THE ADVOCATE Page 1 February/March 2020

THE ADVOCATE

Newsletter of The Baltimore County Bar Association

Inside This Edition

Annual Charity Pg. 25 Bench/Bar Update Pg. 5 Black Tie Banquet Pg. 8 Bollinger Portrait Unveil. Pg. 22 Calendar of Events Pg. 3 Civil Law Update Pg. 19 County Council Update Pg. 14 Court Notices Pg. 4 Family Law Pg. 16 Kahl Portrait Unveiling Pg. 12 Law Library Pg. 26 Member Ads Pg. 36 Member News Pg. 30 MVLS Pg. 24 Professionalism Pg. 18

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

by Hon. Michael W. Siri

VOLUME XXIX, NO. 7 February/March 2020

The BCBA is here to help, as best we can, for a situation we and our members have never truly faced.

COVID-19 closed schools, courts, law firms, and the bar office. For our members juggling the demands

of working remotely from their kitchen tables, while simultaneously managing their

clients, and homeschooling their children, we want you to understand that you are not alone.

The BCBA is doing our best to disseminate and distribute information directly affecting our

members. This includes twice-weekly emails with topics varying from available grants and loans for

small businesses affected by COVID-19 to updates related to the Courts to available technology

to assist our members as they work remotely for the foreseeable future. Additionally, BCBA members may access all available information at

www.bcba.org/covid-19.

For members wanting to give back, we are organizing a supply drive

for local hospitals and plan on donating meals to front line

Insight Network Consultants

medical professionals. Information will be provided to

our members if they are interested in making donations through the BCBA or if they

intend to make donations directly.

And for members in need of

assistance, the BCBA is working with Lawyer’s Assistance to find methods our members may use to

deal with the additional stress associated with our new “normal.” During this period of

social distancing, we need to ensure our members are not socially isolated.

As I sit at my kitchen table

drafting this message, I, like many of you, do not know when this will end, what will happen

when it does, and what will never be the same. The only certainty is we will all get through this

together and will need to rely on each other. If you are fortunate enough to help during these time,

please do.

Continued on page 2

THE ADVOCATE Page 2 February/March 2020

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE by Hon. Michael W. Siri

If you need help, whether it requires assistance with technology, running an errand, or emotional

support, our members are here for each other. All you need to do is ask. The BCBA’s greatest asset is our membership and we will coordinate any

requests during this time.

May you be safe and healthy during this unusual time in our lives.

Judge Michael W. Siri

BCBA President, 2019-2020

The BCBA usually holds two programs for Law

Day; a breakfast program and a noon program.

Each year we honor members of the community by

giving out awards for an art contest for students in

grades K through 8 and an essay contest for grades

9 through 12. We also recognize the winning Mock

Trial Team and present the Law Day Award and the

Judith P. Ritchie Award. Due to the current

extraordinary circumstances, both programs have

been cancelled but we will still celebrate Law Day!

On Friday, May 1, please visit www.bcba.org to

watch the Law Day 2020 video. We will hear from

BCBA President, Judge Siri and Law Day Chair,

Tracee Fruman. The high school student with the

winning essay will read their essay and a

representative from the winning Mock Trial team

will make remarks.

Please join us in congratulating this year’s awardee

for the Law Day Award, the Honorable Kathleen G.

Cox and the awardee of the Judith P. Ritchie Award,

Mary R. Sanders. Judge Cox and Mary will receive

their awards in person at the Stated Meeting of the

BCBA on October 15 at 4:30 p.m.

The theme for this year’s Law Day is Your Vote,

Your Voice, Our Democracy - The 19th

Amendment at 100. The women’s suffrage

movement forever changed America, expanding

representative democracy and inspiring other

popular movements for constitutional change and

reform. Yet, honest reflection on the suffrage

movement reveals complexity and tensions over race

and class that remain part of the ongoing story of the

Nineteenth Amendment and its legacies.

THE ADVOCATE Page 3 February/March 2020

CALENDAR OF EVENTS

February 2020

3. ADR Committee Meeting, 4:30pm, Grand Jury Room 13. Bench/Bar Committee Meeting, 8am, 4th Floor Judicial Conference Room 17. Courts and Bar Office closed for Presidents ’ Day 18. Estates & Trusts Committee, Ethical Considerations of

Clients with Diminished Capacity, 5pm, Grand Jury Room

19. Family Law, Minimizing Conflict (Family Law Lawyer as a SOLDIER), 6pm, Vito Ristorante, 10249 York Rd, Cockeysvil le

20. Bar Foundation Meeting, 3:30pm, Ceremonial Courtroom 5

20. Stated Meeting, 4:30pm, Ceremonial Courtroom 5 27. Bar Wars Trivia Competition, 5:30pm, The Greene

Turtle, 408 York Rd, Towson

March 2020

4. Historical Committee Meeting, 5pm, BCBA Mezzanine

offices 5. ADR Committee Training & Happy Hour, Grand Jury

Room, Nacho Mama’s

2019-20 Officers

Executive Council

Lisa Y. Settles Sondra M. Douglas Richard Grason VI

Robert K. Erdman, Jr. Tyler J. Nowicki Michelle D. Siri

Rebecca A. Fleming,

Immediate Past President

Whitney E. Wilder, Young Lawyers’ Chair

The Advocate Adam E. Konstas Committee Chair

Michael S. Barranco

Committee Vice -Chair

Contributing Writers

William Alcarese Michael Barranco

Robert K. Erdman, Jr. Suzanne Farace Alexis Holiday Michael Jacko Adam Konstas

Hon. Stacy Mayer Ceecee Paizs

Adam Phillips

The Advocate is a monthly publication of the Baltimore County Bar Association informing its members about current events relating to law. Articles do not necessarily reflect the official position of the BCBA and publication does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed. The contents of advertisements are the responsibility of the advertisers and are not recommendations or endorsements by The Advocate. Publication deadline: 10th of the month preceding publication.

President Pres-Elect Secretary

Treasurer

Hon. Michael W. Siri Jay D. Miller Stanford G. Gann, Jr. John G. Turnbull III

THE ADVOCATE Page 4 February/March 2020

COURT NOTICES

The Circuit and District Court of Baltimore County

continue to operate with essential personnel, including

judges. Click on the following link to Circuit Court

for guidance on the current operations of the Circuit

Court, including criminal, family, juvenile, and

guardianship matters.

Click on the following link for guidance on the current

operation of the District Court, including bail reviews,

bench warrants, body attachments, emergency

evaluation petitions, and quarantine and isolation

violations. Additionally, emergency matters will be

reviewed by the District Court to determine whether

the matter must be heard in person, by remote

electronic participation, be scheduled after the

emergency period ends, or may be decided without a

hearing: protective orders, criminal competency,

contempt hearings related to peace or protective

orders, matters involving locally incarcerated

defendants, and motions regarding ERPOs, protective

orders, and peace orders.

Information on the operations of other jurisdictions in

Maryland can be found here.

Approximately 15 clerks in the Circuit Court for

Baltimore County’s Clerk’s Office are performing

their duties remotely, leaving approximately 25 clerks

working daily at the courthouse. As a result, some

telephone calls are not immediately addressed because

of the decrease of onsite clerks. To better respond to

inquiries from attorneys and parties, the Circuit Court

for Baltimore County has established group email

addresses for specific departments, including

Assignment, Civil, Criminal, Family, Juvenile, and

Records. A clerk will be devoted to monitoring all

incoming emails to reply and provide any

necessary assistance.

The group email addresses are as follows:

Assignment –

ccbaltcoclerkassignment@mdcourts.gov

Civil – ccbaltcoclerkcivil@mdcourts.gov

Criminal – ccbaltcoclerkcriminal@mdcourts.gov

Family – ccbaltcoclerkfamily@mdcourts.gov

Juvenile – ccbaltcoclerkjuvenile@mdcourts.gov

Records – ccbaltcoclerkrecords@mdcourts.gov

The first-floor front lobby of the Circuit Court for

Baltimore County contains two drop boxes – one

for Land Records and one for the Clerk’s

office. The drop boxes are checked twice a day for

delivery to the appropriate department.

Finally, a public access computer from Land

Records may be accessed at the corner Information

Desk on the first-floor front lobby of the Circuit

Courthouse. Printing of any documents requires a

HECON key. If an individual does not have an

issued HECON key but wishes to print documents,

contact the Land Records Copy Center at 410-887-

2657 to obtain a temporary HECON key. The

individual must surrender their Driver’s License

until payment for the documents have been made.

THE ADVOCATE Page 5 February/March 2020

BENCH/BAR UPDATE By Suzanne K. Farace

The December meeting of the Bench Bar Committee

took place on December 12, 2019. The Committee

Chair, Christopher W. Nicholson, called the meeting

to order at 8:05 a.m. The Minutes of the meeting of

November 14, 2019 were voted on and approved.

In attendance were: The Honorable Kathleen G. Cox,

Magistrate Wendy Schenker, Debra A. Thomas,

Debra G. Schubert, The Honorable Dorothy J.

Wilson, Timothy Sheridan, Carol Miller, The

Honorable William R. Evans, Carl R. Gold, The

Honorable Dennis M. Robinson, Jr., Laurence A.

Ruth, Alaina Storie, Suzanne K. Farace, Fred

Allentoff, Harry Chase, The Honorable Will

Somerville, Maria Fields, Donald Zaremba, The

Honorable Michael Siri, Christopher W. Nicholson

and Raphael J. Santini.

District Court

Reporting for the District Court, the Honorable

Dorothy Wilson indicated that the Towson District

Court would close at 4:30 p.m. on January 3, 2020

and reopen at 8:30 a.m. on January 6, 2020 in the

new Catonsville District Court building at 1 Rolling

Cross Road, Catonsville, Maryland, 21228. On

January 6th and January 7th, 2020, the new

Catonsville District Court would have a limited

docket -- Domestic Violence and Bail Reviews – but

the regular docket would resume on January 8th.

There have been various announcements and News

Releases, including on WBAL radio, as well as signs

posted in the District Court in Towson and in the

garage and library in Towson regarding this move.

The Police Department and Bailiffs have toured the

new Catonsville District Court courthouse.

District Court Administration

Reporting for the District Court Administration,

Maria Fields indicated that all the Towson District

Court files were being packed for the move to the

new Catonsville District Court. Notices were being

sent with respect to the move to the new Catonsville

District Court.

Circuit Court

Reporting for the Circuit Court, the Honorable

Kathleen G. Cox indicated that the Circuit Court

has need of two additional Judges. Application has

been made for an additional Judgeship in the

proposed budget.

Mr. Timothy Sheridan is doing a study analysis

with respect to accommodations for more spaces

for Judges.

Circuit Court Administration

Reporting for the Administrative Office of the

Circuit for Baltimore County, Timothy Sheridan

indicated that there will be a ramp built from the

plaza to the front door of the Circuit Court building

by the Summer of 2020.

Executive Council

Reporting for the Executive Council, the

Honorable Michael W. Siri advised that the Bar

Association is helping 35 families for Christmas

through the Y's Adopt a Family Program. The

Annual Black Tie Banquet will be held on January

30, 2020 at Martin's Valley Mansion.

Judge Siri also reported that applications for a

position on the Executive Council were due just

after the first of the year.

Office of Administrative Hearings

Reporting for the Office of Administrative

Hearing, the Honorable William J.D. Somerville,

III, indicated that the Honorable Michael D. Carlis

has retired from the Office of Administrative

Hearings.

Orphan’s Court

Reporting for the Orphan’s Court, the Honorable

William R. Evans indicated that Kathy Forbes left

and Renee Boyd will replace her. Judge Evans also

reported that the Register of Will’s Office is

running smoothly and will not be using MDEC.

Continued on page 6

THE ADVOCATE Page 6 February/March 2020

BENCH/BAR UPDATE By Suzanne K. Farace

Magistrates

Reporting for the Magistrates, Magistrate Wendy

Zerwitz Schenker advised that the new Parenting Plan

forms will be required for all cases filed on or after

January 1, 2020. The forms will be handed out at

Scheduling Conference and must be turned in at the

Settlement Conference.

Baltimore City Bar

Reporting for the Bar Association of Baltimore City,

Harry Chase indicated that as of January 1, 2020, the

Honorable Michael A. DiPietro will now be in charge

of Family Court Administration in Baltimore City.

Portrait Committee

Reporting for the County Bar Portrait Committee,

Harry Chase indicated that:

Judge Bollinger’s portrait unveiling was standing

room only;

Judge Kahl’s posthumous portrait unveiling was very

emotional; and

The portraits of Judge Daniels and Judge Dugan are

in the process of being completed.

Family Law

Reporting for the Family Law Committee, Chair

Alaina L. Storie reported that there would be Family

Law Programs on January 8, January 15 and January

23 of 2020. The Family Law Committee will be

scheduling another event addressing the new

Parenting Plan forms. Please check the Baltimore

County Bar Association website for topics and times.

The following committees did not have official

reports: the Circuit Court Clerk's Office, the Office

of the County Attorney, the Office of the State's

Attorney, and the Office of the Public Defender, the

Criminal Defense Bar, the Harford County Bar, and

the Young Lawyers Committee.

There was no new business and no old business to

discuss. A motion to adjourn was made, there was a

second and the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 a.m.

The next meeting will be held on January 9, 2020.

The January meeting of the Bench/Bar Committee

was held on January 9, 2020, with Chairperson

Christopher Nicholson presiding.

Judge Kathleen Cox opened the Circuit Court report

with a request for members to serve as judges for

mock trial. Anyone interested should contact Judge

Cox’s chambers. Judge Cox also reported that Judge

Nagel is out for surgery and that the Circuit Court

will be increasing domestic violence dockets given

the temporary closure of the Towson district court.

There is currently a commission looking into a

method to reduce postponements in circuit court and

a recent change to the uniform subpoena.

Information about the subpoena change can be found

on the Bar Association home page.

Tim Sheridan gave the Circuit Court Administration

report by indicating that all is well and there is an

ongoing review of the large dockets.

The District Court Bench reported that the new

district court building is fabulous and open for

business. Judge Dorothy Wilson urged everyone to

have patience as there are some growing pains. The

Department of General Services is still busy moving

furniture into the courthouse and courtrooms 7 and 8

remain under construction. The Public Defender’s

Office and the State’s Attorney’s Office have

operational offices, but Parole and Probation has not

yet moved in. Judge Wilson congratulated Maria

Fields on her hard work in ensuring a smooth move

and noted that construction has now begun on the

Towson District Court building.

Maria Fields gave the District Court Administration

BENCH/BAR UPDATE By Hon. Stacy A. Mayer

THE ADVOCATE Page 7 February/March 2020

BENCH/BAR UPDATE By Hon. Stacy A. Mayer

report and noted that the clerk’s office is on the

second floor of the new building. There are some

problems with the electronic docket boards and, as a

result, paper dockets are being used for the time

being. There is a shuttle service from the Towson

district court to the new Catonsville courthouse for

interested persons and that schedule can be located

on the District Court home page.

The Executive Council report was given by Jay

Miller, who reported that Judge Larry Daniel’s

portrait unveiling will be scheduled shortly, and

additional information will be forthcoming on the

home page. The Bar Wars will be held at the

Greene Turtle on February 27th and will include a

guest bartender. All proceeds from the event benefit

the YMCA of Central Maryland.

On April 1, 2020, the Baltimore County Bar

Association will have an oath ceremony at the

United States Supreme Court. All are welcome.

Additional information can be found on the home

page.

Magistrate Wendy Schenker reported for the

Magistrates that the parenting plan is in full effect.

Don Zaremba gave the report from the Office of the

Public Defender, indicating that their office in the

new courthouse is open for business.

Gregory Gaskins gave the report for the Office of

the Law. Two new attorneys, Glenn Marrow and

Dorrell Brooks, have recently been hired.

William Somerville, for the Office of the

Administrative Hearings, reported that ALJ Mary

Shock will be retiring.

The Family Law report was given by Alaina Storie.

The Committee is very busy and currently planning a

joint program with the Estates and Trust Committee.

The Young Lawyers report was submitted in writing

by Chair Whitney Wilder. On December 4, 2019, the

Young Lawyers had another successful Holiday

Lunch Toy Drive to benefit the Court Appointed

Special Advocates (CASA). The event was well-

attended and raised $580 dollars and several boxes of

toys for CASA.

The Bull and Oyster Roast will be held on April 5,

2020 at the American Legion with proceeds to benefit

the YMCA of Central Maryland. A planning meeting

will be held in February. There will also be another

Chambers’ Chat this spring and planning for that

lunch is in the works.

The next meeting of the Bench Bar Committee will

be held on February 13, 2020 at 8 am. If anyone has

an issue to bring to the Bench Bar Committee, please

speak with an at-large member. The list of at-large

members can be found on the Bar website.

Paul E. Alpert, Retired Judge

Available for Mediation and Arbitration

Former Judge of District Court, Circuit

Court and Court of Special Appeals

410-484-2088

THE ADVOCATE Page 8 February/March 2020

98TH ANNUAL BLACK TIE BANQUET

The 98th Annual Annual Black Tie Banquet of the

Baltimore County Bar Association, the BCBA ‘Prom’

was held on Thursday, January 30th, 2020 at Martin’s

Valley Mansion in Cockeysville. Attended by nearly

650 attorneys and judges from throughout the State,

the Black Tie Banquet was another success.

Over 350 children’s books were collected for this

year’s designated charity, The Y in Central Maryland

and Read Across America. BCBA 100th Anniversary

lapel pins were handed out to attendees and a

slideshow with photos from the BCBA’s past was

shown to all in attendance.

Judge Michael W. Siri, BCBA President, recognized

and thanked the Executive Council and announced

the newly nominated Executive Council at-large

member for 2020-2021, Alaina Storie. He reognized

committee chairs and vice-chairs and all of the BCBA

members who have selflessly dedicated their time for

the benefit of all of the members of the bench and bar.

He asked all past presidents of the BCBA to stand and

thanked them for laying the foundation for the current

and future officers to continue to lead and support our

legal community. Judge Siri also discussed the

formation of the Diversity and Inclusion Committee

of the Baltimore County Bar Association and invited

input and participation from all members. Judge Siri

then presented a gift of thanks to his law school

classmate and friend, Rebecca A. Fleming, BCBA

Immediate Past President.

Bill Alcarese, Jr., Chair of the Professionalism

Committee presented this year’s J. Earle Plumhoff

Professionalism Award to a very deserving Suzanne

K. Farace. After praising her for her dignity, integrity

and civility, Bill listed Suzanne’s many contributions

and accomplishments both in Baltimore County and

throughout Maryland.

Thank you to the following organizations for

generously sponsoring the President’s Reception

preceding the banquet:

Advantage Sentencing Alternative Programs, Inc.

An Poitin Stil

Multi Specialty Healthcare

Minnesota Lawyers Mutual

Planet Depos

Vallit Dispute & Valuation Advisors

THE ADVOCATE Page 9 February/March 2020

98TH ANNUAL BLACK TIE BANQUET

All photos courtesy of C. Theresa Beck,

Myles F. Friedman and

Kimberly Dean Photos.

THE ADVOCATE Page 10 February/March 2020

98TH ANNUAL BLACK TIE BANQUET

THE ADVOCATE Page 11 February/March 2020

98TH ANNUAL BLACK TIE BANQUET

THE ADVOCATE Page 12 February/March 2020

JUDICIAL PORTRAIT UNVEILING FOR JUDGE CHRISTIAN M. KAHL By Michael Barranco

On November 25, 2019 the judicial portrait of the

Honorable Christian M. Kahl was unveiled. The

ceremony was conducted in Courtroom 2 of the Circuit

Court and began with greetings from Harry L Chase on

behalf of the Baltimore County Bar Foundation

Judicial Portrait Committee. The Honorable Timothy

J. Martin (Circuit Court for Baltimore County,

Retired), who served on the bench with Judge Kahl,

welcomed those assembled for the unveiling

ceremony. Before the unveiling of the portrait,

remarks were delivered by Bruce White and the

Honorable Joseph F. Murphy, Jr. (Maryland Court of

Appeals, Retired) whose service on the Circuit bench

also overlapped with that of Judge Kahl. Judge Kahl’s

sons, Christian H. Kahl and Andrew G. Kahl, unveiled

the portrait, which was created by artist, Katherine

Meredith. A response from the bench was delivered

by the Honorable Kathleen G. Cox.

Judge Kahl was born in Baltimore, Maryland on

December 21, 1935 and raised in Reisterstown. He was

the son of Christian Henry Kahl, Baltimore County's

first elected county executive. Judge Kahl attended

McDonogh School, graduated from Franklin High

School in 1953 and received his B.A. degree from

Johns Hopkins University in 1958 and was

simultaneously commissioned a Second Lieutenant in

the United States Army Infantry. From 1960 until

1963, Judge Kahl attended Eastern College of

Commerce and Law and graduated from the Mount

Vernon School of Law with an LL.B. Degree in 1963.

During 1962 and 1963 Judge Kahl served as law clerk/

bailiff to Judge Lester L. Barrett of the Circuit Court

for Baltimore County. Judge Kahl was admitted to the

Maryland Bar in 1963 and began practicing law in

1964. He later became a partner with the firm of

Beach, Cadigan and Kahl.

Judge Kahl served as an Assistant Baltimore County

Solicitor from 1965 until 1968. In 1969 he was named

as a Juvenile Court Master of the Circuit Court for

Baltimore County and served part-time in that position

until his appointment as an Associate Judge of the

District Court of Maryland (District 8, Baltimore

County) on August 16, 1984. In September of 1990

Judge Kahl was appointed an Associate Judge of the

Circuit Court for Baltimore County, and was elected

for a full term of fifteen years in 1992.

Judge Kahl retired from the Circuit Court at the mandatory age of 70 on December 20, 2005. He

continued to serve in a recalled status for many years thereafter on the District and Circuit Courts. Judge Kahl passed away on September 26, 2016

THE ADVOCATE Page 13 February/March 2020

JUDICIAL PORTRAIT UNVEILING FOR JUDGE CHRISTIAN M. KAHL By Michael Barranco

THE ADVOCATE Page 14 February/March 2020

COUNTY COUNCIL UPDATE By Adam Phillips

Greetings! The members of the Baltimore County

Council are grateful for the opportunity to update

the County Bar on the activities of our County’s

legislative body. Your seven member County

Council serves as the independent Legislative

Branch of County government. The Council meets

year-round, generally in bi-monthly Legislative

Sessions (held at night) and bi-monthly Work

Sessions (held during the day). All proceedings are

open to the public, and the Legislative Session is

broadcast on BCTV (Comcast & Verizon channel

25). The Council’s Website at

www.baltimorecountycouncil.org provides helpful

information as well.

At its January 21, 2020 Legislative Session, the

County Council passed Bill 72-19, known as the

Secure All Firearms Effectively (“SAFE”) Act,

which imposes new requirements for firearm retail

establishments in Baltimore County to install

appropriate security measures to protect their

inventory from theft. Specifically, the bill creates a

new County license that will be required prior to

storing firearms inventory in a firearm retail

establishment, if the store is located inside or within

100 yards of a park, house of worship, school,

public building, or other place of public assembly. A

license will also be required for temporary gun

shows that are held within the same areas.

The Council also passed Bill 69-19 to allow the

County to accept a bond as a performance security

for certain County development contracts.

Previously, the only forms of security permitted

under Section 32-4-101 of the County Code were

letters of credit, a cashier’s check, or cash, with the

most common form of security held being a letter of

credit. Historically, the County had preferred letters

of credit to bonds as a matter of policy. However,

most major surrounding jurisdictions, including

Harford, Howard, and Montgomery Counties, have

begun accepting bonds from sufficiently rated

financial institutions and have found them to be an

effective means of securing performance because

developers do not want to jeopardize their ability to

obtain bonds and financing from the financial

institutions with which they have relationships by

having disputes and claims filed.

Finally, the Council confirmed Kelly Madigan as the

first Director of the Baltimore County Office of

Ethics and Accountability. This new independent

office will provide increased oversight of county

government by working to identify any fraud, abuse

or illegal acts. Director Madigan comes to Baltimore

County government from the Maryland Office of the

State Prosecutor where she served as the Deputy

State Prosecutor. The State Prosecutor investigates

and prosecutes public corruption, bribery,

misconduct, and election law crimes on behalf of the

State of Maryland. Director Madigan brings a wealth

of knowledge and over 15 years of prosecutorial

experience to this exciting new office. The

formation of the Office of Ethics and Accountability

THE ADVOCATE Page 15 February/March 2020

THE ADVOCATE Page 16 February/March 2020

FAMILY LAW - OUR FAMILY WIZARD By William F. Alcarese, Jr.

On January 23, 2020, the Family Law Committee

presented a lunch time program on the co-parenting

tool, OurFamilyWizard (https://

www.ourfamilywizard.com/). Katrina Volker and

Danielle Kestnbaum, Esq. came all the way from

Minnesota to give a thorough presentation about

OurFamilyWizard to a crowded courtroom of

attorneys.

OurFamilyWizard is an online and mobile application

designed to make co-parenting easier and less

stressful. Parties can communicate directly through

the program, similar to e-mail, and there are

confirmations of messages sent and viewed. No

longer can one party deny receiving a message.

There is even a tone meter that can guide a party in

writing neutral messages, as opposed to messages

that are too emotional or aggressive.

Another feature is the centralized calendar that allows

the parties to set the access, holiday and vacation

schedules and share appointments and activities for

the other parent to see. There is an info bank where

all of the child(ren)’s important and relevant

information ranging from immunization records to

clothing sizes can be shared. Documents such as

medical records, report cards, photographs, etc. can

be uploaded for the other party to access and view.

Parties are able to track expenses for reimbursement,

and payments can even be electronically processed

through the program. Each parent can maintain a

journal of the activities involving the child(ren).

Everything is documented and preserved, so there is

proof and accountability.

Attorneys also have access to OurFamilyWizard in

one of two capacities – as the attorney for a party, or

as a neutral attorney, i.e. a Best Interest Attorney.

The attorney can review and monitor the client’s

entire account, i.e. communications, calendar,

journal, expenses, etc. The neutral attorney is able

to view both parties’ accounts by toggling back and

forth between the parties.

As a practitioner, I have clients that use

OurFamilyWizard and it has been an extremely

beneficial tool throughout the representation of the

client especially during discovery and for trial

preparation.

OurFamilyWizard is becoming more popular in all

family law cases, not just the acrimonious ones.

Parties are receptive to this concept to engage the

other about matters pertaining to the child(ren). In

fact, some Judges have ordered parties to register

and use OurFamilyWizard as a more effective

means of transmitting information between the

parties to reduce the tension and, hopefully, the

litigation.

There is a fee to use OurFamilyWizard, and it seems

to be worth the value. The cost for the program is

$99 per year, per party. There are also fee waivers

for parties that may qualify, i.e. on government

assistance, low income, in the military, etc.

Attorneys are provided a free account.

On behalf of the Family Law Committee, I would

like to thank Katrina and Danielle for providing all

of their expertise, insight and knowledge about

OurFamilyWizard, and for sponsoring this event

which included a free lunch for the attendees.

THE ADVOCATE Page 17 February/March 2020

FAMILY LAW - PARENTING PLAN WORKSHOP By Alexis L. Holiday

The Baltimore County Bar Association held a

workshop on January 23, 2020, led by Mary Roby

Sanders, Esquire, and Christopher W. Nicholson,

Esquire, of Turnbull, Nicholson & Sanders, P.A. The

presenters were a very distinguished group who were

instrumental in getting the Parenting Plan Rule passed.

They were Mary & Chris as well as Risa Garon, LCSW

-C, BCD, CFLE, Executive Director of the National

Family Resiliency Center, Inc. and Keith Schiszik,

Esquire of Offit Kurman. The Honorable Kathleen G.

Cox and the Honorable Ruth Ann Jakubowski gave

comments from the bench regarding the new Rule and

how they believe it will be an invaluable tool for the

litigants and the bench in formulating the best possible

resolution for children.

Effective January 1, 2020, the Maryland Rules now

require all parents to complete a Parenting Plan during

in any custody dispute. A Parenting Plan is a written

agreement describing how parents will care for and

make decisions for their child(ren). The Parenting Plan

acts like any other written agreement between the

parties. Decision-making authority, communication

between the parents, information sharing between the

parties, parenting time of each parent, transportation

and exchange of the child(ren), and child care should

be addressed in the Parenting Plan.

Risa Garon stressed the importance of developing a

solid parenting plan that will help parties minimize

conflict and to tailor each plan to each family. Keith

Schiszik provided a history of the Rule and how it was

developed and approved by the Rules Committee.

Christopher W. Nicholson discussed the role of the

Best Interest Attorney in developing a Parenting Plan,

and that a Best Interest Attorney should not file his/her

own Plan. Attendees of the workshop then broke off

into small groups to work on different scenarios,

developing and completing the required forms for the

new Parenting Plan Rule. All attendees received

materials including the new Rule, the Parenting Plan

Statement, the Parenting Plan Tool (forms) and

information regarding the new rule.

Parenting Plans are critical to successfully resolving

custody issues, because they reduce conflict, avoid

extra costs involved with litigation, and identify

key areas where parents agree and disagree. The

Parenting Plan Rule is intended to force parents to

make their decisions child-focused. If parents do

agree on some terms, the Court will integrate those

terms into its final Order if it finds that it is in the

child(ren)’s best interest. A Parenting Plan “tool”

will be provided to the parents at their first court

appearance. The tool asks questions and will assist

the parties in agreeing to certain terms, while

highlighting where there is disagreement, so further

work can focus on those areas.

If by the time of trial parents cannot agree on terms

of the care for their child(ren), then parents are to

complete a “Joint Statement Concerning Decision

Making Authority and Parenting Time” identifying

their disagreements. This joint statement is due ten

(10) days before the case’s Settlement Conference.

If there is no Settlement Conference, the joint

statement is due twenty (20) days before trial. At

least thirty (30) days before the due date, each party

should exchange a joint statement identifying their

disagreements regarding the care for their child

(ren). Fifteen (15) days before the due date, the

Plaintiff must serve the Defendant a proposed joint

statement that reflects both parties’ positions. If

the Defendant agrees with the Plaintiff’s proposal,

then the Defendant must file it with the Court

before the due date. If parents do not agree on

some terms, the Court is aware of these

disagreements and will decide what is in the best

interest of the child(ren).

The parents may work together, separately, or with

a mediator to complete their Parenting Plan.

Family Court Services will work with the parties

during mediation to complete the Parenting Plan

tool and the Joint Statement. The parties’ attorneys

may also assist the parents in completing both.

For further information please visit https://

mdcourts.gov/sites/default/files/court-forms/

ccdrin109.pdf.

THE ADVOCATE Page 18 February/March 2020

PROFESSIONALISM - AVOIDING CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

INVOLVING PRIOR PROSPECTIVE CLIENTS By Michael Jacko

In addition to a duty of loyalty to current clients, the

Rules of Professional Responsibility impose a

similar duty to both former clients and to former

potential clients. Intuitively, the rules contemplate a

less onerous duty of loyalty to a potential client than

to a former client. (This stands in contrast to the

treatment of the duty of confidentiality, which

applies equally to both groups. See Md. Rule

19‑301.18(b).) Understanding this distinction has

important implications for the handling of

consultations with potential clients so as to prevent

conflicts of interest in the future.

Rule 1.18 governs duties to prospective clients. It

states that even when no attorney-client relationship

comes to be, the attorney shall not (barring an

informed waiver) “represent a client with interests

materially adverse to those of a prospective client in

the same or a substantially related matter if the

attorney received information from the prospective

client that could be significantly harmful to that

person in the matter.” Md. Rule 19‑301.18(c). This

is distinguishable from Rule 1.9, governing duties to

former clients, which identifies a conflict without

mentioning the sharing of harmful information. See

Md. Rule 19‑301.9(a). Essentially, the Rules

presume that an attorney does not receive harmful

information in a consultation with every prospective

client but reverse this presumption once the attorney

-client relationship is fully realized.

Attorneys wishing to avoid tomorrow’s conflict of

interest with today’s potential client may employ a

combination of several tactics to do so. The most

obvious strategies are limiting the receipt of

“significantly harmful information” from

prospective clients, seeking advanced waivers from

prospective clients, and maintaining records on

consultations with prospective clients that include

what information was shared.

Appreciating the distinction discussed above, the

first way to avoid a conflict stemming from one’s

next consultation is to only receive as much

information as is necessary for both parties to make a

decision about retaining the lawyer. If the attorney

does not receive any information from the prospective

client that could be harmful to that person, then the

attorney will not be prevented from representing an

adverse party in the future. See Md. Rule 19‑301.18

Comment [6]. “Significantly harmful” information

may include (1) sensitive personal information; (2)

financial information; (3) settlement positions; (4)

litigation strategies; and (5) information that could be

used against the prospective client, for example, as

impeachment evidence. See Wisconsin Formal Ethics

Opinion EF 10‑03 (cited favorably by MSBA Ethics

Docket 2019‑05).

Because conflicts involving potential clients are

waivable, a second way to avoid creating a future

conflict of interest emerging from a consultation is to

have every prospective client agree up front that no

information they share will prohibit the attorney from

going on to represent another client in a related matter.

See Md. Rule 19‑301.18 Comment [5]. The rules

governing informed consent apply to such waiver, id.,

so the attorney will need to exercise caution when

explaining the potential risks inherent in agreeing to

such terms. Admittedly, it may not always be possible

to fully explain to a layperson the risk of disclosing

information when the attorney does not yet know what

information might be disclosed.

Maintaining good records on prospective clients with

whom one meets is a third strategy to prevent future

conflicts of interest. Attorneys are obliged to maintain

lists of prospective clients with whom they consult.

See MSBA Ethics Docket 2019-05. Moreover, should

the attorney later desire to represent another party with

interests that are materially adverse to those of the

prospective client, then a record of the material

discussed in the consultation might help to

demonstrate that no significantly harmful information

was shared, and thus, that there is no conflict. See id.

Finally, it should be noted that while conflicts

involving prospective clients are imputed to other

THE ADVOCATE Page 19 February/March 2020

members of an attorney’s firm, screening of the

affected attorney is also possible. See Md. Rule 19-

301.18(d).

By remaining mindful of one’s duty of loyalty to

prospective clients, an attorney can develop habits

that will minimize the chance that he or she

unknowingly creates a conflict that will one day

prevent him or her from representing another party

involved in the same or a related matter.

CIVIL LAW UPDATE By Ceecee Paizs

District Court, which found that since Mr. Johnson

was fired rather than terminating his employment

himself, he was not required to repay the debt.

CBH appealed to the Circuit Court, which heard the

case on the record and the Circuit Court affirmed,

finding that the district court “was not clearly

erroneous in its interpretation of the promissory

note at issue in this case”. CBH filed a writ of

certiorari to the Court of Appeals, asking the Court

to determine: (i) whether the circuit erroneously

applied Maryland Rule 7-113(f) when it reviewed

the district court’s interpretation of the promissory

note for clear error; and (ii) whether the circuit

court erred in its interpretation of the promissory

noted.

The Court of Appeals reversed, finding that when

the circuit court reviews a judgment of the district

court under Maryland Rule 7-113(f), the circuit

court reviews the district court’s factual

determinations for clear error and its legal

conclusions de novo. Because the interpretation of

a contract is a legal endeavor, the Court held that

the circuit court erred by applying the incorrect

standard of review to the district court’s legal

conclusions. Further, the Court held that under the

promissory note at issue CBH employees are

required to repay the loan in accordance with the

repayment schedule set forth in Paragraph 1(a)

whether an employee is fired or quits. The Court

held that the final part of Paragraph 1(a) constitutes

an independent obligation to repay the loan and that

an interpretation that repayment was only required

in situations where an employee quits defies

Maryland’s common sense approach to contract

interpretation.

THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS:

Gannett Fleming, Inc. v. Corman Construction, Inc.

, No. 2827, September Term 2018, filed November

21, 2019. Opinion by Kehoe, Judge

The parties to this matter entered into two separate

agreements, a teaming agreement which did not

PROFESSIONALISM CONTINUED By Michael Jacko

Review of the Amicus Curiarum for December , 2019

revealed the following civil case of interest:

THE COURT OF APPEALS:

Credible Behavioral Health, Inc. v. Emmanuel

Johnson, No. 19, September Term 2019, Filed

November 20, 2019. Opinion by Greene, Judge

Credible Behavioral Health, Inc. (CBH) provided

tuition assistance to its employees, in the form of

loans to the employees. The amount that is required

to be repaid was dependent on how long the employee

remained with CBH after obtaining his/her degree. In

2016, Mr. Johnson entered CBH’s tuition loan

program to fund his education. A promissory note

memorialized the agreement in which Paragraph 1(a)

contained a repayment provision that outlines the

amount an employee must repay based on the length

of employment post degree and which also contained

the language that state “[i]f you terminate employment

with the Company[.]” In December 2017, CBH fired

Mr. Johnson before he had obtained his degree. CBH

brought an action seeking repayment of the loan in

THE ADVOCATE Page 20 February/March 2020

CIVIL LAW UPDATE By Ceecee Paizs

contain an alternate dispute resolution provision, and

a design subcontract which contained a clause that

required a three-phase dispute-resolution process.

While construction was ongoing, the builder realized

that the engineering firm had underestimated the

quantity of materials needed to complete the project.

To settle this potential claim, the parties entered into

(1) direct discussions and then (2) mediation. When

mediation did not resolve the dispute, the builder

made a demand for arbitration, step 3. The

engineering firm filed a petition to stay arbitration in

the Circuit Court arguing that the builder’s right to

arbitration had been waived due to the lapsing of the

three-year statute of limitations and that since the

builder’s claim related solely to services preformed

under the teaming agreement, it fell outside the scope

pf the arbitration clause in the design subcontract.

The circuit court denied the petition to stay

arbitration.

The Court of Special Appeals affirmed, finding that

the right to arbitrate is not waived simply because the

same claim, if brought before a court would be time

barred. Such a required would need to be specifically

provided for in the contract. The Court further held

that the scope of the parties’ agreement to arbitrate

extends to all disputes, including those caused by a

breach of the teaming agreement, as it is related to

the design subcontract’s performance or breach.

Therefore the dispute herein fell within the

substantive scope of the arbitration clause.

Natella Azizova v. Muzaffar Suleymanov, No. 2338,

September Term 2018, filed November 21, 2019.

Opinion by Battaglia, Lynne, Judge.

Mother and Father lived together for nine months

after their child was born, at which time Mother left

Maryland to live with her mother in Georgia. Father

filed a complaint for custody in Maryland and

Mother filed a counter-complaint for custody. After

a hearing, a Family Magistrate recommended that

Mother be granted sole legal and primary physical

custody of the child while providing Father with

visitation right. The circuit court judge, after

considering the factors pertinent to custody

determinations, disagreed and awarded the parties

joint legal with Father having primary physical

custody of the child. The judge concluded that the

best interest of the child would be served by

awarding Father primary physical custody, stating

that Mother was unfit due to her youth her decision

to enroll in school, work part-time and an isolated

incident of intoxication at a concert.

The Court of Special Appeals vacated and remanded,

holding that the trial judge abused her discretion in

awarding Father primary physical custody based

upon factors cited in her opinion. The judge

misapplied the best interest child standard and failed

to articulate how Mother’s choices directly and

adversely impacted the well-being of the child.

Further, the Court stated that the judge’s comments

inferring that it was inappropriate for a mother to

work or attend school absent financial necessity

when she has a young child at home lacked support

in the record and demonstrated gender bias in her

decision making.

Review of the Amicus Curiarum for January 2020

revealed the following civil case of interest:

THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS:

In the Matter of Ronald Meddings, No. 2096,

September Term 2018, filed December 23, 2019.

Opinion by Wells, Judge

As the result of a violent incident at a VA Hospital,

Mr. Meddings was charged with first and second-

degree assault. During the prosecution, based on a

diagnosis of schizophrenia the Circuit Court found

Meddings incompetent to stand trial and committed

him. While committed, Meddings refused to take

prescribed medications to treat his psychosis and

atrial fibrillation. The Clinical Review Panel

(“CRP”)approved medicating Meddings

involuntarily, but was not authorized to order

treatment for the atrial fibrillation. The hospital filed

a petition seeking the appointment of a guardian for

Meddings’ on an on-going basis in order to treat

THE ADVOCATE Page 21 February/March 2020

CIVIL LAW UPDATE By Ceecee Paizs

Meddings on an on-going basis and the CRP did not

effectively allow the hospital to protect Meddings

from himself or others. Meddings argued that the

CRP provided a less restrictive alternative to

guardianship. The Circuit Court granted the

hospital’s petition for guardianship of Meddings’

person.

The Court of Special Appeals affirmed, establishing

that the appropriate standard of review in an adult

guardianship case should be the same as the tripartite

and interrelated standard review in child guardianship

cases, the Court of Special Appeals concluded that, no

less restrictive form of intervention was available.

Meddings was incompetent to execute an advanced

directive and a surrogate decision-maker was not a

viable option either. Further, the Court determined

that the CRP is not a less restrictive alternative form

of intervention. The evidence adduced at trial showed

that on one occasion, the CRP could not be convened

before Medding’ anti-psychotic medicine ran out and

Meddings was violent, endangering himself and the

hospital staff. In addition, the CPR cannot address

Meddings’ atrial fibrillation which if untreated would

likely be fatal. For these reasons, the Court held that

the circuit court’s appointment of a guarding in

Meddings’ case was not an abuse of discretion.

In the Matter of Gerald S. Dory, No. 1084, September

Term 2018, filed December 23, 2019. Opinion by

Leahy, Andrea Judge

Ms. Sullivan was appointed guardian of the property

of Mr. Dory, an elderly widower who was diagnosed

with dementia and an altered mental state. When Mr.

Dory’s real property went into foreclosure, Ms

Sullivan filed a petition requesting authorization to

conduct a private sale. The order was issued and the

circuit court subsequently ratified the contract of sale,

which included a sales price above the property’s

appraised value. Ms. Sullivan petitioned for a

commission on the sale which she calculated pursuant

to the rate specified in Local Rule BR7 of the Seventh

Judicial Circuit. The circuit court denied the petition

without a hearing, determining that the commission

was not in Mr. Dory’s best interest and that it was

wholly inequitable when considering the time and

labor expended by Sullivan.

The Court of Special Appeals reversed and

remanded, holding that the circuit court applied the

wrong legal standard in denying Ms. Sullivan a

commission on the sale of Mr. Dory’s real property.

Reading the local rule and harmonizing the

provisions of Estates and Trusts §§13-281(a) and

14.5-708, a guardian of property is entitled to a

commission for the sale of real property approved

by the court and absent a petition by an interested

person or agreement to the contrary, that

commission may not be diminished except in the

narrow circumstances articulated in ET §14.5-708

(a)(1)(iii) and Local Rule BR7. In this case the

circuit court erred by engaging in a determination of

whether the commission was in Mr. Dory’s best

interest, whether the commission was equitable in

light of the services and labor expended by Ms.

Sullivan and whether unusual circumstances exited

to allow the commission and the case was remanded

with instructions to determine Sullivan’s

commission consistent with the Local Rule and

applicable sections of the ET provisions.

Paul W. Nusbaum, Jr. v. Marzha R. Nusbaum,, et al.

, No. 480, September Term 2018, Filed December

20, 2019. Opinion by Wells, Judge

Father and Mother were divorce in Maryland in

2005. At the time, the circuit court ordered that

Father pay $3250 per month in non-modifiable

alimony and $1422 per month in child support for

their four children. The funds were paid through an

Earnings Withholding Order paid through the Office

of Child Support (“OCSE”). IN 2008, Father

moved to Georgia, where his wages did not meet the

full monthly amount of either child support or

alimony. In 2010, Father requested a modification

of his child support payment. At that time, Father

owed $36,262.60 in unpaid child support and

$117,127.22 in unpaid alimony.

Continued on page 29

THE ADVOCATE Page 22 February/March 2020

his boat is running); fishing (which usually requires

the use of a running boat); golf (the 19th hole and

Golf Digest); cooking (there is “talk” of a

restaurant!); and weekly trips to Costco for the latest

bulk specials.

The BCBA thanks the Jacqueline Dawson Portrait

Fund, Judge Bollinger’s family, and Katherine

Meredith (the talented artist) for making the portrait

possible.

JUDICIAL PORTRAIT UNVEILING FOR JUDGE THOMAS J. BOLLINGER By Adam E. Konstas

On December 2, 2019, members of the Baltimore

County Bar Association, colleagues, friends, and

family, gathered in Baltimore County Circuit

Courtroom #2 for the unveiling of the judicial

portrait of the Honorable Thomas J. Bollinger.

The Honorable Kathleen G. Cox presided over the

event and called the gallery to order. Guests were

treated to an invocation by Father Jack B. Ward, and

John B. Gontrum of the Baltimore County Bar

Foundation Judicial Portrait Committee welcomed

guests and thanked those who made the portrait

unveiling possible. Judge Bollinger’s former judicial

assistant, Angela Miller, delivered the remarks ahead

of the portrait unveiling, which Judge Bollinger and

his wife Marguerite received along-side family and

friends. Judge Robert E. Cahill Jr. delivered closing

remarks, as the attendees gathered together around

the portrait to celebrate.

Judge Bollinger was appointed to the position of

District Court Judge for Baltimore County by then

Governor William Donald Schaefer in September

1989. Just 19 months later, Governor Schaefer

appointed Judge Bollinger to the Baltimore County

Circuit Court. Judge Bollinger served on the

Baltimore County Circuit Court bench until June 3,

2011, the date of his retirement. Judge Bollinger has

been a longstanding member of the Baltimore

County Bar Association, American Legion, and

Towson ELKS. When not serving those

organization, Judge Bollinger enjoys boating (when

THE ADVOCATE Page 23 February/March 2020

JUDICIAL PORTRAIT UNVEILING FOR JUDGE THOMAS J. BOLLINGER By Adam E. Konstas

THE ADVOCATE Page 24 February/March 2020

MVLS EXPANDS HUMAN TRAFFICKING PREVENTION PROJECT

MVLS Expands Human Trafficking Prevention

Project Thanks to Funding from the Venable Foundation

BALTIMORE, January 13, 2020 – Maryland

Volunteer Lawyers Service (MVLS), the largest provider of pro bono civil legal services to low-income Marylanders, today announced a generous

grant from the Venable Foundation to support its Human Trafficking Prevention Project (HTPP), which was launched in 2016 in partnership with the

University of Baltimore School of Law. January is recognized as National Human Trafficking Awareness Month and the new funding will be

critical in matching pro bono attorneys with survivors of human trafficking to provide legal counsel and full representation for their civil cases. Since 2016,

MVLS has trained more than 75 pro bono attorneys to assist more than 100 clients that are survivors of human trafficking or those at risk of being trafficked.

“We are thrilled to receive ongoing funding from the

Venable Foundation to support our Human Trafficking Prevention Project in Maryland,” said Susan Francis, executive director, MVLS. “With this

funding, MVLS will be able to improve the project’s capacity to provide comprehensive civil legal services to survivors, which helps them on their path

to recovery from the severe trauma they experienced while trafficked. Venable is a loyal supporter of MVLS and makes pro bono work a priority for its attorneys as many Venable attorneys are a part of

MVLS’s volunteer network. We look forward to matching our network of pro bono attorneys with survivors of human trafficking for brief advice or full

representation.”

Survivors of human trafficking and those at risk of being trafficked can find themselves with a record of criminal convictions and civil issues that create a

need for legal help with family law matters, consumer and housing issues, the need for criminal record expungements, and vacatur of prostitution

convictions. Assistance from pro bono attorneys help these survivors move forward on their road to recovery.

“We are honored to provide funding to Maryland

Volunteer Lawyers Service for the remarkable legal assistance they are providing to Marylanders in need,

especially survivors of human trafficking,” said Michael W. Bigley, director of the Venable

Foundation at Venable. “We will continue to encourage and inspire attorneys to share their skills with those who need help navigating the civil legal

system.”

The HTPP provides on-site intake at multiple community-based organizations, including Pride Center of Maryland, Family Crisis Center of

Baltimore County, TurnAround, Inc., Helping Up Mission, Support, Partnership, and Realtime Communication (SPARC) Center for Women,

Pivot Program, and Catholic Charities’ My Sister’s Place Women’s Center.

To learn more about MVLS or to become a volunteer, please visit www.mvlslaw.org.

Founded in 1981 with a mission to provide access to justice for all, Maryland Volunteer Lawyers

Service (MVLS) serves Maryland’s low-income residents by offering legal counseling and full representation for civil cases. MVLS matches

clients with volunteer lawyers who represent them in a wide range of consumer, family and workforce re-entry situations, including foreclosure,

bankruptcy, income tax disputes, landlord/tenant disputes, estate planning, criminal record expungement, divorce/custody and deed changes.

For more information about MVLS’ services, visit www.mvlslaw.org.

The Venable Foundation, Inc. was established in 1983 to support a wide variety of charitable, civic,

and cultural endeavors, as well as public interest law needs in our communities. In the past 10 years, the Venable Foundation granted more than $25

million to worthy organizations that provide critical support to those in need. These include children's services and funding for disadvantaged

families and individuals; homeless shelters and food programs; community organizations, hospitals, hospices, and local chapters of national

health organizations; and educational, artistic, and cultural events and organizations. The Foundation is funded by the partners of Venable LLP. To learn

more, please visit www.venable.com.

THE ADVOCATE Page 25 February/March 2020

THE Y IN CENTRAL MARYLAND—

2019 OPEN DOORS SUMMARY

As a cause-driven, charitable organization, the Y

values the practice of inclusion for all and is deeply

committed to raising the funds necessary to remove

income as a barrier. Through the Y Open Doors

Financial Assistance program, everyone in the

community can participate in Y membership,

programs and services that encourage positive

growth, promote a healthy lifestyle, build community

and support social responsibility.

In 2019, through the Y Open Doors program and with

the help of generous donors, the Y provided financial

assistance to:

3,530 individuals and families totaling $1.9M for Y

membership

361 children in Y Camp programs totaling more than

$216,000

104 children in Y Preschool programs totaling more

than $312,000

77 children in Y Before & After School Enrichment

programs totaling almost $47,000

The Y could not do so much for so many without the

support of organizations like the Baltimore County

Bar Association. Here are just a few words of thanks

from Y scholarship recipients.

"I am so thankful for my Y membership. My family

was given a scholarship and I cannot even state the

impact it has had. The Y is a safe place for my

children. The people are friendly and make me feel

like I belong."

"I’m so grateful to the Y. My son comes home happy

every day and he is learning so much! I can’t thank

you enough."

"For me, being retired, it’s nice to be able to get out

of the house and meet people."

"My daughter was able to go to camp at a discounted

rate. She said it was her best summer ever. Now she

will be able to start swim lessons."

"Great staff and teachers, safe atmosphere. My

daughter loves it here and is learning fundamental

educational and social skills."

"The Y has given my grandson and I a chance to

bond."

THE ADVOCATE Page 26 February/March 2020

LAW LIBRARY NEWS

MDEC & Guardianship

Recent changes to the Maryland Rules now limit

access to guardianship documents in MDEC. This

includes what can be viewed via Kiosk in the Law

Library. Please be aware of these changes and how

they impact your role as an attorney of record or

when reviewing the case file of a potential client.

From the Maryland Judiciary:

Per Legislation update of amendments to Md. Rule

16-907 adopted by the Court of Appeals in the

11/19/2019 Report Rules Order, access to documents

filed in guardianship cases are to be restricted from

the public except for docket entries and orders

entered under Md. Rule 10-108, with the exceptions

below:

• Orders appointing a guardian

• Orders assuming jurisdiction over a fiduciary

estate other than a guardianship

• Letters of guardianship

• Modifications of guardianship

New Titles

The staff added the following titles to the law

library’s collection:

Antitrust Law and Economics In A Nutshell by

Ernest Gellhorn et al. – West Academic Publishing,

2004. KF 1652 .G4

Biotechnology and the Law, 2nd Ed. By Hugh

Wellons et al. – ABA, 2019. KF 3133 .B56

The Constitutional and Legal Rights of Women, 4th

Ed / Leslie Goldstein et al. – West Academic

Publishing, 2019. KF 4758 .A7 .G66

Contracts in a Nutshell, 8th Ed by Claude Rohwer et

al. – West Academic Publishing, 2017. KF

801 .Z9 .C66

THE ADVOCATE Page 27 February/March 2020

The Bar Association offices are currently closed, but the Lawyer Referral & Information Service is still

fully operational. Please direct the public to call 410-337-9100 Monday—Friday from 9:00 a.m.—4:30

p.m. The 2020-2021 Lawyer Referral & Information Service Panel Application will be available soon.

Contact Rachel Fuller at rfuller@bcba.org if you are interested in participating in Lawyer Referral or if

you have any questions. All current panel members will receive the new application via email.

Remember...You can join or renew at any time! CLICK HERE for more information.

Did you know???

The Baltimore County Bar

Association held their first

meeting on May 21, 1920.

The Baltimore County Bar

Association was founded on

May 4, 1921.

BALTIMORE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION HISTORICAL COMMITTEE

Do you have old photos of past

Baltimore County Bar Association

events and programs? We would

love to have them! Please email

Rachel Ruocco at

rruocco@bcba.org to coordinate.

THE ADVOCATE Page 28 February/March 2020

Seasoned Litigator and Business Lawyer Michael

Lentz Joins Lawrence Law

(Baltimore, Maryland, January 27, 2020)— Lawrence

Law, LLC welcomes seasoned litigator and business

lawyer Michael Lentz to the firm. Lentz brings twenty

years of experience in business and commercial

litigation and significant transactional matters.

Lentz joins Lawrence Law from a large, Mid-Atlantic

law firm, where he headed its commercial litigation

practice. At Lawrence Law, Lentz will continue to

represent businesses ofall sizes—and their owners,

officers, and directors—in litigation before federal and

state courts and in private arbitrations. He will also

represent personal representatives, trustees, and other

fiduciaries. Further, Lentz will assist business clients

with asset sales, mergers, and acquisitions, and with

day-to-day legal matters.

Lentz is the third new attorney in three months to join

Lawrence Law since it moved into The Warehouse at

Camden Yards in November. And the firm intends on

continuing its growth in2020. “We couldn’t be

more excited about Michael’s joining our growing

team,” said Kate Lawrence. “My brother Greg and I

created Lawrence Law to be a place where talented

people love to work and to deliver excellent results

to our clients. Michael is the perfect fit. He is

atenacious litigator and respected business lawyer

who always explores creative alternatives toachieve

superior results.”

Lentz received his law degree from Georgetown

University Law Center and his bachelor’s degree

from Princeton University. He is a member of the

Maryland State and Baltimore County Bar

Associations. Lentz has taught Legal Analysis,

Research and Writing at the University of Baltimore

School of Law, and he served on the Board of

Trustees of the Alumni Association of the Gilman

School. He formerly lived in Seville, Spain, and he

speaks Spanish proficiently. Lentz is admitted to

practice law in the Maryland, Nevada, and

California.

Lawrence Law is a boutique business law firm

focused on solving legal issues for businesses and

businesspeople. From high-stakes litigation to day-

to-day employment law advice and contract

drafting, Lawrence Law attorneys bring in-depth

experience, professionalism, and responsiveness to

every issue they handle. When litigation is

necessary, Lawrence Law attorneys have a proven

record of success in complex and high-profile cases

across the nation and are aggressive, trial-ready, and

focus on the heart of a dispute.

MEMBERS ON THE MOVE

THE ADVOCATE Page 29 February/March 2020

CIVIL LAW UPDATE By Ceecee Paizs

permissible for the court to order the reallocation in

the first instance.

The Court of Special Appeals affirmed, concluding

that although the circuit court erred in its application

of judicial estoppel, the circuit court could not have

ordered the reallocation in any event. The Court

held that although Father claimed part of his

payments to Mother as alimony on his income tax

returns that act was not “an inconsistent position” in

different litigation (first element of judicially

estoppel) and that fact was not “a position accepted

by the court”, (2nd element). While Mother may be

correct that the third element, that being

intentionally misleading the court to gain an unfair

advantage may have been met, the first two elements

were lacking and therefore judicial estoppel could

not apply. Equitable estoppel also did not apply as

Mother did not conclusively prove a present

detriment. Most significantly, the Court held that

the circuit court could not have ordered the

requested reallocation under the separation of

powers doctrine. As long as OSCE’s method of

carrying out a statutory mandate is lawful, the Court

is precluded from ordering the agency to alter that

method and further the agency’s allocation method

is not incompatible with the best interests of the

child standard.

Since two children had emancipated by 2010 the court

reduced his child support payment accordingly. In

2016, Father requested that the court order OCSE to

perform an audit and established his arrears for both

alimony and child support after he learned that

Georgia allocated his monthly payments differently

than Maryland. While Maryland declared his child

support arrears were $80,905.25, Georgia allocated a

greater percentage of his monthly payments to child

support, leaving an arrears of approximately $30,000

by Georgia’s calculations. Father requested that an

audit be performed that credited all payments made

for both spousal and child support solely to his child

support obligation until satisfied and then credited

towards spousal support. After a hearing on

Exceptions to a Magistrate’s findings, the trial court

ordered OSCE to perform the audit and beginning

crediting any future payments Father made solely to

child support. Only after that obligation (plus arrears)

was satisfied would any remaining payments be

credited to his alimony obligation. Only after

Mother’s motion to alter or amend and OCSE’s

concomitant motion to reconsider, the circuit court

determined that Father was judicially estopped from

reallocating all of his payments solely to child

support, as he requested. The Trial court declined to

address the threshold question of whether it was

THE ADVOCATE Page 30 February/March 2020

Kramon & Graham, a leading law firm providing

litigation, real estate, and transactional services, is

pleased to announce that prominent Maryland defense

attorney David B. Irwin has joined the firm as Of

Counsel.

Known for his work in high-profile criminal and civil

cases, Mr. Irwin is a veteran attorney with more than

four decades of experience. Mr. Irwin has handled

cases of national and international interest,

including the representation of a former currency

trader for Allied Irish Banks (Allfirst Bank), and a

former U.S. civil servant who played a pivotal role in

the Clinton–Lewinsky scandal. David also represents

corporations, public officials, doctors, lawyers,

members of the judiciary, and other professionals in

both civil and criminal liability matters.

David regularly testifies as an expert witness on civil

and criminal matters. Most recently, he was engaged

as an expert in the post-conviction defense of the

main subject of the podcast "Serial."

"David is a skilled litigator with an outstanding and

well-earned reputation from many years of

successfully handling high-profile matters,"

commented Kramon & Graham managing principal

Dave Shuster. "He is a gifted lawyer and makes an

excellent addition to our team."

"Kramon & Graham attorneys have the experience

and resources to handle even the most complex of

cases," said Mr. Irwin. "The firm has an enviable

record of courtroom success and a long-standing

reputation for providing quality representation. I am

thrilled to join such a distinguished team."

Mr. Irwin began his legal career in 1973 as an

assistant state's attorney, first in Baltimore City and

then Baltimore County, where he ultimately served

as Chief of the Felony Trial Division. In 1980, as an

Assistant United States Attorney for the District of

Maryland, he was appointed by the Attorney General

of the United States as the Chief of Narcotics Cases.

In 1983, he was assigned to the United States

Department of Justice as a U.S. Attorney

Coordinator for the President's Organized Crime

Drug Enforcement Task Force. Mr. Irwin joined

Venable in 1985 before founding his own firm in

1988.

Mr. Irwin received his law degree in 1973 from the

University of Maryland Francis King Carey School

of Law and his undergraduate degree in 1970 from

Cornell University.

MEMBERS ON THE MOVE

Jennifer R. Bowman

Assistant Attorney General

Office of the Attorney General Maryland Department of the Environment

1800 Washington Blvd., Suite 6048 Baltimore, Maryland 21230

Phone: (410) 537-3042 Fax: (410) 537-3943

jennifer.bowman@maryland.gov

THE ADVOCATE Page 31 February/March 2020

MEMBER NEWS

WELCOME NEW MEMBERS!

2-Plus Years in Practice

David Baxter

Aleksandr Binder

Jana Corn Burch

Mollie G. Caplis

Elizabeth Erin Crow

Timothy J. Doory

Syeetah Hampton-El

Hossein Parizian

Stuart Jay Robinson

Florian Tabaku

Government/Non-Profit

Amanda Rodriguez

Law Students

Antonia Clay

Taylor Ann Mooney

Onome Obazee

1st Year Attorneys

Sara Assaid

Abigail Quinn Belcher

Jessica Erler

Aaron David Fray

Zachary Austin Phillips

Caitlin Anne Rayhart

Adam Richard Rutherford

Ryan Zachry Ullman

Christopher Paul Wheatcroft

Carley Wilbourne

Amber Williams

MARY ROBY SANDERS, CHRISTOPHER W. NICHOLSON, REBECCA A. FLEMING & ALAINA L. STORIE

of

TURNBULL, NICHOLSON & SANDERS, P.A.

are pleased to welcome to their firm

SNEHAL P. MASSEY, Esq. & ALEXIS L. HOLIDAY, Esq.

The firm shall continue to concentrate its practice in the negotiation, litigation, arbitration, and mediation of Family Law matters.

210 W. Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 420, Towson, Maryland 21204 (410) 339-4100

THE ADVOCATE Page 32 February/March 2020

THE ADVOCATE Page 33 February/March 2020

THE ADVOCATE Page 34 February/March 2020

THE ADVOCATE Page 35 February/March 2020

The Baltimore County Bar Association

continues its Signature Sponsor program,

which enhances the opportunities for our

sponsors, as well as our members. This single-

tier program provides more engagement

between our sponsors and our members. Each

Signature Sponsor can host an event during the

year, thereby reducing the cost of the event for

members while providing added benefits.

Sponsorships help the Bar Association maintain

its current dues level despite the increasing costs

of providing top-shelf legal education programs,

social events, networking opportunities and Bar

Office services available in the County Courts

Building. If you know of a business that would

be interested in one of these limited sponsorship

opportunities, please contact Rachel Ruocco

(410) 337-9100 or rruocco@bcba,org).

Signature Sponsors

For the last 12 years, Insight Network

Consultants has offered managed IT services

and phone solutions as a competitive

advantage. Whether you have 5 employees or

100+, we have you covered.

Call Insight and you will always get to our

support staff on the first ring.

410-INSIGHT

Www.insightnc.com

THE ADVOCATE Page 36 February/March 2020

Baltimore County Bar Association 100 County Courts Building 401 Bosley Avenue Towson, MD 21204-4491 410-337-9103-Telephone 410-823-3418-Facsimile www.bcba.org

Member Advertisements

TOWSON. Furnished office available in beautifully appointed suite in the heart of Towson. Use of conference room and other amenities. Contact Susan at 410-583-7007.

TOWSON. Second floor office for rent with space available for admin/secretary. On site parking with shared conference room. Email nfick@neurolaw.com or call 410-321-5000 if interested.

TOWSON. Small firm in Towson looking for an experienced part-time legal assistant/secretary two to three days a week. Any experienced candidates should contact Robert Jacobson at 410-583-8883.

TOWSON. 303 W. Pennsylvania Avenue, Towson across Bosley Avenue from the Circuit Court Building, three offices with bathroom on the second floor, 3rd floor four offices available, conference room, bathroom and kitchen on first floor, free parking space available, rent negotiable $50 to $100 less than comparable spaces. $400-$500 per office, great satellite office with possibility of overflow work. Contact Joe Glass at 410-823-4214 or 410-790-1980.

CATONSVILLE. Office Space for Rent. Catonsville, 1002 Frederick Road, 2nd floor office. Private entrance, semi private restroom, use of conference room and kitchen on first floor. Free parking. Would be a great satellite office. Please contact Lou Weinkam, Jr. at 410-744-3256 ext. 103.

TOWSON. 309 Allegheny Avenue. 2nd floor offices with private restroom, 3 regular offices, partially furnished, 1 executive office (can be made into five offices) fully furnished. Private restroom. Tenant will have available to them a conference room, print/scan/fax center and kitchenette on 1st floor. Additionally, 2nd floor has 2 private entrances, 5 free parking spaces, and approximately 800 sq. ft. of combined dry/secure storage on 3rd floor and basement.

TOWSON. Sublease available one block from courthouse. Space in excellent condition. Spacious conference rooms, 3-4 offices, reception area, copy/supply room, and kitchen. Sublease until August, then take on new lease. Rent negotiable. Contact towsonfirm@gmail.com to schedule a tour or get more information.

TOWSON. Office for Rent: $990/month for one office with reception area right off the elevator. Located in Towson within walking distance to courthouse. Newly renovated and furnished. $1,200 to add an additional office connected to entire suite. Includes electric, internet and one parking space. For more information email doug@dbmcommunications.com or call 410-825-7400.

TOWSON. Office sharing available. One block from Courthouse. Use of phone system, copier, fax and secretarial available. Please call Beverly at 410-296-6820.

Presort Standard U.S. Postage

PAID Permit No. 1262 Baltimore, MD