Cases Pending Before The Supreme Court

NOTE: Cases are added to this table when they are scheduled for oral argument. Note that oral argument dates may change at any time. After oral arguments, a link to the archived video recording is added. Cases are removed when the mandate issues (or, for attorney disciplinary matters, approximately 30 days after the opinion was filed).

Click on the column title to sort by that column.

Case No.YearPetitionerRespondentCert. GrantedOral ArgumentsOpinion FiledIssues
024
2022FooksState2022-11-182023-03-02
[Oral Arguments]
2023-08-15
[PC Order]
Constitutional Law – 1) In view of existing Supreme Court precedent in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), and McDonald v. City of Chicago, Ill., 561 U.S. 742 (2010), and in light of the Supreme Court’s recent interim decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, No. 20-843, 597 U.S. --- (June 23, 2022), what is the proper analytical framework to apply to constitutional challenges to Maryland’s firearms laws? 2) Did CSA fail to apply the proper analytical framework to the constitutional challenges in this case? 3) Is Md. Code § 5-133(b)(2) of the Public Safety Article unconstitutional, or unconstitutional as applied to this case?

Court of Special Appeals, No. 269, Sept. Term, 2021 [Opinion]
030
2022Katz, Abosch, Windesheim, etc., P.A.Parkway Neuroscience & Spine2023-01-202023-05-04
[Oral Arguments]
2023-08-30
[Opinion]
Maryland Rules – Did ACM err in finding that the trial court abused its discretion in excluding expert testimony on lost profits?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 658, Sept. Term, 2021 [Opinion]
007
2023SyedLee, et al.2023-06-282023-10-05
[Oral Arguments]
 Criminal Procedure – 1) Does a lawfully entered nolle prosequi render moot an appeal alleging procedural violations at a hearing occurring prior to the nolle prosequi? 2) Does a victim’s representative, a non-party to a case, have the right to attend a vacatur hearing in-person or does remote attendance satisfy the right? 3) Was notice to the victim’s representative of the vacatur hearing sufficient where the State complied with all statutory and rules-based notice requirements? 4) Must a victim’s representative seeking reversal show prejudice on appeal? 5) Is a victim’s right to speak incorporated into the Vacatur Statute, Md. Code § 8-301.1 of the Criminal Procedure Article, where no party or entity other than the victim has an interest in challenging the evidence alleged to support vacatur?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1291, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
010
2023In the Matter of McCloy 2023-08-112023-11-03
[Oral Arguments]

Please note: These oral arguments were held at Dr. Henry A. Wise, Jr. High School in Upper Marlboro, MD.
 Public Safety – 1) Did ACM err in affirming the Maryland State Police’s (“MSP”) denial of petitioner’s application to purchase a regulated firearm? 2) Did ACM err in finding that the relevant Md. statute to be considered for equivalence is the statue in effect at the time of the application, not the statute in effect at the time of the out-of-state conviction? 3) Did ACM err in adopting a “substantial evidence” test that fails to provide clear criteria for determining the equivalence of out-of-state offenses and affords unreasonable deference to the agency’s changing statutory interpretations? 4) Did ACM err in finding that a “reasonable mind” could accept the MSP’s conclusion, given that MSP’s conclusion has abruptly and inexplicably changed absent any changes to the relevant facts or law?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 673, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
008
2023MitchellState2023-07-262023-11-06
[Oral Arguments]
 Criminal Law – Should Stewart v. State, 399 Md. 146 (2007) – which summarily rejected the request to ask voir dire questions regarding the credibility of children, like the one at issue in this case, that is: whether any prospective juror would be more or less likely to believe a witness merely because the witness is a child – be reconsidered in light of recent case law governing voir dire?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 560, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
009
2023Cunningham ex rel GainesBaltimore Cty.2023-08-112023-12-04
[Oral Arguments]
2024-06-25
[Opinion]
Constitutional Law – 1) Did ACM err in holding that the law enforcement officer was entitled to qualified immunity with respect to petitioner’s innocent bystander’s substantive due process claim? 2) Does a party waive appellate rights in a second appeal following remand on an issue the trial court did not address in the proceedings prior to the first appeal?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 378, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
017
2023Doctor's Weight Loss Ctrs.Blackston2023-09-222024-01-08
[Oral Arguments]
 Torts – Did ACM utilize the correct standard for determining when a cause of action manifested itself to determine the correct choice of law using the lex loci delicti rule?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 533, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
018
2023African Cemetery CoalitionHousing Opportunities Comm'n2023-09-222021-01-08
[Oral Arguments]
 Business Regulations – 1) Did the ACM err in holding that §5-505 of the Business Relations Article of the Md. Code is nothing more than a “quiet title” statute, providing land owners with an optional proceeding that they may choose to institute when selling land containing a burial ground if they wish to convey a “clean” title to the realty? 2) Under Maryland law, does a court of equity need to assess whether (and if so, on what conditions) a property owner can sell land containing a burial ground for non-burial use in view of the 1829 decision of the United States Supreme Court in Beatty v. Kurtz, which (applying Maryland law) charged courts of chancery operating pursuant to their equity powers “to preserve the repose of the ashes of the dead and the religious sensibilities of the living,” as well as subsequent decisions by this Court and other courts?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1488, Sept. Term, 2021 [Opinion]
015
2023StateThomas2023-09-222024-02-05
[Oral Arguments]
 Criminal Procedure – 1) Does Maryland Rule 4-345(e), which states that a court “may not revise the sentence after the expiration of five years from the date the sentence originally was imposed,” mean that a court may not revise a sentence under Rule 4-345(e) after the five-year period expires? 2) Where a defendant timely files a motion to modify under Maryland Rule 4-345(e) and repeatedly requests a hearing on the motion, is the trial court required to exercise its discretion within five years, i.e. either deny the motion without a hearing or hold a hearing to determine whether to grant the motion, or does the rule permit the court to let the five years lapse without exercising discretion?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 657, Sept. Term, 2021 (unreported)
019
2023RovinState2023-10-232024-02-06
[Oral Arguments]
 Constitutional Law – 1) Did ACM err in concluding that the “objectively reasonable” mistake of law test articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Heien v. North Carolina, 574 U.S. 54 (2014), applies to civil constitutional tort claims arising under the Maryland Constitution, including Article 26 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights? 2) Did ACM err in concluding that the “objectively reasonable” mistake of law test articulated in Heien applies to claims arising under Maryland’s common law, such as for false arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution? 3) Did ACM err in determining that the officers in Petitioner’s case made an objectively reasonable mistake-of-law in arresting, imprisoning, and prosecuting her and that, as a result, Petitioner’s claims failed as a matter of law? 4) Did ACM err in determining that the juror intimidation statute in Md. Code Criminal Law Article § 9-305(a) was not unconstitutionally vague, in violation of the due process protections guaranteed by Article 24 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights? 5) Did ACM err in determining that Petitioner’s free speech rights under Article 40 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights were not violated? 6) Was the warrant issued for Petitioner’s arrest invalid based on the contents of the warrant affidavit, which show no crime was committed?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 198, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
027
2023Town of Bel AirBodt2023-12-182024-03-01
[Oral Arguments]
2024-07-08
[Opinion]
Local Government – 1) Does the Express Powers Act, Md. Code § 5-213 of the Local Government Article, require a municipality to adopt an ordinance, rather than a resolution, when the municipality denies a petition for referendum for failure to comply with the requirements of the municipal charter? 2) Does Gray v. Howard County Bd. Of Electionsspan>Md.App. 654 (2014) control the procedure for a municipality’s denial of a referendum petition? 3) Are organizers of a petition for referendum prohibited from altering the language of a petition after they have obtained signatures in support of the petition? 4) Where a municipal charter is silent regarding whether a petition for referendum may challenge only part of an ordinance, must a petition for referendum challenge the entire ordinance?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1079, Sept. Term, 2023 (Pending)
025
2023BennettGentile2023-11-292024-03-05
[Oral Arguments]

Please note: These oral arguments were held at St. Mary’s College of Maryland in St. Mary’s City, MD. 
 Estates & Trusts – 1) Was petitioner an intended third-party beneficiary of an oral retainer agreement between the Trust Settlor and respondent? 2) Does Noble v. Bruce, 349 Md. 730 (1998), apply to the unique facts of this case? 3) Should Noble be overturned and replaced with the “balancing of factors” test adopted by other state courts? 4) Can the collateral litigation doctrine apply when the collateral claim which is litigated in the case is the source of that claim?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 479, Sept. Term, 2023 (Pending)
022
2023JarvisState2023-11-172024-04-05
[Oral Arguments]
 Criminal Law – 1) Did the ACM err when it held that the trial court’s erroneous refusal to instruct the jury on attempted voluntary manslaughter based on imperfect self-defense was harmless error where had the petitioner been convicted of attempted voluntary manslaughter rather than first-degree assault his sentence would be shorter? 2) Did the ACM err when it held that the trial court abused its discretion in not instructing the jury on imperfect self-defense?

Appellatte Court of Maryland, No. 744, Sept. Term, 2020 (unreported)
020
2023TurenneState2023-10-232024-04-05
[Oral Arguments]
 Criminal Law – Is the evidence insufficient to sustain the child pornography convictions under Md. Code Criminal Law Article (“CL”) §§ 11-207(a)(1) and -208(b) and child sex abuse convictions under CL § 3-602(b)? (A) What is the appropriate test to determine whether an image constitutes “lascivious exhibition of the genitals” under the child pornography statutes? (B) What role, if any, does evidence of possession of adult pornography play in assessing the sufficiency of the evidence?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 714, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
024
2023FreemanState2023-11-292024-04-09
[Oral Arguments]
 Criminal Law – 1) Where a witness is not disclosed in discovery or offered at trial as an expert, does Md. law recognize a theory that such a witness may “implicitly” be found to be an expert and therefore provide opinion testimony? 2) Assuming that such an implicit finding is valid, by what means does an opposing party determine the field or area of the witness’s alleged expertise? 3) In the instant case was the detective, who was not disclosed or offered as an expert, properly permitted to testify that in his opinion the words “lick” and “sweet licks,” referred to in text messages between petitioner and his alleged co-conspirators, meant “robbery” and “robbery of an easy target” respectively? 4) Regardless of whether the trial judge makes an implicit or explicit finding, does the State’s noncompliance with Md. Rule 4-263(d)(8) preclude the calling of an expert witness? 5) May a lay witness testify to the meaning of a slang term with which the witness is familiar? 6) Did the trial court in this case properly permit the detective to give lay opinion testimony that the word “lick” means “a robbery”?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1118, Sept. Term, 2024 [Opinion]
016
2023Adventist HealthCareBehram2023-09-222024-04-09
[Oral Arguments]
 Health Occupations – 1) Did the ACM err by relying on extrinsic evidence in its interpretation of the fully integrated Settlement Agreement without determining whether the Agreement is ambiguous or considering the effect of its integration clause in contravention of settled Maryland law? 2) Did the ACM err by failing to apply standard principles of contract interpretation, by interpreting a Settlement Agreement that expressly releases claims related to three specific events, as unambiguously releasing claims related to other events, and thereby exclude extrinsic evidence that showed that the parties did not intend to release claims related to those other events?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 375, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
030
2023StateSmith2024-01-192024-05-06
[Oral Arguments]
 Criminal Law – As a matter of first impression, is the “statement against penal interest” evidentiary rule Maryland’s only exception to the rule that a defendant is required to request redaction in order to properly raise a failure-to-redact claim on appeal?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 573, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
031
2023Lithko ContractingXL Insurance Amer.2024-01-192024-05-06
[Oral Arguments]
 Insurance Law – 1) Did ACM err where it held that Petitioners were not protected by the waiver of subrogation in the agreement to develop certain property and an exhibit to the agreement? 2) As a matter of first impression, did ACM err where it held that the lessee of the property did not waive subrogation against Petitioners despite requiring the general contractor to include the agreement’s exhibit’s waiver of subrogation in all its subcontracts?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 316, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
002 JD
2023In the Matter of Hon. Ademiluyi  2024-05-06
[Oral Arguments]
2024-05-06
[PC Order]
Judicial disabilities matter.
047 AG
2021Attorney Grievance Comm'nWhitted 2024-06-03
[Oral Arguments]
 Attorney disciplinary matter.
014
2023CookState 2024-06-03
[Oral Arguments]
 DNA appeal.

 
032
2023MooneyState2023-12-162024-06-03
[Oral Arguments]

Please note: Due to a technical glitch, there is a section of the recording with no video.  
 Criminal Law – Did ACM lower the requirements for authentication of video evidence through the “pictorial testimony theory” where a witness is permitted to authenticate video evidence even when the witness did not see the entirety of the events depicted in it?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1561, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
001
2024SM Landover LLC

SM Parkside LLC
Sanders



Lindsey
2024-02-162024-09-05 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, Nos. 1876 & 1880, Sept. Term, 2021 (unreported)
002
2024Caruso Builder Belle OakSullivan2024-02-162024-09-05 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 153, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
003
2024LedfordJenway Contracting2024-03-252024-09-05 Labor & Employment – Did ACM err by extending the exclusivity provision of § 9-509 of the Labor & Employment Article (workers’ compensation) to non-dependents?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1755, Sept. Term, 2022, [Opinion]
006
2024Greenmark PropertiesParts, Inc.2024-05-282024-09-06 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1986, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
050 Misc.
2023Application of O.A.S. for Admission to the Bar 2024-05-282024-09-09 In the Matter of the Application of O.A.S. for Admission to the Bar of Maryland
 
005
2024HollinsState2024-04-182024-09-09 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 2023, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
007
2024AkersState2024-05-282024-09-09 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 925, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
001 Misc.
2024Latter-Day SaintsDoe 2024-09-10 Certified Question of Law from the US District Court for the District of Maryland:

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?
002 Misc.
2024Key SchoolBunker 2024-09-10 Certified Question of Law from the US District Court for the District of Maryland: 

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?
009
2024Archbishop of WashingtonDoe2024-05-282024-09-10 Courts & Judicial Proceedings – 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 107, Sept. Term, 2024 (pending)
010
2024Bd. of EducationDoe2024-05-282024-09-10 Courts & Judicial Proceedings – 1) 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)(the “MCVA”), 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? 
2) 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 107, Sept. Term, 2024 (pending)
008
2024In re: M.Z. 2024-05-282024-10-01 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1412, Sept. Term, 2023 (unreported)
014
2024ZukowskiAnne Arundel Cty.2024-06-172024-10-01 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1121, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
011
2024WaltonPremier Soccer Club2024-05-312024-10-02 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1691, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
004
2024StateScarboro2024-03-252024-10-02 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)?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1646, Sept. Term, 2022 (unreported)
015
2024In re: Estate of Schappell 2024-06-172024-10-07 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 2048, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
016
2024In the Matter of Isely 2024-06-172024-10-07 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?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 490, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
017
2024Petition of Featherfall Restoration 2024-06-172024-10-08 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.)

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 1313, Sept. Term, 2022 [Opinion]
018
2024LeiwekeBernstein2024-06-172024-10-08 Courts & Judicial Proceedings – Under Md. Rule 2-403, which instructs a court to “enter any order that justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense”, should a court quash a subpoena for a high-ranking corporate executive when the executive has carried the burden to demonstrate that the information is available through less intrusive means?

Appellate Court of Maryland, No. 712, Sept. Term, 2023 (unreported)