SCHEDULE OF ORAL ARGUMENTS
September Term, 2016
Thursday, January 5, 2017:
AG No. 36 (2015 T.) Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Allen Ray Dyer and Susan Baker Gray
Attorneys for Petitioner: Lydia E. Lawless and Jennifer L. Thompson
Attorneys for Respondent: Allen R. Dyer and Susan Baker Gray
No. 33 Elvaton Towne Condominium Regime II, Inc. v. William Kevin Rose et ux.
Issues – Real Property – 1) Does Md. law permit and do Petitioner’s Declaration and Bylaws provide authority to implement rules that temporarily suspend unit owners who are delinquent in their condominium assessments from using the community parking lot and pool? 2) Did CSA err by finding that Respondents were precluded from pursuing a declaratory judgment related to Petitioner’s Statement of Lien, which established an interested in Respondents’ real property, and Respondents’ only procedural remedy was to pursue a defense in a money damages consumer collection action pending in the District Court?
Attorneys for Petitioner: Jay Allan Abarbanel and Ira Lee Oring
Attorney for Respondent: Anthony J. May
No. 32 Daniel Rohrer v. Humane Society of Washington County
Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Does Criminal Law § 10-615 permit the notice and removal of an animal under §§ 10-615(c) and (d) when the animal was seized pursuant to a search and seizure warrant and is in the custody of the State? 2) Must the factors and conditions that permit the removal of an animal pursuant to § 10-615(c) exist at the time the “notice of removal” is given to the owner under § 10-615? 3) Does the denial of a petition for the return of animals pursuant to § 10-615(d)(2) during the pendency of a criminal charge against the owner pursuant to § 10-604 result in the loss of ownership and disposal of those animals, or is the denial temporary until there is a final disposition of the criminal matter?
Attorney for Petitioner: Rebekah D. Lusk
Attorney for Respondent: Adam D. Greivell
No. 47 Richard A. Edwards v. State of Maryland
Attorney for Appellant: Allison Pierce Brasseaux
Attorney for Appellee: Robert K. Taylor, Jr.
No. 42 United Food and Commercial Workers International Union et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al.
Issue – Labor & Employment – Did CSA err when it held that this case does not involve a labor dispute and the National Labor Relations Act does not preempt Walmart’s claims?
Attorney for Petitioner: George Wiszynski
Attorneys for Respondent: Jennifer M. Alexander and Steven D. Wheeless
No. 49 State of Maryland v. Douglas Ford Bey II
Issue – Criminal Law – Did CSA err in concluding that Criminal Law § 3-315, which prohibits engaging in a continuing course of conduct with a child, prohibits more than one conviction and sentence per victim, regardless of the duration of the abuse or the type of sexual acts committed?
Attorney for Petitioner: Sarah Page Pritzlaff
Attorney for Respondent: Rachel Simmonsen
No. 45 Clifford Cain, Jr. v. Midland Funding LLC
Issues – Courts and Judicial Proceedings – 1) Did CSA err in concluding that a debt buyer’s pattern of filing thousands of collection actions in Md. courts, and obtaining judgments in those actions, was unrelated to a later putative class action seeking a judicial declaration that those earlier judgments were void and disgorgement of the money so obtained, thus finding the doctrine of waiver inapplicable and permitting the debt buyer to compel arbitration on an individual basis? 2) In concluding that no waiver of the right to arbitrate had occurred, did CSA err in disregarding the tactical timing of the debt buyer’s motion to compel arbitration, which it filed only after a CSA opinion in a related case that was adverse to the debt buyer’s litigation position?
Attorney for Petitioner: Karla Gilbride
Attorney for Respondent: James P. Ulwick
On the day of argument, counsel are instructed to register in the Clerk’s Office no later than 9:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified.
After January 9, 2017, the Court will recess until February 2, 2017.
BESSIE M. DECKER