On Wednesday, Nov. 10, a three-judge panel of the Maryland Court of Special Appeals will hear oral arguments in the School of Law's Ceremonial Courtroom. Oral arguments will begin at 9:30 a.m. Students, faculty, and friends are invited to attend.
Overflow seating featuring a simulcast of the arguments will be available in Room 307.
This is an employment case involving a dispute over wages and salary bonuses between Appellant and his former employer. At issue is whether the trial court erred in granting a motion to compel arbitration without a hearing; whether the action is subject to mandatory arbitration; whether the arbitration clause in the Employment Agreement should be construed against the employer who drafted it; and whether the employer waived its right to compel arbitration.No. 01374/09 Ramon Ruiz-Eguren vs. State of Maryland
Appellant Ruiz-Eguren raises four issues in appealing his conviction for child sex abuse: (1) the denial of his motion for new trial (based on the defense discovering after the trial that the victim reported a different series of assaults by a different man, which occurred contemporaneously with the abuse in this case); (2) an elaboration on the jury instruction concerning the voluntariness of a custodial statement; (3) the admissibility of the victim’s hearsay statements to a nurse examiner; and (4) the admissibility of a detective’s lay opinion that children "have difficulty with nailing down specific days and dates and months and cognitive ability on every child is different."No. 01871/09 John Robert Furbush vs. State of Maryland
Appellant Furbush was found guilty of possession with intent to distribute cocaine. The only issue on appeal in concerns the admissibility of narcotics found in a pat-down search. He argues that the officer could not immediately tell that the crack cocaine was contraband and, therefore, the search was not justified under the "plain feel" exception recognized in Minnesota v. Dickerson.No. 00322/09 Susan Joan Griffin vs. State of Maryland
Appellant Griffin was convicted of second degree felony murder after her son died from what appeared to be severe parental neglect. The issues on appeal concern the admissibility of a statement to police (with several sub-issues, including whether the appellant was in custody; whether the Miranda warnings were complete; and whether the police violated the Maryland common law rule against promises and inducements); joinder of Mrs. Griffin’s case with her husband’s; and whether the police secured a valid warrant to search the Griffins’ residence.No. 01436/09 Tyree James Green vs. BHP Patriots Limited Partnership et al.
This is a lead paint poisoning case. Plaintiff claims that Defendant’s negligence and violations of the Consumer Protection Act caused his exposure to lead-based paint and subsequent brain injury. The trial court granted Defendant/Appellee’s motion to preclude the testimony of plaintiff’s medical causation expert and subsequently granted defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff/Appellant appeals both of these rulings.No. 00668/10* In Re: Sofia A., Kevin A. and Gabriela G.
In this Child in Need of Assistance ("CINA") case, the Circuit Court found that the mother of three young children had neglected all three children and abused two of them. Based on this February 2009 finding, the court ordered that the children be placed in therapeutic foster care, with weekly visitation with their mother. At the Department of Health and Human Service’s request, the Court held an emergency review hearing in May 2010, at which time it suspended all visits between the mother and children. On appeal, Appellant raises two issues: whether the court erred in admitting letters into evidence in violation of the rule against hearsay, and whether the court erred in suspending all visitations with the mother.