Archive of Highlighted Cases 2005-2018

Media Resource Center
News Releases

 

No. 85 - September Term, 2017
Linda H. Lamone v. Nancy Lewin, et al.
Oral Arguments heard May 2, 2018 at 10:00 a.m. [Oral Arguments]

Issue – Election Law – Did the trial court err in entering a preliminary injunction that requires Appellant to remove the name of a candidate from the ballot for the 2018 primary election, where the statutory deadlines have passed, laches bars the relief ordered, removal at this late date will disrupt the orderly process of the election and other, less disruptive, relief is available?


07-31-2018: Opinion
05-18-2018: Denial of Motion to Recall Mandate and For Reconsideration
05-18-2018: Opposition to Motion to Recall Mandate and For Reconsideration
05-18-2018: Exhibit A to Opposition to Motion to Recall Mandate and For Reconsideration
05-11-2018: Motion to Recall Mandate and For Reconsideration
05-02-2018: Per Curiam Order
05-01-2018: Appellees' Reply Brief
05-01-2018: Reply Brief of Appellant
04-30-2018: Record Extract
04-30-2018: Brief of Appellant
04-30-2018: Appendix (to Appellees' Brief)
04-30-2018: Appellees' Brief
04-27-2018: Petition for Writ of Certiorari Granted
04-26-2018: Opposition to Motion For Immediate Stay Pending Further Review
04-26-2018: Consent Motion to Shorten Time To Respond To Petitioner's Motion to Stay Pending Further Review
04-26-2018: Motion for Immediate Stay Pending Further Review
04-26-2018: Appendix to Petition for Writ of Certiorari
04-26-2018: Petition for Writ of Certiorari and Request for Expedited Review (Petition Docket No. 97, Sept. Term 2018)

 

 

 

No. 98 - September Term 2016
Jane and John Doe, et al. v. Alternative Medicine Maryland, LLC, et al.
Oral Arguments heard July 27, 2017 at 10:00am. [Oral Arguments]

Issues – Health General – 1) Are Appellants entitled to participate in a lawsuit, including a preliminary injunction hearing, where the Appellee (plaintiff in the trial court) has expressly asked to invalidate their award and any injunction would destroy their businesses, force them to lay off employees, cause substantial economic losses and deprive some Petitioners of needed cannabis therapy? 2) Should the trial court action be stayed pending resolution of the issue of indispensable parties, given that the Appellee waited months or years to seek a preliminary injunction and has no likelihood of success on the merits?

07-28-2017: Per Curiam Order
07-07-2017: Brief of Appellee & Appendix
07-07-2017: Brief of Appellee Natalie M. LaPrade Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission
07-07-2017: Line Supplementing Certificate of Service
07-06-2017: Opposition to AMM's July 3, 2017, Motion
07-06-2017: Order
07-03-2017: Respondent's Motion to Require Respondent Natalie M. LaPrade Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission to Argue with Petitioners, or in the Alternative, Motion for Additional Argument Time and Motion to Allow Respondent to File a Responsive Brief to any Brief Filed by Respondent Natalie M. LaPrade Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission
06-26-2017: Record Extract, Part 1 of 3
06-26-2017: Record Extract, Part 2 of 3
06-26-2017: Record Extract, Part 3 of 3
06-23-2017: Brief of Appellant Temescal Wellness, LLC
06-23-2017: Brief of Appellant Holistic Industries, LLC
06-23-2017: Brief of Appellant ForwardGro, LLC
06-23-2017: Brief of Appellants Jane and John Doe, et al.
06-09-2017: Order of Court of Appeals granting Petition for Writ of Certiorari
06-05-2017: Line by ForwardGro, LLC
06-05-2017: State Defendants' Supplemental Response to Petition for Writ of Certiorari and Motion to Stay Circuit Court Action
06-05-2017: State Defendants' Response in Opposition to Motion for Extension of Temporary Restraining Order Pending Appeal
06-05-2017: Line by Holistic Industries, LLC
06-05-2017: Line by Temescal Wellness, LLC
06-05-2017: Petitioner's Opposition to Motion to Maintain Status Quo
06-02-2017: Respondent's Motion to Maintain Status Quo Pending Further Order of This Honorable Court and Request for Hearing
06-02-2017: Order of Court of Appeals granting Motion for Stay of Proceedings in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City
06-02-2017: State Defendants' Response to Emergency Bypass Petition for Writ of Certiorary and Motion to Stay Circuit Court Action
06-02-2017: Respondent's Opposition to Petitioners' Anticipated Emergency Bypass Petition for Writ of Certiorary and Motion to Stay Circuit Court Action, etc., and Request for Hearing
06-02-2017: Appellants' Emergency Motion for Stay of Proceedings in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City and/or Injunction
06-02-2017: Emergency Bypass Petition for Writ of Certiorary and Motion to Stay Circuit Court Action

 
Cases pertaining to the Freddie Gray matter

Case No. 96 - September Term 2015
State of Maryland v. Brian Rice

Case No. 97 - September Term 2015
State of Maryland v. Edward Nero

Case No. 98 - September Term 2015
State of Maryland v. Garrett Miller
Oral Arguments in Nos. 96, 97, & 98 held March 3, 2016 at 10:00am.
[Oral Arguments 1Mbps] [Oral Arguments 5Mbps]

Issues – Courts and Judicial Proceedings - 1) Does Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article, § 9-123 require a court to order compelled, immunized witness testimony after verifying that the statutory pleading requirements of the prosecutor's motion to compel have been met, or does the statute instead permit a court to substitute its own discretion and judgment as to whether compelling the witness's testimony may be necessary to the public interest such that the court may deny a prosecutor's motion to compel even if the motion complies with the statute's pleading requirements? 2) Whether the circuit court's order denying the State's motion to compel Officer William Porter to testify is appealable, i.e. whether the order is a final judgment or an interlocutory order subject to appeal or an order appealable on any other basis?

Case No. 99 - September Term 2015
Alicia White v. State of Maryland; Caesar Goodson v. State of Maryland
Oral Arguments held March 3, 2016 at 10:00am.
[Oral Arguments 1Mbps] [Oral Arguments 5Mbps]

Issues – Courts and Judicial Proceedings - 1) Does Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article, § 9-123 provide Porter sufficient protection against self-incrimination to allow his testimony to be compelled in the trials of Caesar Goodson and Alicia White?

State of Maryland v. Brian Rice - Case No. 96- September Term 2015
 

No. 13 - September Term 2013
James Allen Kulbicki v. State of Maryland
Oral Arguments held October 3, 2013 at 10:00am. [Oral Arguments]

Issues – Criminal Law - 1) Does a conviction obtained through the use of scientific evidence that is later demonstrated to be unreliable, misleading, and inadmissible violate a defendant's guarantee of due process? 2) Does the use of perjured expert testimony by a State expert violate a defendant's due process rights when the perjured testimony involves the expert's qualifications and background? 3) Does the failure of defense counsel to investigate or challenge the State's scientific evidence and failure to object to the scope of the State's closing arguments constitute ineffective assistance of counsel? 4) Did CSA err in stating that the State is chargeable with the “knowing use of perjured testimony” where the falsity is unknown at the time of the testimony?

FBI Study: Comparison of Bullets Using the Elemental Composition of the Lead Component

12-17-2015: Order of the Court of Appeals on Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States
10-05-2015: Order of the Supreme Court of the United States in No. 14-848, Maryland v. Kulbicki
08-27-2014: Opinion of the Court of Appeals
09-26-2012: Opinion of the Court of Special Appeals

 

No. 105 - September Term 2013
Ben C. Clyburn, et al. v. Quinton Richmond, et al.
Oral Arguments held Friday, March 7, 2014 at 10:00am. [Oral Arguments]
Additional oral arguments scheduled for Tuesday, May 6, 2014 at 10:00am per order dated March 11, 2014 (below). [Oral Arguments]

Issues – Criminal Procedure – 1) Did the circuit court err in entering an injunction directing officials of the District Court to conduct initial appearances in a manner inconsistent with the existing rules promulgated by this Court? 2) Did the circuit court err in granting an application for supplemental relief based on a prior declaratory judgment without first issuing a show cause order, as required by the statute governing such applications? 3) Did the circuit court err in ordering officials of the District Court to appoint counsel for all arrestees at initial appearances and prohibiting those court officials from conducting initial appearances for arrestees who were not provided with counsel?

05-28-2014: Order
05-27-2014: Rules Order Adopting the 183rd Report
05-02-2014: Supplemental Reply Brief of Appellants
04-30-2014: Supplemental Brief of Appellee Paul B. DeWolfe, Jr.
04-30-2014: Supplemental Brief of Appellees
04-16-2014: Supplemental Brief of Appellants
03-11-2014: Order
03-07-2014: Order
03-05-2014: Response to Motion to Dismiss and Reply Brief of Appellants
03-04-2014: Brief of Appellees
03-04-2014: Brief For Appellee Paul B. DeWolfe, Jr.
02-18-2014: Brief of Appellants
02-18-2014: Record Extract, part 1 of 3
02-18-2014: Record Extract, part 2 of 3
02-18-2014: Record Extract, part 3 of 3
01-23-2014: Order granting Petition for Writ of Certiorari
01-17-2014: Plaintiffs' Response to District Court Defendants' Motion for Stay
01-17-2014: Answer to a Petition for Writ of Certiorari
01-14-2014: Temporary Stay Order
01-14-2014: Petition for Writ of Certiorari
01-14-2014: Motion for Stay Pending Further Review

 

 

No. 34 - September Term 2011
Paul B. DeWolfe, in his official capacity as the Public Defender for the State of Maryland, et al. v. Quinton Richmond, et al.
Oral Arguments heard Tuesday, November 8, 2011 at 10:00am. [Oral Arguments]
Reargued Friday, January 4, 2013 at 10:00am. [Oral Arguments]

Issues - Criminal Law - (1) Do indigent defendants have a right to counsel at initial bail hearings: (a) before District Court Commissioners under MD's Public Defender Act? (b) under the Sixth Amendment & Art. 21 of the Declaration of Rights? (c) under MD or federal guarantees of due process? (d) when commissioners impose bail "preset" by the District Court in absentia? (2) Did the trial court abuse its discretion by granting the class declaratory relief in accord with its findings that defendants are violating the class's statutory & constitutional rights? (3) Did the trial court err in issuing the declaration without in any way addressing remedy & how this undisputed funding shortfall might be practicably addressed?

Issues on Reargument- Criminal Law - Are Petitioners entitled, under the recently amended Public Defender Act (2012 Md. Laws ch. 504-05), to relief on the basis of the right to counsel provided in either or both the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution and Art. 21 of the Md. Declaration of Rights and/or either or both the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution and Art.24 of the Md. Declaration of Rights.

11-06-2013: Order On Motion for Reconsideration filed

09-25-2013: Opinion On Reconsideration filed

01-04-2012: Opinion filed

 

No. 68 - September Term 2011
Alonzo J. King v. State of Maryland
Oral Arguments heard Monday, January 9, 2011 at 10:00am. [Oral Arguments]

Issues - Criminal Law - (1) Did the trial court err by denying appellant's motion to suppress DNA evidence obtained through a warrantless search conducted without any individualized suspicion of wrongdoing? (2) Did the court below improperly shift the burden of proof to the defense to demonstrate that a search or seizure made without individualized suspicion is unreasonable?

Counsel for Appellant:
Counsel for Appellee:
Celia Anderson Davis, Assistant Public Defender
(Paul B. DeWolfe, Public Defender)
Robert Taylor, Jr, Assistant Attorney General
(Douglas F. Gansler, Attorney General of Maryland)

09-25-13: Opinion of the Court of Appeals on Remand

06-03-13: Opinion of the United States Supreme Court overturning the Court of Appeals

04-24-12: Opinion of the Court of Appeals

Question Presented to the United States Supreme Court: Does the Fourth Amendment allow the States to collect and analyze DNA from people arrested and charged with serious crimes?

A petition for a writ of certiorari was granted by the United States Supreme Court, November 9, 2012.
Oral arguments heard by the United States Supreme Court on Tuesday, February 26, 2013. [Transcript] [Link to Oral Arguments Audio]

U.S. Supreme Court No. 12-207 Docket Entries
07-30-12: In Chambers Opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on the State's application for a stay of the Court of Appeals' judgment pending the Supreme Court's disposition of its petition for a writ of certiorari
Application 12A48 Docket Entries: Application by the State of Maryland for a stay of the judgment and mandate pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari

Amicus Curiae:
  • Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia and American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland in Support of Appellant
 

No. 100 - September Term 2012
Gregory Hall, et al. v. Prince George's County Central Democratic Committee, et al.
Oral Arguments heard Friday, January 4, 2012. [Oral Arguments]

Issues – State Government - 1) As a matter of first impression, under Art. III, § 13(a)(1) of the MD Constitution where a central committee submits a name to the Governor within 30 days of a vacancy of office in the House of Delegates, does the Governor have a mandatory duty to appoint the person whose name is submitted to him within 15 days? 2) As a matter of first impression, what is the final day for the Governor to perform his duty to appoint under Art III, § 13(a)(1) of the MD Constitution where the 15th day following submission of the name falls on a legal holiday? 3) As a matter of first impression, does the central committee have any authority to rescind the name it submitted to the Governor under MD Constitution Art. III, § 13(a)(1) more than 30 days after the event that created the vacancy in the House of Delegates. 4) Should a writ of mandamus issue to the Governor to appoint the central committee's nominee if he fails to do so after 15 days? 5) Did the trial court err in considering on summary judgment an affidavit that was based upon "information and belief"? 6) Does Art. XV, § 2 of the MD Constitution permit the expulsion of a duly-elected legislator who received a final disposition of probation before judgment? 7) Where charges against an elected official resulted in a final disposition of probation before judgment in another county, did the lower court have the power to revoke this disposition and disqualify that official from completing her term in office?

12-06-12: Petition for writ of certiorari filed.
12-06-12: Order staying the Judgment of the Circuit Court for Prince George's County
12-10-12: Governor Martin O'Malley's Motion to Lift Stay
12-11-12: Second petition filed titled: Tiffay T. Alston v. Speaker Michael E. Busch, et al.
12-11-12: Delegate Tiffany T. Alson's Response in opposition to motion to lift stay
12-12-12: Answer of Respondent Prince George's County Democratic Committee to Plaintiff Gregory Hall's petition for writ of certiorari
12-12-12: Response of Respondent Prince George's County Democratice Committee to Governor Martin O'Malley's motion to lift stay
12-13-12: Order of Court of Appeals granting Writ of Certiorari
12-20-12: Brief of Appellant Gregory Hall
12-20-12: Brief of Appellant Tiffany T. Alston
12-27-12: Brief of Appellee Prince George's County Democratic Central Committee
12-27-12: Brief of Appellees Governor Martin O'Malley and Speaker Michael E. Busch
01-02-13: Reply Brief of Appellant Gregory Hall
01-02-13: Tiffany T. Alston's Reply Brief

01-04-13: Order filed

04-08-13: Opinion filed

 

No 6 - September Term 2010
Norman Bruce Derr v. State of Maryland
Oral Arguments heard September 2, 2010. [Oral Arguments]
Oral Arguments on Remand from the United States Supreme Court held Friday, January 4, 2012. [Oral Arguments]

Issues - Criminal Law - Whether appellant's federal and state constitutional rights of confrontation were violated when the state was permitted to introduce: (1) the opinion by a serology examiner through the testimony of an expert who did not participate either directly or in a supervisory capacity in the serological testing without calling the serology examiner as a witness or showing that the examiner was unavailable and that appellant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the examiner? (2) the results of DNA testing of biological evidence through the testimony of an expert who did not participate either directly or in a supervisory capacity in the DNA testing without calling the DNA analyst who performed the testing as a witness or showing that the analyst was unavailable and appellant had a prior opportunity to cross-examine the analyst?

Counsel for Appellant:
Counsel for Appellee:
Stephen B. Mercer, Assigned Public Defender
 
William G. McLain
David A. Clark School of Law, University of the District of Columbia
Robert Taylor, Jr, Assistant Attorney General
(Douglas F. Gansler, Attorney General of Maryland)

08-22-2013: Opinion of the Court of Appeals on Remand

06-29-12: U.S. Supreme Court order disposing of the case (The judgment is vacated and the case remanded back to the Court of Appeals for further consideration in the light of Williams v. Illinois, 567 U.S. _____ (2012).
Williams v. Illinois (The U.S. Supreme Court Opinion referenced in the summary disposition.)

A petition for a writ of certiorari was granted by the United States Supreme Court, 06-29-12.
U.S. Supreme Court Petition No. 11-694 Docket Entries
09-29-11: Opinion

Amicus Curiae:

  • Howard University School of Law Criminal Justice Clinic and Civil Rights Clinic on behalf of Appellant
  • American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland in Support of Appellant
 

Misc. Nos. 2, 3, & 5 - September Term 2012
2012 Legislative Districting of the State
Oral Arguments heard Wednesday November 7, 2012 at 10:00 a.m. [Misc 2. Oral Arguments][Misc. 3 Oral Arguments][Misc 5. Oral Arguments]

Misc. 2 Christopher Eric Bouchat v. State of Maryland
Counsel for Appellant:
Counsel for Appellee:
Christopher Eric Bouchat
Dan Friedman
Misc. 3 Petition of Delores Kelley and James Brochin
Counsel for Appellant:
Counsel for Appellee:
Jonathan S. Shurberg
Dan Friedman
Misc. 5 Petition of Cynthia Houser, et al. v. Martin O'Malley
Counsel for Appellant:
Counsel for Appellee:
C. Paul Smith
Dan Friedman

12-10-2013: Opinion filed

11-09-12: Order of the Court of Appeals In the Matter of the 2012 Legislative Districting of the State
09-20-12: Report of the Special Master
05-30-12: Order
03-06-12: Order

 

No. 87 - September Term 2008
Stop Slots MD 2008, et al. v. State Board of Elections
Oral Arguments heard Monday, September 15, 2008. [Oral Arguments]

01-06-12: Opinion
09-15-08: Per Curiam Order

Appellants' Brief
Appellees' Brief

 

No. 88 - September Term 2008
IAFF 1715, et al. v. Mayor and City Council of Cumberland, et al.
Oral Arguments heard Monday, September 15, 2008. [Oral Arguments]

12-22-08: Opinion
09-15-08: Per Curiam Order

Appellants' Brief
Brief of Appellee State Board of Elections
Memorandum of Appellee/Cross-Appellant
Petition for Writ of Certiorari

 

No. 61 - September Term 2008
Jane Doe, et al. v. Montgomery County Board of Elections
Oral Arguments heard Monday, September 8, 2008. [Oral Arguments]

Issues - Constitutional Law - (1) Did the trial court err in ruling that a voter challenge to the certification of a referendum petition that failed to carry the required number of signatures, which challenge was filed within ten days of the certification, is nonetheless partially time-barred? (2) Did the trial court err in holding that the Board is required to include inactive voters in calculating the total number of registered voters in Montgomery County?

12-19-08: Opinion
09-09-08: Per Curiam Order

Reply Brief of Respondent/Cross-Petitioner
Brief of Respondent/Cross-Petitioner
Brief of Appellants/Cross-Appellees
Reply Brief of Appellants/Cross-Appellees

Amicus Curiae:

  • Brief of Amicus Curiae, Maryland Citizens for a Responsible Government Corporation, Supporting Appellee/Cross-Appellants
  • Brief filed by Public Justice Center, Casa de Maryland, and Maryland Disability Law Center as Amici Curiae for Appellants/Cross-Appellees
 

No. 121 - September Term 2007
Michael D. Smigiel, Sr., et al. v. Peter V. R. Franchot, et al.
Oral arguments heard Tuesday, March 11, 2008. [Oral Arguments]

Issue - Constitutional Law - May lawmakers delegate decisions to voters by passing statutes which are contingent upon popular approval of duplicitous constitutional amendments?

08-26-09: Opinion
03-12-08: Per Curiam Order

Petitioners Reply Brief
Brief of Petitioners
Brief of the State Respondents

 

No. 122 - September Term 2007
State Board of Elections v. Clifford E. Snyder, Jr.***State Board of Elections v. Richard D. Boltuck
Oral arguments heard Friday, February 8th. [Oral Arguments]

02-08-08: Per Curiam Order

Appellant's Brief
Memorandum of Appellee Clifford E. Snyder, Jr.
Record Extract
Brief of Appellee Richard Boltuck

 

No. 14 - September Term 2007
State of Maryland v. Maouloud Baby
Oral arguments heard Tuesday, October 2. [Oral Arguments]

Issue - Criminal Law - If a woman during sexual intercourse withdraws consent but is forced to continue against her will is she a victim of rape?

04-16-08: Opinion

Petitioner's Brief
Respondent's Brief
Reply Brief of Petitioner and Brief of Cross-Respondent
Respondent/Cross-Petitioner's Reply Brief

Amicus Curiae:

  • Second Brief filed by Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault and Women's Law Center of Maryland, Inc.
  • Brief filed by Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault  and Women’s Law Center of Maryland, Inc.

 

Media Resource Center

No.44 - September Term 2006
Conaway, et al. v. Deane, et al.
Oral arguments heard Monday, December 4, 2006.

Issue - Maryland Constitution - Does Maryland law prohibit the marriage of two persons of the same gender?

09-18-07: Opinion

Appellants' Brief
Brief of Plaintiffs' - Appellees

Amicus Curiae Briefs filed by:

  • Religious Organizations and Leaders
  • NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.
  • The Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, The Maryland Disability Law Center, Maryland Adapt, The National Council on Independent Living, The National Mental Health Association, The National Senior Citizens Law Center, and People for the American Way
  • Maryland Law Professors
  • The National Legal Foundation
  • Knights of Columbus
  • Equality Maryland, Inc.; Families With Pride; Gay Fathers Coalition; Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgender Community Center of Baltimore and Central Maryland; Maryland Lesbian & Gay Law Association; PFLAG Baltimore; PFLAG Columbia/Howard County; Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders; Human Rights Campaign; Human Rights Campaign Foundation; National Black Justice Coalition; and National Center for Lesbian Rights
  • James Q. Wilson, et al., Legal and Family Scholars
  • Association of Maryland Families and Liberty Counsel
  • American Center for Law & Justice, Northeast, Inc.
  • Senators Janet Greenip, Alex X. Mooney, and Delegates Don Dwyer, Jr., Patrick L. McDonough, Richard K. Impallaria, Tony A. Thornton Shewell, Joseph C. Boteler, III, Tony McConkey, Christopher B. Shank and Emmett C. Burns., Jr.
  • Professors of Psychology and Psychiatry
  • Toni Marie Davis
  • Alliance for Marriage
  • Citizens for Traditional Families, Family Leader Foundation, and United Families International
  • Becket Fund for Religious Liberty
  • Family Research Council
  • The Maryland Catholic Conference
  • American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, Maryland Chapter
  • Organization of American Historians; Bar Association of Baltimore City; Maryland Latino Coalition for Justice; Maryland NOW; National Lawyer's Guild-Maryland; Public Justice Center; James & Colette Roberts; City of Takoma Park, The Women's Law Center of Maryland, Inc.; Asian American Justice Center; Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund; Freedom to Marry; Legal Momentum; National Organization of Women Foundation; Southern Poverty Law Center; and 34 Individual Historians & Scholars
  • The National Association of Social Workers, The Maryland Chapter of the National Association of Social Workers, Maryland Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Ellen C. Perrin, M.D., Judith Stacey and Timothy Biblarz
  • American Psychological Association, Maryland Psychological Association, Baltimore Psychological Association, and American Psychiatric Association
  • Family Research Council

No. 73 - September Term 2006
Fritszche v. State Board of Elections, et al.
Oral Arguments heard Monday, November 13, 2006.

02-12-07: Opinion
11-13-06: Per Curiam Order

Appellants' Motion to Expedite Appeal
Appellants' Brief
Appellants' Motion to Supplement the Record
Record Extract
Respondents' Brief

Order granting Writ of Certiorari
Petition for Writ of Certiorari

No. 71 - September Term 2006
Liddy v. Lamone, et al.
Oral Arguments heard Thursday, November 2, 2006.

Issue - Election Law - Was the challenge to the candidacy of Douglas Gansler for Attorney General barred by limitations and/or laches?

03-29-07: Opinion
11-01-06: Per Curiam Order

Joint Cross-Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Appellant's Brief
Respondents' Brief
Appellee's Brief
Appendix to Appellee's Brief

Order granting Writ of Certiorari
Petition for Writ of Certiorari

No.143 - September Term 2005
Lamone v. Capozzi
Oral Arguments heard Friday, August 25, 2004.

Issue - Election Law - Is Maryland's early voting law valid?

12-11-06: Opinion
8-25-06: Per Curiam Order

Petitioner's Brief
Record Extract
Appellee's Brief

Order Granting Writ of Certiorari
Petition for Writ of Certiorari

No.142 - September Term 2005
Abrams v. Lamone
Oral Arguments held Friday, August 25, 2005.

Issue - Election Law - Does the proposed candidate for Attorney General of Maryland possess the necessary qualifications for office?

03-26-07: Opinion
8-29-06: Order on motion for reconsideration
8-29-06: Second order on motion for reconsideration
8-29-06: Motion of Stuart O. Simms to Intervene
8-29-06: Response to Motion to Modify Order filed by Perez
8-29-06: Line Regarding Motion to Modify filed by Respondents, Lamone and State Board of Elections
8-29-06: Abrams response to Motion to Modify Order
8-28-06: Motion to Modify Order filed by Respondents Lamone and State Board of Elections
8-25-06: Per Curiam Order filed

Brief of Petitioner Abrams
Appendices:
  Vol. 2 (5KB)
  Vol. 3 (5 MB)
  Vol. 4a (4 MB)
  Vol. 4b (not available online)
  Vol. 5 (10 MB)
Brief of Appellee Perez
Brief of Respondents Linda Lamone and State Board of Elections

Record Extract:

No.141 - September Term 2005
Roskelly, et al. v. Lamone, et al.
Oral Arguments heard Tuesday, July 25, 2006.

Issue - Election Law - Was a petition to place Senate Bill 478 on the ballot for referendum initiated in a timely fashion?

Counsel for Appellants:
Counsel for Appellees:
John H. West, III, James West
West & Costello, LLC
Mark J. Davis, Robert A. Zarnoch
Office of the Attorney General

12-11-06: Opinion
7-25-06: Per Curiam Order

Appellant's Brief
Brief of Respondents

Joint Extract Part 1
Joint Extract Part 2
Joint Extract Part 3

No. 140 - September Term 2005
Kenneth D. Schisler, et al. v. State of Maryland
Oral Arguments: Friday, July 7, 2006.

Issue - Civil Procedure - Did the circuit court properly deny a motion for a temporary restraining order?

Counsel for Appellants:
Counsel for Appellees:
Andrew Radding, Gregory M. Kline, H. Scott Jones
Adelberg, Rudow, Dorf & Hendler, LLC

David R. Thompson, Brynja M. Booth
Cowdrey, Thompson & Karsten, P.C.
Michael Berman, William F. Brockman, Cynthia G. Peltzman, Carl N. Zacarias
Office of the Attorney General
 

9-14-06: Opinion
7-7-06: Per Curiam Order

Appellant's Brief

1. Plaintiffs' Verified Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary and Permanent Injunctive Relief ("Complaint")
2. Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction
3. Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
4. Exhibit 1 to Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
5. Exhibit 2 to Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
6. Exhibit 3 to Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
7. Exhibit 4 to Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
NOTE: the following documents are not available online
8. Transcript of June 28, 2006 Hearing before the Circuit Court of Baltimore City
9. June 28, 2006 Order of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City denying Plaintiffs' Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction.
10. Appellants' Notice of Appeal.
11. Affidavits of Kenneth D. Schisler ("Schisler Affidavit 1")

Appellee's Brief

 

Media Resource Center