Maryland Courts

PETITIONS FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

September Term, 2011

 

Granted May 9, 2012

100 Investment Limited Partnership, et al. v. Columbia Town Center Title Company, et al. - Case No. 19, September Term, 2012

Issues - Torts - 1) Did CSA err by holding that title companies do not owe a tort duty of care when conducting a title search? 2) Did CSA err by holding that the title insurer was not vicariously liable for the negligence of the title companies who were its agents?

Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Albright - Case No. 15, September Term, 2012

Issues- Torts - 1) Whether, in an action for fraud, evidence of the Defendant's false, sworn testimony to the government, made with the intent of influencing government action, & relied upon by it to the Plaintiff's detriment, satisfies the requirement that Plaintiffs prove reliance? 2) Whether property owners whose sole source of potable water has been contaminated with a genotoxic substance for which there is no safe level of exposure, are entitled to damages for fear of cancer or for medical monitoring. 3) Whether, in an action for property damage, evidence that the Defendant released contaminants into the aquifer that serves as the Plaintiff's sole source of potable water is sufficient to establish Defendant's liability for an invasion of the Plaintiff's land?

Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Ford - Case No. 16, September Term, 2012

Issues - Torts - 1) Does MD permit awards for emotional distress due to fear of developing cancer &, if so, must claimant prove that his or her wrongful exposure to a carcinogen makes it more likely than not that he or she will develop cancer? 2) May a jury's verdict that all of Plaintiffs' properties were worthless be upheld where (a) the properties were all still habitable & many had no contamination; (b) all experts testified that the properties retained substantial value; & (c) those properties which were sold all sold for a substantial price? 3) Did CSA err in holding that counsel for Petitioner did not waive his client's right to challenge the compensatory damage awards, despite implicit acquiescence in the jury verdict? 4) Should Plaintiff's property damage expert's opinions have been admitted where he failed to use any generally accepted method of valuation & he failed to consider actual sales or forecast accurately those arms length valuations? 5) Should emotional distress verdicts be overturned where the uniform awards ignored the substantial differences among Plaintiffs, evidence satisfying the Vance standards for recovery of such damages was not presented, & the jury instruction permitted recovery for fear of cancer without any evidence of exposure to the alleged carcinogen or that the exposure made it "reasonably probable" that a Plaintiff would contract cancer? 6) Did CSA err in holding that the "fear of cancer" jury instruction was erroneous & prejudicial? 7) Does MD law permit damages for medical monitoring & if so, may such damages be awarded where a) no Plaintiff claimed to have any current disease caused by exposure to contaminant, b) there was no proof that any Plaintiff had a significantly increased risk of developing any disease, & c) as to many Plaintiffs, there was no proof of exposure? 8) Is a new damages trial required when a jury's award of compensatory damages is not based on the Plaintiff's alleged injuries? 9) Did CSA violate CJP § 1-403(c) when it issued its in banc decisions without a "concurrence of a majority of the incumbent judges of the entire Court"? 10) Did CSA reach a majority vote of the sitting judges on the issue of medical monitoring and, if they did, was there error in holding that the evidence was insufficient to support an award for medical monitoring?

McCracken, Reginald v. State of Maryland - Case No. 18, September Term, 2012

Issues - Criminal Law - 1) Does the plain-feel doctrine allow police to seize evidence when they have only reasonable suspicion, but not probable cause, to associate that evidence with criminal activity? 2) Did CSA err in concluding the officer could seize a set of keys & a car remote because he had probable cause to believe they were evidence of "hacking"?

Ray v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore - Case No. 21, September Term, 2012

Issue - Real Property - Did CSA err when it ruled that Petitioners lacked standing because they were neither prima facie aggrieved nor specially aggrieved by the City's land use decision?

Spence, Graylin Bernard v. State of Maryland - Case No. 17, September Term, 2012

Issues - Criminal Law - 1) Did CSA properly decline to address the legality of a sentence when that court vacated the conviction upon which the allegedly illegal sentence was based? 2) Was the evidence sufficient to establish that petitioner was subject to enhanced penalty as a subsequent offender? 3) Did CSA err in finding the trial court was obligated to conduct a MD Rule 4-215(e) hearing where the trial court was never apprised that Petitioner had a desire to discharge his assigned public defender?

State Department of Assessments & Taxation v. Baltimore Gas & Electric - Case No. 14, September Term, 2012

Issue - Taxation - Did the MD Tax Court correctly interpret Public Utilities Art. §§ 7-524 & 7-548 when it rejected an adjustment to the taxable gross receipts of a public utility, where the franchise tax is imposed on the statutorily-defined gross receipts from the utility's electricity distribution charges, where the adjustment sought by the utility was based on a credit that offset the increased cost to consumers of electricity generation, & where the offset did not alter the revenue received by the utility from its distribution service?

State of Maryland v. Ray, John Wesley - Case No. 23, September Term, 2012

Issue - Criminal Law - Did CSA err in reversing the lower court's proper denial of Respondent's motion to dismiss those re-instituted charges in light of Ray v. State, 410 Md. 385 (2009)?

State of Maryland v. Weems, Latresha L. - Case No. 20, September Term, 2012

Issues - Criminal Law - 1) Are the requirements of Criminal Law Art. § 7-104(d) met if it is shown that a defendant knew that he or she had obtained property by mistake, learned the identity of the owner, failed to take measures to restore the property to the owner, and intended to permanently deprive the owner of the property? 2) Did CSA err in holding that the State failed to prove that Respondent took reasonable measures to restore the property to its owner?

Transcare Maryland, Inc. v. Murray - Case No. 24, September Term, 2012

Issues - Statutory Law - 1) Whether the Good Samaritan Act precludes civil liability to a vicariously liable private employer whose employee is immune under the Act? 2) Whether the Fire and Rescue Act provides immunity for a paramedic & his employer, a private ambulance company, providing emergency medical services in the absence of gross negligence?

WSG Holdings, LLC v. Bowie - Case No. 22, September Term, 2012

Issues - Administrative Law - 1) Did CSA err when it found that objections to the site visit were preserved for appellate review & that there was no recorded vote or any recognition that the exclusion of some members of the public were subject to the procedural requirements of the state Open Meetings Act? 2) Did CSA err when it found that the March 17, 2009 site visit violated the open meeting requirement? 3) Did CSA err in reversing the judgment & remanding the matter to the Board for another hearing & decision without further instructions to the trial court and Board?

 

Denied May 11, 2012

Arey, Douglas Scott v. State - Pet. Docket No. 581
Arey, Douglas Scott v. State - Pet. Docket No. 589
Armstead v. Karium - Pet. Docket No. 24*
Armstrong v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore - Pet. Docket No. 36*
Baines, Christopher Sterling v. State - Pet. Docket No. 579
Baystate Properties, L.L.C. v. Serio - Pet. Docket No. 573
Bedingfield v. Personnel Board of Anne Arundel County - Pet. Docket No. 10*
Blanks, Richard Lavonte v. State - Pet. Docket No. 27*
Booth, Maurice Jerome v. State - Pet Docket No. 20*
Brothers Services, Co. v. The Ryland Group, Inc. - Pet. Docket No. 37*
Bryan v. Victory Housing, Inc. - Pet. Docket No. 574
Cokely, Maurice Dean v. State - Pet. Docket No. 590
Council of Unit Owners of the Fairway Courtyards II at Waverly Woods v. Courtyards II, LLC - Pet. Docket No. 22* and conditional cross-petition
Cox v. Geren - Pet. Docket No. 583
Davis v. Petito - Pet. Docket No. 8*
DiCarlo v. John W. Tieder, Inc. - Pet. Docket No. 14*
Doughty v. Kirson - Pet. Docket No. 575
Drummond, Randy Robert v. State - Pet. Docket No. 9*
Erie Insurance Exchange v. H.T. Harrison & Sons, Inc. - Pet. Docket No. 595
Froneberger, Gary v. State - Pet. Docket No. 482
Fulgham v. Housing Authority of Baltimore City - Pet. Docket No. 13* and conditional cross-petition
Garcia, Robert Alexander v. State - Pet. Docket No. 21*
Garrity v. Injured Worker's Insurance Fund - Pet. Docket No. 15*
Gilman, Bradley M. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 25*
In Re: Adoption/Guardianship of Hailey E., Larah E., and Meadow E. - Pet. Docket No. 16*
In Re: Juliana B. - Pet. Docket No. 42*
Jackson, Terrell v. State - Pet. Docket No. 564
Janusz v. Gilliam - Pet. Docket No. 7*
Mason, Quintin v. State - Pet. Docket No. 28*
Mastromarco v. Long - Pet. Docket No. 4*
Mitchell, Robert Earl, Jr. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 45*
Montijo v. Maryland MRI, LLC - Pet. Docket No. 593
Nichols v. Carriage House Condominiums at Perry Hall Farms, Inc. - Pet. Docket No. 23*
North Brook Property Management, LLC v. U.S. Bank National Association - Pet. Docket No. 19*
Page, Donald v. State - Pet. Docket No. 479
Salley v. Webb - Pet. Docket No. 30*
Sampson, Lamar Devon v. State - Pet. Docket No. 588
Schaefer v. Lipskin - Pet. Docket No. 11*
Shepperson, Travis Rashard v. State - Pet. Docket No. 585
Siskos v. Marino - Pet. Docket No. 570
Southall, Michael R. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 525
Sullivan, Mark Vincent v. State - Pet Docket No. 510
Thompson, Craig Devon v. State - Pet. Docket No. 43*
Tiller v. Lanvale Housing LP - Pet. Docket No. 545
Tinsley v. Genesis Healthcare Corporation - Pet. Docket No. 3*
Turner, David Ward v. State - Pet. Docket No. 2*
Walker, Carlos v. State - Pet Docket No. 594
Wallace, Michael v. State - Pet. Docket No. 497
Wright, Jerome v. State - Pet. Docket No. 546

 

Denied May 17, 2012

Kelley, Lisa C. v. State - Pet. Docket No. 144*

 

Granted May 18, 2012

Hodge v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority - Case No. 25, September Term, 2012

Issues - Transportation - 1) Whether Petitioner's claims against WMATA are barred by governmental immunity under § 80 of the WMATA Compact, codified as Md. Transport. § 10-204? 2) Whether WMATA's claimed immunity is limited by § 75 of said compact regarding compliance with state and local laws as there exists a wide body of case law in Maryland providing for premises liability? 3) Whether WMATA's claimed immunity is limited by § 75 of said compact as Prince George's County has enacted a Property Standards and Management Code and a Fire Prevention Code which preclude commercial businesses from failing to clean and police their floors? 4) Whether Petitioner failed to make a prima facie case of negligence as a matter of law in light of the blizzard which occurred shortly before Petitioner's fall?

Lowery, Edward Bruce, Jr. v. State of Maryland - Case No. 26, September Term, 2012

Issues - Environmental Law - 1) Whether MD Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has complied with its statutory duty to publish specific delineations of submerged aquatic vegetation protection zones when the public notice provided contact information within DNR but contained no actual delineations? 2) Whether MD DNR has complied with its statutory duty to give public notice of delineations of submerged aquatic vegetation protection zones when the legal notice given was published broadly on the Eastern Shore and Southern MD but only once elsewhere in the state?

Philips v. Board of Trustees of Montgomery College - Case No. 27, September Term, 2012

Issue - Taxation - Whether taxpayers invoking the longstanding common law right of MD taxpayers to challenge illegal or ultra vires acts of MD public officials that are likely to cause pecuniary injury also must possess a separate "private right of action" in order to be entitled to declaratory or injunctive relief?

 

Denied May 21, 2012

Abrishamian v. Montgomery Co. Department of Health and Human Services - Pet. Docket No. 421
Moore v. Imagine Capital, Inc. - Pet. Docket No. 104*

* September Term, 2012