SCHEDULE OF ORAL ARGUMENTS
September Term, 2024
Monday, March 4, 2025:
Bar Admissions
No. 34 In the Matter of the Marriage of Houser
Issues – Family Law – 1) Did the trial court err when it issued a child support order after the parties had voluntarily withdrawn child support as a justiciable issue, and the court did so over the objections of the parents who the court found to be fit and proper? 2) Did the trial court mis-apply the statute, or abuse its discretion, when the court order child support and arrears over the express objection of the parents who the court found to be fit and proper? 3) Did the trial court violate the parents’ constitutional rights when the court sua sponte, and without evidence, rejected their agreement regarding the financial support of their child when the parents were found to be fit and proper? 4) Does the Maryland child support statute permit parents to waive a party’s child support obligation, as part of a global settlement agreement, where the parties have shared physical custody, and their combined adjusted gross income exceeds the highest level of income set forth in the Maryland child support Guidelines? 5) Does the ACM’s decision have a chilling effect on parents’ rights to enter into agreements that they believe to be in their children’s best interest?
Misc. No. 20 Taivon Giles v. Trumbull Insurance Company
Certified Question of Law for the United States District Court for the District of Maryland
In a case in which (a) an employee was injured on the job and filed for workers’ compensation benefits, (b) the employer’s workers’ compensation insurer filed a third-party action pursuant to Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. (LE) § 9-902(a), (c) the employee, through separate counsel, subsequently intervenes with consent in that third-party action, and (d) there is a negotiated global settlement:
1. Does LE § 9-902(f) apply in light of LE § 9-902(c)?
2. May the employee’s counsel recover fees and costs from the employer’s worker’s compensation lien recovery pursuant to LE § 9-902(f) or otherwise?
3. If so, how are those fees and costs to be calculated?
Tuesday, March 5, 2025:
No. 31 Fred Cromartie v. State of Maryland
Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Can prosecutors designate a law enforcement officer as the State’s “representative” under Rule 5-615(b)(2), and thereby exempt the officer from otherwise mandatory witness sequestration? 2) If there is an officer exemption under Rule 5-615(b)(2), is that exemption discretionary? 3) May a law enforcement officer designated as a party representative under Rule 5-165(b)(2) provide lay opinion testimony relying on knowledge gained by hearing other witnesses testify?
Misc. No. 17 Estefany Martinez v. Amazon.com Services LLC
Certified Question of Law from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland
Does the doctrine of de minimis non curat lex, as described in Anderson v. Mt. Clemens Pottery Co., 328 U.S. 680 (1946) and Sandifer v. U.S. Steel Corp., 571 U.S. 220 (2014), apply to claims brought under the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law and the Maryland Wage and Hour Law?
After March 4, 2025, the Court will recess until April 3, 2025.
On the day of argument, counsel must register in the Clerk’s Office no later than 8:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified.
GREGORY HILTON
CLERK