SCHEDULE OF ORAL ARGUMENTS
September Term, 2025
Friday, March 6, 2026:
Bar Admissions
Misc. No. 26 In re: Scarlett B. Bowman
Certified Question of Law from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland
1) Because the Act purports to "clarify" the licensing exemption after Brown, does that mean the General Assembly successfully restored the licensing exemption for passive trusts as if Brown had not been decided? Footnote 4
Footnote 4 Reads: If the General Assembly could not have restored the license exemptions to their pre-Brown posture by the language of the Act-perhaps as an impermissible legislative reversal of a court opinion-the second question certified remains ripe for decision.
2) Assuming the Act merely exempts passive trusts from the licensing requirement as of the date it was enacted, are passive trusts precluded from collecting interest and fees for the period prior to the Act's enactment given that no procedure exists for passive trusts to now obtain a license?
No. 45 Joseph Basso v. Jose Rodriguez, et al.
Issue – Maryland Rules – Under Maryland Rule 1-341, where a court finds that the conduct of a party in maintaining or defending any proceeding was in bad faith or without substantial justification, may the court require the offending party and/or attorney to pay reasonable attorney’s fees to the adverse party, where the adverse party is represented by counsel under the terms of a contingency fee agreement?
No. 47 In re: B.Cd. & B.Cb.
Issues – Family Law – 1) Does a parent neglect their child – i.e. place them at “substantial risk of harm” – when they act in line with Maryland’s Safe Haven Program? 2) Is a CINA neglect finding a “civil liability” against which the Safe Haven Program provides a shield?
Tuesday, March 10, 2026:
No. 32 Sugarloaf Alliance, Inc. v. Frederick County, Maryland
Issue – State Government – Does a court abuse its discretion by reducing a prevailing plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees for reasons inconsistent with the purposes of the Maryland Public Information Act, Md. Code, General Provisions § 4-362(f)?
No. 48 Andrew Campbell Founds v. State of Maryland
Issues – Criminal Law – 1) Did ACM err in affirming the trial court’s denial of Mr. Founds’s motion to suppress evidence? 2) Was the evidence sufficient to support Mr. Founds’s convictions for three possessory offenses?
After March 10, 2026, the Court will recess until April 7, 2026.
On the day of argument, counsel must register in the Clerk’s Office no later than 8:30 a.m. unless otherwise notified.
GREGORY HILTON
CLERK