On these pages, the Supreme Court of Maryland archives videos of the current term year oral arguments and videos of the oral arguments from the preceding three term years. Videos of arguments from earlier term years are available upon request. The Court's archive of oral argument videos covers the period from May 2007 to the present.
SEPTEMBER TERM 2024 Webcasts
December 2024 Oral Arguments
November 2024 Oral Arguments
October 2024 Oral Arguments
September 2024 Oral Arguments
SEPTEMBER TERM 2023 Webcasts
Oral Arguments Archives
September Term 2023 Webcasts
September Term 2022 Webcasts
September Term 2021 Webcasts
Webcasts and the archived recordings of webcasts are made available to the general public for informational purposes only and do not constitute an official record of court proceedings. Recording or copying of any portion of the live webcast or the archived recording of a webcast is prohibited without the express permission of the Supreme Court, which can be obtained by contacting Government Relations and Public Affairs at 410-260-1488 or at [email protected]. Copies of the recorded audio of the proceedings are available from the Clerk upon request and payment of a $10.00 fee.
| December 2024 Schedule | ||
| Date | Docket # | Title |
| 12-18-2024 | Misc. No. 16 | Roma Scott v. Honorable Paul M. Bowman Petition for wriit of mandamus. |
| 12-10-2024 | Misc. No. 5 | Donald S. Willey, et al. v. Anthony G. Brown, et al. Certified Question of Law from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland 1) What legal standard does the term "reasonable grounds" connote in Maryland's Red Flag Law, codified in Title Five of the Public Safety Article of the Maryland Annotated Code? 2) Does the statue permit an extreme risk protective order to issue upon a standard less than probable cause? |
| 12-10-2024 | No. 23 | State of Maryland, Comptroller of Maryland v. Badlia Brothers, LLC d/b/a/ Southwest Check Cashing Issue – State Government – Where the State has already satisfied its obligation to pay funds pursuant to a state-issued check, did the trial court err in concluding that the State has waived sovereign immunity against a claim by a holder in due course of that check who subsequently seeks to have the State pay that obligation a second time? |
| 12-09-2024 | Bar Admissions | |
| 12-09-2024 | Misc. Nos. 3 & 4 | Government Employees Insurance Company, et al. v. MAO-SSO Recovery II, LLC, Series PMPI, et al. Certified Question of Law from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland Whether the assignment of the right to seek and receive unpaid reimbursement of payments for expenses under 42 U.S.C. § 1395y(b)(3)(A) (2018) pursuant to a contingency compensation arrangement/agreement is void as against public policy of Maryland, and if so, whether such an arrangement/agreement is unenforceable regardless of any choice of law provision contained in such an agreement. |
| 12-09-2024 | No. 17 | In the Matter of the Petition of Featherfall Restoration Issues – Insurance Law – 1) Does the standard insurance policy clause prohibiting assignment of “this policy” absent insurer consent prohibit the insured from assigning a post-loss claim benefit under the policy without its consent? 2) Did the lower courts err in affording deference to and affirming the ruling of law by the Maryland Insurance Administration (“MIA”) that anti-assignment clauses in property insurance policies preclude post-loss assignments of claims, instead of following this Court’s precedents upholding post-loss claim assignments in the face of anti-assignment clauses? 3) Did the lower courts err in affirming the MIA’s decision that Petitioner, as an assignee of insurance benefits from the insurer, was not a “claimant” or “aggrieved” with standing to challenge the insurer’s unfair claims settlement practices with respect to the claim assigned? 4) Should the trial court have issued a declaratory judgment that the assignment of claim benefits at issue did not violate the contractual provision that “assignment of this policy will not be valid unless we give our written consent” instead of deferring to the agency’s interpretation of Maryland contract law? (Note: The SCM granted a writ of cert only as to Petitioner’s questions 2, 4, 5, and 6.) |
| 12-09-2024 | No. 21 | Seamus Coyle v. State of Maryland Issues – Criminal Law – 1) When the Office of the Public Defender appointed counsel to Petitioner and approved of assigned counsel’s determination that a petition for writ of certiorari should be filed, was Petitioner entitled to the effective assistance of counsel in filing such a petition? 2) Must prejudice be presumed when, due to ineffective assistance of counsel, Petitioner was denied his right to file a petition for writ of certiorari and did the post-conviction court err in holding that he must establish that the petition would have been granted? |
| November 2024 Schedule | ||
| Date | Docket # | Title |
| 11-08-2024 | No. 12 | Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Jamie Wallace Issues – Natural Resources – 1) Did ACM err when it held that the Maryland Recreational Use Statute, Md. Code, Natural Resources § 5-1101, et seq., (“MRUS”) does not apply to paths in public parks, even where a local government has made the path available for recreational use? 2) Did ACM err when it held that Haley v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 211 Md. 269 (1956), applies to any path that may serve as a “public connector” between parts of the City, so that any such path in a public park is not subject to MRUS protections? |
| 11-08-2024 | No. 13 | Christopher Nguyen v. State of Maryland Issues – Criminal Law – Petition: 1) Does Maryland common law impose on police officers a general “duty to protect,” a breach of which is enforceable in a criminal prosecution for reckless endangerment or other crimes of omission, and if so, is the duty triggered when one suspect assaults another suspect in an officer’s presence? 2) If Petitioner had a “duty to protect”, was the testimony of other officers that they would have separated or stood between the two suspects legally sufficient to prove that Petitioner, by taking neither action, grossly departed from the standard of conduct that a reasonable, similarly situated police officer would have observed? Conditional Cross-Petition: 3) If the “special relationship” requirement extends to criminal cases involving a police officer-defendant accused of committing reckless endangerment by omission, did the ACM err in concluding that no “special relationship” existed between Petitioner and one of the suspects? |
| 11-07-2024 | Bar Admissions | |
| 11-07-2024 | No. 19 | Stephen Zimmerman v. State of Maryland Criminal Procedure – Whether further appellate review lies in either the Supreme Court of Maryland or the Appellate Court of Maryland from a circuit court’s order revoking probation when the circuit court’s order was entered in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction over a decision of the District Court of Maryland. |
| October 2024 Schedule | ||
| Date | Docket # | Title |
| 10-08-2024 | No. 26 | Maryland State Board of Elections, et al. v. Anthony J. Ambridge, et al. Direct appeal under Maryland Election Law. |
| 10-07-2024 | 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? |
| 10-07-2024 | AG No. 42 (2023 T.) | Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Francis Edward Yeatman |
| 10-07-2024 | 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? |
| 10-02-2024 | No. 11 The oral arguments in this matter were held at Frederick Douglass High School, Northwestern Campus, in Baltimore, Maryland. | 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? |
| 10-02-2024 | No. 4 The oral arguments in this matter were held at Frederick Douglass High School, Northwestern Campus, in Baltimore, Maryland. | 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)? |
| 10-01-2024 | 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? |
| 10-01-2024 | 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? |
| September 2024 Schedule | ||
| Date | Docket # | Title |
| 09-10-2024 | Misc. No. 2 No. 10 Please note these cases were consolidated for the purposes of oral argument on the Constitutional question. | The Key School, Inc., et al. v. Valerie Bunker Board of Education of Harford County v. John Doe Constitutional Question Does the Maryland Child Victims Act of 2023, 2023 Md. Laws ch. 5 (S.B. 686), (codified at Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-117), constitute an impermissible abrogation of a vested right in violation of Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights and/or Article III, Section 40 of the Maryland Constitution? |
| 09-10-2024 | No. 10 This recording is on the standing question only. | Board of Education of Harford County v. John Doe Standing Question As a subdivision of the State, see Bd. Of Educ. v. Sec’y of Personnel, 317 Md. 34, 44-45 (1989), does the petitioner have standing to challenge the constitutionality of the MCVA? |
| 09-10-2024 | No. 9 | Roman Catholic Archbishop of Washington v. John Doe, et al. Does the Maryland Child Victims Act of 2023, 2023 Md. Laws ch. 5 (S.B. 686), (codified at Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-117), constitute an impermissible abrogation of a vested right in violation of Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights and/or Article III, Section 40 of the Maryland Constitution? |
| 09-09-2024 | Misc. No. 50 (2023 T.) | In the Matter of the Application of O. A. S. for Admission to the Bar of Maryland |
| 09-09-2024 | No. 5 | Isiah A. Hollins v. State of Maryland Issue – Criminal Law – 1) Did the ACM erroneously apply a sufficiency of the evidence standard instead of the “some evidence” standard when it upheld the denial of Petitioner’s request for a non-pattern jury instruction regarding the alleged victim’s propensity for violence? 2) Did the trial court violate the Confrontation Clause of the U.S. Constitution when it prohibited Petitioner from cross-examining the alleged victim about visible injuries to rebut the claim raised on direct examination that the victim had outgrown any violence in his past? |
| 09-09-2024 | No. 7 | Moira E. Akers v. State of Maryland Issue – Criminal Law – Is evidence of a pregnant woman’s forgoing prenatal care or evidence of a pregnant woman’s conducting Internet searches about terminating the pregnancy relevant as a matter of law to show the woman’s intent to kill the newborn at birth, or if marginally relevant, unfairly prejudicial? |
| 09-06-2024 | No. 6 | Greenmark Properties, LLC v. Parts, Inc., et al. Issues – Corporations & Associations – 1) Is a contract to sell the only asset of a corporation valid if the contract is signed by the sole shareholder still living at the time of the contract and who held in person or by proxy the right to vote the majority of shares in any business decision, but where the sale was not approved by the personal representative of the estates that held title to the majority of the stock? 2) Is a contract to sell the only asset of the corporation void ab initio because the sale was not approved by the corporation’s shareholders in compliance with § 3-105 of the Corporations and Associations Article? 3) Did the ACM correctly determine that petitioner failed to preserve the issue of its standing to challenge the validity of the second contract under §§ 1-403 and 3-105 of the Corporations and Associations Article? |
| 09-05-2024 | Bar Admissions | |
| 09-05-2024 | No. 1 | SM Landover, LLC v. Wynton Sanders; SM Parkside, LLC v. Tosha Lindsey Issues – Real Property – 1) When does a cause of action accrue under the Disclosure Act, Md. Code, Real Prop. Art. (“RP”) § 14-117(a)(3)(i), for failing to include in the initial contract of sale statutory disclosures relating to deferred water and sewer charges? 2) Is a person who is a “home builder” under Md. Code, Business Regulations Art. (“BR”) §4.5-101 relieved of their duty to register as a “home builder” when a different registered home builder is a party to the same contract? 3) Can the unregistered home builder, acting as the seller, of a new home enforce the sales contract against the purchaser where another party, here the builder of the home, who is a registered home builder is also a party to the sale contract? |
| 09-05-2024 | No. 2 | Caruso Builder Belle Oak, LLC v. Ronalda Sullivan Issue – Real Property - When does a cause of action accrue under the Disclosure Act, Md. Code, Real Prop. Art. § 14-117(a)(3)(i), for failing to include in the initial contract of sale statutory disclosures relating to deferred water and sewer charges? |
| 09-05-2024 | No. 3 | Summer Ledford v. Jenway Contracting, Inc. Issue – Labor & Employment – Did ACM err by extending the exclusivity provision of § 9-509 of the Labor & Employment Article (workers’ compensation) to non-dependents? |
| August 2024 Schedule (September Term 2023) | ||
| Date | Docket # | Title |
| 08-28-2024 | No. 35 | Benedict J. Frederick, III, et al. v. Baltimore City Board of Elections, et al. Direct appeal under Maryland Election Law. |
| 08-28-2024 | No. 34 | Baltimore City Board of Elections, et al. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, et al. Direct appeal under Maryland Election Law. |