|
HOME | OPINIONS | JOBS | FORMS | FAQs | SITE INDEX | CONTACT US | SEARCH |
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND SCHEDULE Thursday, May 1, 2008: Bar Admissions AG 26 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Emmanuel Damascus Akpan Attorney for Petitioner: Glenn M. Grossman AG 8 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Ephraim C. Ugwuonye Attorney for Petitioner: Fletcher Thompson No. 125 Wildwood Medical Center, L.L.C. v. Montgomery County, Maryland ISSUE - MARYLAND TAX COURT - WHETHER MARYLAND TAX COURT AND CIRCUIT COURT WERE BOTH CORRECT IN ALLOWING PETITIONER EXEMPTIONS FROM TRANSFER AND RECORDATION TAXES UPON RECORDATION OF THE SUBJECT DEED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTIONS 12-108(y) AND 13-405(c) OF THE TAX-PROPERTY ARTICLE, AS PETITIONER'S PREDECESSOR ENTITY IN TITLE WAS A MARYLAND GENERAL PARTNERSHIP? Attorneys for Appellant: James J. Demma and John R. Llewellyn No. 128 Pittway Corporation et al. v. Stephon Collins et al. ISSUE - TORTS - (1) DOES DECISION OF LOWER COURT IMPROPERLY CHANGE THE MARYLAND LAW OF SUPERSEDING CAUSE IN WAYS THAT CONFLICT WITH WELL-SETTLED PRINCIPLES LONG APPLIED BY THIS COURT? (2) DOES DECISION OF THE LOWER COURT IMPROPERLY PREVENT TRIAL COURTS FROM DECIDING THE ISSUE OF SUPERSEDING CAUSATION ON MOTION TO DISMISS? Attorneys for Appellant: Timothy L. Mullin, Jr. and Kevin Arthur No. 131 Department of Human Resources, Baltimore City Department of Social Services v. Angela Hayward****Department of Human Resources, Baltimore City Department of Social Services v. William Dixon ISSUE - FAMILY LAW - DID THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES PROPERLY INTERPRET THE LAW AS PROVIDING STANDING TO APPEAL SOLELY TO INDIVIDUALS FOUND RESPONSIBLE FOR "UNSUBSTANTIATED" OR "INDICATED" CHILD ABUSE OR NEGLECT? Attorney for Appellant: Sandra Barnes Friday, May 2, 2008: AG 30 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Harte Peary Stafford Attorney for Petitioner: Fletcher P. Thompson Misc. 12 John Deere Construction v. Reliable Tractor Attorneys for Appellant: Kevin Arthur and Randall L. Allen No. 124 Michael Blaine Shatzer, Sr. v. State of Maryland ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN ADMITTING INTO EVIDENCE STATEMENTS OBTAINED BY POLICE FROM APPELLANT IN VIOLATION OF HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO REMAIN SILENT AND TO HAVE COUNSEL PRESENT DURING QUESTION? Attorney for Appellant: Celia Anderson Davis No. 118 State of Maryland Central Collection Unit v. Robert William Jordan Attorney for Appellant: Michael Scott Friedman Monday, May 5, 2008: AG 10 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Harold Mark Walter Attorney for Petitioner: Dolores Ridgell AG 25 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Ernest S. Nichols Attorney for Petitioner: James P. Botluck No. 120 Jody Lee Miles v. State of Maryland Attorneys for Appellant: Robert Biddle and Erika A. Short No. 132 Kevin Ricardo Lee v. State of Maryland ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN PERMITTING THE STATE TO ARGUE TO THE JURY THAT THE "LAW OF THE STREETS" PREVENTED VICTIM FROM IDENTIFYING PETITIONER AS HIS ASSAILANT AND TO ARGUE THEY SHOULD PROTECT THEIR COMMUNITY BY TEACHING PETITIONER A LESSON? Attorney for Appellant: David Kennedy
Tuesday, May 6, 2008: No. 110 Maryland State Board of Physicians v. Harold I. Eist ISSUE - HEALTH OCCUPATIONS - MAY A PHYSICIAN, INVOKING A PATIENT'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY, REFUSE TO DISCLOSE TO THE BOARD A PATIENT'S MENTAL HEALTH RECORDS? Attorney for Appellant: Steven M. Sullivan No. 126 Betty Garner et al. v. Archers Glen Partners, Inc. et al. ISSUES - ADMINISTRATIVE LAW - (1) WHETHER A COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MAY PARTICIPATE AS A PARTY IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL OF ITS DECISION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLAN FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT? (2) DOES THE LAW OF CASE DOCTRINE APPLY TO LOWER COURT OPINION IN SAME PROCEEDING WHICH ADDRESSES A LEGAL QUESTION PURSUANT TO MD. RULE 8-131(a) IN ORDER TO PROVIDE "GUIDANCE" AND "TO AVOID THE EXPENSE AND DELAY OF ADDITIONAL APPEALS"? Attorney for Appellant: G. Macy Nelson AG 27 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Patrick Joseph Smith Attorney for Petitioner: Dolores O. Ridgell
On the day of argument, counsel are instructed to register in the Clerk’s Office no later than 9:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified. After May 6, 2008, the Court will recess until June 5, 2008.
BESSIE M. DECKER |