38 results for 'court:"The Appellate Court of Maryland"'.
J. Arthur finds the lower court properly dismissed a matter due to general jurisdiction, but improperly dismissed it on grounds that it lacked personal jurisdiction. A former student-athlete, also a Maryland resident, filed suit against the NCAA seeking to recover damages for a degenerative neurological condition he alleges is linked to the years he played football at Rutgers University. The former student-athlete argues the NCAA is subject to both general and personal jurisdiction in Maryland despite the NCAA being headquartered in Indiana, but the lower court determined it did not have jurisdiction over the matter due to the NCAA’s headquarters being located in Indiana. While the instant court agrees the NCAA is not subject to general jurisdiction, the former student-athlete did satisfactorily demonstrate that it is subject to specific personal jurisdiction based on the NCAA’s rulemaking activities in Maryland, and that due process will not be violated by answering the former student-athletes claims. Reversed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Arthur, Filed On: February 1, 2024, Case #: 0866, Categories: Negligence, Due Process, Jurisdiction
J. Leahy finds the lower court properly determined an administrator, who is also the son of a shipping supply company owner, left the company, taking many of the company’s employees with him to start a competing company. The lower court properly found the employees in breach of contract, as they violated the terms of the non-compete agreement with the supply company, and found that many of the company’s documents were taken, including client lists and proprietary information. However, the lower court erred in accepting the supply company’s calculation of damages, as they were not properly compiled, and also erred in finding the employee’s actions were malicious. The matter is remanded for a re-assessment and calculation of damages. Affirmed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Leahy, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 421, Categories: Antitrust, Trade Secrets, Contract
J. Leahy finds the lower court properly determined an administrator, who is also the son of a shipping supply company owner, left the company, taking many of the company’s employees with him to start a competing company. The lower court properly found the employees in breach of contract, as they violated the terms of the non-compete agreement with the supply company, and found that many of the company’s documents were taken, including client lists and proprietary information. However, the lower court erred in accepting the supply company’s calculation of damages, as they were not properly compiled, and also erred in finding the employee’s actions were malicious. The matter is remanded for a re-assessment and calculation of damages. Affirmed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Leahy, Filed On: December 22, 2023, Case #: 421, Categories: Antitrust, Trade Secrets, Contract
J. Graeff finds the Public Service Commission erroneously dismissed a complaint on grounds that it involved issues that may affect other companies. The Commission dismissed claims against an energy company for alleged violations of the utility code of conduct by way of marketing statements that were allegedly deceptive and misleading. The instant court finds the Commission is only allowed to dismiss a complaint if it fails to state a claim in which relief can be granted, and by dismissing for other reasons, violated its own policy. The matter is remanded for further consideration. Reversed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Graeff, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: 2033, Categories: Energy, Agency, False Advertising
J. Getty finds the lower court improperly conducted voir dire. Defendant was convicted of first-degree murder for shooting a man twice, killing him, after communicating in a chat room and meeting him at the victim’s apartment to have sex. Defendant argues there was bias on the jury since prospective jurors were not asked whether they were prejudiced against gay sexual relations. The instant court finds that due to the homosexual nature of the relationship between defendant and the victim, and because evidence of gay sexual relations was presented and discussed, the jury should have been questioned to identify any potential bias. The matter is remanded for further proceedings.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Getty, Filed On: December 6, 2023, Case #: 1898, Categories: Jury, Murder
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Wright finds the lower court properly dismissed a wrongful death claim. The daughter of a man who fell to his death while working filed suit against his employer claiming the employer’s negligence caused her father’s death. Because the father died in the course of doing his job, the lower court determined that all claims for damages must be remedied through the Maryland Workers’ Compensation Act. As the daughter is not a dependant, she has no claim to benefits under the Workers’ Compensation Act, and the lower court dismissed the case. The instant court finds no error in the lower court's findings. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Wright, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 1755, Categories: Negligence, Wrongful Death, Workers' Compensation
J. Taylor finds the lower court properly convicted defendant of unlawfully possessing a regulated firearm and ammunition for displaying a handgun during the course of a confrontation with another man in a parking lot. Defendant was sentenced to 10 years incarceration, with five years to serve and three years probation. Evidence in this case was properly admitted and considered, and any possible prejudice is deemed harmless. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Taylor, Filed On: November 30, 2023, Case #: 1254, Categories: Evidence, Firearms
J. Sharer concurs with the trial court’s finding in favor of the neighbor of a dog owner after the dog bit the neighbor, and the dog owner will not be granted a new trial. This is because the dog was “at large” or loose outside on property that the dog owner and neighbor shared, and because the neighbor did not provoke the dog in any way. The dog owner is liable for the dog’s behavior when it is not leashed, and the neighbor was awarded over $130,000 for medical treatment and other damages. Although the owner believes the award is shocking and unreasonable, the court disagrees and there is no need for a new trial. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Sharer, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: 24-C-21-000655, Categories: Evidence, Tort, Negligence
J. Alpert agrees with the trial court’s decisions to use a police officer’s statements as evidence and to use coconspirator hearsay and text messages as evidence against a man convicted of felony murder, robbery and other charges. The officer told the court that when the man used the word “lick” in communication with coconspirators, the word referred to committing a robbery. The officer was not treated as an expert, but his experience in law enforcement, particularly his nine years in a robbery unit, was treated as reliable testimony in this case. Further, hearsay in this case was admissible because the information was directly relevant having come from coconspirators in the crimes. Finally, texts messages between the man and third parties are also admissible because they establish his preparation, motivation and intent to commit the crimes. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Alpert, Filed On: September 27, 2023, Case #: C-08-CR-20-000179, Categories: Evidence, Murder, Robbery
J. Leahy disagrees with the lower court’s decision to award a husband a frozen pre-embryo in order for him to have it destroyed against his wife’s wishes after they decided to divorce. The couple, while married, made an oral agreement that “no matter what,” they would give all of three pre-embryos a chance at life as part of an IVF process. The first ended in a miscarriage, while the second resulted in the birth of a healthy baby. Not long after, the couple split up, leaving the third pre-embryo as yet unused. The husband preferred to have it destroyed because, he argued, the agreement should have a stipulation that they only use it if they are married. However, this stipulation was never part of the oral agreement, so the wife will be able to use the pre-embryo to attempt pregnancy again. Reversed and remanded.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Leahy, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: 03-C-17-007803, Categories: Family Law, Contract
J. McDonald concurs with the lower court’s decision that a city’s insurer cannot apply a last injurious exposure rule to avoid its liability after a police officer made a workers’ compensation claim for hearing loss. The officer was employed in three different Maryland governments (town, city and county) over 25 years and developed hearing loss in both ears as a result. Workers’ compensation law makes it the responsibility of the last employer chronologically to compensate the employee even if it is found they developed a condition over their time at more than one work place. However, this rule does not extend to insurance, so all providers over the worker’s career are liable.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: McDonald, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: CAL21-07018, Categories: Employment, Insurance, Workers' Compensation
J. Woodward concurs with the lower court’s dismissal of manslaughter and homicide of a viable fetus after a driver under the influence of alcohol crashed into a car, causing a pregnant woman injury that resulted in the baby being stillborn at a hospital. The state charged the driver under laws that require the driver to have acted recklessly with the knowledge that a person is pregnant. Even though he was negligent in drinking and driving, the driver could not have known that anyone in the car he hit was pregnant. However, he is still charged with causing life-threatening injury. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Woodward, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: CT191310X, Categories: Manslaughter, Vehicle, Criminal Negligence
J. Ripken agrees with the lower court’s decision to classify a crime as a felony after a car buyer used her work supervisor’s identity to fraudulently co-sign a loan to purchase a vehicle. The buyer argues that because a Maryland criminal code does not specify the monetary value regarding the offense, she should only receive a misdemeanor. However, a caption provided by police estimating the value between $1,500 and $25,000 necessarily stands in place of the specificity in the code, and the value of the car is high enough to warrant a felony conviction. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Ripken, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: C-22-CR-21-000541, Categories: Fraud, Identity Theft
J. Kenney agrees in part with the lower court's decision that Cricket and AT&T violated consumer protection laws when they sold CDMA-only phones to customers that they knew would not work after a merger. Cricket sold at least 50,000 cell phones that only used the CDMA network after announcing its merger with AT&T. However, it planned to decommission the network upon merging, and neither company told the phone customers. An investigation by the state's Office of the Attorney General revealed the companies to have sold the phones deceptively. While they argue on appeal that the suit is time-barred under a judicial proceedings rule, this is incorrect because the rule does not apply to administrative proceedings, under which this case falls.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Kenney, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: 24C21003491, Categories: Antitrust, Trade, Consumer Law
J. Moylan concurs with the lower court's decision to charge a bar customer with second-degree murder after he alleged stabbed someone, who died shortly after, outside the bar. The customer, on appeal, questions whether the evidence of video footage and the testimony of bar staff and other customers is legally sufficient and whether the judge abused his discretion by dismissing a juror. Upon review, although no one claimed to have seen the moment where the perpetrator stabbed the victim, multiple witnesses corroborated the customer's presence and physical description, as did the footage, and saw him running away just after the stabbing took place. Also, the judge was correct in replacing a juror as there was a potential conflict of interest since the juror was acquainted with some of the customer's family members. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Moylan, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: C-21-CR-18-000464, Categories: Evidence, Jury, Murder
[Consolidated.] J. Nazarian agrees with the lower court's ruling that a group of residential property purchasers are not owed any amount they overpaid on tax sale properties, including any post-sale environmental citations and water charges. According to state tax law, any overage the purchasers paid goes to the previous property owners, which in this case was the City of Baltimore. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Nazarian, Filed On: September 5, 2023, Case #: 24-C-C-19-001233, Categories: Property, Tax
J. Arthur agrees with the lower court's decision to uphold an agreement between an attorney and the law firm she worked for, which ordered her to pay the firm fees she had withheld from it after she left the practice. The attorney argues that the agreement is unethical and therefore unenforceable because the practice took too large a percentage of the payment she received from the client. She withheld over $700,000 as a result. Because her client opted to continue working with her after she left the firm, she argues she is entitled to the client's payments. However, because the client started his legal relationship with the attorney when she was part of the firm, the agreement states that the firm is still owed a higher percentage of the client's payments, plus interest accrued.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Arthur, Filed On: September 1, 2023, Case #: CAL-18-36527, Categories: Contract, Attorney Discipline
J. Arthur upholds the lower court's determination that an appeal should be heard in Pennsylvania (PA), not in Maryland (MD), after a realty investment trust demanded payment from a limited liability corporation because the trust's commercial tenant in PA defaulted. The corporation filed suit in Montgomery County, MD, seeking a declaration that it does not have liability on the guaranty, and moments later, the trust filed suit in Montgomery County, PA, the location of the property. In this case, the trust anticipated the corporation's filing in MD, so filed its own in PA because it thought MD may review the corporation's damages claims with more scrutiny than PA. Typically in a case like this, the rule is to proceed with litigation in the county where either party filed first. However, in this case, because the trust filed in PA in anticipation of the corporation's MD filing, the first-to-file rule will not be used and PA is the appropriate venue.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Arthur, Filed On: September 1, 2023, Case #: 485946-V, Categories: Civil Procedure, Corporations, Trusts
J. Getty disagrees with the lower court’s granting of summary judgment to condo owners who disagreed with their neighbor’s exterior alterations to his own condo based on an implied homeowners’ association law that requires any owner to get written approval before making such changes. However, a declaration made in 1978 did not create the subject community under that homeowners’ law, and thus, the neighbor is not subject to that law. Vacated and remanded.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Getty, Filed On: August 2, 2023, Case #: C-23-CV-20-000194, Categories: Property, Real Estate, Contract
J. Albright disagrees with the lower court's decision to deny an incarcerated man his motion to reduce his sentence based on the Juvenile Restoration Act as the court erroneously concluded that it lacked authority to do otherwise. The man was convicted of first degree murder at the age of 17 in 1988 and sentenced to life plus two consecutive 20-year sentences for other charges. The lower court argues that because the man's sentence is parole eligible, a reduction should be decided by the parole board. However, according to a state statute, parole eligibility does not prevent the court from granting a reduced sentence. Vacated.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Albright, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: 00009893, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Juvenile Law, Murder
J. Kehoe opposes the lower court's ruling that a mortgage firm should not be awarded any portion of a home insurance policy after the mortgagee's house burned down and took his life and that of an adult child. The mortgage had not been satisfied at the time of the fire, and the firm purchased it at auction after foreclosing on it for much less than the outstanding balance. The mortgagee's family argue that because of this, the firm is owed nothing from the home insurance policy. State law, however, protects the firm's interests when fire damages the collateral. Reversed and remanded.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Kehoe, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: C-07-CV-19-000482, Categories: Insurance, Property, Banking / Lending
J. Adkins disagrees with the lower court's decision to grant summary judgment to State Farm in a bad faith lawsuit brought by a passenger who was injured in a hit and run collision. State Farm refused to cover medical costs associated with the passenger's recovery. The passenger also filed a complaint with the state insurance administration, then the office of administrative hearings, both of which ended up in favor of State Farm. The lower court then said she was estopped from relitigating her claim because it constituted an independent civil claim, but this is incorrect because it was actually an appeal of the administration's decision. Reversed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Adkins, Filed On: July 27, 2023, Case #: 475045V, Categories: Insurance, Vehicle, Contract
J. Arthur finds that the lower court improperly dismissed a petition after finding that it did not fall under the definition of extraordinary cause when defendant's attorney failed to timely file for post-conviction relief. Defendant's attorney filed the petition one day before the 10-year deadline expired. However, upon checking the state's electronic court system, she found her filing had not properly processed and she had to submit it late. The attorney's actions constitute malpractice and demonstrate extraordinary cause. Vacated.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Arthur, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 03-K-08-002390, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Ineffective Assistance, Murder
J. Arthur partially reverses the denial of a petition for post-conviction relief in an attempted murder case because defendant made a valid claim that he may use a subpoena to demand the state provide Brady material and internal affairs files for a police officer who testified against him. Because the state was obligated to produce the information demanded by defendant during his criminal trial, he is allowed the subpoena. Reversed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Arthur, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: 111025040-42, Categories: Evidence, Firearms, Discovery
J. Graeff finds that the lower court properly denied defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal on the charge of participation in a criminal organization that resulted in death. Defendant, a former gang member who robbed, shot and killed another man who had just left his own birthday celebration, argues he did not do so as part of the gang. However, because the gang supplied the weapon and defendant sought help from the gang afterward, his actions are considered to be in association with the gang and therefore demand a felony conviction. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Graeff, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: 03-K-18-003647, Categories: Murder, Robbery, Gangs
J. Wells finds that the lower court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the charges of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamines against her. While she awaited a hearing in Maryland, she was arrested and incarcerated for separate crimes in West Virginia. After serving her sentence, she filed the dismissal, arguing Maryland failed to comply with an Interstate Agreement on Detainers. However, because she herself did not file any written notice for final disposition, she cannot benefit from the IAD statute of being brought to trial within 180 days. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Wells, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: C-11-CR-20-000080, Categories: Drug Offender, Intent, Speedy Trial
J. Raker agrees with the lower court’s decision that the jury should not have received voluntariness instructions in a trial where the court convicted a gun owner of murder. The gun owner, seen shooting a man on a closed circuit camera at a business, was positively identified and all other evidence supports this identification. There was also no evidence that the gun owner had been coerced by police into a false confession. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Raker, Filed On: July 7, 2023, Case #: 119248020, Categories: Firearms, Murder, Jury Instructions
J. Moylan agrees with the lower court's decision not to grant a mistrial to defendant, who physically attacked and choked his ex-girlfriend, when he objected to the so-called erroneous presentation of hearsay evidence from a 9-1-1 call and other such errors. The evidence from the call included an excited utterance, "There's a man beating the shit out of a woman," to which defendant objected. Although defendant contests this admission, an officer who was on the scene, the woman herself, a neighbor who intervened in the attack and all other evidence submitted positively identifies defendant as the assailant. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Moylan, Filed On: July 3, 2023, Case #: C-06-CR-21-000610, Categories: Evidence, Fair Trial, Assault
J. Leahy finds that the lower court erred when it denied a woman's extramarital romantic partner his request to provide criminal pattern jury instruction concerning the voluntariness of his statements to law enforcement. This comes after the second jury trial for the partner in which he was convicted of second degree murder of the woman's husband. However, the lower court did not violate the partner's double jeopardy rights when it entered evidence of premeditation and conspiracy because the same evidence was used for the murder conviction, and that evidence was sufficient for that conviction. Reversed in part.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Leahy, Filed On: June 29, 2023, Case #: 12-77-06-C, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Murder, Jury Instructions