MCOA (MARYLAND COURT OF APPEALS) BLOG: October 2012 Schedule

From the national general law practice of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors: "Still working.  Still committed.  Still here to make a difference."

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND
ARGUMENT SCHEDULE

Friday, October 5, 2012:

No. 14 State Department of Assessments and Taxation v. Baltimore Gas & Electric Company

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?

No. 17 Graylin Bernard Spence v. State of Maryland

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?

No. 22 WSG Holdings v. Larry Bowie, et al.

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?

Tuesday, October 9, 2012:

No. 23 State of Maryland v. John Wesley Ray

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)?

No. 12 Maryland Insurance Commissioner v. Leon Kaplan

Issues - Insurance Law - 1) Did the Insurance Commissioner correctly find that ERISA does not preempt Md. Code Ann., Ins. §14-139, where there is no indication that Congress intended to preempt or supplant State efforts to protect assets of non-profit health insurers from depletion and where ERISA and §14-139 serve altogether different purposes? 2) Did the trial court err in holding that ERISA preempts any State regulatory action pursuant to §14-139 that affects the amount of any payment from an ERISA plan, even where the payment would be made out of corporate assets of the non-profit insurer? 3) Did the trial court err in failing to recognize that §14-139 regulates insurance & therefore is not preempted by ERISA?

No. 19 100 Investment Limited Partnership, et al. v. Columbia Town Center Title Company, et al.

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?

Attorney for Petitioner: James E. Carbine
Attorney for Respondent: Richard E. Hagerty

Wednesday, October 10, 2012:

No. 21 Benn Ray, et al. v. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, et al.

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?

No. 18 Reginald McCracken v. State of Maryland

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"?

[www.courts.state.md.us/coappeals/schedule/10/2schedule]