|
HOME | OPINIONS | JOBS | FORMS | FAQs | SITE INDEX | CONTACT US | SEARCH |
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND Thursday, October 1, 2009: Bar Admissions AG 24 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. (2008 T.) Richard Nelson Foltz, III Attorney for Petitioner: Dolores O. Ridgell No. 11 Gary Agurs v. State of Maryland ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - WHETHER THE LOWER COURT MISCONSTRUED PATTERSON V. STATE, 401 MD. 76 (2007), AND ERRED IN FINDING GOOD FAITH WHERE THE SEARCH WARRANT WAS BASED ON AN AFFIDAVIT THAT WAS SO LACKING IN PROBABLE CAUSE AS TO RENDER OFFICIAL BELIEF IN ITS EXISTENCE ENTIRELY UNREASONABLE? No. 12 Arnold Houghton v. Cheryl Forrest ISSUES - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - TORTS - (1) CAN PUBLIC OFFICIAL BE PROTECTED BY QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY FOR (a) A NON-NEGLIGENT DISCRETIONARY ACT DONE IN THE FURTHERANCE OF OFFICIAL DUTIES (b) AN INTENTIONAL ACT THAT ARISES FROM AND IS THE DIRECT RESULT OF NEGLIGENCE? (2) DID THE LOWER COURT OVERSTEP ITS AUTHORITY WHEN IT ACTED AS THE FACT FINDER IN DETERMINING THE INTENTIONS OF PETITIONER AND DETERMINING WHICH INFERENCES TO ACCEPT IN CONCLUDING THAT PLAINTIFF FAILED TO PROVE MALICE? Attorney for Appellant: William R. Phelan, Jr. No. 14 State of Maryland v. Isa Manuel Santiago ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE LOWER COURT ERR IN HOLDING THAT A CRIMINAL DEFENDANT CANNOT WAIVE HIS COMPLAINT ABOUT THE FAILURE TO POLL OR HEARKEN THE JURY?
ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN REFUSING TO RULE ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF PRIOR CONVICTIONS UNDER MD. RULE 5-609 UNTIL AFTER APPELLANT COMPLETED HIS DIRECT TESTIMONY BEFORE THE JURY? AG 28 Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v.
(2008 T.) Adekunle B. Olujobi (Awojobi)
ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE TRIAL JUDGE ERR IN REFUSING TO PERMIT THE JURY TO REVIEW THE TAPE OF ALLEGED DRUG TRANSACTION WHICH HAD BEEN ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE? Attorney for Appellant: George E. Burns, Jr. No. 15 Shirley L. Suder v. Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, LLP, et al. ISSUES - LEGAL MALPRACTICE - ESTATES AND TRUSTS - (1) CAN DEFENDANT IN A LEGAL MALPRACTICE CASE RELY ON AN AFFIRMATIVE OR MANDATORY DEFENSE THAT WAS CONCLUSIVELY WAIVED BY THE PARTY-OPPONENT IN THE UNDERLYING CASE? (2) DOES THE “CASE-WITHIN-A-CASE” METHODOLOGY PERMIT A COURT TO SPECULATE ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAVE HAPPENED IN THE ABSENCE OF A LAWYER’S NEGLIGENCE? (3) DID THE LOWER COURT ERR IN REVERSING TRIAL COURT’S DETERMINATION THAT RESPONDENT’S NEGLIGENCE WAS THE PROXIMATE CAUSE OF PETITIONER’S DAMAGES? Attorney for Appellant: Howard J. Schulman
AG 32 (2008 Term) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. George Simon Jarosinski
ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE LOWER COURT CORRECTLY CONCLUDE THAT THE MOTIONS COURT DID NOT ERR IN DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE OF CRACK COCAINE RECOVERED FROM HIS PERSON? Attorney for Appellant: Nadine Jones No. 19 The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning
Commission, et al. v. Greater Baden-Aquaso Citizens ISSUES - (1) DOES THE LOWER COURT’S DECISION IMPROPERLY USURP THE COUNTY COUNCIL’S LEGISLATIVE FUNCTION BY IMPOSING AN INTERPRETATION OF THE GENERAL PLAN THAT THE COUNCIL EXPRESSLY DID NOT INTEND? (2) WOULD THE LOWER COURT’S DECISION UNDULY SUBJECT THE COMMISSION TO INNUMERABLE BASELESS LAWSUITS AND EFFECT A DE FACTO MORATORIUM ON DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTY’S RURAL TIER? ISSUES - CRIMINAL LAW - (1) DID RESPONDENT FAIL TO PRESERVE HIS CLAIM THAT THE DOCKET ENTRIES WERE INCORRECT? (2) DID THE LOWER COURT INCORRECTLY HOLD THAT THE TRIAL COURT FAILED TO RENDER A VERDICT AS TO COUNTS THREE THROUGH EIGHT OF THE INDICTMENT, AND THEREBY ACQUITTED RESPONDENT OF THOSE COUNTS? (3) DID THE LOWER COURT INCORRECTLY HOLD THAT IT COULD NOT CONSIDER REMARKS MADE BY THE TRIAL JUDGE BEFORE THE VERDICT TO DETERMINE THE TRIAL JUDGE’S INTENT IN RENDERING HIS VERDICT?
AG 58 (2008 Term) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v.
Garrett Lamont Lee No. 134 (2008 Term) Beulah Addison v. Lochearn Nursing Home, LLC d/b/a Future Care-Lochearn ISSUE - TORT LAW - CONTRACT - DID THE LOWER COURT ERR IN COMPELLING ARBITRATION OF CLAIMS ARISING FROM A PREDATORY REAL ESTATE SCAM AND SABOTAGED MEDICAID APPLICATION? No. 16 Omar Nathan McLennan v. State of Maryland ISSUE - CRIMINAL LAW - DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN REFUSING TO ALLOW DEFENSE WITNESSES TO TESTIFY ON PETITIONER’S BEHALF? No. 18 Rungrudee Nonceeya v. Lone Star Steakhouse ISSUES - CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - SUMMARY JUDGMENT - (1) WHEN A CIVIL LITIGANT REQUIRES A FOREIGN LANGUAGE TRANSLATOR IN A CIVIL PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT AND A WRITTEN REQUEST IS MADE AND APPROVED BY THE COURT, IS THE LITIGANT ALSO ENTITLED TO A TRANSLATOR WHEN BEING DEPOSED BY ORAL DEPOSITION? (2) WHEN A CIVIL LITIGANT MAKES A REQUEST TO HAVE A FOREIGN LANGUAGE TRANSLATOR EITHER IN COURT OR AT AN ORAL DEPOSITION, WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DETERMINING WHEN A LITIGANT HAS WAIVED SUCH A REQUEST FOR A FOREIGN LANGUAGE TRANSLATOR? 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 October 6 2009, the Court will recess until
BESSIE M. DECKER
|