WHITTINGTON V. STATE

A COURT ORDER TO CONDUCT A SEARCH IS VALID IF THE ORDER COMPLIES WITH FOURTH AMENDMENT REQUIREMENTS AND A SUFFICIENT BASIS FOR PROBABLE CAUSE EXISTS WHEN WITNESSING SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY IF DETECTIVES RELY ON THEIR EXPERIENCE AND OBSERVATIONS.   The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that as a matter of first impression, even if a statutory compliant court order is not labeled as a “warrant,” the order … Continue reading WHITTINGTON V. STATE

HUNT V. STATE

ACTUAL INNOCENCE PETITIONERS MAY BE GRANTED A NEW TRIAL BASED ON NEWLY DISCOVERED EVIDENCE OF AN EXPERT’S FRAUD IF COUNSEL COULD NOT, THROUGH THE EXERCISE OF DUE DILIGENCE, HAVE DISCOVERED THAT EVIDENCE EARLIER. The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that in the context of the Maryland actual innocence statute, due diligence does not require counsel to discover an opposing expert’s fraud if counsel lacked … Continue reading HUNT V. STATE

UNITED BANK V. BUCKINGHAM

A CHANGE IN BENEFICIARY ON A LIFE INSURANCE POLICY IS A TYPE OF CONVEYANCE AND MARYLAND LAW DOES NOT AUTHORIZE GUARDIANS OF THE PROPERTY TO MAKE A CHANGE IN BENEFICIARY WITHOUT A COURT’S PERMISSION. The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a change in beneficiary designation is a conveyance under the Maryland Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (“MUFCA”).  United Bank v. Buckingham, 472 Md. 407, … Continue reading UNITED BANK V. BUCKINGHAM

STATE V. ELZEY

IN THE EVENT A DEFENDANT RAISES BATTERED SPOUSE SYNDROME TO SUPPORT A SELF-DEFENSE CLAIM, A COURT MAY NOT EMPHASIZE CERTAIN EVIDENCE OF ABUSE BY INSTRUCTING THE JURY TO MAKE A FINDING OF ABUSE BY THE DECEDENT BEFORE CONSIDERING OTHER EVIDENCE OF PAST ABUSE. The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that, in the event a defendant raises the issue of Battered Spouse Syndrome (“BSS”), a court … Continue reading STATE V. ELZEY

BEL AIR CARPET, INC. V. KOREY HOMES BLDG. GRP., LLC

MARYLAND LAW DOES NOT RECOGNIZE THAT A HOMEOWNER’S LENDER HAS A DUTY TO ENSURE PAYMENT TO A SUBCONTRACTOR IN THE ABSENCE OF PRIVITY OF CONTRACT OR AN INTIMATE NEXUS. The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland held that, in an action for negligence, a homeowner’s lender does not have a duty to ensure that a general contractor pays a subcontractor when there is no privity … Continue reading BEL AIR CARPET, INC. V. KOREY HOMES BLDG. GRP., LLC

UTHUS V. VALLEY MILL CAMP, INC.

ABSENT AN AGREEMENT INDICATING TENANCY, AN OCCUPANT OF REAL PROPERTY IS A LICENSEE AGAINST WHOM THE LANDOWNER MAY BRING A TRESPASS ACTION. The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that an agreement permitting an employee to occupy an apartment on his employer’s land created a license and not a tenancy because no rental payments were made, and the employee did not have exclusive possession.  Uthus … Continue reading UTHUS V. VALLEY MILL CAMP, INC.

TRAVELOCITY.COM LP V. COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND

AS TRAVEL PRACTICES EVOLVED, THE MARYLAND GENERAL ASSEMBLY’S 2015 AMENDMENT OF THE TAX CODE REDEFINED THE DEFINITION OF A VENDOR TO INCLUDE ACCOMMODATIONS INTERMEDIARY. The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that facilitating hotel room and rental car reservations did not meet the statutory definition of “vendors” who “sold” or “delivered tangible personal property” for sales and use tax purposes.   Travelocity.com LP v. Comptroller of … Continue reading TRAVELOCITY.COM LP V. COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND

PLANK v. CHERNESKI

MARYLAND NOW RECOGNIZES THAT BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY MAY BE BROUGHT AS AN INDEPENDENT CAUSE OF ACTION. The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that breach of fiduciary duty may be brought as an independent cause of action, and that the remedy for the breach will be dependent on the particular fiduciary relationship.  Plank v. Cherneski, 469 Md. 548, 625, 231 A.3d 436, 481-82 (2020). … Continue reading PLANK v. CHERNESKI

STATE V. MORRISON

CO-SLEEPING WITH AN INFANT IS NOT INHERENTLY DANGEROUS CONDUCT TO SUSTAIN A CONVICTION FOR INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER OR RECKLESS ENDANGERMENT ABSENT SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE SHOWING GROSS NEGLIGENCE. The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that co-sleeping with an infant after consuming alcohol does not rise to the level of inherently dangerous conduct without a showing of gross negligence or evidence that such conduct was a gross departure … Continue reading STATE V. MORRISON

STEAMFITTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 602 V. ERIE INS. EXCH.

A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNER OWES NEIGHBORS A DUTY TO MAINTAIN PROPERTY SO THERE IS NOT AN UNREASONABLE RISK OF FIRE SPREADING TO THE NEIGHBORS’ PROPERTIES.      The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that commercial property owners owe a duty of reasonable care to manage property in a way that prevents a dangerous condition, located on their property, from harming neighboring properties.  Steamfitters Local Union … Continue reading STEAMFITTERS LOCAL UNION NO. 602 V. ERIE INS. EXCH.