Law Commons^™

Brief Of Appellant, Abdullah Malik Joppy A/K/A Richard Joppy V. State Of Maryland, No. 533, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Peter Honnef

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, Davon Jones V. State Of Maryland, No. 547, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Matthew T. Healy

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, Matthew Bredlow V. State Of Maryland, No. 621, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Ardalun Kamali

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, Mark Andrew Matthews V. State Of Maryland, No. 327, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Jesse M. Lachman

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, John Hill V. State Of Maryland, No. 2740, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Silva Georgian

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Appellant, James Goss V. State Of Maryland, No. 669, Paul Dewolfe, Renée M. Hutchins, Lisa M. Johnson

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae Food Allergy Research & Education, & Council Of Parent Attorneys And Advocates In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellants And Urging Reversal, T.F., A Minor By His Parents And D.F. And T.S.F., On Their Own Behalf V. Fox Chapel Area School District, Marc Charmatz, Caroline Jackson

Court Briefs

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Appellant, James Townsend V. Midland Funding, Llc, Stuart Robert Cohen, Peter A. Holland

Court Briefs

The Consumer Protection Clinic of the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, filed a Motion to Participate and an Amicus Brief in the case of Townsend v. Midland Funding, LLC. The case presents the question of whether documents created by third party predecessors in interest—usually a bank—may be admitted into evidence when a debt buyer plaintiff does not demonstrate personal knowledge regarding any of the foundational elements which would be required to admit the documents under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. Amici urge the Court to overturn the lower court, and hold that a …

Memorandum Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Petition For Writ Of Certiorari, Pasadena Receivables, Inc. V. Loren W. Parker,, Peter A. Holland

Court Briefs

The petition for certiorari to the Maryland Court of Appeals by Loren Parker concerned the interpretation of Maryland Rule of Evidence 5-902, specifically the authentication of business records by debt buyers.

The central issue was whether a debt purchaser is bound by the same rules of evidence for the admissibility of business records as other Maryland businesses. Rule 5-902(b) provides for the self-authentication of records of a regularly conducted business activity. It requires that a party served with a 5-902(b) notice must object within 5 days. The petitioner debtor argued that this rule was being abused by debt buyers, like …

Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellant, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission V. The Picture People, Inc., No. 11-1306, Marc Charmatz, Debra Patkin

Court Briefs

The National Association for the Deaf and the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law Civil Rights of Persons with Disabilities Clinic submitted an amici curiae Brief in EEOC v. Picture People, 684 F.3d 981 (10th Cir. 2012). At issue in Picture People was whether deaf or hard of hearing individuals may be discharged from an employment position in a photography studio because the employer believes the employee may have a limited ability to communicate verbally when the employer has accommodated the employee’s hearing disability. The brief supports the retaliation argument proffered by the EEOC in their …

Brief Of Amici Curiae On Behalf Of Appellants, Paul Dewolfe, Jr., Et Al. V. Quinton Richmond, Et Al., 2011 No. 34, A.J. Bellido De Luna, Michael Pinard

Court Briefs

In this case the appellants sought to overturn a decision by the Circuit Court for Baltimore City that held criminal defendants have a right to representation by an attorney at an initial bail hearing. Due to their concern about the quality of justice given to criminal defendants in the state’s criminal justice process, law professors at both the University of Baltimore and the University of Maryland filed an amicus brief with the Maryland Court of Appeals in support of the appellees.

The amici presented one issue: Did a Court of Appeals decision in 2001 holding that the Maryland Public Defender …

Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Robert Calvin Brown, Iii V. State Of Maryland, No. 08-118, Brenda Bratton Blom

Court Briefs

Amici brief filed by the University of Maryland School of Law’s Clinical Program and members of the Baltimore legal community including legal educators, lawyers, student attorneys, service providers, government administrators, community based organizations, and nationally recognized individuals from community justice initiatives and organizations on Respondent’s behalf. The individuals and organizations represented in the brief have all collaborated together to build and support what are colloquially known as “problem solving dockets”: courts that are specialized, alternative sentencing dockets that offer diversionary programs to qualified offenders. The dockets are run out of Maryland’s district and circuit courts, but not separate, freestanding judicial …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae In Support Of Appellants, Quinton Richmond, Et Al., V. The District Court Of Maryland, Et Al., No. 08-54, Brenda Bratton Blom, Robert Rubinson, Phillip J. Closius

Court Briefs

Amici curiae brief filed by 78 faculty members from the University of Maryland School of Law and the University of Baltimore School of Law, on behalf of Appellants Quinton Richmond, et al. Amicus members felt the need to comment on the application and implications of the statutory right to counsel under Maryland law for indigent criminal defendants. The issue before the Court of Appeals was whether the Court’s previous holding in McCarter v. State, 363 Md. 705 (2001), that the plain language of the Maryland Public Defender Act created a right to counsel during all stages of a criminal …

Brief Of Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioner, Juan Rivera V. State Of Maryland, No. 08-80, Maureen A. Sweeney

Court Briefs

The petitioner requested the Maryland Court of Appeals to reverse a decision that his criminal plea of guilty was voluntary. The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland had ruled it voluntary. Law professors at the University of Maryland and the University of Baltimore filed this amicus brief in support of the petitioner.

The brief presents the issue of whether a guilty plea is voluntary and knowingly given when it is based on affirmative misinformation about the direct immigration consequences of such a plea. The amici argue that the petitioner’s plea was unconstitutionally involuntary and unknowing because his attorney, the prosecutor, …

Brief For Amicus Curiae Supporting Appellants-Defendants And Urging Reversal, Capitol Mortgage Bankers, Inc. V. Andrew M. Cuomo, Secretary, United States Department Of Housing And Urban Development And United States Department Of Housing And Urban Development, No. 00-1036, Denis J. Murphy

Court Briefs

Amici curiae brief filed by St. Ambrose Housing Aid Center, Associated Communities Organized for Reform Now (ACORN), Southeast East Community Organization (SECO), Park Reist Corridor Coalition (PRCC), and the National Training and Information Center (NTIC) on behalf of Defendant-Appellants, Andrew Cuomo, Secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and HUD. Amici argue that based upon the statutory construction of 12 U.S.C. §1709(r), the Secretary of HUD had the authority to promulgate 24 C.F.R. §202.3 and to subsequently terminate Appellee Capitol Mortgage Bankers’ ability to originate Federal Housing Act (FHA) loans. Alternatively, amici argue that because …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae In Support Of Respondents, Allen Becker V. State Of Maryland, Et Al., No. 99-111, Anne L. Blumenberg, Alan T.L. Sun

Court Briefs

Amici curiae brief filed by the Community Law Center on behalf of Respondent, State of Maryland. At issue before the Court of Appeals was whether the equitable power granted by Md. Ann. Code, Real Property § 14-120(e) allows a District Court to abate a drug nuisance, which has been found to be a threat to the safety and welfare of a community, through the demolition of a building. Md. Ann. Code, Real Property § 14-120(e) is known as the “Drug Nuisance Statute” and the Community Law Center has devoted much of its resources to representing community associations in drug nuisance …