper€can€argue€that€Poindexter€did€notŠ Ų œ Šcomply€with€this€title€because€Poindexter€didn't€give€him€sufficient€notice€under€the€law.Š Ä ˆ ŠBecause€Poindexter€didn't€give€Jasper€sufficient€notice€Jasper€suffered€damages€and€should€beŠ °t Šawarded€monetary€damages€and€not€be€forced€to€pay€for€the€deficiency€judgment.€HoweverŠ œ` Šunder,€9„625€(c)(1„2)€it€looks€like€the€most€Jasper€will€be€able€to€do€is€get€the€deficiencyŠ ˆL  Šjudgment€voided.€Jasper€will€have€his€deficiency€eliminated€and€Poindexter€will€learn€to€addŠ t8  Šmore€specificity€in€his€notice€to€redeem.Š `$  ŠŠ L  ŠÓ  Óņ ņŠ 8ü  ŠREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óŠ  ä  ŠÓ(¼ÓŠ  Š  ŠThis€question€is€governed€by€UCC€Article€9,€as€it€involves€a€security€interest.Š ų¼ ŠŠ äØ ŠA.€Security€InterestŠ Š” ŠŠ ¼€ ŠÓ xÓA€ņņsecurity€interestóó€is€an€interest€in€personal€property€on€fixtures€which€secures€paymentŠ Øl Šor€performance€of€an€obligation.€€Here,€Jasper€(J)€entered€into€a€3„year€equipment€leaseŠ ”X Šagreement€with€Poindexter€(P)€for€customized€computer€software€and€Ō‡XŁXXXäŒŌAŌ#†XäŒXXXى¾#ŌŌ‡XʄXXXäŒŌin€stockŌ#†XäŒXXXƄ̾#ŌŌ‡XŁXXXäŒŌ@Ō#†XäŒXXXŁæ#Ō€software€itemsŠ €D Šfor€a€3„year€period€over€which€J€would€pay€P€$90,000.00,€pay€license€fees€and€taxes,€keep€theŠ l0 Šequipment€in€good€repair€and€assume€the€risk€of€loss.€€The€agreement€included€an€option€to€buyŠ X Šthe€equipment€for€a€Ō‡XŁXXXäŒŌAŌ#†XäŒXXXŁvĄ#Ōnominal€fee@€at€the€end€of€the€lease.Š D ŠŠ 0 ō ŠThe€question€of€whether€this€agreement€creates€a€ņņlease€óóor€ņņsecurity€interestóó€is€determinedŠ !ą Šby€the€facts,€however,€it€will€create€a€security€interest€where€the€consideration€the€lessee€is€to€payŠ "Ģ Šthe€lessor€for€the€right€to€possession€and€use€of€the€goods€is€an€obligation€for€the€term€of€the€leaseŠ ō"ø Šnot€subject€to€termination€by€the€lessee€ņņandóó€the€original€term€of€the€lease€is€equal€to€or€greaterŠ ą#¤ Šthan€the€remaining€economic€life€of€the€goods€or€has€the€option€to€buy€the€goods€at€the€end€of€theŠ Ģ$ Šlease€for€no€consideration€or€nominal€additional€consideration.€€Here,€J€is€paying€for€the€use€ofŠ ø%|  Šthe€equipment€with€no€right€to€terminate€and€the€parties€project€the€equipment€will€be€out€of€dateŠ ¤&h! Šin€3€years€ņņandóó€gives€J€the€option€to€buy€the€equipment€for€a€nominal€feešš€at€the€end€of€the€lease.Š 'T" ŠŠ |(@ # ŠThere€is€a€security€interest€in€the€equipment.Š h),!$ ŠŃ  ŃÓ XÓĢB.€NotificationŠ @+#& ŠÓ XÓņņŠ ,,š#' ŠŃi"Ńā āŃ£eŃŃ‹ČŃā āŃ  ŃTimeliness€of€Notice.óó€€A€notification€for€disposition€sent€after€default€and€10€days€orŠ < Šmore€before€the€earliest€time€of€disposition€set€forth€in€the€notification€is€sent€within€a€reasonableŠ ( ģ Štime€before€the€disposition.€€Here,€P€sent€notice€to€J€that€he€had€15€days€to€redeem€his€collateral,Š  Ų Šbut€did€not€include€a€time€for€disposition€and€in€fact€did€not€sell€the€collateral€at€a€private€saleŠ  Ä Šuntil€Ō‡XŁXXXäŒŌAŌ#†XäŒXXXŁĖĒ#ŌŌ‡XʄXXXäŒŌseveral€months€after€its€notice€to€JŌ#†XäŒXXXʄČ#Ō€thus€ņņnotóó€giving€J€reasonable€notification€of€the€time€forŠ ģ ° Šsale€and€depriving€him€of€his€opportunity€to€redeem€which€extends€until€the€collateral€is€sold.€€PŠ Ų œ Šdid€not€provide€reasonable€notification€under€Title€9.Š Ä ˆ ŠÓ XÓĢC.€€Deficiency€JudgmentŠ œ` ŠÓ XÓņņŠ ˆL  ŠSecured€Partyššššs€Failure€to€Comply.óó€€Under€'9„625€(a)€if€a€secured€party€fails€to€complyŠ t8  Šwith€Title€9€a€Court€may€restrain€enforcement€or€disposition€of€collateral.€€Here,€P€did€not€give€JŠ `$  Šreasonable€notice€of€the€sale€and€foreclosed€Jššs€right€to€redeem€before€the€collateral€was€disposedŠ L  Šof€and€a€court€may€therefore€rule€against€P€in€his€deficiency€judgment€case.Š 8ü  ŠÓ XÓŌ‡{fXXäŒŌŌ‡@a{fŌĢņ ņŌ#†XʄX@aÄĖ#ŌŌ#†XäŒXXXʄćĖ#ŌĢĢó óĢĢÓ  ÓÓ  Óņ ņŠ  n2 ŠŃ€'ærŃŃ€&@øŃQUESTION€5ó óŠ < ŠÓ_ĢÓĢŌ#aaŌą  ąOn€December€15,€2005,€in€Baltimore€County,€Maryland,€Paul€was€seriously€injured€while€aŠ  Ų Špassenger€in€a€taxi€owned€by€Boco€Transport,€Inc.€and€operated€by€its€employee,€John.€€John€lost€controlŠ  Ä Šof€the€vehicle€and€struck€a€bridge€abutment.€€As€a€consequence,€Paul€is€confined€to€a€wheel€chair.€€Š ģ ° ŠĢą  ąOn€June€15,€2006,€while€recovering€from€his€injuries€at€a€local€rehabilitation€center,€Paul€wasŠ Ä ˆ Švisited€by€Andy,€and€agent€of€ABC€Insurance€Company,€the€liability€insurance€company€for€Boco.€€HisŠ °t Špurpose€was€to€discuss€PaulŌ‡ō6 ņXXäŒŌŌ#ddaaŌ€Ō#†XäŒX ņō6lĻ#ŌŌ#aaddŌs€claims€against€Boco.€€At€the€time€Paul€had€not€achieved€maximum€recoveryŠ œ` Šfrom€his€injuries€and€there€was€no€discussion€about€settlement.€€He€did,€however,€sign€a€medicalŠ ˆL  Šauthorization€to€permit€Boco€to€get€PaulŌ‡ō6 ņXXäŒŌŌ#ddaaŌ€Ō#†XäŒX ņō6ĻŠ#ŌŌ#aaddŌs€medical€records€and€reports.€Š t8  ŠŃ  ŃĢą  ąOn€February€15,€2007,€Paul€retained€the€services€of€Smith,€Maryland€attorney,€to€represent€himŠ L  Šin€his€claim€against€Boco.€€On€that€date€he€signed€an€employment€contract€authorizing€Smith€to€representŠ 8ü  Šhim€in€settlement€negotiations€with€ABC€Insurance€and€to€file€suit€against€Boco€if€a€settlement€agreeableŠ $č  Što€Paul€was€not€achieved.€€The€contract€also€provided€for€the€customary€contingent€fee€and€expenses,Š Ō  Šdependent€upon€the€case€being€settled€or€tried.€€Smith€promptly,€in€writing,€informed€ABC€of€hisŠ üĄ Šrepresentation€of€Paul.€€Š č¬ ŠĢą  ąPaul€discussed€his€accident€and€pending€claim€with€his€good€friend,€Tom.€€During€the€course€ofŠ Ą„ Šthe€conversation€Paul€informed€Tom€that€Attorney€Smith€was€representing€him.€€Tom€said€that€Smith€hadŠ ¬p Šrepresented€his€neighbor€in€a€similar€case€and€that€he€was€dissatisfied€with€Smith€in€that€he€did€not€getŠ ˜\ Šthe€kind€of€settlement€that€Smith€had€led€him€to€believe€he€would€get.€Š „H Šą  ąĢą  ąConcerned,€Paul€called€Smith€who€assured€him€that€he€was€compiling€the€information€and€dataŠ \  Šneeded€to€make€a€settlement€demand€or€institute€suit€if€negotiations€failed.€Š H  ŠĢŃ  Ńą  ąOn€March€15,€2007€Paul€received€a€call€from€Andy€of€ABC€Insurance€inquiring€about€his€health.€Š  !ä ŠDuring€the€conversation€he€noted€that€Paul€was€now€represented€by€counsel€and€that€he€was€confidentŠ  "Š Šthat€the€claim€would€be€settled€to€PaulŌ‡ō6 ņXXäŒŌŌ#ddaaŌ€Ō#†XäŒX ņō6÷×#ŌŌ#aaddŌs€satisfaction.€€Š ų"¼ ŠŃ  ŃĢą  ąEncouraged,€Paul€instituted€a€number€of€calls€to€Andy€in€which€settlement€was€discussed.€Š Š$” ŠUltimately,€ABC€offered€a€sum€acceptable€to€Paul€and€for€which€he€released€Boco€and€ABC€from€furtherŠ ¼%€  Šliability.Š Ø&l! ŠĢą  ąSmith€has€filed€suit€against€ABC€for€tortious€interference€with€contract.€€Š €(D # ŠĢŃ  Ńą  ąņ ņWho€should€prevail?€€Why?ó óŠ X*"% ŠŃ  ŃŌ#ddaaŌÓ  Óą  ąĢĢņ ņÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ņņŠ -ą$( Šó óóóÓ˜ŚÓŠ .Ģ%) Šą  ąTo€recover€for€tortious€interference€with€a€contract,€the€plaintiff€must€show€that€theŠ < Šdefendant€knew€of€the€contract€and€its€terms,€either€intentionally€or€negligently€interfered€withŠ ( ģ Šthe€performance€of€that€contract,€causing€damages.€€Here,€Smith€alleges€that€ABC€interfered€withŠ  Ų Šhis€employment€contract€with€Paul,€the€terms€of€which€authorized€Smith€to€represent€Paul€"inŠ  Ä Šsettlement€negotiations€with€ABC€insurance"€and€to€"file€suit€against€Boco€if€a€settlementŠ ģ ° Šagreeable€to€Paul€was€not€reached."Š Ų œ ŠĢą  ąFirst€of€all,€ABC€never€contacted€Paul,€because€it€is€a€business€entity.€€However,€aŠ °t Šprincipal€can€be€vicariously€liable€for€the€torts€of€its€agents€acting€with€authority€or€in€the€scopeŠ œ` Šof€their€employment.€€Here,€Andy€was€an€"agent€of€ABC€Insurance€Company,"€and€therefore,Š ˆL  ŠABC€can€be€vicariously€liable€for€Andy's€actions.Š t8  ŠĢą  ąThe€first€visit€from€Andy€when€Paul€was€in€the€hospital€does€not€trigger€any€issuesŠ L  Šbecause€Paul€was€not€represented€by€counsel€at€that€point,€nor€were€there€any€settlementŠ 8ü  Šdiscussions.Š $č  ŠĢą  ąHowever,€once€Paul€retained€Smith's€services,€Paul€signed€the€employment€contract€andŠ üĄ ŠSmith€"promptly,€in€writing,€informed€ABC€of€his€representation€of€Paul."€€This€gave€ABCŠ č¬ Šnotice€that€Paul€was€now€represented€by€counsel.Š Ō˜ ŠĢą  ąThereafter,€Andy€called€Paul€and€"inquired€about€his€health."€€Andy€knew€that€Paul€wasŠ ¬p Šrepresented€in€that€he€noted€that€"Paul€was€represented€by€counsel."€€However,€during€thisŠ ˜\ Šconversation,€Andy€did€not€attempt€to€negotiate€a€settlement.€€However,€he€did€make€a€commentŠ „H Šthat€he€was€"confident€that€the€claim€would€be€settled."€€Moreover,€it€was€improper€for€Andy€toŠ p4 Ševen€contact€Paul,€knowing€that€Paul€was€represented€by€counsel.€€While€Andy's€actions€mostŠ \  Šlikely€violated€the€Rules€of€Professional€Conduct€(if€he€is€an€attorney),€there€is€not€enoughŠ H  Šinformation€to€show€that€he€tortiously€interfered€with€Paul€and€Smith's€contract€yet.Š 4 ų ŠĢą  ąOnce€Paul€started€calling€Andy,€though,€where€"settlement€was€discussed,"€and€ABCŠ  "Š Š"offered€a€sum€acceptable€to€Paul,"€Andy€had€interfered€with€Smith's€right€to€represent€Paul€inŠ ų"¼ Šsettlement€negotiations€with€ABC.€€ABC€could€defend€by€saying€that€although€they€had€noticeŠ ä#Ø Šthat€Paul€was€represented,€they€did€not€have€notice€of€the€terms€of€the€employment€contract.€Š Š$” ŠThis€argument€is€weak€because€Andy€(and€ABC)€knew€at€least€that€Paul€had€counsel€and€theyŠ ¼%€  Šshould€have€known€that€as€counsel,€Smith€would€be€there€for€something€as€important€as€aŠ Ø&l! Šsettlement€negotiation.€€Even€though€Paul€was€skeptical€about€Smith's€abilities,€Smith€had€neverŠ ”'X" Šbeen€discharged.€€Š €(D # ŠĢą  ąSmith's€fee€was€contingent€and€was€dependent€on€whether€the€case€was€settled€or€tried.€Š X*"% ŠThus,€ABC's€actions€(through€its€agent)€had€an€outcome€on€the€fee€that€Smith€would€get,€and€byŠ D+#& Šinterfering€with€Smith's€ability€to€even€participate€in€the€negotiations,€they€caused€him€damages.€€Š 0,ō#' ŠŃ  ŃSmith€will€prevail€on€his€claim€for€tortious€interference€with€contract.Š -ą$( ŠŠ .Ģ%) ŠÓ  ÓĢņ ņREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óŠ ( ģ ŠÓ‚éÓĢą  ąIn€order€to€prevail€under€a€tortious€interference€with€contract€claim€in€Maryland,€SmithŠ  Ä Šwill€have€to€show€that€a€contract€existed,€that€ABC€knew€of€its€existence,€that€ABC€intentionallyŠ ģ ° Šinterfered€with€the€contract€and€therefore€caused€it€to€be€breached€or€repudiated,€and€damages.€Š Ų œ ŠFurthermore,€because€Smith€is€suing€ABC€and€not€Andy,€Smith€will€have€to€show€that€ABC€isŠ Ä ˆ Šliable€on€Andy's€actions€based€on€agency€theory.€€Š °t ŠŃ  ŃĢą  ąFirst,€Smith€will€be€able€to€show€that€ABC€is€liable€for€the€tortious€conduct,€if€any,€of€itsŠ ˆL  Šemployee€Andy.€€An€employer€is€vicariously€liable€for€the€tortious€conduct€of€its€employeesŠ t8  Šcommitted€within€the€scope€of€employment.€€Andy,€as€an€agent€for€ABC,€was€acting€within€theŠ `$  Šscope€of€his€employment€when€he€negotiated€and€entered€into€a€settlement€agreement€with€Paul.€€Š L  ŠĢą  ąSecond,€Smith€will€likely€not€be€successful€in€showing€the€elements€of€tortiousŠ $č  Šinterference€with€contract.€€Paul€and€Smith€signed€an€employment€contract€on€February€15,€2007Š Ō  Šauthorizing€Smith€to€represent€Paul€in€settlement€negotiations€with€ABC.€€It€appears€that€theŠ üĄ Šcontract€does€not€violate€any€of€the€requirements€of€the€Maryland€code€of€professionalŠ č¬ Šresponsibility,€in€that€Andy€apparently€gave€his€signed,€written€consent€to€the€contract€and€theŠ Ō˜ Šcontract€contained€the€requirements€provisions€regarding€contingency€fees€such€as€how€expensesŠ Ą„ Šare€calculated.€€Andy€became€aware€of€the€contract€on€March€15,€2007€when€he€called€Paul€toŠ ¬p Šinquire€about€his€health.€€However,€Andy€arguably€did€not€intentionally€interfere€with€thatŠ ˜\ Šcontract,€rather€it€was€Tom,€who€told€Paul€that€his€neighbor€was€dissatisfied€with€Smith's€work,Š „H Šthat€constituted€"interference"€with€the€contract.€€Andy€knew€that€Paul€was€represented€byŠ p4 Šcounsel,€but€that€does€not€prevent€Andy,€a€non„attorney,€from€speaking€with€Paul.€€Furthermore,Š \  ŠAndy€statement€that€he€was€"confident€that€the€claim€would€be€settled€to€Paul's€satisfaction,"€isŠ H  Šnot€the€kind€of€statement€that€would€cause€someone€to€breach€a€contract.€€Rather,€it€is€anŠ 4 ų Šambiguous€statement€that€could€even€be€interpreted€as€Andy€approving€of€Paul's€choice€ofŠ  !ä Šattorney.€€As€Paul's€attorney,€Smith€could€have€instructed€Paul€not€to€speak€with€Andy€outside€ofŠ  "Š Šhis€presence,€but€a€client€always€has€the€option€of€entering€into€a€settlement€agreement€withoutŠ ų"¼ Šthe€aid€of€counsel.€€Here,€in€fact,€it€was€Paul€who€initiated€the€calls€to€Andy.€€Client€may€fireŠ ä#Ø Štheir€attorney€at€any€time,€although€the€attorney€may€receive€quantum€meruit€compensation€forŠ Š$” Šservices€rendered.€€It€is€likely€that€it€was€not€Andy's€conduct€that€caused€Smith's€contract€withŠ ¼%€  ŠPaul€to€be€repudiated,€rather€it€was€Smith's€own€reputation€speaking€for€him.€€Smith€may€be€ableŠ Ø&l! Što€show€that€he€suffered€damages,€although,€because€the€contract€was€contingency€based,€heŠ ”'X" Šwould€have€to€show€a€likelihood€of€trying€or€settling€the€case€and€thus€satisfying€the€contingency.€Š €(D # ŠĢĢą  ąFor€the€above„stated€reasons,€ABC€should€prevail.Š D+#& ŠĢņ ņÓ  Óą @ ąQUESTION€6Š -ą$( Šó óÓū÷ÓŠ .Ģ%) ŠÓ XÓÓ  ÓOn€March€1,€2006€at€approximately€4:30€PM€David€was€operating€his€vehicle€East€on€RouteŠ < Š7,€a€two€lane€paved€highway€in€a€rural€area€in€Washington€County,€Maryland.€€There€is€a€three„footŠ ( ģ Šberm€or€shoulder€on€both€the€North€and€South€sides€of€Route€7.€€The€speed€limit€on€Route€7€in€thisŠ  Ų Šlocation€is€55€miles€per€hour.€Š  Ä ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓAt€a€marked€passing€zone,€a€tractor„trailer,€also€moving€in€an€easterly€direction,€passedŠ Ų œ ŠDavidššs€vehicle.€€In€response€to€the€passing€truck€David€moved€several€feet€toward€the€southerlyŠ Ä ˆ Šshoulder€of€the€roadway€where€his€vehicle€struck€and€injured€Paula€who€was€walking€in€an€easterlyŠ °t Šdirection€on€the€adjacent€shoulder€at€approximately€€two€feet€from€the€paved€edge€of€Route€7.€€AtŠ œ` Šthe€time€of€the€accident,€David€was€driving€50€miles€per€hour.€€Š ˆL  ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓUpon€investigation€at€the€scene€of€the€accident,€the€investigating€state€trooper€issued€DavidŠ `$  Ša€ticket€citing€violation€of€Sec.€21„504€of€the€Transportation€Article,€Code€of€Maryland.€€Š L  ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓSection€21„504€provides,€Ō  Ōņņinter€aliaóóŌ  Ō,€that€(a)€š š...the€driver€of€a€vehicle€shall€exercise€due€careŠ $č  Što€avoid€colliding€with€any€pedestriansšš,€(b)€š š...the€driver€of€a€vehicle€shall€if€necessary€warn€anyŠ Ō  Špedestrian€by€sounding€the€horn€of€the€vehicle.šš€€Š üĄ ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓOn€return€to€his€home€in€Somerset€County,€Maryland,€David€mailed€a€check€to€theŠ Ō˜ ŠDepartment€of€Motor€Vehicles€in€the€amount€of€the€preset€fine€noted€on€the€citation.€Š Ą„ ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓOn€September€10,€2006,€Paula€filed€a€personal€injury€suit€against€David€in€WashingtonŠ ˜\ ŠCounty€alleging€that€his€negligence€was€the€proximate€cause€of€the€accident€and€her€resultantŠ „H Šinjuries.€Š p4 ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓDavid,€by€counsel,€filed€a€general€denial€of€liability€and€a€separate€affirmative€defense€ofŠ H  Šcontributory€negligence.Š 4 ų ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓAt€the€trail€before€a€jury,€the€following€occurred:€€Š  "Š ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓņ ņa.€€Paulaššs€counsel€sought€to€introduce€evidence€(as€an€admission)€that€David€had€beenŠ ä#Ø Šissued€a€citation€and€had€paid€a€fine.€€Davidššs€counsel€objected.Š Š$” ŠÓ XӀ€Š ¼%€  ŠÓ XÓHow€should€the€Court€rule?€€On€what€grounds?€Š Ø&l! ŠÓ XÓó óĢÓ XÓAt€the€close€of€plaintiffššs€case,€Davidššs€attorney€moved€for€judgment€on€the€ground€thatŠ €(D # Šplaintiffššs€testimony€that€she€was€walking€on€the€right€side€of€the€highway€with€her€back€to€trafficŠ l)0!$ Šshowed€that€she€violated€mandate€of€Section€2„506(b)€of€the€Transportation€Article,€Code€ofŠ X*"% ŠMaryland,€which€provides:€€ą8  ąš šWhen€a€sidewalk€is€not€provided,€aŠ D+#& Špedestrian€who€walks€along€and€on€aŠ 0,ō#' Šhighway,€may€walk€only€on€the€leftŠ -ą$( Šshoulder€if€practicable,€or€on€the€leftŠ .Ģ%) Šside€of€the€highway€as€near€asŠ < Špracticable€to€the€edge€of€the€roadwayŠ ( ģ Šfacing€traffic€that€might€approach€fromŠ  Ų Šthe€opposite€direction.ššņ ņŠ ÄČČ ŠÓ XÓĢą  ąb.€€Davidššs€counsel€asserts€that€Paula€was€guilty€of€negligence€as€a€matter€of€law.€Š Ų œ ŠĢą  ąHow€should€the€court€rule€and€why?€€€Explain€fully.ó óŠ °t ŠĢą  ąĢÓ  Óą @ ąņ ņREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óŠ t8  ŠÓ¤ÓĢ(A)€Š L  ŠĢŃ  ŃÓ XÓThe€Court€should€probably€sustain€David's€objection€to€the€introduction€of€the€evidence€asŠ $č  Ša€party€admission.€Š Ō  ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓUnder€the€rules€of€evidence€in€Maryland,€party€admissions€is€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€ruleŠ č¬ Šwhich€allows€out„of„court€statements€to€be€offered€in€court€for€the€purposes€of€proving€the€truth€ofŠ Ō˜ Šthe€matter€asserted€in€them.€€A€party€admission€is€any€statement€made€by€a€party€can€be€introducedŠ Ą„ Šagainst€them€by€the€opposing€party€as€a€party€admission.€€Party€admissions€can€be€affirmativeŠ ¬p Šstatements€(either€oral€or€written)€by€a€party,€or€they€can€be€vicarious€(admissions€of€a€party'sŠ ˜\ Šemployees€or€agents)€or€adoptive€(admissions€by€a€party€through€silence).€€Š „H ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓHere,€it€does€not€appear€that€the€evidence€of€the€ticket€and€David's€payment€of€such€ticketŠ \  Šshould€be€admissible€as€a€party€admission€against€him.€€Paula€is€attempting€to€introduce€the€evidenceŠ H  Šagainst€David€in€order€to€establish€the€truth€of€the€matter€(1)€asserted€in€the€ticket€„€that€David€brokeŠ 4 ų ŠSec.€21„504€„€and€(2)€asserted€in€the€check€„€that€David's€payment€of€the€ticket€amounts€to€hisŠ  !ä Šadmission€of€guilt€of€breaking€the€law.€€However,€this€is€likely€improper€grounds€for€allowing€suchŠ  "Š Ševidence€in€as€excepted€hearsay€on€such€grounds.€€There€are€no€facts€presented€to€suggest€that€DavidŠ ų"¼ Šadmitted€being€guilty€of€violating€the€law€through€the€sending€of€a€check€to€pay€the€fine.€€Rather,€theŠ ä#Ø Šfacts€suggest€that€David€was€simply€paying€the€fine€because€he€was€issued€a€citation.€€Such€payment,Š Š$” Šwithout€any€other€accompanying€oral€or€written€statements,€can€not€amount€to€an€admission€byŠ ¼%€  ŠDavid€that€he€was€guilty€of€breaking€Sec.€21„504.€Further,€the€mere€fact€that€David€was€issued€theŠ Ø&l! Šcitation€does€not€establish€that€David€actually€committed€the€crime€in€question.€Therefore,€the€courtŠ ”'X" Šshould€not€allow€the€evidence€to€come€in€under€such€an€exception€to€the€hearsay€rule.€Š €(D # ŠÓ XÓĢŃ  Ń(B)€Š X*"% ŠŃ  ŃÓ XÓThe€Court€should€reject€David's€argument€because€Maryland€does€not€recognize€that€theŠ D+#& Šviolation€of€a€statute€amounts€to€negligence€as€a€matter€of€law€(ie€negligence€per€se),€rather€only€thatŠ 0,ō#' Šproof€of€such€violation€amounts€to€evidence€weighing€towards€a€finding€that€negligence€occurred.Š -ą$( ŠTherefore,€as€a€matter€of€law,€Paula's€violation€of€Sec.€2„506(b)€does€not€amount€to€contributoryŠ .Ģ%) Šnegligence€per€se€and,€therefore,€does€not€bar€her€from€her€claim€against€David.€Š < ŠŠ ( ģ ŠA€party€defending€a€negligence€action€can€argue€that€the€opposing€party€was€contributorilyŠ  Ų Šnegligent€during€the€transaction€that€gave€rise€to€the€plaintiff's€injuries.€€Such€a€showing,€inŠ  Ä ŠMaryland,€bars€the€plaintiff€from€recovering€unless€the€plaintiff€can€establish€that€the€defendant€wasŠ ģ ° Šthe€one€with€the€last€clear€chance€to€avoid€the€injury€causing€event.€€In€the€majority€of€states,€suchŠ Ų œ Ša€showing€of€contributory€negligence€can€be€found€as€a€matter€of€law€if€the€plaintiff€violated€aŠ Ä ˆ Šstatutorily€imposed€duty€of€care.€€However,€in€Maryland,€such€a€violation€will€not€establishŠ °t Šcontributory€negligence€as€a€matter€of€law.€€Therefore,€a€defendant€asserting€that€the€plaintiff'sŠ œ` Šviolation€of€a€statutorily€imposed€duty€of€care€amounts€to€contributory€negligence€that€bars€her€claimŠ ˆL  Šmust€actually€prove€the€negligence€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€Š t8  ŠŠ `$  ŠÓ XӀ€€€€€€€€€€€€Therefore,€in€this€case,€David's€assertion€that€Paula's€violation€of€Sect.€2„506(b)€amounts€toŠ L  Šcontributory€negligence€as€a€matter€of€law€will€not€be€permitted€by€the€court.€€David€will€have€toŠ 8ü  Šestablish€that€(1)€Paula€was€in„fact€also€negligent€and€(2)€that€David€did€not€have€the€last€clearŠ $č  Šchance€to€prevent€the€injury€from€occurring.€Š Ō  ŠĢÓ XÓHere,€it€seems€apparent€that€Paula€was€at€least€partially€negligent€during€the€events€thatŠ č¬ Šoccurred€leading€up€to€her€injury.€€Paula€was€walking€alongside€of€a€55€M.P.H.€two€lane€highway€Š Ō˜ Šwith€her€back€facing€traffic.€€Further,€the€facts€state€that€she€was€only€two€feet€off€of€the€side€of€theŠ Ą„ Šhighway€at€the€time€the€injury€occurred.€€Therefore,€it€appears€that€her€imprudent€behavior€was€atŠ ¬p Šleast€partially€a€cause€of€the€accident€that€occurred.€€Š ˜\ ŠÓ XÓĢÓ XÓAs€to€whether€Paula€had€the€last€clear€chance€to€avoid€the€injury,€the€facts€suggest€that€sheŠ p4 Šdid€not€have€such€chance.€€However,€at€the€same€time,€it€appears€that€David€also€did€not€have€suchŠ \  Ša€reasonable€chance.€€The€facts€state€that,€upon€being€passed€by€the€tractor€trailer,€David€only€droveŠ H  Ša€few€feet€towards€the€shoulder€before€he€struck€Paula.€€If€David€was€going€50€MPH€when€theŠ 4 ų Šaccident€occurred,€it€is€likely€that€a€court€would€find€that€he€would€have€had€enough€time€to€preventŠ  !ä Šthe€injury€from€occurring€in€those€few€feet.Š  "Š ŠÓ XÓĢĢņ ņÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2Š Š$” Šó óÓ­ÓĢa.€€The€citation€is€an€out€of€court€statement€entered€for€the€truth€of€the€matter€asserted.€€As€such,€itŠ Ø&l! Šis€hearsay.€€Paula€is€obviously€trying€to€enter€it€into€evidence€as€an€admission.€€However,€the€citationŠ ”'X" Šand€subsequent€payment€of€the€citation€are€not€admissions.€€First,€a€citation€alone€is€not€an€admissionŠ €(D # Š„€it€is€a€document€issued€by€the€police€directing€one€to€pay.€€One's€decision€to€pay€the€citation€doesŠ l)0!$ Šnot€constitute€an€admission€of€anything.€€Rather,€it€is€a€decision€not€to€contest€the€ticket.€€While€partyŠ X*"% Šadmissions€need€not€be€against€interest,€they€also€need€to€actually€constitute€oral€or€written€out€ofŠ D+#& Šcourt€statements.€€David's€check€to€pay€the€fine€was€not€such€a€statement.Š 0,ō#' ŠĢb.€€The€court€should€deny€David's€counsels€motion€for€judgment,€because€violation€of€a€statute€inŠ .Ģ%) ŠMaryland€is€not€per€se€evidence€of€negligence;€rather,€it€is€one€factor€that€the€trier€of€fact€mustŠ < Šconsider€in€making€a€determination.€€Moreover,€violation€of€a€statute€is€never€conclusive€on€the€factŠ ( ģ Šof€whether€there€is€causation€and€damages€„€Paula€may've€been€negligent€in€walking€on€the€wrongŠ  Ų Šside€of€the€road,€but€it's€still€for€the€trier€of€fact€to€determine€whether€there€is€an€issue€as€to€causation.Š  Ä ŠĢ€€€€€€€First,€it€is€clear€that€this€is€a€case€where€Paula€is€arguing€that€David€is€negligent,€while€DavidŠ Ų œ Šis€arguing€that€she€is€contributorily€negligent,€and€thus€barred€from€recovery€under€Maryland€Law.€Š Ä ˆ ŠIn€making€her€claim,€Paula€is€obviously€resting€on€the€fact€that€David€swerved€off€the€road€and€hitŠ °t Šher€without€honking€or€making€an€attempt€to€avoid€her.€€Notably,€she€may€not€argue€that€Section€21„Š œ` Š504€conclusively€proves€that€David€had€a€duty€toward€her€and€that€he€breached€that€duty,€becauseŠ ˆL  ŠMaryland€only€allows€statutory€standards€of€care€to€be€some€evidence€of€duty€and€breach.€Š t8  ŠNonetheless,€she€could€make€a€prima€facie€case€against€David,€because€Paula€was€in€David's€zoneŠ `$  Šof€danger,€and€thus€he€owed€her€the€duty€of€care€of€an€ordinarily€prudent€person.€€It's€at€least€a€juryŠ L  Šissue€whether€he€breached€that€duty,€because€even€though€he€was€driving€slowly,€he€probablyŠ 8ü  Šshould've€seen€her.€€His€failure€to€see€Paula€was€at€least€a€factual€cause€of€the€injury.€David,Š $č  Šhowever,€will€argue€that€Paula's€own€negligence€is€a€proximate€cause€of€her€injury€€and€that,€as€such,Š Ō  Šhe€could€not€have€foreseen€her€negligence.€€He€may€point€to€the€statute€in€proving€this,€but€as€notedŠ üĄ Šabove,€he€will€not€able€to€conclusively€prove,€as€a€matter€of€law,€that€Paula€should€be€barred€fromŠ č¬ Šrecovery€because€she€did€not€abide€by€the€statute.€€This€is€because:Š Ō˜ ŠĢ€€€€€€€€€€€Statutory€standards€of€care€are€not€presumptive€evidence€of€negligence,€but€rather€a€questionŠ ¬p Šfor€the€trier€of€fact.Š ˜\ ŠĢ€€€€€€€€€Moreover,€even€a€failure€to€abide€by€the€statutory€standard€of€care€does€not€mean€that€PaulaŠ p4 Šwas€the€proximate€cause€of€the€resulting€accident.€€Paula€could,€for€instance,€argue€that€even€if€sheŠ \  Šwas€negligent,€David€had€the€last€clear€chance€to€avoid€the€injury.€€To€be€sure,€David€would€be€ableŠ H  Što€point€to€the€fact€that€he€was€being€passed€by€a€car€on€a€narrow€two€lane€road€and€his€drivingŠ 4 ų Šseveral€feet€off€the€road€should€mean€that€he€is€not€even€negligent€in€the€first€place.Š  !ä ŠĢ€€€€€€€€€€Nevertheless,€the€point€is€that€there€are€simply€too€many€factual€issues€to€resolve€this€questionŠ ų"¼ Šon€motion€for€judgment.€€The€trier€of€fact€should€decide€whether€Paula€was€negligent€and€whetherŠ ä#Ø Šit€was€a€proximate€cause€of€her€injuries.€€As€such,€motion€denied.Š Š$” ŠĢÓ  ÓŌ‡XʄXXXäŒŌĢĢĢĢŌ#†XäŒXXXʄY/#ŌŃÜ£ŃÓ  Óņ ņQUESTION€7Š @*"% Šó óÓ  ÓÓ 8ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌŠ ,+š"& ŠÓ XÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒų/#ŌÓ 8ÓÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌSam€and€Lisa,€husband€and€wife,€live€in€Howard€County,€Maryland.€Early€in€their€marriage,Š < Šthey€created€a€profitable€internet€advertising€business.€In€late€January,€2008,€Sam€and€Lisa€decidedŠ ( ģ Što€obtain€a€divorce.Š  Ų ŠÓ XÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒw0#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒć1#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌTo€determine€the€best€course€of€action,€Sam€and€Lisa€met€with€Seymour,€a€partner€andŠ ģ ° Šmember€of€the€Maryland€bar,€and€John,€a€member€of€the€Virginia€bar€recently€employed€as€anŠ Ų œ Šassociate€by€Seymour's€Howard€County€law€firm.€Seymour€told€Sam€and€Lisa€that€he€was€tied€upŠ Ä ˆ Šin€a€trial€and€that€John€would€handle€the€matter.€During€the€meeting,€John€stated€that€he€wouldŠ °t Šrepresent€them€in€the€preparation€of€the€initial€draft€of€the€property€settlement€agreementŠ œ` Š(š šAgreementšš)€if€they€would€pay€him€$500€per€hour.€Sam€and€Lisa€agreed,€and€they€delivered€toŠ ˆL  ŠJohn€a€payment€of€$5,000€to€be€applied€towards€the€services€that€John€would€provide.€John€gaveŠ t8  Šthem€a€receipt€for€the€payment€and€two€financial€statements€to€complete.€John€promptly€depositedŠ `$  Šthe€payment€into€the€firm€operating€account.Š L  ŠÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ@2#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢÓ XÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒj6#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌSeveral€weeks€later,€David€Counsel€called€John€to€let€him€know€that€he€was€recently€engagedŠ $č  Što€represent€Lisa,€and€to€recommend€that€John€remove€himself€from€the€case.€John€continued€to€actŠ Ō  Šas€Sam's€lawyer€with€agreement€from€Sam€that€Sam€would€pay€an€additional€fee€to€John€of€2%€ofŠ üĄ Šthe€value€of€the€assets€John€obtained€for€Sam€under€the€Agreement€that€are€in€excess€of€50%€of€theŠ č¬ Švalue€of€the€marital€assets.Š Ō˜ ŠÓ XÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒĒ6#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ#9#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌAfter€lengthy€negotiations,€John€sent€an€electronic€draft€of€the€Agreement€to€David,€fromŠ ¬p Šwhich€David€accessed€certain€data€through€his€computer€containing,€among€other€things,€the€dateŠ ˜\ Šand€content€of€prior€internal€versions€of€the€initial€draft€Agreement.€Together€with€Sam's€comments,Š „H Šthe€information€revealed€that€Sam€believed€that€the€value€of€the€internet€advertising€business€wasŠ p4 Š$2,000,000,€and€that€Sam€was€prepared€to€offer€Lisa€$1,000,000€for€her€interest€in€the€business.Š \  ŠHowever,€the€initial€draft€Agreement€sent€to€Lisa€contained€an€offer€for€only€$500,000.€DavidŠ H  Šconsulted€with€Lisa,€and€a€strategy€was€adopted€using€the€revealed€information€to€enhance€Lisa'sŠ 4 ų Šposition€in€the€division€of€the€marital€assets.Š  !ä ŠÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXX䌀9#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒN=#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌSubsequent€to€the€execution€of€the€voluntary€separation€agreement,€Lisa€told€Sam€that€DavidŠ ų"¼ Šwas€a€much€better€lawyer€than€John€because€David€knew€more€about€what€Sam€was€willing€to€giveŠ ä#Ø Šher€to€get€her€to€sign€the€Agreement.Š Š$” ŠÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXX䌫=#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ#?#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌSam€confronted€John€about€how€David€knew€about€Sam's€position.€In€addition,€SamŠ Ø&l! Šdemanded€from€John€the€return€of€his€legal€fees€of€$15,000,€consisting€of€$10,000€in€hourly€fees€andŠ ”'X" Š$5,000€as€the€additional€fee.€John€refused€to€return€the€fees.€Consequently,€Sam€filed€a€complaintŠ €(D # Šwith€the€Attorney€Grievance€Commission.Š l)0!$ ŠÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXX䌀?#ŌÓ  ÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢÓ ÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒlA#ŌÓ  Óņ ņYou€are€assistant€bar€counsel€investigating€the€complaint.€Please€identify€and€discussŠ D+#& Šany€grounds€for€recommending€disciplinary€proceedings€against€John€and€Seymour.Š < ŠŠ ( ģ ŠÓ ÓÓ  ÓREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Š  Ų Šó óÓ¾BÓÓ  ÓĢŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ‚’p’ŻŃ  ŃÓJÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ ÓŻ‚’p’5CŻŻ  Żņņņ ņJohnó óóóŻƒ’p5C›C݌Š ģ ° ЌÓJÓŃ  ŃŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ ÓŻ‚’p’ŻŃ  ŃÓJÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻŻ‚’p’NDŻŻ  ŻņņŻƒ’pND¦D݌̌ÓJÓŃ  ŃŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  Żņ ņConflict€of€Interestó óóóŠ €D ŠĢŻ‚!’’’ŻŃ  ŃÓ XÓÓÓÓ€ÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ€ÓŻ‚!’’’]EŻŻ  ŻA€lawyer€shall€refrain€from€representing€two€clients€who€are€adverse€to€each€other.€Ō#]]ddŌWhileŠ X Šsome€lawyers€think€that€this€it€is€possible€to€represent€a€husband€and€wife€in€a€divorce,€by€its€nature,€theŠ D  Špositions€are€directly€in€conflict€and€a€lawyer€cannot€represent€both.€Therefore,€when€Sam€and€LisaŠ 0ō  Šcame€to€Seymour€and€John,€they€should€have€advised€them€that€the€firm€would€only€be€able€to€representŠ ą  Šone€party€in€the€dispute€and€the€other€should€find€another€lawyer.€Even€here€they€have€may€have€been€aŠ Ģ  Šproblem€if€Sam€and€Lisa€provided€confidential€information€to€either€attorney€in€confidence,€since€bothŠ ōø  Šcould€then€be€considered€clients€and€further€representation€of€either€would€be€in€violation€of€the€rules.Żƒ!’’]EēE݌Рठ ЌÓÓŃ  ŃÓÓÓ XÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒC#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒJ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ‚’p’ŻŃ  ŃÓJÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ ÓŻ‚’p’sJŻŻ  Żņņņ ņUnlicensed€Practice€of€Lawó óŻƒ’psJŁJ݌Š ø| ЌÓJÓŃ  ŃŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻóóŻ‚’p’ŻŃ  ŃÓJÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻŻ‚’p’”KŻŻ  ŻŻƒ’p”KģK݌̌ÓJÓŃ  ŃŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ ÓŻ‚!’’’ŻŃ  ŃÓ XÓÓÓÓ€ÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ€ÓŻ‚!’’’{LŻŻ  ŻJohn€is€not€barred€in€Maryland,€he€is€only€barred€in€Virginia.€Maryland€prohibits€a€lawyer€fromŠ L Šholding€themselves€out€as€being€able€to€practice€law€in€the€state€of€Maryland€if€they€have€not€beenŠ 8ü Šadmitted€to€the€bar.€While€there€are€some€exceptions€to€this€rule,€none€would€apply€under€the€factsŠ $č Šrelated€here.Żƒ!’’{LM݌Š Ō ЌÓÓŃ  ŃÓÓÓ XÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒTJ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒNO#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ‚’p’ŻŃ  ŃÓJÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ ÓÓ@JÓŻ‚’p’°OŻŻ  Żņņņ ņExcessive€Feeó óŻƒ’p°O(P݌Š č¬ ЌÓ@ÓŃ  ŃŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻóóŻ‚’p’ŻŃ  ŃÓJÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻŻ‚’p’ÖPŻŻ  ŻŻƒ’pÖP.Q݌̌ÓJÓŃ  ŃŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ ÓŻ‚!’’’ŻŃ  ŃÓ XÓÓÓÓ€ÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻÓ€ÓŻ‚!’’’½QŻŻ  ŻFees€must€be€reasonably€set€for€the€representation€Ō#ff]]Ōof€the€client.€While€not€Ō#__ffŌconclusive,€theŠ r!6 Šcomplexity€in€the€area€of€law,€the€rate€charged€by€others€in€the€field€and€the€amount€of€work€foregoneŠ ^"" Šare€calculated€in€determining€whether€a€fee€is€reasonable.€Here€there€are€no€special€circumstances€thatŠ J# Šwould€indicate€that€John€had€to€forego€any€other€work€or€that€the€law€itself€was€that€complicated.€TheŠ 6$ś Šrate€of€$500€an€hour€is€excessively€high€should€be€adjusted€to€something€more€reasonable€for€theŠ "%ę Šrepresentation.Żƒ!’’½QGR݌Š &Ņ ЌÓÓŃ  ŃÓÓÓ XÓŌ€XäŒXXXäŒŌŻ  ŻĢņņņ ņContingency€Fee€in€a€Family€MatteróóŠ ę'Ŗ  Šó óÓ XÓÓ <ÓÓ šÓŌ#†XäŒXXX䌑O#ŌŠ Ņ(– ! ŠMaryland€has€a€strict€bar€to€contingency€fees€in€family€matters,€especially€divorce€andŠ ŗ)~!" Šchild€custody.€€The€2%€contingency€fee,€while€nominal,€contradicts€this€blanket€rule€and€will€beŠ ¦*j"# Šheld€as€a€violation€of€the€rules.Š < ŠÓ XÓÓ <ÓÓ šÓŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒmW#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌÓ ZÓņņņ ņConflict€with€Former€ClientóóŠ  Ų Šó óĢÓ <ZÓą D ąJohn€represented€both€Sam€and€Lisa,€in€direct€contradiction€of€the€rules,€but€when€LisaŠ ģ ° Šobtained€her€own€lawyer,€John€should€have€withdrawn.€Lisa€was€at€that€time,€a€former€client,€havingŠ Ų œ Šterminated€her€representation€by€John.€With€respect€to€former€clients,€a€lawyer€cannot€take€on€newŠ Ä ˆ Šrepresentation€that€adversely€affects€the€interests€of€the€former€client.€Here€John's€continuedŠ °t Šrepresentation€of€Sam€was€in€direct€contradiction€to€Lisa's€goals€and€therefore€should€be€barred.Š œ` ŠWhile€it€is€hypothetically€possible€that€John€could€have€received€a€waiver€from€the€conflict,€Lisa,Š ˆL  Šthrough€David,€had€already€expressed€her€dissent€to€his€continued€representation,€thus€making€aŠ t8  Šwaiver€of€that€conflict€impossible.Š `$  ŠÓ <ÓĢą  ąFurthermore,€John€was€likely€in€custody€of€Lisa's€confidential€information€which€could€nowŠ 8ü  Šbe€used€against€her€during€the€subsequent€negotiations.€Attorneys€must€protect€former€clientsŠ $č  Šconfidential€information€in€the€same€way€they€protect€current€clients.Š Ō  ŠŌ#†XäŒXXX䌰W#Ōņ ņĢņņViolation€of€disclosure€of€confidential€informationóóó óŠ č¬ ŠĢą  ąWhen€John€sent€the€electronic€draft€of€the€Agreement€to€David€he€failed€to€remove€theŠ Ą„ Šmetadata€which€included€significantly€important€information€regarding€Sam's€confidential€position€onŠ ¬p Šthe€internet€business.€While€likely€inadvertent€and€even€possibly€completely€unforeseen€by€John,€JohnŠ ˜\ Šstill€maintains€a€significantly€high€burden€in€protecting€confidential€information€of€his€client.€HeŠ „H Šshould€have€been€aware€of€the€technological€advances€that€make€this€sort€of€information€readilyŠ p4 Šaccessible.Š \  ŠŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒć_#Ōņ ņSeymourŠ 4 ų Šó óŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌĢŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒH`#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌņ ņņņConflict€of€Interestóóó 󀀩  "Š ŠĢą  ąSeymour€should€also€be€imputed€with€the€same€ņ ņconflict€of€interestó ó€that€John€had€as€above.€AsŠ č#¬ Šmembers€of€the€same€firm,€any€conflict€that€John€is€affected€by€is€ņ ņimputed€to€the€firm€and€allŠ Ų$œ Šmembers€of€the€firm.€ó óAdditionally,€Seymour€was€the€first€to€speak€with€Sam€and€Lisa€and€shouldŠ Č%Œ  Šhave€recognized€the€conflict€in€representing€both€parties€in€the€divorce€action.€He€should€haveŠ ø&|! Šexplained€to€them€that€the€firm€could€only€represent€one€party.Ō#†XäŒXXX䌋`#ŌŠ ¤'h" ŠŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌņņņ ņObligation€to€Superviseó óóóŠ (T # ŠĢą  ąSeymour€as€a€partner€in€the€firm€has€the€ņ ņobligation€to€supervise€ó óthe€attorneys€and€assistantsŠ h*,"% Šbelow€him€to€ensure€that€they€are€ņ ņnot€in€violation€of€the€rules.€ó óThis€includes€reviewing€theirŠ < Šcredentials€to€make€sure€they€can€practice€in€the€state€and€reviewing€billing€rates€to€ensureŠ , š Šreasonableness.€Here€it€seems€that€Seymour€simply€laid€the€case€at€the€feet€of€the€new€associate€andŠ  Ü Špermitted€him€to€run€wild€without€supervision.Š  Č ŠŌ–† Jš “ŌÓ <ÓÓ ąÓŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒĘ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌthreats€of€violenceŌ#†XäŒXXX䌙Ę#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖīĘ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ.€€A€hearing€was€scheduled€for€April€23,€2008.€€Al€and€Peg€appeared€onŠ č¬ Šthat€date€and€Peg€testified€as€follows:Š Śž ŠĢÓ –ÓÓ?+Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ģDœōL¤°œX?Óą Ü ąWhen€I€got€home€Hazel€was€very€upset€because€my€husband€told€her€that€she€was€fired.€Š ²v ŠMy€children€were€frightened€by€seeing€Hazel,€their€nanny,€so€distraught.€€I€was€very€angryŠ žb Šand€I€just€knew€he€would€do€something€crazyŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ4Ē#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ;Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖkÉ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€he€wouldnŌ#†XäŒXXX䌮É#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖśÉ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌt€even€leave€the€home€when€I€toldŠ ŠN Šhim€I€wanted€a€divorce!€€And,€on€top€of€that,€he€said€to€meŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ@Ź#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ€š šŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖóŹ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌIŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ:Ė#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖ}Ė#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌm€leaving€now€because€thisŠ |@ Šcould€get€ugly.€€Get€Hazel€out€of€the€house€before€I€get€back.Ō#†XäŒXXXäŒĆĖ#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖrĢ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€€My€husband€has€never€hit€meŠ n2 Šbefore,€but€he€was€acting€weird,€and€you€can€never€be€too€careful.Š `$ Šą Ü ąĢÓ –ÓÓB(Ü Ü4Œ ä <”ģDœōL¤ÜÜ‚,Œ ‰XBÓą  ąOn€the€basis€of€this€testimony,€the€District€Court€issued€a€protective€order€against€Al,Š 8!ü Šordered€that€Al€stay€out€of€the€marital€home€for€a€period€of€six€months,€that€Peg€has€permanentŠ $"č Šcustody€of€the€two€children,€and€that€Al€pay€an€amount€of€$3,000€monthly€in€support€andŠ #Ō Šfamily€maintenance.€€Š ü#Ą ŠĢņ ņą  ąa.€€Al€retains€you,€a€Maryland€attorney,€and€asks€whether€he€may€appeal€the€courtŠ Ō%˜  Šorder€and/or€reduce€the€amount€required€in€the€Child€Support€Guidelines€by€deductingŠ Ą&„! Šfrom€his€income€the€monies€he€pays€monthly€to€his€personal€pension€plan€and€hisŠ ¬'p" Šbusiness€expenses,€which€were€not€brought€to€the€attention€of€the€lower€court.€€WhatŠ ˜(\ # Šadvice€would€you€give?ó óŠ „)H!$ ŠĢŃ  Ńą  ąThe€next€day€Peg€filed€for€an€absolute€divorce€in€the€appropriate€Circuit€Court,Š \+ #& Šconfident€of€success€since€the€District€Court€granted€a€protective€order€against€Al.Š H, $' ŠŃ  Ńņ ņą  ąb.€€Al€asks€you€if€there€any€way€to€challenge€the€divorce€proceedings€filed€by€Peg.ó ó€Š < Šņ ņĢÓ  ÓŌ& œ ŌREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1Š  Ü Šó óÓ  ÓĢą  ą(a)ą ` ąI€would€advise€Al€that€the€protective€order€is€not€a€final€judgment€because€itŠ š “ Šmay€be€modified€and€that€it€ordinarily€would€not€be€immediately€appealable;€however,€thereŠ Ü   ŠareŌ'œ ˜ŅŌ€exceptions€when€the€order€is€for€child€custody€and€support,€and€alimony.€€I€would€adviseŠ Č Œ ŠAl€to€file€written€exceptions€in€the€appeal€from€the€District€Court€to€the€Circuit€Court€and€alsoŠ “x Što€file€a€claim€for€divorce€in€the€Family€Division€of€the€Circuit€Court€as€that€is€the€appropriateŠ  d Šcourt€to€hear€these€matters.Š ŒP  ŠŃ  ŃĢŃ  Ńą  ąIn€his€appeal€Al€should€object€to€the€length€of€the€protective€order€of€six€months.€Š d(  ŠGenerally,€a€protective€order€is€awarded€for€thirty€days€and€may€be€subject€to€renewal.€€SixŠ P  Šmonths€is€quite€lengthy€especially€considering€the€fact€that€Al€did€not€physically€injure€theŠ <  Šchildren€or€Peg.€€Furthermore,€Ō#†XäŒXXX䌸Ģ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌthereššs€conflicting€evidence€about€whether€he€really€was€asŠ (ģ  Šinfuriated€or€as€crazy€as€Peg€tried€to€portray.Š Ų  ŠĢą  ąAlso,€the€District€Court€did€not€have€the€authority€to€awardŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ"×#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ€?Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖDŲ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌpermanent€custodyŌ#†XäŒXXX䌈Ų#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ?Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖŪŲ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€orŠ ģ° Špermanent€support€and€maintenance.€€The€Family€Division€of€the€Circuit€Court€has€theРޢ Šjurisdiction€for€those€matters€and€would€be€the€appropriate€court€to€hear€the€merits.€€TheŠ ŹŽ Šdistrict€court€may€have€been€able€to€award€temporary€custody€and€payment€of€the€mortgage;Š ¶z Šhowever,€without€assessing€the€following€factors,€a€proper€determination€could€not€be€made.€Š ¢f ŠTo€determine€custody€the€court€must€assess€the€best€interest€of€the€child€based€on€the€Ō#†XäŒXXXäŒŁ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌchildššsŠ ŽR Šdesire,€whether€there€was€actual€violence,€the€reason€for€the€separation,€whether€the€parentsŠ z> Šcould€get€along€in€the€future,€and€whether€the€parents€would€live€in€close€proximity.€€TheŠ f* Štestimony€by€Peg€touches€on€a€few€of€these€aspects€but€not€nearly€enough€to€award€permanentŠ R Šcustody.Š >  ŠĢą  ąAlso,€in€looking€at€the€award€of€$3,000€monthly€in€support€and€family€maintenance€thatŠ "Ś Štoo€seems€to€be€an€arbitrary€amount.€€Rather,€to€consider€child€support€the€court€should€look€atŠ #Ę Šthe€guidelines.€€There€is€no€information€anywhere€in€the€facts€about€the€income€of€the€spousesŠ ī#² Šother€than€the€fact€that€Al€is€a€neurosurgeon€and€Peg€is€a€financial€planner.€€It€is€likely€that€theyŠ Ś$ž Šare€making€a€combined€income€of€more€than€$10,000€however€financial€statements€should€beŠ Ę%Š  Šsupplied.€€The€Court€would€then€have€to€consider€the€standard€of€living€of€the€children€toŠ ²&v! Šdetermine€support.€€Money€paid€to€Ō#†XäŒXXX䌆Ū#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌAlššs€pension€plan€and€his€business€expenses€would€beŠ ž'b" Šconsidered€since€that€is€not€liquid€money€that€he€has€to€pay€towards€the€support.€€However,€theŠ Š(N # Špension€would€be€considered€marital€property€since€acquired€and€sustained€during€theŠ v):!$ Šmarriage.€€Also,€the€business€itself€would€be€marital€practice€and€Peg€would€be€entitled€to€one„Š b*&"% Šhalf€of€it€should€the€couple€divorce.€€As€far€as€alimony€is€concerned,€the€court€must€considerŠ N+#& Šwhether€to€award€alimony€pendent€elite,€rehabilitative,€or€permanent.€€The€$3,000€may€haveŠ :,ž#' ŠŃ'ær%Ńā 'āŃ  Ńā 'āŃ  Ńbeen€alimony€pendente€lite,€however,€itŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ-ą#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖYć#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€not€clear€whether€this€was€enough€or€too€much€toŠ < Šsustain€Peg€and€the€children.€€Also,€because€Peg€is€pretty€sufficient€herself€as€a€financialŠ . ņ Šplanner€and€the€couple€has€a€nanny,€those€factors€need€to€be€considered€in€determiningŠ  Ž Šalimony.€€Peg€may€be€entitled€to€rehabilitative€alimony,€but€even€that€is€not€definite€sinceŠ  Ź ŠsheŌ#†XäŒXXX䌟ć#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖxå#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€been€able€to€maintain€work.€€Without€financial€statements,€assessing€all€of€the€assetsŠ ņ ¶ Šowned€by€the€couple,€and€considering€the€best€interest€of€the€child,€they€were€premature€andŠ ä Ø Šnot€within€the€district€courtššs€discretion.Š Š ” ŠĢą  ą(b)ą ` ąAl€may€challenge€the€divorce€proceedings€filed€by€Peg.€€Since€Peg€has€filed€forŠ Øl Šabsolute€divorce,€she€will€either€be€asserting€no„fault€or€fault€grounds.€€It€is€unlikely€that€she€isŠ ”X  Šseeking€a€divorce€based€on€no„fault,€but€if€she€and€Al€were€opposed€to€the€divorce,€he€wouldŠ €D  Šassert€his€opposition€in€this€response.€€For€a€no„fault€divorce€the€court€requires€the€parties€toŠ l0  Šlive€separate€and€apart.€€If€it€were€a€voluntary€divorce,€the€couple€would€only€have€to€liveŠ X  Šseparate€and€apart€for€one€year.€€However,€if€Al€wants€to€challenge€it€hoping€that€the€marriageŠ D  Šis€reconcilable,€then€he€should€assert€that€and€the€court€would€require€that€the€couple€liveŠ 0ō  Šseparate€and€apart€for€two€years.Š ą  ŠĢŃ  Ńą  ąBased€on€the€protective€order€though€and€PegŌ#†XäŒXXX䌾å#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖÓź#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€antics€in€court,€it€is€likely€that€she€willŠ ōø Šbe€bringing€an€action€based€on€fault€grounds.€€Fault€grounds€that€she€may€be€asserting€includeŠ ęŖ Šcruelty,€or€possibly€excessively€vicious€behavior.€€As€AlŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒė#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖIģ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€attorney,€I€need€to€find€out€exactlyŠ Ņ– Šwhat€has€transpired€between€the€couple€and€perhaps€speak€to€Hazel€since€she€lived€in€theŠ Äˆ Šhouse€and€had€knowledge€of€their€relationship.€€AlŌ#†XäŒXXX䌏ģ#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖ«ķ#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€conduct€as€described€by€Peg€would€notŠ °t Šrise€to€the€level€of€excessively€vicious€behavior€since€there€was€no€abuse;€however,€Peg€mayŠ ¢f Šhave€a€claim€for€cruelty€if€Al€truly€berated€Peg€in€front€of€Hazel,€made€the€children€frightened,Š ŽR Šand€otherwise€treated€Peg€poorly.€€The€fact€that€Al€fired€Hazel€just€to€get€at€Peg€is€indication€ofŠ z> Šhis€abusive€behavior.Š f* ŠĢą  ąAl€may€be€able€to€assert€the€defense€of€recrimination€such€that€Peg€contributed€to€theŠ >! Šfault€as€well.€€Peg€did€ask€Al€to€leave€the€marital€home€but€the€first€time€she€did€not€indicateŠ *"ī Šwhy.€€I€should€investigate€as€to€what€Peg€may€have€been€doing€and€see€what€the€root€of€theŠ #Ś Šproblem€is€to€ensure€the€best€defense€for€my€client.Š $Ę ŠÓ  ÓĢÓ  Óą@%%ģąņ ņREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€2ó óˆŠ Ś%ž  ŠĢą  ąAppealing€the€court€order:€€Al€may€appeal€the€court€order.€€Family€law€actions€areŠ ²'v" Šappealable,€as€are€just€about€every€type€of€civil€action.€€He€has€good€grounds€for€an€appeal€too,Š ž(b # Šand€should€file€a€statement€of€exceptions€to€the€District€CourtŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒńķ#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖ$ó#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€findings€of€fact€as€well€asŠ Š)N!$ Šappealing€several€aspects€of€its€orders€as€discussed€below.Š |*@"% ŠĢą  ąJurisdiction€of€the€Court:€€Generally,€the€Circuit€Court€has€jurisdiction€of€actions€forŠ T,$' Šdivorce.€€While€the€District€Court€may€have€jurisdiction€to€enter€protective€orders,€ordersŠ < Šsetting€alimony€(whether€pendente€lite€or€post„divorce),€orders€affective€custody€(whetherŠ ( ģ Štemporary€or€permanent),€and€orders€awarding€disposition€of€marital€property€(such€as€aŠ  Ų Šmarital€home)€can€only€be€entered€by€the€circuit€court€as€part€of€a€limited€divorce€(not€withŠ  Ä Šrespect€to€final€property€settlement)€or€absolute€divorce€action.€€Thus,€the€district€courtŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒjó#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖĄö#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌššsŠ ģ ° Šaward€of€alimony,€its€determination€of€custody,€and€its€order€interfering€with€use€of€the€maritalŠ Ž ¢ Šhome€appear€to€be€beyond€its€jurisdiction,€and€will€likely€be€summarily€vacated€on€appeal€toŠ Ź Ž Šthe€circuit€court€in€the€county€in€which€the€district€court€sits.Š ¶z ŠĢą  ąComputation€of€Support:€€Even€if€the€district€courtššs€order€was€to€be€reinstated€by€aŠ ŽR  Šcourt€with€jurisdiction,€that€court€would€have€to€correctly€compute€the€partiesŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ÷#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ?Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖhł#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€incomes€beforeŠ z>  Šawarding€alimony/child€support.€€ItŌ#†XäŒXXX䌫ł#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ?Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖ4ś#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌššs€not€clear€on€these€facts€whether€theŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒwś#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ€?Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖćś#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌsupport€andŠ l0  Šfamily€maintenanceŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ'ū#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ?Ō#†XäŒX XXG֛ū#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€is€supposed€to€be€alimony,€child€support,€or€both.€€If€both,€the€alimonyŠ ^"  Šshould€be€awarded€separately,€on€the€record,€before€the€child€support,€because€the€alimony€isŠ P  Šincome€to€the€recipient€and€will€be€included€in€her€income€for€purposes€of€determining€theŠ <  Šshare€of€child€support€each€party€will€pay.€€Furthermore,€each€partyŌ#†XäŒXXX䌮ū#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ?Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖ£ż#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌššs€income€should€beŠ (ģ  Šcalculated€from€net€income,€not€gross€business€receipts.€€Al€should€be€able€to€successfullyŠ Ž Šchallenge€the€courtŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒęż#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖÖž#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€refusing€to€consider€his€business€expenses€insofar€as€they€are€not€part€ofŠ Ź Šhis€net€personal€income.€€His€personal€pension€plan€is€less€likely€to€escape€being€included€inŠ ų¼ Šhis€incomeŌ#†XäŒXXX䌒#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ€?Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖ<#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€at€least,€pensions€are€marital€property€that€can€be€taken€into€account€in€awardingŠ äØ Šdistribution€of€marital€property,€so€Al€cannot€shelter€money€by€diverting€it€into€pension€funds.Š Öš ŠĢą  ąValidity€of€the€Protective€Order:€€Peg€does€not€appear€to€have€been€granted€a€protectiveŠ ®r Šorder€properly€on€these€facts,€and€an€appellate€court€will€likely€vacate€the€order.€€A€long„termŠ š^ Šprotective€order€should€only€be€issued€to€protect€against€a€serious€threat€of€violence.€€PegŠ †J Špresented€no€facts€that€indicated€that€Al€was€a€threat€of€physical€violence;€on€the€contrary,€sheŠ r6 Šstated€that€Al€had€never€hit€her€before,€and€was€unable€to€articulate€a€specific€reason€to€fearŠ ^ " Šthat€he€would€hit€her€in€the€future.€€The€law€does€not€allow€for€protective€orders€merelyŠ J! Šbecause€one€side€in€a€family€dispute€feels€uncomfortable,€or€acts€in€unprecedented€waysŌ#†XäŒXXX䌀#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ,Ō#†XäŒX XXGÖ®#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€thereŠ 6"ś Šmust€be€a€specific€threat€of€violence€or€some€similar€cognizable€ground€for€the€law€to€interfereŠ (#ģ Što€prevent€serious€harm.€€Allegations€of€emotional€distress€in€a€12€and€10€year€old€over€aŠ $Ų Šfamily€argument,€and€unfounded€fears,€should€not€give€rise€to€a€protective€order.Š %Ä ŠĢGrounds€for€Absolute€DivorceŠ Ų&œ! ŠŃ  ŃĢŃ  Ńą  ąAbsolute€divorce€is€available€on€six€fault„based€grounds€and€two€no„fault€basedŠ °(t # Šgrounds.€€Al€is€challenging€the€divorce,€so€neither€no„fault€ground€is€available€(in€addition,Š œ)`!$ Šinsufficient€time€has€passed€for€either€to€be€available,€assuming€the€problem€takes€place€onŠ ˆ*L"% ŠJuly€29,€2008€€(well€under€1€and€2€years€into€the€separation).€€Fault„based€grounds€includeŠ t+8#& Šadultery,€incarceration€(under€certain€conditions),€mental€illness€(under€certain€conditions),Š `,$$' ŠŃ#?c'Ńā #āŃĄ°Ńā #āŃ  Ńcruelty€of€treatment,€excessively€vicious€conduct,€and€desertion.€€The€first€three€of€these€areŠ < Šnot€implicated€on€these€facts,€no€adultery,€incarceration,€or€institutionalization€is€mentioned.Š ( ģ ŠĢą  ąAlŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒń#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖW #ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌsŌ#†XäŒXXX䌝 #ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ€š šŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖą #ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌbadŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ' #ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖl #ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€behavior€that€can€be€cited€in€PegŌ#†XäŒXXX䌲 #ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖ #ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€divorce€action€includes:€€refusing€toŠ  Ä Šleave€the€marital€home,€firing€the€live„in€child€care€assistant,€leaving€when€Pet€demanded€heŠ ņ ¶ Šleave€after€firing€Hazel,€and€being€the€subject€of€an€erroneously€given€protective€order€basedŠ Ž ¢ Šon€PegŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ\ #ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖÅ #ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€insufficient€testimony€that€he€wasŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒ #ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ€š šŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖq#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌacting€weirdšš.Š Ź Ž ŠĢą  ąCruelty€of€treatment€is€conduct€reasonably€calculated€to€impair€the€health€or€destroy€theŠ Øl Šhappiness€of€the€other€spouse.€€A€single€act€of€violence€is€not€always€sufficient€to€give€rise€toŠ ”X  Šthis€ground;€it€seems€unlikely€that€any€of€Alššs€actions€enumerated€above€rise€to€the€level€ofŠ €D  Šcruelty€of€treatment.€€It€is€not€cruelty€of€treatment€to€not€want€a€divorce,€to€refuse€to€leave€theŠ l0  Šmarital€home€when€the€other€spouse€requests,€or€to€fire€a€nanny,€even€without€consulting€theŠ X  Šother€spouse.€€Peg€may€be€able€to€argue€that€Al€fired€Hazel€toŌ#†XäŒXXX䌸#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌ€š šŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖ­#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌdevastateŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒō#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖ?#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌ€her€(the€facts€doŠ D  Šsay€that€Al€knew€that€Peg€would€be€devastated€by€this).€€The€facts€donŌ#†XäŒXXX䌅#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖ4#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌt€indicate€that€he€hadŠ 6ś  Šthe€intent€to€bring€about€this€result,€though€they€imply€that€his€action€was€taken€in€retaliationŠ (ģ  Šfor€her€request€for€divorce.€€It€is€conceivable€that€a€court€could€find€that,€if€Al€did€this€actionŠ Ų Šsolely€to€devastate€Pet,€that€it€would€conclude€it€was€conduct€reasonably€calculated€to€destroyŠ Ä ŠPegŌ#†XäŒXXXäŒz#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖL#ŌŌ‡XäŒXXXäŒŌs€happiness€sufficient€to€rise€to€the€level€of€cruelty€of€treatment;€however,€it€seems€moreŠ ģ° Šlikely€that€a€court€would€not€so€find.Рޢ ŠĢą  ąExcessively€vicious€conduct:€€EVC€overlaps€considerably€with€CT,€and€is€likely€notŠ ¶z Šavailable€if€CT€is€not.€€Cursing€and€vile€epithets€do€not€make€EVC,€so€it€seems,€unlikely€thatŠ ¢f Šan€argument€about€divorce€or€about€the€nanny€would€either.Š ŽR ŠŃ  ŃĢą  ąDesertion:€€Desertion€would€require€a€showing€that€a€spouse€left€the€marital€homeŠ f* Šwithout€reasonable€excuse€with€intent€to€end€the€marriage.€€Constructive€desertion€could€beŠ R  Šshown€if€one€spouse€did€not€leave,€but€made€it€impossible€for€the€other€spouse€to€remain€andŠ >! Šmaintain€health,€happiness,€or€self„respect.€€Peg€can€argue€that€Al€has€actually€deserted€herŠ *"ī Š(though,€as€he€does€not€want€a€divorce,€his€action€in€leaving€does€not€seem€to€amount€to€this).€Š #Ś ŠShe€can€also€argue€that€firing€Hazel€made€it€impossible€for€her€to€remain€in€a€manner€that€gaveŠ $Ę Šrise€to€constructive€desertion.€€Regardless,€neither€option€will€help€Peg€because€an€absoluteŠ ī$² Šdivorce€on€grounds€of€desertion€is€only€available€if€the€desertion€has€lasted€more€than€12Š Ś%ž  Šmonths,€which€it€has€not€on€these€facts.Š Ę&Š! ŠĢŃ  Ńą  ąThe€only€grounds€on€which€Peg€could€conceivably€get€an€absolute€divorce€on€theseŠ ž(b # Šfacts€would€be€the€court€finding€cruelty€of€treatment.€€This€is€unlikely,€as€discussed€above,€andŠ Š)N!$ Šthus€Al€will€probably€be€able€to€successfully€oppose€Pegššs€divorce€action.€€If€the€parties€donŌ#†XäŒXXX䌒#ŌŌ‡XGÖ XXXäŒŌššŌ#†XäŒX XXGÖć#ŌtŠ v*:"% Ševentually€reconcile,€though,€Peg€will€be€able€to€pursue€a€limited€divorce€and€eventually€anŠ h+,#& Šabsolute€divorce,€if€for€no€other€reason€that€the€parties€may€divorce€after€living€apart€for€twoŠ T,$' Šyears€if€the€marriage€is€irretrievably€Ō_Ōbroken.Š @-%( Їņ ņÓ  ÓQUESTION€10Š < Šó óĢÓ  ÓÓ °XÜÜ‹XÓą  ąOn€May€1,€2008,€Husband€and€Wife€sign€a€contract€to€purchase€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō,€a€25€acre€farmŠ  Ų Šoutside€Havre€de€Grace,€Harford€County,€Maryland.€The€contract€requires€that€Husband€and€WifeŠ  Ä Šconduct€a€title€search,€and€notify€the€Sellers,€Ō_ŌA,BŌ_Ō,€and€C,€of€any€defects€in€the€title.€Settlement€isŠ ģ ° Šscheduled€to€occur€on€June€30,€2008.Š Ų œ ŠĢą  ąHusband€and€Wife€ask€a€member€of€the€Maryland€Bar€to€represent€them€and€to€conduct€aŠ °t Štitle€search€for€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō.€The€title€search€reveals€the€following:Š œ` Š€€€€€Š ˆL  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ąa.ą ` ąA€judgment€was€recorded€in€Harford€County€Circuit€Court€against€theŠ t8  Šcurrent€owners€of€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō,€A,€B,€and€C,€on€May€13,€2008;Š`$ ` Š ` Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ąą ° ąŠ ` Š ` Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ąb.ą ` ąA€deed€of€trust€securing€a€$150,000€loan€signed€by€A,€B€and€C€wasŠ 8ü  Šrecorded€against€the€property€on€March€1,€1993;Š$č ` Š ` Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ąą ° ąŠ ` Š ` Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ąc.ą ` ąA€pending€lawsuit€in€the€Circuit€Court€for€Harford€County€against€C€forŠ üĄ Šfailure€to€pay€for€a€tractor€for€use€on€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō;€andŠč¬` Š ` Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ąą ° ąŠ ` Š ` Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ąd.ą ` ąThe€plat€of€survey€provided€to€Husband€and€Wife€is€consistent€with€whatŠ Ą„ Šthey€saw€when€they€visited€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō€prior€to€signing€the€contract.€TheŠ ¬p Šsurvey€shows:Š˜\` Š ` Š  Šßk€Z 7'#`<ĒśĶōC `ĄWMEū ōCōC°¾ŠŁkßā :(#:(#°(#°(#āĢÓ  Ӏ€€€€Š p4 Š€ą8 ’ ąą0@’ Š Š ąą0@’ ` Š ` Š ąą : ąŠ\ ’ Š ’ Š  ŠÓ  ÓĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢŠ-ą$(:(#:(# Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ą1.ą ` ąAn€unpaved€driveway€running€the€length€of€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō€parallel€to€the€westŠ < Šboundary€line€leading€to€a€free€standing€garage€on€Ō_ŌWhiteacreŌ_Ō,€which€isŠ ( ģ Šnorth€and€adjacent€to€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō;Š Ų` Š ` Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą0ø ` Š ` Š ąą ` ąŠ ø Š ø Š  Šą8  ąą0` Š Š ąą  ą2.ą ` ąŌ_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō's€shed,€which€was€erected€by€A,€B€and€C€when€they€purchasedŠ ģ ° ŠŌ_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō€in€February€1986,€encroaches€two€feet€over€the€property€line€ontoŠ Ų œ ŠŌ_ŌWhiteacreŌ_Ō;€andŠÄ ˆ` Š ` Š  ŠĢą0  ąą0` (#(#ąą  ą3.ą ` ąA€corn€crop€planted€by€Tenant€and€a€house€occupied€by€Tenant€on€the€land€leasedŠ œ` Šby€Tenant€on€the€rear€ten€acres€of€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō.ŠˆL ` (#` (# ŠĢņ ņą  ąWhat€is€the€possible€effect€of€each€of€the€above€items€on€the€title€to€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō?ó óŠ `$  ŠĢĢņ ņÓ  ÓŌ& ° ŌREPRESENTATIVE€ANSWER€1ó óŠ $č  ŠÓ3-ÓĢ1.€€€ą  ąGenerally,€when€two€parties€enter€into€a€contract€for€the€sale€of€land,€the€seller€warrantsŠ üĄ Šup€until€the€date€of€closing€that€they€have€a€marketable€title.€€If€any€encumbrances€on€the€propertyŌ'°$?-ŌŠ č¬ Šresult€in€the€seller€not€having€a€marketable€title,€the€defendant€can€back€away€from€the€contractŠ Ō˜ Šwithout€breach.€€Therefore,€if€any€of€the€items€listed€below€would€cause€the€title€to€becomeŠ Ą„ Šunmarketable,€the€buyer€could€choose€not€to€go€through€with€the€transaction€prior€to€closing.Š ¬p ŠĢPart€(a)ą0 ` ąŠ„H` (#` (# Šą  ąĢ€ą  ąUnder€the€Doctrine€of€Equitable€Conversion,€what€is€considered€equitable€to€be€done€isŠ \  Šdone.€With€respect€to€land€contracts€in€Maryland,€the€doctrine€provides€that€once€two€parties€enterŠ H  Šinto€a€contract€to€buy€and€sell€land,€the€equitable€title€to€the€land€passes€to€the€buyer€and€theŠ 4 ų Šequitable€title€to€the€purchase€money€passes€to€the€seller,€despite€the€fact€that€they€do€not€haveŠ  !ä Šproper€title€until€closing.€Here,€the€contract€was€entered€into€on€May€1,€2008,€at€which€pointŠ  "Š ŠHusband€and€Wife€became€equitable€owners€of€the€land.€The€judgment€against€the€sellers€wasŠ ų"¼ Šentered€on€May€13,€2008,€which€would€entitle€the€plaintiff€in€that€case€to€a€judicial€lien€on€theŠ ä#Ø Šproperty€of€A,€B,€and€C€in€Maryland.€However,€since€Husband€and€Wife€were€equitable€ownersŠ Š$” Šof€the€land€prior€to€May€13,€2008,€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō€would€not€be€subject€to€the€judicial€lien€(althoughŠ ¼%€  Šthe€purchase€money,€now€the€equitable€property€of€A,€B,€and€C,€would€be€subject€to€a€judicialŠ Ø&l! Šlien).€Therefore€the€judgment€does€not€have€an€adverse€effect€on€the€title.€However,€Husband€andŠ ”'X" ŠWife€should€check€if€the€plaintiff€in€the€case€attached€the€property€prior€to€May€1,€and€if€so,€it€mayŠ €(D # Šbe€subject€to€the€judicial€lien.Š l)0!$ ŠĢPart€(b)Š D+#& ŠĢ€€ą  ąA€deed€of€trust€is€analogous€to€a€mortgage,€though€held€by€a€trustee€and€not€a€mortgagee,Š -ą$( Šand€is€treated€as€such€under€Maryland€law.€€If€a€land€is€subject€to€a€deed€of€trust,€the€encumbranceŠ < Šstays€with€the€land€notwithstanding€the€fact€that€there€will€be€a€new€owner€of€the€land.€€SellersŠ ( ģ Šwho€sell€land€encumbered€by€a€mortgage€are€unable€to€convey€marketable€title.€€However,€thisŠ  Ų Šdoes€not€necessarily€violate€the€sellersšš€warranty€to€provide€marketable€title.€€There€is€anŠ  Ä Šimplication€that€the€money€received€at€closing€will€be€used€to€cover€any€existing€mortgages€on€theŠ ģ ° Šland.€€If€the€seller€receives€enough€money€from€the€sale€of€the€land€to€pay€off€the€deed€of€trustŠ Ų œ Š(including€possible€contribution€from€other€assets),€then€they€can€convey€marketable€title.Š Ä ˆ ŠĢPart€(c)Š œ` ŠĢą  ąThe€pending€lawsuit€in€circuit€court€for€failure€to€pay€for€a€tractor€could€potentially€beŠ t8  Šlevied€against€any€property€interest€C€has€in€the€state€of€Maryland.€€However,€since€C€no€longerŠ `$  Šhas€a€property€interest€in€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō€as€described€in€Part€(a),€the€plaintiff€in€that€lawsuit€wouldnšštŠ L  Šbe€able€to€levy€on€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō.€€If€the€circumstances€were€such€that€the€plaintiff€could€levy€upon€CššsŠ 8ü  Šinterest€in€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō,€it€could€only€levy€upon€Cššs€interest€only.Š $č  ŠĢPart€(d)Š üĄ Šą  ąĢą  ąSubpart€(1)Š Ō˜ ŠĢą  ąThe€unpaved€driveway€could€be€evidence€of€an€easement€by€necessity,€which€can€be€a€validŠ ¬p Šimplied€easement€even€if€not€specifically€mentioned€turned€up€in€the€title€search.€€Easements€byŠ ˜\ Šnecessity€are€easements€granted€against€a€Ō_ŌservientŌ_Ō€tenement€when€(1)€the€dominant€and€Ō_ŌservientŌ_ŌŠ „H Štenements€were€granted€in€the€same€conveyance€and€(2)€there€is€no€means€of€ingress€and€egressŠ p4 Što€the€dominant€tenement€other€than€through€the€land€of€the€Ō_ŌservientŌ_Ō€tenement.€€Since€thatŠ \  Šdriveway€leads€to€a€garage€on€Ō_ŌWhiteacreŌ_Ō,€it€seems€that€there€is€no€means€of€ingress€or€egress€otherŠ H  Šthan€over€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō.€€If€that€is€the€case,€and€there€is€no€other€way€to€enter€Ō_ŌWhiteacreŌ_Ō,€the€title€mayŠ 4 ų Šbe€subject€to€that€easement.Š  !ä ŠĢą  ąSubpart€(2)Š ų"¼ ŠĢą  ąThe€shed€encroaching€upon€Ō_ŌWhiteacreŌ_Ō€is€potentially€subject€to€an€action€of€trespass€againstŠ Š$” ŠŌ_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō.€€It€doesnššt€effect€title€to€the€land,€however,€but€Husband€and€Wife€may€be€liable€forŠ ¼%€  Šdamages€in€trespass.€€If€the€shed€has€been€on€the€land€for€over€20€years,€however,€and€was€doneŠ Ø&l! Šwithout€the€consent€of€Ō_ŌWhiteacreŌ_Ō,€the€owners€of€Ō_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō€might€have€acquired€the€land€on€whichŠ ”'X" Šthe€shed€sits€by€adverse€possession.€€In€Maryland,€adverse€possession€does€create€Š €(D # Šmarketable€title,€so€if€the€shed€was€acquired€by€adverse€possession,€it€would€be€part€of€the€title€toŠ l)0!$ ŠŌ_ŌBlackacreŌ_Ō.Š X*"% ŠĢą  ąSubpart€(3)Š 0,ō#' ŠŠ -ą$( ŠŌ_Ōą  ąThe€house€of€tenant€are€subject€to€a€leasehold€interest,€which€doesnššt€affect€the€title€toŠ < ŠBlackacre.€€At€the€end€of€the€lease,€the€title€to€Blackacre€will€contain€the€house€and€all€fixturesŠ ( ģ Štherein,€including€ones€installed€by€tenant€that€canššt€be€removed€without€substantial€damage€toŠ  Ų Šthe€property.€€The€Tenant€generally€retains€title€to€the€crops€on€the€land€if€he€planted€them.€Š  Ä ŠHowever,€if€the€crops€remain€of€the€land€at€the€end€of€the€lease,€the€title€to€the€crops€would€revertŠ ģ ° Što€the€owners€of€Blackacre,€and€they€would€have€title€to€them.Š Ų œ ŠĢņ ņą@¬¬ģąRepresentative€Answeró ó€ņ ņ2ó óˆŠ °t ŠĢA)€€ą  ąThe€judgment€could€make€title€unmarketable€if€it€is€attached€to€the€property€before€titleŠ ŒP  Špasses€at€closing€on€June€30,€2008.€€However,€the€judgment€has€not€yet€attached€to€the€property.€Š x<  ŠMoreover,€the€doctrine€of€equitable€conversion€entitles€husband€and€wife€to€title€of€the€property.€Š d(  ŠTherefore,€because€the€judgment€was€recorded€after€husband€and€wife€signed€the€contract€toŠ P  Špurchase€Blackacre,€a€court€will€likely€estop€the€judgment€creditors€from€attaching€Blackacre€toŠ <  Šsatisfy€the€judgment€against€A,€B,€and€C.Š (ģ  ŠĢB)€€ą  ąThe€deed€of€trust€recorded€against€Blackacre€might€also€render€title€unmarketable.€Š Ä ŠMaryland€follows€the€Title€Theory€of€Mortgages.€€However,€Husband€and€Wife€must€give€A,€B,Š ģ° Šand€C€an€opportunity€to€pay€off€the€mortgage€from€the€proceeds€of€the€sale€of€Blackacre,€thusŠ Ųœ Šclearing€any€title€defect€caused€by€said€mortgage.€€If€A,€B€and€C€assure€that€the€loan€will€beŠ Äˆ Šsatisfied€upon€sale,€title€will€not€be€deemed€unmarketable€based€on€that€loan.Š °t ŠĢC)€€ą  ąThe€pending€lawsuit€against€C€will€not€likely€have€any€effect€on€the€marketability€of€title.€Š ˆL ŠBecause€there€is€not€yet€a€judgment,€there€is€nothing€to€attach,€and€thus€no€problem.€€If€theŠ t8 Šplaintiff€attempts€to€obtain€attachment€before€judgment,€a€court€will€likely€prevent€attachment€toŠ `$ ŠBlackacre€based€on€equitable€conversion€as€discussed€previously.Š L ŠĢD)€€ą  ą1.€€The€unpaved€driveway€appears€to€be€an€easement€which€would€run€with€the€land,€giveŠ $!č Šthat€Husband€and€Wife€are€on€notice€of€its€existence.€€This€easement€is€an€encumbrance€that€couldŠ "Ō Šrender€title€unmarketable.€€If€Husband€and€Wife€take€title€to€Blackacre,€they€will€take€subject€toŠ ü"Ą Šthe€easement.Š č#¬ ŠĢ2.€€ą  ąThe€two€feet€of€Whiteacre€that€has€been€occupied€by€the€shed€has€been€obtained€throughŠ Ą%„  Šadverse€possession.€€The€shed€was€erected€in€1986,€over€20€years€ago.€€Accordingly,€the€use€of€thisŠ ¬&p! Športion€of€Whiteacre€has€been€continuous,€open€and€notorious,€actual€and€exclusive€and€hostileŠ ˜'\" Šfor€the€20€year€statutory€period€required.€€Accordingly€that€portion€of€Whiteacre€has€been€obtainedŠ „(H # Šby€A,€B,€and€C€through€adverse€possession.€€In€Maryland,€adverse€possession€does€not€render€titleŠ p)4!$ Šunmarketable.€€If€Husband€and€Wife€take€Blackacre€they€will€also€acquire€this€portion€ofŠ \* "% ŠWhiteacre.Š H+ #& ŠĢ3.€€ą  ąThe€lease€may€be€an€encumbrance€that€renders€title€unmarketable.€€However,€if€HusbandŠ  -ä$( Šand€Wife€take€Blackacre,€they€will€only€be€responsible€for€covenants€in€the€lease€that€touch€andŠ < Šconcern€the€land.€€They€will€collect€rent€from€Tenant€and€will€have€general€duties€as€landlord,€butŠ ( ģ Šthey€will€not€be€responsible€for€any€express€provisions€in€the€lease€that€do€not€touch€and€concernŠ  Ų Šthe€land.Š  Ä Š