SCHEDULE OF ORAL ARGUMENTS
September Term, 2024
Tuesday, October 1, 2024:
Bar Admissions
No. 8 In re: M.Z.
Issue – Family Law – When a court terminates jurisdiction in a CINA case over the objection of a parent, is the parent “aggrieved” by that court’s unfavorable judgment such that the parent is entitled to appeal?
Attorney for Petitioner: Maili Shaffer
Attorney for Respondent: Hubert Chang
No. 14 Mark Zukowski, et al. v. Anne Arundel County
Issue – Workers’ Compensation – Did the General Assembly intend to offset compensation or benefits to be paid directly to claimants when it adopted Md. Code, Labor & Employment Art. § 9-610?
Attorney for Petitioner: James K. MacAlister
Attorney for Respondent: Joseph M. Marshall
Wednesday, October 2, 2024 - to be held at Frederick Douglass High School, Northwestern Campus, in Baltimore, Maryland:
No. 11 Homer Walton, et al. v. Premier Soccer Club, Inc., et al.
Issue – Torts – Did ACM properly affirm the trial court’s ruling that a violation of Md. Code Health General Article § 14-501 (concussion policy and awareness) could not be the proximate cause of a concussion injury as a matter of law notwithstanding that the injured person was within the class of persons – youth athletes – that the statute was intended to protect and the injury was the type of injury the statue was designed to prevent?
Attorney for Petitioner: Ray M. Shepard
Attorneys for Respondent: Timothy J. Dygert and Walter Gillcrist, Jr.
No. 4 State of Maryland v. Dominick Scarboro
Issue – Constitutional Law – When an appellant claims a Sixth Amendment violation of the right to a public trial based on the trial court’s ostensible denial of courtroom access, does the burden lie with appellant to establish preliminarily that the courtroom closure is significant enough (i.e. not “de minimis”) that it implicates the constitutional right and requires analysis under the four-part test articulated in Waller v. Georgia, 467 U.S. 39, 48 (1984)?
Attorney for Petitioner: Virginia S. Hovermill
Attorney for Respondent: Peter F. Rose
Monday, October 7, 2024:
AG No. 42 (2023 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Francis Edward Yeatman
Attorney for Petitioner: Garrett E. Byron
Attorney for Respondent: F. Douglas Yeatman
No. 15 In Re: The Estate of Michael Gerard Schappell
Issue – Estates & Trusts – Did ACM err by rejecting Maryland’s longstanding requirement of an agreement to adopt as an element of equitable adoption, instead replacing it with a case-by-case examination of “fairness” factors?
Attorneys for Petitioner: James P. Lillis and Robert E. Grant
Attorney for Respondent: Matthew Bryant
Tuesday, October 8, 2024:
No. 16 In the Matter of Cindy Isely, Personal Representative of the Estate of Bonnie Campbell
Issue – Family Law – Does the reach of Federal preemption extend such that a former spouse is without rights to enforce a contract related to already distributed retirement proceeds from a federal Thrift Savings Plan; or does Maryland follow the reasoning and interpretation set forth in Andochick v. Byrd, 709 F.3d 296 (4th Cir. 2013), allowing a former spouse to enforce a contract right regarding already distributed retirement proceeds to effectuate the intention of the parties?
Attorney for Petitioner: Barton D. Moorstein
Attorney for Petitioner: Michael J. Lentz
Wednesday, October 9, 2024, 1:00 p.m.:
No. 26 Maryland State Board of Elections, et al. v. Anthony J. Ambridge, et al.
Justice Battaglia will sit in place of Justice Watts.
Direct appeal under Maryland Election Law.
Attorneys for Appellants: Daniel Kobrin and Michael Redmond
Attorney for Appellees: Thiruvendran Vignarajah
On the day of argument, counsel must register in the Clerk’s Office no later than one half hour before argument time unless otherwise notified.
After October 9, 2024, the Court will recess until November 1, 2024.
GREGORY HILTON
CLERK