COURT OF APPEALS STANDING COMMITTEE

Court rules

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

ON RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Minutes of a meeting of the Rules Committee held in Training

Rooms 5 and 6 of the Judiciary Education and Conference Center, 2011

Commerce Park Drive, Annapolis, Maryland on September 10, 2015.

Members present:

Hon. Alan M. Wilner, Chair

H. Kenneth Armstrong, Esq.

Hon. Yvette M. Bryant

James E. Carbine, Esq.

Hon. John P. Davey

Mary Anne Day, Esq.

Christopher R. Dunn, Esq.

Hon. Angela M. Eaves

Hon. JoAnn M. Ellinghaus-Jones

Alvin I. Frederick, Esq.

Donna Ellen McBride, Esq.

Hon. Danielle M. Mosley

Hon. Douglas R. M. Nazarian

Hon. Paula A. Price

Scott D. Shellenberger, Esq.

Steven M. Sullivan, Esq.

Robert Zarbin, Esq.

Thurman W. Zollicoffer, Esq.

In attendance:

Sandra F. Haines, Esq., Reporter

David R. Durfee, Jr., Esq., Assistant Reporter

Sherie B. Libber, Esq., Assistant Reporter

Erin McCarthy, Esq., Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County

Lee Sampson, Administrative Office of the Courts

Hon. Gary G. Everngam

Faye D. Matthews, Deputy State Court Administrator

Polly Harding, District Court Headquarters

Jeffrey C. Shipley, Esq., Secretary, State Board of Law Examiners

Hon. Anne C. Dodd, Howard County Orphans’ Court

Sarah Norton, Esq., Court of Special Appeals

Rachel Dombrowski, Esq., Court of Special Appeals

Margaret H. Phipps, Register of Wills for Calvert County

Grace G. Connolly, Register of Wills for Baltimore County

P. Gregory Hilton, Esq., Clerk, Court of Special Appeals

The Chair convened the meeting.

after the summer break.

He welcomed everyone back

He welcomed a new member, the Honorable

Yvette M. Bryant, a judge on the Circuit Court of Baltimore City,

who is replacing the Honorable W. Michel Pierson.

He also

welcomed Scott D. Shellenberger, Esq., State’s Attorney for

Baltimore County, who had previously attended many Committee

meetings, and who is now on the Committee.

The Chair officially announced the unfortunate and untimely

death of Derrick Lowe, Esq., who had been the Clerk of Cecil

County and a member of the Committee.

The Chair had sent a

letter on behalf of the Committee to Mr. Lowe’s wife and children

expressing the Committee’s sympathy.

The Chair had just learned

that the Court of Appeals had appointed Dennis J. Weaver, Clerk

of Washington County, in place of Mr. Lowe.

Mr. Weaver had only

found out about the appointment yesterday afternoon and was

unable to be at the meeting.

The Chair said that the Court of Appeals is going to have an

open hearing on the 187th Report on September 17, 2015 at 1:00

p.m.

The Chair told the Committee that they had been tasked over

the summer with two new items to study and develop rules on

quickly.

One is going to be the product of a work group

appointed by the Honorable Mary Ellen Barbera, Chief Judge of the

Court of Appeals, to address what to do about teaching

professionalism.

The Honorable Clayton Greene, Jr., Associate

Judge of the Court of Appeals, is chairing the work group, and he

is going to make a report to the Court, possibly by September 17,

2015.

Some rules will be necessary to implement whatever is

decided.

These also need to be completed in a hurry, because the

-2-

current professionalism procedures sunset on January 1, 2016.

The Chair referred to the exposés in The Washington Post,

which were picked up by The Sunpapers, on problems arising from

the assignment of rights under structured settlement agreements.

The Court of Appeals has asked the Committee to address this

issue quickly.

The Chair has appointed a special subcommittee to

discuss this and draft rules.

Hopefully, there will be some

rules to consider at the October Rules Committee meeting.

The Chair said that he had been asked to take up Agenda Item

2 first.

Agenda Item 2. Consideration of proposed amendments to Rule

16-205 (Disposition of Records)

_________________________________________________________________

The Chair presented Rule 16-205, Disposition of Records, for

the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 16 - COURT ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER 200 - GENERAL PROVISIONS – CIRCUIT

AND DISTRICT COURT

Rule 16-205.

(a)

DISPOSITION OF RECORDS

Definitions

In this Rule, the following

definitions apply except as otherwise

provided or as necessary implication

requires.

(1) Authorized Judge

“Authorized judge” means

-3-

(A) with respect to records of a

circuit court, the County Administrative

Judge; and

(B) with respect to records of the

District Court, the Chief Judge of that

Court.

(2) Court

“Court” means a circuit court or the

District Court.

Cross reference: See Rule 8-113 (b)(3) for

disposition of records of the Court of

Appeals and Court of Special Appeals.

(3) Dispose

"Dispose" means to destroy or

remove.

(4) Records

"Records" means any original papers,

official books, documents, files, including

dockets, electronic recordings of testimony,

and exhibits within the custody of the clerk

of the court.

Cross reference: See Code, State Government

Article, §§9-1009 and 10-639 through 10-642.

(5) Schedule

"Schedule" means the form known as

the "Records Retention and Disposal Schedule"

used by the Records Management Division of

the Department of General Services.

(b)

Authority of Clerk

The clerk of the court may dispose of

records in the clerk’s custody:

(1) in accordance with the provisions of

this Rule or Rule 16-405 (d)(2);

(2) with the written approval of the

authorized judge; and

(3) in cooperation with the State

-4-

Archivist.

Cross reference:

§2-205.

(c)

See Code, Courts Article,

Procedure

(1) The clerk shall prepare an initial

schedule for the disposition of court records

and submit the schedule to the State

Archivist for the Archivist’s recommendation.

(2) Upon receipt of the recommendation of

the State Archivist, the clerk shall submit

the schedule and the recommendation to the

authorized judge, who may approve, amend, or

disapprove the schedule. Approval of the

schedule in whole or in part shall be by an

order providing for disposal of the records.

(3) The schedule, as approved, shall

identify the records and set forth:

(A) the length of time the records are

to be retained by the clerk of the court

before disposition;

(B) whether the State Archivist

declines to accept the records for

preservation;

destroyed or removed;

(D) if the records are to be removed,

the place to which they would be removed; and

(E) whether the schedule shall be

operative until changed by further order of

court.

(4) The records shall be disposed of:

(A) in accordance with procedures of

the State Archivist if the State Archivist

accepts the records;

(B) otherwise, in accordance with the

terms specified in the approved schedule. If

the records are to be destroyed, the clerk

shall obtain the approval of the Board of

-5-

Public Works and, upon destruction, shall

file a certificate of destruction with the

State Archivist.

Cross reference: See Code, State Government

Article, §10-642.

(d) Limitations Upon Disposal of Circuit

Court Records

(1) This section applies only to circuit

court records.

(2) Subject to subsection (d)(5) of this

Rule, the following records shall be retained

permanently either by the clerk or the State

Archivist:

(A) permanent books of account;

(B) indices and dockets maintained by

the clerk; and

approved schedule.

(3) Subject to subsection (d)(5) of this

Rule, the clerk shall retain permanently

records affecting title to real property.

(4) The clerk may destroy:

(A) Records in a motor vehicle or

natural resources case at any time three

years or more after the case was closed and

any required audit was completed, except that

the clerk shall retain as permanent records

convictions of offenses which carry

subsequent offender penalties;

(B) Records in a landlord/tenant case

involving restitution of the premises but no

money judgment at any time three years or

more after the case was closed; and

approved schedule at any time 12 years or

more after the case was closed.

(5) The clerk may dispose of records

specified in subsections (d)(2), (d)(3), or

-6-

(d)(4) of this Rule at any time if an

unredacted version of the records has been

duplicated in accordance with State

Archivist’s procedures and copies have been

substituted for the originals.

(e) Limitations upon Disposal of District

Court Records

(1) This section applies only to District

Court records.

(2) Subject to subsection (e)(10) of this

Rule, the clerk shall retain the records

described in subsections (e)(3) through

(e)(9) of this Rule for the periods specified

in those subsections.

(3) The clerk shall retain permanently

all indices, dockets, and books of account.

(4) The clerk shall retain for a period

of 12 years after the case is closed all

original papers and exhibits in any case

containing a petition for emergency

evaluation or a petition for protection from

domestic violence.

(5) In any case in which a money judgment

is entered, the clerk shall retain all

original papers, exhibits, and electronic

recordings of testimony for a period of three

years after entry of the judgment and

thereafter shall continue to retain all

original papers and exhibits in the file

until the judgment expires or is satisfied.

(6) In any criminal case which is

dismissed or in which a nolle prosequi or

stet is entered, the clerk shall retain all

original papers, exhibits, and electronic

recordings of testimony for a period of three

years after the case is so concluded.

(7) In any criminal case in which

judgment is entered or probation before

judgment is granted, the clerk shall retain

all original papers, exhibits, and electronic

recordings of testimony for a period of three

years after the case is so concluded, and if

within that three year period the defendant

-7-

fails to comply with the order of court, the

clerk shall continue to retain the original

papers and exhibits in the file until the

failure is cured or an arrest warrant issued

as a result of the failure is invalidated as

permitted by law.

(8) In any criminal case involving a

misdemeanor in which an arrest warrant issued

on the charging document or as a result of

the defendant's failure to appear for trial

remains unserved three years after its

issuance, the clerk shall retain all the

original papers and exhibits in the file

until the warrant is invalidated as permitted

by law.

(9) The clerk shall retain the original

papers, exhibits, and electronic recordings

of testimony in all other cases for a period

of three years after the case is concluded by

dismissal, settlement, or entry of judgment.

(10) (A) Any of the records, except

dockets, set forth in subsections (e)(1)

through (e)(9) of this Rule may be disposed

of at any time provided that an unredacted

version of the records has been duplicated

in accordance with State Archivist’s

procedures and copies have been substituted

for the originals, including a master

security negative which shall be retained

permanently.

(B) Traffic and criminal dockets may be

disposed of after a period of five years if

copies are retained in accordance with

subsection (10)(A) of this Rule.

(f)

Retention by State Archives

A requirement of this Rule that the

clerk retain records may be satisfied by

retention of the records by the State

Archives. Records retained by the clerk that

are twenty-five years old and have not been

transferred to the State Archives shall be

transferred to the Archives or disposed of

according to an approved schedule.

-8-

Cross reference: For the archival of MDEC

records, see Rules 20-102 (c) and 20-503.

(a) Applicability

(1) This Rule does not apply to records

initially filed or submitted for filing in

paper form and subsequently scanned into

electronic form pursuant to Rule 20-106.

Upon scanning, those written documents cease

to be court records and shall be disposed of

in accordance with Rule 20-106.

(2) This Rule applies to records in the

custody of a circuit court or the District

Court that (A) for a circuit court are

subject to a Records Retention and Disposal

Schedule for the Circuit Courts adopted by

the Records Management Division of the

Department of General Services and approved

by the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals,

or (B) for the District Court, are subject to

a District Court Records Retention and

Storage Manual adopted by the Chief Judge of

that Court and approved by the Chief Judge of

the Court of Appeals.

Committee note: This Rule is to be read in

harmony with the statutes and Rules governing

the expungement of court records.

(b) Definitions

In this Rule, the following definitions

apply except as otherwise provided or as

necessary implication requires.

(1) Dispose

“Dispose” means to destroy or remove.

(2) Records

“Records” means original papers,

official books, documents, files, dockets,

electronic recordings of testimony and court

proceedings, and exhibits in the custody of

the court.

-9-

(1) Duty of Clerk and County

Administrative Judge

Each custodian of records of a

circuit court and the county administrative

judge of that court shall dispose of those

records in accordance with the procedures,

schedules, forms, and exhibits set forth in

the Records Retention and Disposal Schedule

for the Circuit Courts of Maryland most

recently adopted by the Records Management

Division of the Department of General

Services and approved by the Chief Judge of

the Court of Appeals.

(2) Duty of State Court Administrator

The State Court Administrator shall

assure that a copy of the most recently

adopted and approved Schedule is delivered to

each county administrative judge and each

clerk of a circuit court, along with any

appropriate instructions regarding its use.

(d) District Court Records

The Chief Clerk of the District Court

and the Chief Judge of the District Court

shall dispose of records of the District

Court in accordance with the procedures,

schedules, forms, and exhibits set forth in

the District Court Records Retention and

Storage Manual most recently adopted by the

Chief Judge of the District Court and

approved by the Chief Judge of the Court of

Appeals.

Cross reference: See Code, Courts Article,

§2-205 and Code, State Government Article,

§10-616 (b) concerning destruction of

records.

Source: This Rule is derived from former

Rules 16-505 and 16-818 (2015) new.

The Chair explained that when Part I of the 178th Report,

which was a complete reorganization of the Rules pertaining to

-10-

court administration, was completed, one of the Rules in Part 1

was Rule 16-205 dealing with the disposition of court records.

The Rule was a combination of two current Rules, Rule 16-505 and

16-818, both entitled “Disposition of Records.”

In 2013, the

Committee combined the two Rules and restyled them, but they did

not change very much substantively.

All of the procedures for

disposing of court records that were in the current Rules were

put in proposed Rule 16-205.

This was all done before the

Maryland Electronic Court Initiative (“MDEC”) started.

In part,

as a result of MDEC, proposed Rule 16-205 was reviewed.

The Rule

is before the Court of Appeals now.

In light of MDEC and two

statutes governing the disposition of court records that were

handed out at the meeting, Code, Courts Article, §2-205 and Code,

State Government Article, §10-616 (b), Rule 16-205 needs to be

looked at again.

The Chair noted that there had been a review of the proposed

Rule that had been sent to the Court as part of Part I of the

178th Report in light of actual retention and disposition manuals

that exist for the District Court and the circuit courts.

The

District Court manual is prepared and adopted by the Chief Judge

of the District Court.

The circuit court manual is prepared by

units in the Maryland Department of General Services.

Archivist is involved in preparing the manual.

The State

That schedule is

subject to approval by the County Administrative Judge, the

clerk, and others for each county.

-11-

The manuals are far more

detailed than the Rules.

They include several schedules, and

this is what the clerks use for retention and disposition of

records.

After discussions with the Chair, Chief Judge Barbera,

and Ms. Pamela Harris, State Court Administrator, the decision

was to get rid of all of the detail that is in the Rule.

Instead

the clerks will be directed to follow the manuals, which they are

required to do and which they already do.

The Chair pointed out that the current manuals are out of

date, and they need to be revised.

They are currently being

worked on by a committee of the Judicial Council and a

subcommittee of that committee.

The Subcommittee is headed by

the Honorable James Eyler, a retired judge of the Court of

Special Appeals.

The Honorable Gary Everngam, a District Court

judge, was present at the meeting.

He had been very involved in

this process and would address the Committee soon.

The Chair said that, based upon the discussions with Chief

Judge Barbera and Ms. Harris, the main goal for the Committee is

to try to get all of the detail out of Rule 16-205.

being modified all of the time because of MDEC.

Rules are

As MDEC rolls

out, the retention issues will require more changes, because

there are very different situations with retention and

disposition of electronic records as opposed to paper records.

The Chair noted that one of the concerns that had already

been expressed by Judge Eyler’s group pertains to MDEC.

This is

what Judge Eyler calls the “backscanning” of paper records.

-12-

Title 20, several provisions relate to the situation when someone

files in paper form.

If the paper can be scanned, the clerk

scans it and gives the paper back.

record.

It never really was a court

The official record is the electronic record.

This is

true for exhibits filed with the court or any paper filed that

can be scanned.

When MDEC goes into force in a particular county, there are

already many court files of cases, and Rule 20-106, When

Electronic Filing Required; Exceptions, permits the clerk to scan

the paper files in, with the approval of the County Administrative Judge of a circuit court, or the Chief Judge of the

District Court, and approval by the State Court Administrator.

The Chair noted that the point of this was that the file may

have been opened only two weeks before with just a complaint and

an answer to a motion, so that is easy to scan.

However, there

could be a protracted case with boxes and boxes of papers, and it

would be very difficult to scan all of this.

The Rules try to

provide some flexibility, so that the clerks do not have to deal

with a file that has both paper and electronic files.

The

question of what happens to the paper arose with respect to those

kinds of files that existed in paper form and were then scanned.

Does it fall under the retention schedule that requires that it

be retained until a certain point in time, or can it just be

disposed of?

As a result of a conference call, the conclusion

was that as to that “backscanning,” those papers do not fall

-13-

within the retention schedule.

given back to the filer.

Rule 16-205.

The papers can be disposed of or

This is in the proposed amendment to

The rest of the Rule has been stricken.

All of the

details about the retention and disposal of records have been

taken out.

The Rule essentially provides that court records are

disposed of in accordance with the manuals.

One limitation in

the manuals and in the statutes is that the records cannot be

destroyed without the approval of the Archivist of the State

Archives and the County Administrative Judge or the Chief Judge

of the District Court.

That limitation has been preserved.

Judge Everngam explained that the problem arose, because

once someone has a document that is important, the person usually

would like to keep it.

Even after it becomes unimportant, the

person may still want to keep it.

One of the benefits of MDEC is

that space that had been used for storing papers can be used for

other purposes.

Early on, the Executive Committee and its

predecessor, the Advisory Board, had realized that it is not a

good idea to rely on paper, and paper needed to be eliminated

from the system as quickly as possible.

What to do with the

paper caused a great deal of consternation.

Judge Eyler’s report

pointed out that there may be some ambiguities.

Judge Everngam said that he had spoken with Ms. Harris and

with the Honorable John P. Morrissey, Chief Judge of the District

Court, who are very interested in this.

They feel that the

proposed amendment to subsection (a)(1) of Rule 16-205 makes it

-14-

clear that the electronic record is the official record, and the

paper form of it is unnecessary.

retained.

Some papers were required to be

The Rule is important, so that the Judiciary can move

on with MDEC, and the papers that do not have to be kept can be

disposed of.

The Executive Committee is in favor of the

amendment to subsection (a)(1).

They hope that the Court of

Appeals will adopt proposed Rule 16-205.

The Chair said that a motion would be necessary to approve

Rule 16-205, because it had not been considered by a

Subcommittee.

Mr. Frederick moved to approve Rule 16-205, the

motion was seconded, and it passed unanimously.

The Chair told the Committee that Agenda Items 10 and 11

would be considered next.

Agenda Item 10. Reconsideration of proposed amendments to:

Rule 1-321 (Service of Pleadings and Papers Other than Original

Pleadings) and Rule 2-613 (Default Judgment)

_________________________________________________________________

Mr. Dunn presented Rules 1-321, Service of Pleadings and

Papers Other than Original Pleadings, and 2-613, Default

Judgment, for the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

CHAPTER 300 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 1-321 (b) to require service

of a request for entry of judgment arising

out of an order of default, as follows:

-15-

Rule 1-321. SERVICE OF PLEADINGS AND PAPERS

OTHER THAN ORIGINAL PLEADINGS

(a)

Generally

Except as otherwise provided in these

rules or by order of court, every pleading

and other paper filed after the original

pleading shall be served upon each of the

parties. If service is required or permitted

to be made upon a party represented by an

attorney, service shall be made upon the

attorney unless service upon the party is

ordered by the court. Service upon the

attorney or upon a party shall be made by

delivery of a copy or by mailing it to the

address most recently stated in a pleading or

paper filed by the attorney or party, or if

not stated, to the last known address.

Delivery of a copy within this Rule means:

handing it to the attorney or to the party;

or leaving it at the office of the person to

be served with an individual in charge; or,

if there is no one in charge, leaving it in a

conspicuous place in the office; or, if the

office is closed or the person to be served

has no office, leaving it at the dwelling

house or usual place of abode of that person

with some individual of suitable age and

discretion who is residing there. Service by

mail is complete upon mailing.

(b) Party in Default - Exceptions

No pleading or other paper after the

original pleading need be served on a party

in default for failure to appear except:

(1) a pleading asserting a new or

additional claim for relief against the party

shall be served in accordance with the rules

for service of original process; and

(2) a request for entry of judgment

arising out of an order of default under Rule

2-613 shall be served in accordance with

section (a) of this Rule.

(c)

Requests to Clerk - Exception

-16-

A request directed to the clerk for

the issuance of process or any writ need not

be served on any party.

Source: This Rule is derived as follows:

Section (a) is derived from former Rule 306

a 1 and c and the 1980 version of Fed. R.

Civ. P. 5 (a).

Section (b) is derived from former Rule 306

b and the 1980 version of Fed. R. Civ. P. 5

(a).

Section (c) is new.

Rule 1-321 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s note.

An order of default under Rule 2-613 is

an interlocutory determination of liability.

It is not a judgment for a specific amount of

money damages or for other relief. In some

cases, after an order of default has been

entered, it may be necessary for the court to

consider additional evidence before entering

a judgment. Even after an order of default

has been entered, the defendant has the right

to participate in any further proceedings in

the action on the issue of damages or other

relief to be granted. See Banegura v.

Taylor, 312 Md. 609 (1988) and Greer v.

Inman, 79 Md. App. 350 (1989).

The General Provisions Subcommittee

recommends that Rule 1-321 (b) be amended by

the addition of the requirement for service

of a request for entry of judgment arising

out of an order of default under Rule 2-613

to make clear that a request for entry of

judgment arising out of an order for default

under Rule 2-613 is to be served on the

defendant. The Subcommittee also recommends

that Rule 2-613 be amended by the addition of

a cross reference to the new subsection of

Rule 1-321 (b).

-17-

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 2 - CIVIL PROCEDURE - CIRCUIT COURT

CHAPTER 600 - JUDGMENT

AMEND Rule 2-613 by adding a cross

reference after section (f), as follows:

Rule 2-613.

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

. . .

(f)

Entry of Judgment

If a motion was not filed under

section (d) of this Rule or was filed and

denied, the court, upon request, may enter a

judgment by default that includes a

determination as to the liability and all

relief sought, if it is satisfied (1) that it

has jurisdiction to enter the judgment and

(2) that the notice required by section (c)

of this Rule was mailed. If, in

order to enable the court to enter judgment,

it is necessary to take an account or to

determine the amount of damages or to

establish the truth of any averment by

evidence or to make an investigation of any

matter, the court, may rely on affidavits,

conduct hearings, or order references as

appropriate and, if requested, shall preserve

to the plaintiff the right to trial by jury.

Cross reference: For the requirement that a

request for entry of judgment under section

(f) of this Rule be served on the defendant,

see Rule 1-321 (b)(2).

. . .

Rule 2-613 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s note.

See the Reporter’s note to Rule 1-321.

Mr. Dunn explained that this item pertains to default

judgments and the notice to defaulting parties.

-18-

It involves the

interplay between Rules 1-321 and 2-613.

A circuit court judge

had alerted the Committee that on occasion, a plaintiff who

requests a judgment under Rule 2-613 (f) does not serve the

request upon the defendant, and the plaintiff will cite Rule 1321 (b) to support this.

The judge had said that his practice

and the practice of many other judges is that they deny the

request and insist that the defendant be served.

The General

Provisions Subcommittee has suggested adding a new subsection

(b)(2), which reads: “a request for entry of judgment arising out

of an order of default under Rule 2-613 shall be served in

accordance with section (a) of this Rule.”

The Subcommittee also

recommends a cross reference to subsection (b)(2) after section

(f) of Rule 2-613.

By consensus, the Committee approved the changes to Rules 1321 and 2-613 as presented.

Agenda Item 11. Consideration of proposed amendments to: Rule

2-321 (Time for Filing Answer)

_________________________________________________________________

Mr. Dunn presented Rule 2-321, Time for Filing Answer, for

the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 2 - CIVIL PROCEDURE - CIRCUIT COURT

CHAPTER 300 - PLEADINGS AND MOTIONS

AMEND Rule 2-321 (c) to add language

referring to matters that have been remanded

from certain courts, as follows:

-19-

Rule 2-321.

TIME FOR FILING ANSWER

. . .

(c)

Automatic Extension

When a motion is filed pursuant to

Rule 2-322 or when a matter is remanded from

an appellate court or a federal court, the

time for filing an answer is extended without

special order to 15 days after entry of the

court's order on the motion or remand or, if

the court grants a motion for a more definite

statement, to 15 days after the service of

the more definite statement.

. . .

Rule 2-321 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s note.

An attorney pointed out that the

Maryland Rules do not provide for the time

for filing a paper following a remand from a

federal court or a State appellate court.

The attorney suggested amending Rule 1-203

(e). The General Provisions Subcommittee

recommends amending Rule 2-321 (c) to address

this gap in the Rules.

Mr. Dunn told the Committee that an attorney had written to

the Chair asking that language be added to Rule 2-321 to clarify

when an answer is due after a case has been remanded from an

appellate or a federal court.

The Subcommittee had not been sure

when that issue would ever come up.

In a State court, a

plaintiff files a complaint, and the defendant, instead of filing

an answer, files a motion for lack of venue or for forum non

conveniens.

The trial judge grants the motion.

If it is

granted, the plaintiff has a right to an automatic appeal.

the motion is denied, the defendant does not have that right.

the plaintiff files that appeal, it would go up to the appellate

-20-

court, and no answer would be filed.

If the case is remanded,

the question is when the answer is due.

federal court.

This is very rare in

Mr. Dunn said that when he files a petition for

removal, he files an answer and an automatic stay in State court,

and the petition for removal is filed in federal court along with

all of the pleadings.

This is what most practitioners do.

Technically, the attorney can file the motion to stay without

filing an answer.

The attorney who wrote the letter suggested that language be

added to Rule 1-203, Time.

However, the Subcommittee felt that

it would be better to add language to Rule 2-321 (c), which

provides for 15 days to file an answer after a motion is filed

pursuant to Rule 2-322.

The new language would refer to matters

that are remanded, so that the answer would be filed 15 days

after entry of the court’s order on the remand.

By consensus, the Committee approved the change to Rule 2321 (c) as presented.

Agenda Item 1. Consideration of proposed amendments to: Rule

1-311 (Signing of Pleadings and Other Papers), Rule 20-107

(Electronic Signatures), Rule 20-203 (Review by Clerk; Striking

of Submission; Delinquency Notice; Correction; Enforcement),

and Rule 20-106 (When Electronic Filing Required; Exceptions)

_________________________________________________________________

Mr. Carbine explained that the issue of using an attorney’s

Client Protection Fund number as the identification number for

MDEC had been discussed at the May, 2015 Rules Committee meeting.

The MDEC Subcommittee discussed it over the summer, and they came

-21-

up with some suggestions for tweaking some of the MDEC Rules.

None of the Judicial Information Systems (“JIS”)

employees who

work with MDEC were present, so Mr. Carbine said he would explain

the technological limitations of MDEC from a layman’s point of

view.

He explained that MDEC consists of two separate systems.

The filing system is entitled “File and Serve.”

The case

management system that takes over after filing and does all of

the case management work is entitled “Odyssey.”

Mr. Carbine noted that, as had been discussed last May, the

File and Serve system and the Odyssey system do not communicate

with each other.

The clerks have to manually take the filing

information out of the File and Serve system and enter it into

the Odyssey system.

Lost in that translation, because it is deep

in the part of the computer software that is in cyberspace, is

the unique attorney identification number for the Client

Protection Fund (“CPF”).

All Maryland attorneys have a CPF

number.

Mr. Carbine said that he had surveyed the members of the

Rules Committee last May, and not one member knew what his or her

number was.

The proposed Rules will require every attorney in

Maryland in MDEC and outside of MDEC to supply the CPF number

below the attorney’s signature on papers along with the list of

other information that is required.

issue decided by the Committee.

This change was a policy

The question arose last May.

The purpose of having the unique identifier for attorneys is to

-22-

make sure that the system can distinguish between attorneys with

similar names, or can determine that two different papers filed

by the same person but under a different name, such as John Jones

and John C. Jones, belong to that one person.

Mr. Carbine remarked that the question was asked as to how

this would relate to non-attorneys filing papers.

The

Subcommittee had learned that although it is mandated in Rule 20104, User Registration, JIS does not generate a unique

identification number for registered users.

It will be necessary

to discuss this again, because the same problem exists for nonattorneys, except there is no unique identifier for those

individuals.

requires.

JIS is not issuing the numbers Rule 20-104

The Chair said that JIS has claimed that they cannot

issue the numbers.

Mr. Carbine remarked that there are

reasonable grounds for debate as to whether JIS will not, cannot,

or does not want to issue the numbers.

Mr. Carbine said that the proposed Rule change is an interim

step.

At a minimum, it will take care of the vast majority of

registered users who are attorneys.

Mr. Carbine presented Rule 1-311, Signing of Pleadings and

Other Papers, for the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

CHAPTER 300 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

-23-

AMEND Rule 1-311 to require that every

pleading or paper signed by an attorney

pursuant to Rule 20-107 contain the

attorney’s Client Protection Fund ID number,

as follows:

Rule 1-311.

PAPERS

(a)

SIGNING OF PLEADINGS AND OTHER

Requirement

Every pleading and paper of a party

represented by an attorney shall be signed by

at least one attorney who has been admitted

to practice law in this State and who

complies with Rule 1-312. Every pleading and

paper of a party who is not represented by an

attorney shall be signed by the party. Every

pleading or paper filed shall contain (1) the

signer's address, telephone number, facsimile

number, if any, and e-mail address, if any,

and (2) if the pleading or paper is signed by

an attorney pursuant to Rule 20-107, the

attorney’s Client Protection Fund ID number.

Committee note: The requirement that a

pleading contain a facsimile number, if any,

and e-mail address, if any, does not alter

the filing or service rules or time periods

triggered by the entry of a judgment. See

Blundon v. Taylor, 364 Md. 1 (2001).

(b)

Effect of Signature

The signature of an attorney on a

pleading or paper constitutes a certification

that the attorney has read the pleading or

paper; that to the best of the attorney's

knowledge, information, and belief there is

good ground to support it; and that it is not

interposed for improper purpose or delay.

(c)

Sanctions

If a pleading or paper is not signed

as required (except inadvertent omission to

sign, if promptly corrected) or is signed

with intent to defeat the purpose of this

Rule, it may be stricken and the action may

proceed as though the pleading or paper had

-24-

not been filed. For a wilful violation of

this Rule, an attorney is subject to

appropriate disciplinary action.

Source: This Rule is derived as follows:

Section (a) is derived from former Rules

302 a, 301 f, and the 1937 version of Fed. R.

Civ. P. 11.

Section (b) is derived from former Rule 302

b and the 1937 version of Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.

Section (c) is derived from the 1937

version of Fed. R. Civ. P. 11.

Rule 1-311 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s note.

At the request of the Judicial

Information Systems and the State Court

Administrator, an amendment is proposed to

Rule 1-311 to require that every pleading or

paper signed by an attorney pursuant to Rule

20-107 contain the attorney’s Client

Protection Fund ID number. Requiring an

attorney to include the Client Protection

Fund ID number, a unique identifier, will

assist clerks if there is any confusion over

an attorney’s identity.

Mr. Carbine explained that the change to Rule 1-311 requires

that the CPF ID number be added to the list of information that

is given below the signature lines on a filing.

The importance

of Rule 1-311 is that the Rule applies to all pleadings and

papers and not only those filed under MDEC.

be informed of this change.

attorney education.

The bar will have to

It will require a great amount of

The Committee is fairly comfortable with the

fact that if the CPF ID number is not on a paper filing, the

filing will not be rejected.

Mr. Carbine said that he felt very

strongly about the policy issue concerning the miscreant who

fails to put his or her CPF ID number below the person’s

signature.

Without the changes being proposed at the meeting,

-25-

the submission would be subject to rejection by the clerk.

Mr.

Carbine expressed the opinion that it should not be rejected; it

should be subject to a deficiency notice that is sent to the

person filing.

Mr. Carbine presented Rule 20-107, Electronic Signatures,

for the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 20 - ELECTRONIC FILINGS AND CASE

MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 100 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 20-107 to divide section (a)

into subsections and to require that an

attorney filer who electronically signs a

submission under MDEC include the attorney’s

Client Protection Fund ID number, as follows:

Rule 20-107.

(a)

ELECTRONIC SIGNATURES

Signature by Filer; Generally

(1) Subject to sections (b), (c),

(d), and (e) of this Rule, when a filer is

required to sign a submission, the filer

shall electronically sign the submission by

inserting a (1) (A) facsimile signature or

(2) (B) typographical signature.

(2) The filer shall insert the

electronic signature above the filer's typed

name, address, e-mail address, and telephone

number and, if the filer is an attorney, the

attorney’s Client Protection Fund ID number.

An electronic signature on an electronically

filed submission constitutes and has the same

force and effect as a signature required

under Rule 1-311.

(b)

Signature by Judge or Judicial

-26-

Appointee

A judge or judicial appointee shall

sign a submission electronically by (1)

personally affixing the judge's or judicial

appointee's digital signature or (2)

hand-signing a paper version of the

submission and scanning or directing an

assistant to scan the hand-signed submission

to convert the handwritten signature to a

facsimile signature in preparation for

electronic filing.

Cross reference: For delegation by an

attorney, judge, or judicial appointee to

file a signed submission, see Rule 20-108.

(c)

Signature by Clerk

When a clerk is required to sign a

submission electronically, the clerk's

signature shall be a digital signature or a

facsimile signature.

(d) Multiple Signatures on a Single

Document

When the signature of more than one

person is required on a document, the filer

shall (1) confirm that the content of the

document is acceptable to all signers; (2)

obtain the handwritten, facsimile, or digital

signatures of all signers; and (3) file the

document electronically, indicating the

signers in the same manner as the filer's

signature. Filers other than judges,

judicial appointees, clerks, and judicial

personnel shall retain the signed document

until the action is concluded.

(e) Signature Under Oath, Affirmation, or

with Verification

When a person is required to sign a

document under oath, affirmation, or with

verification, the signer shall hand-sign the

document. The filer shall scan the

hand-signed document, converting the signer's

handwritten signature to a facsimile

signature, and file the scanned document

electronically. The filer shall retain the

-27-

original hand-signed document until the

action is concluded or for such longer period

ordered by the court. At any time prior to

the conclusion of the action, the court may

order the filer to produce the original

hand-signed document.

(f)

Verified Submissions

When a submission is verified or

attaches a document under oath, the

electronic signature of the filer constitutes

a certification by the filer that (1) the

filer has read the entire document; (2) the

filer has not altered, or authorized the

alteration of, the text of the verified

material; and (3) the filer has either

personally filed the submission or has

authorized a designated assistant to file the

submission on the filer's behalf pursuant to

Rule 20-108.

Cross reference: For the definition of

"hand-signed," see Rule 20-101.

Source:

This Rule is new.

Rule 20-107 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

The amendments proposed to Rule 20-107

would accomplish two things.

First, in conjunction with proposed

amendments to Rule 1-311, an attorney who is

filing submission under MDEC must include the

attorney’s Client Protection Fund ID number,

which is the unique user identification

number that MDEC has been using. The

amendments require that the Client Protection

Fund ID number be placed beneath the

attorney’s signature, which will assist

clerks if there is confusion over an

attorney’s identity.

The second purpose of the proposed

amendments is to modify the responsibilities

of the clerk to strike a non-conforming

pleading or paper. Presently, Rule 20-203

-28-

if it fails to comply with Rule 20-201 (d).

Rule 20-101 (d) requires that a submission be

signed in accordance with Rule 20-107 if a

signature is required. In the proposed

amendment to Rule 20-107 (a) the signature

requirement is broken into two parts:

subsection (a)(1) will require an electronic

signature by facsimile signature or

typographic signature, and subsection (a)(2)

will require that the electronic signature be

placed above the filer’s typed name, address,

e-mail address, and telephone number. The

proposed amendment adds the requirement that

if the filer is an attorney, the submission

must contain the attorney’s Client Protection

Fund ID number.

Conforming changes are proposed to Rule

20-106 (d)(2), to substitute the phrase, “and

that the pleading is signed” for the current

reference to Rule 20-201 (d).

In conjunction with the proposed

amendments, Rule 20-203 (c) is being changed

to require a clerk to strike a submission if

it fails to comply with the requirements of

Rule 20-107 (a)(1). Therefore, a pleading

that contains a facsimile or a typographical

signature will not be stricken automatically,

even if it does conform with the requirements

of subsection (a)(2). Instead, under Rule

20-203 (d)(1), the clerk will send a

deficiency notice and under subsection

(d)(2), “If the deficiency is not corrected

within two business days of the notice, any

party may move to strike the submission.”

Mr. Carbine explained that section (a) of Rule 20-107 had

been broken into two parts, subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2).

Subsection (a)(1) provides that the filer has to sign the paper

being filed.

Subsection (a)(2) lists all of the information that

goes along with the paper.

subsection (a)(2).

There is a typographical error in

The word “electronic,” which is shown with a

-29-

strikeout line through it, should not have been deleted.

The CPF

ID number is now part of the information that the filer includes

below the signature.

Mr. Carbine presented Rule 20-203, Review by Clerk; Striking

of Submission; Delinquency Notice; Correction; Enforcement, for

the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 20 - ELECTRONIC FILINGS AND CASE

MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 200 - FILING AND SERVICE

AMEND Rule 20-203 (c) to delete

references to Rule 20-201 (d) and to add two

references to Rule 20-107 (a)(1), as follows:

Rule 20-203. REVIEW BY CLERK; STRIKING OF

SUBMISSION; DELINQUENCY NOTICE; CORRECTION;

ENFORCEMENT

(a)

Time and Scope of Review

As soon as practicable, the clerk

shall review a submission, other than a

submission filed by a judge or judicial

appointee, for compliance with Rule 20-201

(d), (e), (f)(1)(B), and (i) and the

published policies and procedures for

acceptance established by the State Court

Administrator. Until the submission is

accepted by the clerk, it remains in the

clerk's queue and shall not be docketed.

(b)

Docketing

(1) Generally

The clerk shall promptly correct

errors of non-compliance that apply to the

form and language of the proposed docket

-30-

entry for the submission. The docket entry

as described by the filer and corrected by

the clerk shall become the official docket

entry for the submission.

(2) Submission Signed by Judge or

Judicial Appointee

The clerk shall enter on the docket

each judgment, order, or other submission

signed by a judge or judicial appointee.

(3) Submission Generated by Clerk

The clerk shall enter each writ,

notice, or other submission generated by the

clerk into the MDEC system for docketing in

the manner required by Rule 16-305.

Submissions

If, upon review pursuant to section

(a) of this Rule, the clerk determines that a

submission, other than a submission filed by

a judge or judicial appointee, fails to

comply with the requirements of Rule 20-107

(a)(1) or Rule 20-201 (d), (e), or (f)(1)(B),

the clerk shall (1) strike the submission,

(2) notify the filer and all other parties of

the striking and the reason for it, and (3)

enter on the docket that the submission was

received, that it was stricken for

non-compliance with the applicable section of

Rule 20-107 (a)(1) or Rule 20-201 (d), (e),

or (f)(1)(B), and that notice pursuant to

this section was sent. The filer may seek

review of the clerk's action by filing a

motion with the administrative judge having

direct administrative supervision over the

court.

(d)

Deficiency Notice

(1) Issuance of Notice

If, upon review, the clerk concludes

that a submission is not subject to striking

under section (c) of this Rule but materially

violates a provision of the Rules in Title 20

-31-

or an applicable published policy or

procedure established by the State Court

Administrator, the clerk shall send to the

filer with a copy to the other parties a

deficiency notice describing the nature of

the violation.

(2) Correction; Enforcement

If the deficiency is not corrected

within two business days after the date of

the notice, any party may move to strike the

submission.

(e)

Restricted Information

(1) Shielding Upon Issuance of Deficiency

Notice

If, after filing, a submission is

found to contain restricted information, the

clerk shall issue a deficiency notice

pursuant to section (d) of this Rule and

shall shield the submission from public

access until the deficiency is corrected.

(2) Shielding of Unredacted Version of

Submission

If, pursuant to Rule 20-201 (f)(2), a

filer has filed electronically a redacted and

an unreadacted submission, the clerk shall

docket both submissions and shield the

unredacted submission from public access.

Any party and any person who is the subject

of the restricted information contained in

the unredacted submission may file a motion

to strike the unredacted submission. Upon

the filing of a motion and any timely answer,

the court shall enter an appropriate order.

Source:

This Rule is new.

Rule 20-203 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

See the Reporter’s note to Rule 20-107.

Mr. Carbine explained that the clerk would review an

-32-

original submission to be sure it complied with section (d) of

Rule 20-201, Requirements for Electronic Filing, which

encompasses all of Rule 20-107 and would require including the

CPF ID number.

This was kept in section (a) of Rule 20-203,

because the clerk has to review the filing for the presence of

the CPF ID number.

However, in section (c), the references to

section (d) of Rule 20-201 were deleted, and in its place is a

reference to Rule 20-107 (a)(1), which applies only to the

signature of the filer.

The only way that a pleading can be

rejected by the clerk is if the person filing it does not sign

it.

If the filing does not have an e-mail address or the CPF ID

number on it, the filer gets a deficiency notice.

Mr. Carbine presented Rule 20-106, When Electronic Filing

Required; Exceptions, for the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 20 - ELECTRONIC FILINGS AND CASE

MANAGEMENT

CHAPTER 100 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 20-106 (d) to delete

references to Rule 20-201 (d) and to add the

phrase “and that the submission is signed,”

as follows:

Rule 20-106. WHEN ELECTRONIC FILING

REQUIRED; EXCEPTIONS

. . .

(d)

Paper Submissions

-33-

(1) Compliance with MDEC Rules

A paper submission shall comply with

Rule 20-201 (f) and (i). If applicable, a

paper submission also shall comply with Rule

20-201 (g).

(2) Review by Clerk; Scanning

(A) Except as provided in subsection

(d)(2)(B) of this Rule, upon receipt of a

submission in paper form, the clerk shall

review the submission for compliance with

Rule 20-107 (a)(1) and Rule 20-201 (d), (e),

(f)(1)(B), and (I) and that the submission is

signed. If the submission is in compliance,

the clerk shall scan it into the MDEC system,

verify that the electronic version of the

submission is legible, and docket the

submission. If the submission is not in

compliance, the clerk shall decline to scan

it and promptly notify the filer in person or

by first class mail that the submission was

rejected and the reason for the rejection.

Committee note: The clerk's pre-scanning

review is a ministerial function, limited to

ascertaining whether any required fee has

been paid (Rule 20-201 (i)) and the presence

of the filer's signature (Rule 20-201 (d)); a

certificate of service if one is required

(Rule 20-201 (e)); and a certificate as to

the absence or redaction of restricted

information (Rule 20-201 (f)(1)(B)).

(B) Upon receipt of a submission in

paper form that is required by the Rules in

this Title to be filed electronically, the

clerk shall (i) decline to scan the

submission, (ii) notify the filer

electronically that the submission was

rejected because it was required to be filed

electronically, and (iii) enter on the docket

that the submission was received and that it

was not entered into the MDEC system because

of non-compliance with Rule 20-106. The

filer may seek review of the clerk's action

by filing a motion with the administrative

judge having direct administrative

supervision over the court.

-34-

Committee note: Subsection (d)(2)(B) of this

Rule is necessary to enforce the electronic

filing requirement of Rule 20-106. It is

intended to be used only when it is clear

that the filer is a registered user who is

required to file submissions electronically

and that none of the exceptions in sections

(b) or (c) of this Rule appear to be

applicable.

(3) Destruction of Paper Submission

Subject to subsections (d)(4) and

(e)(2) of this Rule, the clerk may destroy a

paper submission after scanning it and

verifying the legibility of the electronic

version of it.

(4) Optional Return of Paper Document

The State Court Administrator may

approve procedures for identifying and, where

feasible, returning paper documents that must

be preserved in their original form.

[Amendment to subsection (d)(5) was approved

at the June 2015 meeting]

(5) Public Notice

Prior to the date specified in Rule

20-102 (a)(1)(A), the The State Court

Administrator shall provide public notice

alerting the public to the procedure set

forth in subsections (d)(2), (3), and (4) of

this Rule.

Committee note: If submissions properly

filed in paper form are to be destroyed by

the clerk following their being scanned into

MDEC, the public must be given reasonable

notice of that policy. Notice may be given in

a variety of ways, including on the Judiciary

website, on on-line and pre-printed forms

prepared by the Judiciary, on summonses or

other notices issued by the clerks, and by

postings in the clerks' offices.

. . .

-35-

Rule 20-106 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

See the Reporter’s note to Rule 20-107.

Mr. Carbine explained that section (d) of Rule 20-106

applies to non-registered users who file papers.

These people

bring the submission to the clerk, who scans it and gets rid of

the paper form.

part of MDEC.

It is in the system as a submission, and it is

Subsection (d)(1) of Rule 20-106 provides that a

paper submission shall comply with Rule 20-201 (g).

(d)(2) pertains to review by the clerk.

not grammatically correct.

Subsection

The proposed change is

Mr. Carbine and the Reporter worked

together to reword this provision.

It should read: “Except as

provided in subsection (d)(2)(B) of this Rule, upon receipt of a

submission in paper form, the clerk shall review the submission

for the presence of a signature and for compliance with Rule 20107 (a)(1) and Rule 20-201 (e), (f)(1)(B), and (I).”

Judge Eaves

asked whether the reference to section “(I)” should be a

reference to section “(i).”

Judge Nazarian answered that it

should be a lower case (i).

Mr. Shellenberger inquired whether people can publicly

access the CPF ID number and get an attorney’s personal

information.

The Assistant State’s Attorneys who work with him

would not like the public to have access to their home addresses.

Mr. Carbine responded that this is a problem that had been

discussed.

The CPF publishes the information.

-36-

The Reporter

added that it is on the Internet.

She said that the attorneys

can use their office addresses, so their home addresses are not

public.

The attorneys can ask the CPF to keep the home address

confidential.

Judge Everngam pointed out that the CPF website

now has the CPF ID numbers added to it.

Whatever address the

attorney gives the CPF would be the contact address.

If the

attorney gave the CPF his or her home address, that will be the

main address.

already exists.

Mr. Carbine noted that this is a problem that

Mr. Frederick remarked that it is simple to get

personal information that is on the Internet.

By consensus, the Committee approved Rules 1-311, 20-107,

and 20-203 as presented and Rule 20-106 as amended.

Agenda Item 3. Consideration of proposed amendments to: Rule

6-456 (Modified Administration - Extension of Time to File a

Final Report and to Make Distribution), Rule 10-106

(Appointment of Attorney or Investigator), Rule 10-201

(Petition for Appointment of a Guardian of the Person), and

Rule 10-206 (Annual Report - Guardianship of a Minor or

Disabled Person)

_________________________________________________________________

Because Mr. Allen, Chair of the Probate/Fiduciary

Subcommittee was not present, the Chair asked Ms. Margaret

Phipps, Register of Wills for Calvert County, to help with the

presentation of the Rules.

The Chair presented Rule 6-456, Modified Administration Extension of Time to File a Final Report and to Make

Distribution, for the Committee’s consideration.

-37-

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 6 - SETTLEMENT OF DECEDENTS’ ESTATES

CHAPTER 400 - ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES

AMEND Rule 6-456 by adding a new section

adding a new section (d), containing a

new form, and by making a stylistic change,

as follows:

Rule 6-456. MODIFIED ADMINISTRATION EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE A FINAL REPORT AND

TO MAKE DISTRIBUTION

(a)

Generally

The initial time periods for filing a

final report and for making distribution to

each legatee and heir may be extended for 90

days if the personal representative and each

interested person sign the form set out in

section (b) of this Rule and file the form

within 10 months of the date of appointment

of the personal representative.

(b)

Form

A consent to an extension of time to

file a final report and to make distribution

in a modified administration shall be in

substantially the following form:

BEFORE THE REGISTER OF WILLS FOR _____________________, MARYLAND

IN THE ESTATE OF __________________________

Estate No. ________

Date of Death ________________________

Date of Appointment of Personal Representative _________________

CONSENT TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE FINAL REPORT AND TO MAKE

DISTRIBUTION IN A MODIFIED ADMINISTRATION

-38-

We, the Personal Representative and Interested Persons in

the above-captioned estate, consent to extend for 90 days the

time to file a final report and to make distribution in the

modified administration of the estate.

We acknowledge that this

consent must be filed within 10 months of the date of appointment

of the personal representative.

Personal Representative(s)

(Type or Print Names)

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

Interested Persons

(Type or Print Names)

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

A register of wills is permitted to extend the time periods

-39-

for filing a final report and for making distribution to each

legatee and heir for an additional period not to exceed 90 days

if a prior request for an additional extension had been filed,

and the time periods have already been extended as permitted by

section (a) of this Rule.

The request shall be signed by the

personal representative and consented to by each interested

person.

The request shall be delivered to the register of wills

before the date for filing a final report as extended under

section (a) of this Rule.

(d) Form

A request for and consent to an additional extension of the

time period to file a final report and to make distribution to

each legatee and heir in a modified administration shall be in

substantially the following form:

BEFORE THE REGISTER OF WILLS FOR _____________________, MARYLAND

IN THE ESTATE OF __________________________

Estate No. ________

Date of Death ________________________

Date Final Report was Due After First Extension_________________

REQUEST FOR AND CONSENT TO FURTHER EXTEND TIME TO FILE

A FINAL REPORT AND TO MAKE DISTRIBUTION IN A MODIFIED

ADMINISTRATION

I, the Personal Representative, in the above-captioned

estate request an additional extension of time, not to exceed 90

-40-

days, to file a final report and make distribution to each

legatee and heir in the modified administration of the estate.

Personal Representative(s)

(Type or Print Names)

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

We, the Interested Persons, in the above-captioned estate

consent to further extend for __________ days (not to exceed 90)

the time to file a final report and to make distribution to each

legatee and heir in the modified administration of the estate.

We acknowledge that this consent has been delivered to the

period for filing the final report.

Interested Persons

(Type or Print Names)

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

________________________________

Name

_______________________________

Signature

___________________________________

-41-

Source:

The Rule is new.

Rule 6-456 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s note.

Chapter 30, Laws of 2015 (SB 418)

amended Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §5703 to provide for a further extension of the

time periods for filing a final report and

for making distribution to each legatee and

heir after the first extension of 90 days in

a modified administration. The

Probate/Fiduciary Subcommittee recommends

amending Rule 6-456, including the addition

of a new form, to conform to the statutory

changes.

The proposed amendment to Rule 6-456 was to add a new

section (c) and (d).

Their purpose is to conform the Rule to

Chapter 30, Laws of 2015 (SB 418).

Ms. Phipps said that in a

modified administration probate, the personal representative and

the interested persons can ask for a 90-day extension for filing

a final report and making distribution to each legatee and heir.

This happens automatically.

However, this may not always solve

the problem, so the personal representative and interested

persons may need another extension, but this one cannot exceed 90

days.

It has to be approved by the Register of Wills.

The

second extension is not automatic and has to be requested.

The Chair said that he had a style issue pertaining to Rule

6-456.

He referred to the language in section (a) that read:

“...file the form within 10 months of the date...”.

language be: “...within 10 months after the date...”?

Should this

Ms.

Phipps responded that this means 10 months before the date.

The Chair presented Rule 10-106, Appointment of Attorney or

-42-

Investigator, for the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 10 - GUARDIANS AND OTHER FIDUCIARIES

CHAPTER 100 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

AMEND Rule 10-106 by deleting language

from and adding language to section (a), by

adding a new subsection (a)(2) pertaining to

disabled persons, and by making stylistic

changes, as follows:

Rule 10-106.

INVESTIGATOR

(a)

APPOINTMENT OF ATTORNEY OR

Appointment of Attorney by the Court

(1) Minor Persons

Upon the filing of a petition for

guardianship of the person or property of a

disabled person or minor who is not

represented by an attorney, the court shall

promptly may appoint an attorney for the

disabled person and may appoint an attorney

for the minor. The fee of an appointed

attorney shall be fixed by the court and

shall be paid out of the fiduciary estate or

as the court shall direct. To the extent the

estate is insufficient, the fee of an

attorney appointed for a disabled person

shall be paid by the State.

(2) Disabled Persons

Upon the filing of a petition for

guardianship of the person or property of a

disabled person who is not represented by an

attorney, the court shall promptly appoint an

attorney for the disabled person and may

require the deposit of an appropriate sum

into the court registry or the appointed

attorney’s escrow account within 30 days

after the order of appointment has been

entered, subject to further order of the

court. If the person is indigent, the State

shall pay a reasonable attorney’s fee. The

court may not require the deposit of an

-43-

appropriate sum into the court registry or

the appointed attorney’s escrow account under

this section if payment for the services of

the court-appointed attorney for the alleged

disabled person is the responsibility of (A)

a government agency paying benefits to the

disabled person, (B) a local department of

Social Services, or (C) an agency’s eligible

to serve as the guardian of the disabled

person under Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, §13-707.

Cross reference: Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, §§13-211 (b) and 13-705 (d). See

also Rule 1.14 of the Maryland Lawyers' Rules

of Professional Conduct with respect to the

attorney's role and obligations.

(b) Automatic Termination of Appointment;

Continuation of Representation if Public

Guardian Appointed

If no appeal is taken from a judgment

dismissing the petition or appointing a

guardian other than a public guardian, the

attorney's appointment shall terminate

automatically upon expiration of the time for

filing an appeal unless the court orders

otherwise. If a public guardian has been

appointed for the disabled person, the court

shall either continue the attorney's

appointment or appoint another attorney to

represent the disabled person before the

Adult Public Guardianship Review Board.

Cross reference:

§14-404 (c)(2).

(c)

Code, Family Law Article,

Investigator

The court may appoint an independent

investigator to investigate the facts of the

case and report written findings to the

court. The fee of an appointed investigator

shall be fixed by the court and shall be paid

out of the fiduciary estate or as the court

shall direct. To the extent the estate is

insufficient, the fee of an independent

investigator appointed by the court shall be

paid by the State.

-44-

Source: This Rule is derived in part from

former Rules R76 and V71 and is in part new.

Rule 10-106 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Chapter 400, Laws of 2015 (HB 109)

amended Code, Estates and Trusts Article,

§13-705 to add a provision that an attorney

who has been appointed by the court to

represent an alleged disabled person in a

guardianship of the person proceeding may be

required to deposit money into the court

registry or into the attorney’s escrow

account. The Probate/Fiduciary Subcommittee

recommends amending Rule 10-106 (a) to

conform to the amended statute.

The Chair told the Committee that subsection (a)(2) of Rule

10-106 is intended to conform the Rule to Chapter 400, Laws of

2015 (HB 109).

The Chair noted that there was a typographical

error towards the end of subsection (a)(2).

should be “agency.”

The word “agency’s”

Judge Bryant pointed out that in subsection

(a)(1), the language “disabled person or” should be taken out,

because disabled persons are covered in subsection (a)(2).

consensus, the Committee agreed with these suggestions.

The Chair presented Rule 10-201, Petition for Appointment of

a Guardian of the Person, for the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 10 - GUARDIANS AND OTHER FIDUCIARIES

CHAPTER 200 - GUARDIAN OF PERSON

AMEND Rule 10-201 by adding a new

section (b) pertaining to the form of

petition, by deleting current section (c), by

-45-

adding a new section (d) pertaining to

attorney’s fees, by adding a cross reference

after section (d), by adding a new section

(e) containing a form for designation of a

guardian of the person by a minor, by adding

a cross reference at the end of the Rule, and

by making stylistic changes, as follows:

Rule 10-201. PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF A

GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON

(a)

Who May File

An interested person may file a

petition requesting a court to appoint a

guardian of a minor or alleged disabled

person.

(b)

Form of Petition

The petition for a guardianship of the

person of a minor shall be filed in

substantially the form set forth in Rule 10111. The petition for a guardianship of the

person of an alleged disabled person shall be

filed in substantially the form set forth in

Rule 10-112.

(b) (c) Venue

(1) Resident

If the minor or alleged disabled

person is a resident of Maryland, the

petition shall be filed in the county where

(A) the minor or alleged disabled person

resides or (B) the person has been admitted

for the purpose of medical care or treatment

to either a general or a special hospital

which is not a State facility as defined in

Code, Health-General Article, §10-406 or a

licensed private facility as defined in Code,

Health-General Article, §§10-501 to 10-511.

(2) Nonresident

If the minor or alleged disabled

person does not reside in this State, a

petition for guardianship of the person may

-46-

be filed in any county in which the person is

physically present.

(c)

Contents

The petition shall be captioned, "In

the Matter of . . ." [stating the name of the

minor or alleged disabled person]. It shall

be signed and verified by the petitioner, may

contain a request for the guardianship of

property, and shall contain at least the

following information:

(1) The petitioner's name, address, age,

and telephone number.

(2) The petitioner's familial or other

relationship to the minor or alleged disabled

person.

(3) Whether the person who is the subject

of the petition is a minor or alleged

disabled person, and, if an alleged disabled

person, a brief description of the alleged

disability and how it affects the alleged

disabled person's ability to function.

(4) The reasons why the court should

appoint a guardian of the person and, if the

subject of the petition is a disabled person,

allegations demonstrating an inability of

that person to make or communicate

responsible decisions concerning the person,

including provisions for health care, food,

clothing, or shelter, because of mental

disability, disease, habitual drunkenness or

addiction to drugs, and a description of less

restrictive alternatives that have been

attempted and have failed.

Cross reference: Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, §13-705 (b).

(5) An identification of any instrument

nominating a guardian or constituting a

durable power of attorney, with a copy

attached to the petition, if possible, and,

if not, an explanation of its absence.

Cross reference: Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, §13-701.

-47-

(6) If a guardian or conservator has been

appointed for the alleged disabled person in

another proceeding, the name and address of

the guardian or conservator and the court

that appointed the guardian or conservator.

If a guardianship or conservatorship

proceeding was previously filed in any other

court, the name and address of the court, the

case number, if known, and whether the

proceeding is still pending in that court.

(7) A list of (A) the name, age, sex, and

address of the minor or alleged disabled

person, (B) the name and address of the

persons with whom the minor or disabled

person resides, and (C) if the minor or

alleged disabled person resides with the

petitioner, the name and address of another

person on whom service can be made.

(8) The name, address, telephone number,

and nature of interest of all other

interested persons and all other persons

exercising control of the minor or alleged

disabled person, to the extent known or

reasonably ascertainable.

(9) If the minor or alleged disabled

person is represented by an attorney, the

name and address of the attorney.

(10) A statement that the certificates

required by Rule 10-202 are attached, or, if

not, an explanation of their absence.

(11) If the petition also seeks a

guardianship of the property, the additional

information required by Rule 10-301.

(12) A statement of the relief sought.

(d)

Attorney’s Fees

If a petition for attorney’s fees is

filed by an interested person or an attorney

employed by the interested person, the court

may order reasonable and necessary attorney’s

fees incurred in bringing a petition for the

appointment of a guardian of the person of a

disabled person to be paid from the estate of

-48-

the disabled person. The court shall

consider the financial resources and needs of

the disabled person and whether there was

substantial justification for the filing of

the petition for guardianship. The court may

not award attorney’s fees if the petition for

guardianship is brought by (1) a government

agency paying benefits to the disabled

person, (2) a local department of Social

Services, or (3) an agency eligible to serve

as the guardian of the disabled person under

Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §13-707.

Cross reference: Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, §13-704.

(e) Designation of a Guardian of the

Person by a Minor

After a minor’s 14th birthday, a minor

may designate a guardian of the minor’s

person substantially in the following form:

[CAPTION]

DESIGNATION OF A GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON BY A MINOR

I, ___________________________________, a minor child,

having attained my 14th birthday, declare:

I am aware of the Petition of __________________________

(petitioner’s name)

to become the guardian of my person.

I hereby designate ____________________________________

as the Guardian of my person.

I understand that I have the right to revoke this

designation at any time up to the granting of the guardianship.

I solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury that the

contents of this document are true based upon my personal

-49-

knowledge.

______________________________

Signature of Minor

Date

Cross reference: See Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, §13-702.

Source: This Rule is derived as follows:

Section (a) is derived from former Rule R71

Section (b) is new.

Section (b) (c) is derived from former Rule

R72 a and b.

Section (c) is derived in part from former

Rule R73 a and in part from former Rule V71

Section (d) is new.

Section (e) is new.

Rule 10-201 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

See the Reporter’s note to Rule 10-111

as to the form of the petition and to explain

the deletion of section (c) of this Rule.

The Chair said that Chapter 400, Laws of 2015 (HB 109)

amends Code, Estates and Trusts Article, §13-704 and provides a

mechanism for an interested person or an attorney employed by the

interested person to receive attorney’s fees incurred in bringing

a petition for appointment of the guardian of the person of a

disabled person.

The Probate/Fiduciary Subcommittee recommends

amending Rule 10-201 to add a new section (d) setting out the

procedure for obtaining attorney’s fees pursuant to Code, Estates

and Trusts Article, §13-704.

The Chair noted that the Subcommittee recommends the

-50-

addition of a form, “Designation of a Guardian of the Person by a

Minor” to be consistent with Code, Estates and Trusts Article,

§13-702.

This form is based upon a draft submitted by a

committee of registers of wills, Orphans’ Court judges and

members of the bar, including members of the Estate and Trust Law

Section of the Maryland State Bar Association.

Ms. Phipps commented that section (d) had been added to Rule

10-201 to conform to Chapter 400, Laws of 2015 (HB 109).

The

Reporter pointed out that the statute goes into effect on October

1, 2015.

The Chair presented Rule 10-206, Annual Report Guardianship of a Minor or Disabled Person, for the Committee’s

consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 10 - GUARDIANS AND OTHER FIDUCIARIES

CHAPTER 200 - GUARDIAN OF PERSON

AMEND Rule 10-206 to change the title of

the Rule, to amend the cross reference after

section (a), to provide that the current

“Annual Report of Guardian” form applies to

guardianships of disabled persons, to add the

word “caption” before the “Order” section of

the form, to conform the affirmation clauses

to other affirmation clauses in Title 10, and

to make stylistic changes, as follows:

Rule 10-206. ANNUAL REPORT - GUARDIANSHIP OF

A MINOR OR DISABLED PERSON

(a)

Report Required

A guardian, other Other than a

-51-

temporary guardian, a guardian of the person

of a minor or disabled person shall file an

annual report in the action. The reporting

year shall end on (1) the anniversary of the

date the court assumed jurisdiction over the

person or (2) any other date approved by the

trust clerk or the court.

Cross reference: See Code, Estates and Trusts

Article, §13-708 (b)(7), which provides that

the court may appoint a guardian of the

person of a disabled person for a limited

period of time, and that the annual report

may be filed biannually.

(b)

Time for Filing

The report shall be filed not later

than 60 days after the end of the reporting

year, unless the court for good cause shown

shall extend the time.

(c)

Copies to Interested Persons

The guardian shall furnish a copy of

the report to any interested person

requesting it, unless the court orders

otherwise.

(d)

Court Approval

The court shall review the report and

either enter an order accepting the report

and continuing the guardianship or take other

appropriate action.

(e) Form of Annual Report of Guardian of

Disabled Person

The guardian's report shall be in

substantially the following form:

[CAPTION]

ANNUAL REPORT OF __________________________________,

GUARDIAN OF THE PERSON OF_________________________________,

WHO IS DISABLED

-52-

1. The name and permanent residence of the disabled person

are:____________________________________________________________.

2. The disabled person currently resides or is physically

present in:

____ own home

____

guardian's home

____ nursing home

____

hospital or medical facility

____ foster or boarding

home

____

relative's home: _____________

relationship

other

____

(If other than disabled person's permanent home, state the name

and address of the place where the disabled person lives _______

_______________________________________________________________.)

3. The disabled person has been in the current location since

_____________.

(date)

If the person has moved within the past year, the

reasons for the change are: ____________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

4. The physical and mental condition of the disabled person is

as follows: ____________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

5. During the past year, the disabled person's physical

mental condition has changed in the following respects: ________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

6. The disabled person is presently receiving the following

care: __________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

-53-

7. I have applied funds as follows from the estate of the

disabled person for the purpose of support, care, or education:

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

8. The plan for the disabled person's future care and wellbeing, including any plan to change the person's location, is:

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

9. [

] I have no serious health problems that affect my

ability to serve as guardian.

[

] I have the following serious health problems that may

affect my ability to serve as guardian: ________________________

________________________________________________________________.

10. This guardianship

[

] should be continued.

[

] should not be continued, for the following reasons:

____________________________________________________

___________________________________________________.

11. My powers as guardian should be changed in the following

respects and for the following reasons: ________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

12. The court should be aware of the following other matters

relating to this guardianship: _________________________________

________________________________________________________________

-54-

________________________________________________________________.

I solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury that the

contents of this report document are true to the best of my

knowledge, information, and belief.

__________________________

Date

_________________________________

Guardian's Signature

_________________________________

Guardian's Name (typed or printed)

_________________________________

Street Address or Box Number

_________________________________

City and State

_________________________________

Telephone Number

[CAPTION]

ORDER

The foregoing Annual Report of a Guardian having

been filed and reviewed, it is by the Court, this ___ day of

______________, _______.

(month)

(year)

ORDERED, that the report is accepted, and the guardianship is

continued.

(or)

ORDERED, that a hearing shall be held in this matter on

________________________.

(date)

_____________________________

JUDGE

-55-

(f) Form of Annual Report of Guardian of Minor

[CAPTION]

ANNUAL REPORT OF ________________________, GUARDIAN

OF THE PERSON OF _____________________________, WHO IS A MINOR

1. The name and permanent residence of the minor are:

_______________________________________________________________.

2. The minor currently resides or is physically present in:

____ own home

____

hospital or medical facility

____ foster or boarding

home

____

relative’s home: _____________

relationship

____ guardian’s home

____

other

(If other than minor’s permanent home, state the name and address

of the place where the minor lives _____________________________

_______________________________________________________________.)

3. The minor has been in the current location since

_____________.

(date)

If the person has moved within the past year, the

reasons for the change are: ____________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

4. The physical and mental condition of the minor is as

follows: _______________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

5. During the past year, the minor’s physical or mental

condition has changed in the following respects: _______________

________________________________________________________________

-56-

________________________________________________________________.

6. The minor is presently receiving the following care:

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

7. I have applied funds as follows from the estate of the

minor for the purpose of support, care, or education:

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

8. The plan for the minor’s future care and well-being,

including any plan to change the person's location, is:

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

9. [

] I have no serious health problems that affect my

ability to serve as guardian.

[

] I have the following serious health problems that may

affect my ability to serve as guardian: ________________________

________________________________________________________________.

10. This guardianship

[

] should be continued.

[

] should not be continued, for the following reasons:

____________________________________________________

___________________________________________________.

11. My powers as guardian should be changed in the following

respects and for the following reasons: ________________________

________________________________________________________________

-57-

________________________________________________________________.

12. The court should be aware of the following other matters

relating to this guardianship: _________________________________

________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________.

I solemnly affirm under the penalties of perjury that the

contents of this document are true to the best of my knowledge,

information, and belief.

__________________________

Date

_________________________________

Guardian's Signature

_________________________________

Guardian's Name (typed or printed)

_________________________________

Street Address or Box Number

_________________________________

City and State

_________________________________

Telephone Number

[CAPTION]

ORDER

The foregoing Annual Report of a Guardian having been filed

and reviewed, it is by the Court, this ___ day of ______, ______,

(month) (year)

ORDERED, that the report is accepted, and the guardianship is

continued.

(or)

-58-

ORDERED, that a hearing shall be held in this matter on

_________________________.

(date)

_____________________________

JUDGE

Source: This Rule is new and is derived as follows:

Section (a) is derived from Code, Estates and Trusts Article,

§13-708 (b)(7) and former Rule V74 c 2 (b).

Section (b) is derived from former Rule V74 c 2 (b).

Section (c) is patterned after Rule 6-417 (d).

Sections (d) and (e) are new.

Section (f) is new.

Rule 10-206 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Guardians of disabled persons had been

required by statute to file an annual report

informing the court of the status of the

guardianship. Chapter 412, Laws of 2015 (HB

293) amended the statute, Code, Estates and

Trusts Article, §13-708, to provide that the

court may appoint a guardian of the person of

a disabled person for a limited period of

time and that the report may be filed

biannually. The Probate/Fiduciary

Subcommittee recommends that the cross

reference after section (a) of Rule 10-206 be

amended to refer to this change in the

statute.

An attorney had suggested that there be

a similar report for minor persons who are

the subject of a guardianship, noting that

the court should also be monitoring

guardianship of minors. The Rules Committee

had approved amending Rule 10-206 to make it

applicable to guardianship of minors and to

add a form parallel to the report form for

guardianships of disabled persons.

A clerk has suggested that the word

“Caption” be added before the word “Order” in

the order forms. The addition of the word

-59-

indicates that the order should be on a

separate piece of paper, making it more

convenient for the clerks to use and docket

the form separately.

See the Reporter’s note to the deletion

of Rule 6-123 for the change to the

affirmation clause.

Judge Nazarian pointed out that section (a) of Rule 10-206

refers to an annual report, but the cross reference after section

(a) states that the report can be filed biannually to track the

statute, Chapter 412, Laws of 2015 (HB 293).

Or is the “annual

report” a term of art that now by statute means that it could be

biannual?

Ms. Phipps explained that if a guardian dies and

another one needs to be appointed, the biannual report is to

catch what happens in between the two guardianships, so the

report could be biannual or annual.

By consensus, the Committee approved Rules 6-456, 10-201,

and 10-206 as presented and Rule 10-106 as amended.

Agenda Item 4. Consideration of proposed amendments to: Rule

16-1005 (Case Records - Required Denial of Inspection - In

General), Rule 16-1006 (Required Denial of Inspection - Certain

Categories of Case Records), and Rule 16-1009 (Court Order

Denying or Permitting Inspection of Case Record)

_________________________________________________________________

The Chair presented Rule 16-1005, Case Records - Required

Denial of Inspection - In General, for the Committee’s

consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 16 - COURTS, JUDGES, AND ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 1000 - ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS

-60-

AMEND Rule 16-1005 by adding a cross

reference following section (b), as follows:

Rule 16-1005. CASE RECORDS - REQUIRED DENIAL

OF INSPECTION - IN GENERAL

. . .

(b) Unless inspection is otherwise

permitted by the Rules in this Chapter, a

custodian shall deny inspection of a case

record or any part of a case record if

inspection would be contrary to a statute

enacted by the Maryland General Assembly,

other than the Maryland Public Information

Act (Code, General Provisions Article, Title

4), that expressly or by necessary

implication applies to a court record.

Cross reference: For an example of a statute

enacted by the General Assembly that

restricts inspection of a case record, see

Code, Criminal Procedure Article, Title 10,

Subtitle 3.

Committee note: Subsection (a)(5) allows a

court to seal a record or otherwise preclude

its disclosure. So long as a court record is

under seal or subject to an order precluding

or limiting disclosure, it may not be

disclosed except in conformance with the

order. The authority to seal a court record

must be exercised in conformance with the

general policy of these Rules and with

supervening standards enunciated in decisions

of the United States Supreme Court and the

Maryland Court of Appeals.

Source:

This Rule is new.

Rule 16-1005 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

A proposed amendment to Rule 16-1005

adds a cross reference to Code, Criminal

Procedure Article, Title 10, Subtitle 3,

which requires that certain criminal case

records be shielded, and which also provides

-61-

for certain exceptions where inspection is to

be permitted.

A comparable change will be proposed for

Rule 16-905 (Case Records - Required Denial

of Inspection - In General), which is

currently before the Court as part of the

178th Report, Part I.

The Chair told the Committee that a cross reference to

Chapter 3l3, Laws of 2015 (HB 244), the Second Chance Act, had

been added after section (b) of Rule 16-1005.

The statute

provides for the shielding of certain criminal records, but it is

not part of the Public Information Act (Code, General Provisions

Article, Title 4, Subtitle 3).

Under the Access Rules, if the

legislature provides for shielding by statute other than the PIA,

the record is shielded.

Rule 16-1005 does not incorporate all of

the PIA, because that Act provides for shielding subject to court

rules.

But if the legislature passes another statute to shield,

then the record or records are shielded.

The cross reference is

added to Rule 16-1005 to draw attention to the statute.

By consensus, the Committee approved the proposed change to

Rule 16-1005 as presented.

The Chair presented Rule 16-1006, Required Denial of

Inspection - Certain Categories of Case Records, for the

Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 16 - COURTS, JUDGES, AND ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 1000 - ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS

-62-

AMEND Rule 16-1006 by adding a new

subsection (h)(7), as follows:

Rule 16-1006. REQUIRED DENIAL OF INSPECTION

- CERTAIN CATEGORIES OF CASE RECORDS

. . .

(h) The following case records in criminal

actions or proceedings:

(1) A case record that has been ordered

expunged pursuant to Rule 4-508.

(2) The following case records pertaining

to search warrants:

(A) The warrant, application, and

supporting affidavit, prior to execution of

the warrant and the filing of the records

with the clerk.

(B) Executed search warrants and all

papers attached thereto filed pursuant to

Rule 4-601.

(3) The following case records pertaining

to an arrest warrant:

(A) A case record pertaining to an

arrest warrant issued under Rule 4-212 (d)

and the charging document upon which the

warrant was issued until the conditions set

forth in Rule 4-212 (d)(3) are satisfied.

(B) Except as otherwise provided in

Code, General Provisions Article, §4-316, a

case record pertaining to an arrest warrant

issued pursuant to a grand jury indictment or

conspiracy investigation and the charging

document upon which the arrest warrant was

issued.

(4) A case record maintained under Code,

Courts Article, §9-106, of the refusal of a

person to testify in a criminal action

against the person's spouse.

(5) A presentence investigation report

-63-

prepared pursuant to Code, Correctional

Services Article, §6-112.

(6) A case record pertaining to a

criminal investigation by (A) a grand jury,

(B) a State's Attorney pursuant to Code,

Criminal Procedure Article, §15-108, (C) the

State Prosecutor pursuant to Code, Criminal

Procedure Article, §14-110, or (D) the

Attorney General when acting pursuant to

Article V, §3 of the Maryland Constitution or

other law.

Committee note: Although this Rule shields

only case records pertaining to a criminal

investigation, there may be other laws that

shield other kinds of court records

pertaining to such investigations. This Rule

is not intended to affect the operation or

effectiveness of any such other law.

(7) A case record required to be shielded

by Code, Criminal Procedure Article, Title

10, Subtitle 3.

. . .

Rule 16-1006 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

A new subsection (h)(7) is proposed to

be added to Rule 16-1006 to add to the

category of criminal case records that are

required to be shielded by Code, Criminal

Procedure Article, Title 10, Subtitle 3.

Those provisions require the shielding of

certain criminal records, but also set forth

exceptions to permit inspection for certain

purposes.

A comparable change will be proposed for

Rule 16-906 (Required Denial of Inspection Certain Categories of Case Records), which is

currently before the Court as part of the

178th Report, Part I.

The Chair explained that the change to Rule 16-1006, which

adds subsection (h)(7), implements Chapter 313, Laws of 2015 (HB

-64-

244), the Second Chance Act.

By consensus, the Committee approved the proposed change to

Rule 16-1006 as presented.

The Chair presented Rule 16-1009, Court Order Denying or

Permitting Inspection of Case Record, for the Committee’s

consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 16 - COURTS, JUDGES, AND ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 1000 -ACCESS TO COURT RECORDS

AMEND Rule 16-1009 by specifying that a

motion to shield a court record pursuant to

Code, Criminal Procedure Article, Title

10, Subtitle 3 be filed in the county where

the judgment of conviction was entered; by

requiring that service be provided in

accordance with the statute; by specifying

that subsection (b)(1) does not apply to

petitions filed under the statute; by

requiring that a final order granting relief

under the statute include the applicable

provisions of the statute; by adding certain

provisions pertaining to actions that were

removed pursuant to Rule 4-254; by providing

that a certain order not be open to public

inspection if otherwise provided by law; and

by making stylistic changes, as follows:

Rule 16-1009. COURT ORDER DENYING OR

PERMITTING INSPECTION OF CASE RECORD

(a)

Motion

(1) A party to an action in which a case

record is filed, including a person who has

been permitted to intervene as a party, and a

person who is the subject of or is

specifically identified in a case record may

file a motion:

-65-

(A) to seal or otherwise limit

inspection of a case record filed in that

action that is not otherwise shielded from

inspection under the Rules in this Chapter or

Title 20; or

(B) to permit inspection of a case

record filed in that action that is not

otherwise subject to inspection under the

Rules in this Chapter or Title 20.

(2) The Except as provided in subsection

(a)(3) of this Rule, the motion shall be

filed with the court in which the case record

is filed and shall be served on:

(A) all parties to the action in which

the case record is filed; and

(B) each identifiable person who is the

subject of the case record.

(3) A petition to shield a court record

pursuant to Code, Criminal Procedure Article,

Title 10, Subtitle 3 shall be filed in the

county where the judgment of conviction was

entered, and service shall be provided in

accordance with the statute.

(b)

Shielding Upon Motion or Request

(1) Preliminary Shielding upon Motion

Subsection (b)(1) of this Rule does

not apply to a petition filed pursuant to

Code, Criminal Procedure Article, Title 10,

Subtitle 3. Upon the filing of a motion to

seal or otherwise limit inspection of a case

record pursuant to section (a) of this Rule,

the custodian shall deny inspection of the

case record for a period not to exceed five

business days, including the day the motion

is filed, in order to allow the court an

opportunity to determine whether a temporary

order should issue.

(2) Shielding upon Request

If a request to shield information in

a case record is filed by or on behalf of a

-66-

person entitled to request the shielding

under Code, Courts Article, Title 3, Subtitle

15 (peace orders) or Code, Family Law

Article, Title 4, Subtitle 5 (domestic

violence), and the request is granted, or if

a request to shield the address or telephone

number of a victim, victim's representative,

or witness is filed in a criminal action, and

the request is granted, a custodian shall

deny inspection of the shielded information.

The shield remains in effect until terminated

or modified by order of court. If the request

is denied, the person seeking to shield

information may file a motion under section

(a) of this Rule.

Committee note: If a court or District Court

Commissioner grants a request to shield

information under subsection (b)(2) of this

Rule, no adversary hearing is held unless a

person seeking inspection of the shielded

information files a motion under section (a)

of this Rule.

Inspection

(1) The court shall consider a motion

filed under this Rule on an expedited basis.

(2) In conformance with the provisions of

Rule 15-504 (Temporary Restraining Order),

the court may enter a temporary order

precluding or limiting inspection of a case

record if it clearly appears from specific

facts shown by affidavit or other statement

under oath that (A) there is a substantial

basis for believing that the case record is

properly subject to an order precluding or

limiting inspection, and (B) immediate,

substantial, and irreparable harm will result

to the person seeking the relief if temporary

relief is not granted before a full adversary

hearing can be held on the propriety of a

final order precluding or limiting

inspection.

(3) A court may not enter a temporary

order permitting inspection of a case record

that is not otherwise subject to inspection

-67-

under the Rules in this Chapter in the

absence of an opportunity for a full

adversary hearing.

(d)

Final Order

(1) After an opportunity for a full

adversary hearing, the court shall enter a

final order:

(A) precluding or limiting inspection

of a case record that is not otherwise

shielded from inspection under the Rules in

this Chapter;

(B) permitting inspection, under such

conditions and limitations as the court finds

necessary, of a case record that is not

otherwise subject to inspection under the

Rules in this Chapter; or

(2) A final order shall include findings

regarding the interest sought to be protected

by the order.

(3) A final order that precludes or

limits inspection of a case record shall be

as narrow as practicable in scope and

duration to effectuate the interest sought to

be protected by the order.

(4) A final order granting relief under

Code, Criminal Procedure Article, Title 10,

Subtitle 3 shall include the applicable

provisions of the statute. If the order

pertains to a judgment of conviction in an

action that was removed pursuant to Rule 4254, the order shall apply to the records of

each court in which there is a record of the

action, and the clerk shall transmit a copy

of the order to each such court.

(4) (5) In determining whether to permit

or deny inspection, the court shall consider:

(A) if the motion seeks to preclude or

limit inspection of a case record that is

otherwise subject to inspection under the

-68-

Rules in this Chapter, whether a special and

compelling reason exists to preclude or limit

inspection of the particular case record; and

(B) if the motion seeks to permit

inspection of a case record that is otherwise

not subject to inspection under the Rules in

this Chapter, whether a special and

compelling reason exists to permit

inspection.

inspection of a case record that has been

previously sealed by court order under

subsection (d)(1)(A) of this Rule and the

movant was not a party to the case when the

order was entered, whether the order

satisfies the standards set forth in

subsections (d)(2), (3), and (4)(A) of this

Rule.

(5) (6) Unless the time is extended by

the court on motion of a party and for good

cause, the court shall enter a final order

within 30 days after a hearing was held or

waived.

(e)

Filing of Order

A copy of any preliminary temporary or

final order shall be filed in the action in

which the case record in question was filed

and, except as otherwise provided by law,

shall be subject to public inspection.

(f)

Non-exclusive Remedy

This Rule does not preclude a court

from exercising its authority at any time to

enter an order that seals or limits

inspection of a case record or that makes a

case record subject to inspection.

Source:

This Rule is new.

Rule 16-1009 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

-69-

The Maryland Second Chance Act of 2015

(“the Act”), Chapter 313, Laws of 2015,

effective October 1, 2015, will permit a

person to petition a court to shield the

person’s court records relating to one or

more shieldable convictions, subject to

certain restrictions and exceptions. The

intent of the amendments proposed to Rule 161009 is to harmonize the Rule to the statute.

New subsection (a)(3) is proposed to

provide that a petition to shield a court

record pursuant to the Act shall be filed in

the county where the judgment of conviction

was entered. It was anticipated that there

may be some confusion in cases where an

action had been removed from one county to

another. Also, subsection (a)(3) specifies

that service shall be provided in accordance

with the Act. This proposal is necessary

because Code, Criminal Procedure Article,

§10-303 (e)(1) conflicts with the Rule by

requiring that “the Court shall have a copy

of the petition for shielding served on the

State’s Attorney,” and §10-303 (f) requires

the court to send written notice of the

proposed action to all listed victims to

advise them of the right to offer information

relevant to the shielding. In contrast, Rule

16-1009 (a)(2) imposes on the movant the duty

to serve the motion on all parties to the

action and each identifiable person who is

the subject of the case record.

New subsection (d)(4) of Rule 16-1009

requires that an order granting relief under

the Act include the applicable provisions of

the statute. As such, the court will be

“order[ing] the shielding of all police

records and court records relating to the

conviction or convictions” pursuant to Code,

Criminal Procedure Article, §10-303 (f)(2),

and the records, although shielded, are to

remain “fully accessible by” the person

listed in Code, Criminal Procedure Article,

§10-302 (b). Subsection (d)(4) also

addresses a gap in the statute by providing

that, if the order pertains to a judgment of

conviction in an action that was removed

pursuant to Rule 4-254, the order shall apply

-70-

to the records of each court in which there

is a record of the action, and by requiring

the clerk to transmit a copy of the order to

each such court.

Two changes are proposed to section (e).

First, the word “temporary” is proposed to

substitute for the word “preliminary,” for

the sake of consistency between sections (c)

and (e). Second, an amendment is proposed to

state that a copy of a temporary or final

order shall be subject to public inspection,

except as otherwise provided by law. The

exception that is added reflects that, in

addition to the Second Chance Act, there are

other laws that direct that the shielding of

court records must include the court orders

in the case. In Code, Criminal Procedure

Article, §10-301(b) the term “court record”

is defined to have the meaning stated in

Code, Criminal Procedure Article, §10-101.

Section 10-101 (c)(2)(ii) defines a court

record to include “an index, docket entry,

charging document, pleading, memorandum,

transcription of proceedings, electronic

recording, order, and judgment.” Similarly,

in two other shielding statutes, Code, Courts

Article, §3-1510 (a)(2)(ii)2 and Code, Family

Law Article, §4-512 (a)(2)(ii)1, the term

“court record” is defined to include “an

index, a docket entry, a petition, a

memorandum, a transcription of proceedings,

an electronic recording, an order, and a

judgment.”

A comparable change will be proposed to

Rule 16-909 (Court Order Denying or

Permitting Inspection of Case Record), which

is currently before the Court as part of the

178th Report, Part I.

The Chair pointed out that the statute, Chapter 313, Laws of

2015 (HB 244), the Second Chance Act, does not directly shield

the criminal records listed.

It requires a petition to shield,

and the court has some discretion.

this petition procedure.

The question was where to put

Rule 16-1009 is an existing Access Rule

-71-

that provides that if a record is not shielded by law, and

someone would like for it to be shielded, the person can file a

petition to shield.

The reverse is true.

If a record is already

shielded, and someone would like for it to be opened, the person

can follow the procedure set out in Rule 16-1009.

This seemed to

be the best approach for bringing in the procedure in the Second

Chance Act.

The Chair noted that there was one problem that the

legislature did not address.

It probably will never happen given

the fact that the crimes for the convictions for which can be

shielded are relatively minor (although they are not all District

Court offenses; some are felonies that are tried in the circuit

court).

This is not a problem in the District Court, because even if

the record is not shielded, the person has to file a petition in

the District Court in the county where the case was tried.

There

are no removals in the District Court according to Ms. Roberta

Warnken, the Chief Clerk of the District Court.

If a case is

filed in Carroll County District Court, and a person does not

like the judge assigned to the case, as long as the assigned

judge agrees, another judge will be brought in to sit in place of

the assigned judge, but the case is not sent out to another

county.

It is called “reassignment,” not “removal.”

The Chair said that in the circuit court, a case can be

removed to another county.

Under Rule 4-254, Reassignment and

-72-

Removal, which applies in the circuit court, if a case starts in

the Circuit Court for Carroll County, and a petition to remove it

is granted, the case could be moved to Baltimore County, and the

State’s Attorney for Carroll County will come to Baltimore County

to try that case.

The Carroll County court will have a file,

because that is where the case was started.

Carroll County will

send whatever is in the file to Baltimore County, but Carroll

County will still have a file.

The Chair commented that according to Rule 4-254, if there

is a conviction in Baltimore County, that county will open its

own file for the case, so there will be a Baltimore County file

and a Carroll County file.

Whatever happens in Baltimore County,

whether it is a conviction, a dismissal, or an acquittal, will

get recorded in the Baltimore County file, and the clerk in

Baltimore County is required by Rule 4-254 to then send a

certified copy of the docket entries back to Carroll County.

The

clerk of Carroll County will then file that certificate of the

docket entries, so that both courts have a file, and both files

will reflect a conviction, if the defendant was convicted.

The Chair commented that the statute provides that someone

can only file a petition to shield the record in one county.

that rare situation where there has been a removal in the circuit

court, two courts will have a record of the conviction, but the

defendant can file a petition in only one county.

small glitch.

This is the

The likelihood of this happening is rather remote

-73-

simply because the crimes for which the petitions can be filed

are not likely to be ones where someone would get a removal, but

it is theoretically possible.

The Chair said that he had spoken with Robin Coffin, Esq.,

Deputy State’s Attorney for Baltimore County, about how Baltimore

County handles this removal situation.

has been the procedure there.

She confirmed that this

The Rule was drafted so that the

defendant files the petition in the court where the case started.

If the case has been removed and tried in another county, the

petition is filed in that county, because they will have the

entire record, since the case was tried there.

If the defendant

was convicted, and the judge in the county where the case was

tried decides that the matter falls within the statute and the

record is shieldable, that county will shield their file and send

the order back to the original county.

It will be a kind of res

judicata situation, and the original county will shield whatever

record it has.

It is only a docket entry, but it shows the

conviction.

The Chair explained that the theory is that it is the same

parties, the same State’s Attorney, and the same defendant.

The

original county should be bound by the judgment in the county to

which the case was removed.

This was the only way that the

drafters of Rule 16-1009 could think of to get around the fact

that the defendant cannot file the petition in both courts.

legislature could fix this if it so chooses.

-74-

The

A comparable change will have to be made to proposed Rule

16-910, Procedures for Compliance, which is the revision of Rule

16-1009 that is in Part I of the 178th Report to the Court of

Appeals.

What the Committee does with Rule 16-1009 will be

reflected in proposed Rule 16-910.

The Chair noted that there is one more glitch.

The statute

has certain procedural provisions in it that have to be followed.

The Criminal Subcommittee will have to discuss this.

subsection (a)(3), a period should be added after the word

“entered.”

The next sentence should be: “Service shall be

provided and proceedings shall be held as directed in that

Subtitle.”

This would leave no ambiguity.

The Chair commented that one of the problems that the

legislature did not address is the issue of victims.

is a little vague about victims.

The statute

It requires that the court

serve the petition on the State’s Attorney, and there is a

provision in the statute that in the final order that the judge

makes, the judge has to consider anything that the victim might

want to say.

This assumes that the victim has been informed

about this proceeding.

The statute contains no provision for

actual service on the victim, but only on the State’s Attorney.

The theory is probably that the victim has filed a request for

notice.

The State’s Attorney will have a copy of this, and so

will the clerk.

The Chair said that he was not sure how many of

the crimes listed in the statute would even have victims.

-75-

A few

crimes may have victims, including the crime of malicious

destruction of property where there is a right of restitution.

Judge Ellinghaus-Jones referred to the issue of cases that

are removed to the circuit court.

She asked whether language

should be added to Rule 16-1009 to include cases that are

appealed from the District Court to the circuit court.

The

conviction would be in the circuit court, but the District Court

would still have a record.

The appeals are usually all de novo,

so the conviction would be in the circuit court.

By analogy,

when an expungement is filed, it has to be filed in the circuit

court if it is an expungeable offense.

She explained that when

an offense is expunged in the circuit court, that court’s order

directs the District Court to expunge the offense also when the

case had been appealed from the District Court.

The Chair agreed

that cases that had been appealed from the District Court to the

circuit court should be included in the scope of Rule 16-1009.

The Style Subcommittee can find a way to draft this.

The

Reporter noted that language could be added to subsection (d)(4)

to address it.

By consensus, the Committee approved the proposed changes to

Rule 16-1009, subject to the change suggested by Judge

Ellinghaus-Jones to add language to cover appeals from the

District Court to the circuit court.

Agenda Item 5. Reconsideration of proposed revised Rules to be

included in the 178th Report, Part III - Rule 19-102 (State

Board of Law Examiners), Rule 19-103 (Character Committees),

Rule 19-104 (Subpoena Power), Rule 19-105 (Confidentiality),

-76-

Rule 19-202 (Application for Admission and Preliminary

Determination of Eligibility), Rule 19-203 (Character Review),

Rule 19-204 (Petition to Take a Scheduled Examination), and

Rule 19-206 (Bar Examination)

_________________________________________________________________

Mr. Frederick presented Rules 19-102, State Board of Law

Examiners; 19-103, Character Committees; 19-104, Subpoena Power;

19-105, Confidentiality; 19-202, Application for Admission and

Preliminary Determination of Eligibility; 19-203, Character

Review; 19-204, Petition to Take a Scheduled Examination; and 19206, Bar Examination, for the Committee’s consideration.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 100 – STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS

AND CHARACTER COMMITTEES

Rule 20. 19-102.

EXAMINERS

(a)

THE STATE BOARD OF LAW

Appointment

There is a State Board of Law

Examiners. The Board shall consist of seven

members appointed by the Court. Each member

shall have been admitted to practice law in

Maryland. The terms of members shall be as

provided in Code, Business Occupations and

Professions Article, §10-202 (c).

(b)

Quorum

A majority of the authorized

membership of the Board is a quorum.

(a) (c) Authority to Adopt Rules

(1) Generally

The Board shall exercise the

authority and perform the duties assigned to

-77-

it by the Rules in this Chapter and Chapter

200 of this Title, including general

supervision over the character and fitness

requirements and procedures set forth in

those Rules and the operations of the

character committees.

(2) Adoption of Rules

The Board may adopt rules to carry

out the requirements of these Rules and to

facilitate the conduct of examinations this

Chapter and Chapter 200 of this Title. The

Rules of the Board shall be published in the

Code, Maryland Rules this Chapter, following

these Rules Rule 19-220.

(b) (d) Amendment of Board Rules Publication

Any amendment of the Board's rules

shall be published at least once in a daily

newspaper of general circulation in this

State. The amendment shall be published

posted on the Judiciary website at least 45

days before the examination at which it is to

become effective, except that an amendment

that substantially increases the area of

subject-matter knowledge required for any

examination shall be published posted at

least one year before the examination.

The Board may appoint the professional

assistants necessary for the proper conduct

of its business. Each professional assistant

shall be an attorney admitted by the Court of

Appeals and shall serve at the pleasure of

the Board.

Committee note: Professional assistants

primarily assist in writing and grading the

bar examination. Section (e) does not apply

to the Secretary or administrative staff.

(d) (f) Compensation of Board Members and

Assistants

-78-

The members of the Board and

assistants shall receive the compensation

fixed from time to time by the Court.

(e) (g)

Secretary to the Board

The Court may appoint a secretary to

the Board, to hold office during at the

pleasure of the Court. The secretary shall

have the administrative powers and duties

that prescribed by the Board may prescribe

and shall serve as the administrative

director of the Office of the State Board of

Law Examiners.

(h)

Fees

The Board shall prescribe the fees,

subject to approval by the Court, to be paid

by applicants under Rules 2 19-202 and 7 19206 and by petitioners under Rule 13 19-212.

Cross reference: See Code, Business

Occupations and Professions Article, §10-208

(b) for maximum examination fee allowed by

law.

Source: This Rule is derived as follows:

Section (a) is derived from former Rule 7 h

and 9 a new.

Section (b) is new.

Sections (c) through (g) are derived from

former Rule 20 of the Rules Governing

Admission to the Bar of Maryland (2015).

Section (h) is derived from former Rule 18

of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar

of Maryland (2015).

Section (b) is derived from former Rule 7 h

and i.

Section (c) is derived from former Rule 9

Section (d) is derived from former Rule 16.

Section (e) is derived from former Rule 17.

Rule 19-102 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

-79-

Rule 19-102 is derived from current RGAB

20 and 18, with style changes. Sections (a)

and (b) are new and include the provisions of

Code, Business Occupations and Professions

Article, §10-202 concerning the composition

of the Board and quorum requirements.

Subsection (c)(1) is new. It implements

a recommendation of the Maryland

Professionalism Center Bar Admission Task

Force that the character and fitness

procedure be put under the purview of the

Board.

Section (d) is updated to require

posting on the Judiciary website, rather than

publication in a newspaper.

Section (e) is clarified by the addition

of the word “professional” in the tagline and

text and by the addition of a Committee note.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 100 – STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS

AND CHARACTER COMMITTEES

Rule 17. 19-103.

CHARACTER COMMITTEES

The Court shall appoint a Character

Committee for each of the seven Appellate

Judicial Circuits of the State. Each

Character Committee shall consist of not less

than five members whose terms shall be five

years each, except that in the Sixth

Appellate Judicial Circuit the term of each

member shall be two years. The terms shall

be staggered. The Court shall designate the

chair of each Committee and vice chair, if

any, and may provide compensation to the

members. For each application referred to a

Character Committee, the Board shall remit to

-80-

the Committee a sum to defray some of the

expense of the investigation.

Cross reference: See Rule 19-203 for the

Character Review Procedure.

Source: This Rule is derived from former

Rule 4 a and e 17 of the Rules Governing

Admission to the Bar of Maryland (2015).

Rule 19-103 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Rule 19-103 is derived from current RGAB

17, with the addition of a reference to a

vice chair, if any, and a cross reference to

the Rule concerning the character review

procedure itself. The reference to

“compensation” is replaced by a sentence that

more accurately describes the sums paid by

the Board to the Character Committees.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 100 – STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS

AND CHARACTER COMMITTEES

Rule 22. 19-104. SUBPOENA POWER OF BOARD

AND CHARACTER COMMITTEES

(a)

Subpoena

(1) Issuance

In any proceeding before the Board or

a Character Committee pursuant to Bar

Admission Rule 5 19-203 or Bar Admission Rule

13 19-212, the Board or Committee, on its own

motion initiative or the motion of an

applicant, may cause a subpoena to be issued

-81-

by a clerk pursuant to Rule 2-510. The

subpoena shall issue from the Circuit Court

for Anne Arundel County if incident to Board

proceedings or from the circuit court in the

county in which the Character Committee

proceedings are is pending, and the. The

proceedings may shall not be docketed in the

issuing court and shall be sealed and

shielded from public inspection.

(2) Name of Applicant

The subpoena shall not divulge the

name of the applicant, except to the extent

this requirement is impracticable.

(3) Return

The sheriff's return shall be made as

directed in the subpoena.

(4) Dockets and Files

The Character Committee or the Board,

as applicable, shall maintain dockets and

files of all papers filed in the proceedings.

(5) Action to Quash or Enforce

Any action to quash or enforce a

subpoena shall be filed under seal and

docketed as a miscellaneous action in the

court from where the subpoena was issued.

Cross reference: See Rule 16-906 (e)(3).

(b)

Sanctions

If a person is subpoenaed to appear

and give testimony or to produce books,

documents, or other tangible things and fails

to do so, the party who requested the

subpoena, by motion that does not divulge the

name of the applicant, (except to the extent

that this requirement is impracticable), may

request the court to issue an attachment

pursuant to Rule 2-510 (j), or to cite the

person for contempt pursuant to Title 15,

Chapter 200 of the Maryland Rules, or both.

Any such motion shall be filed under seal.

-82-

(c)

Court Rules Costs

All court costs in proceedings under

this Rule shall be assessable to and paid by

the State.

Source: This Rule is new derived from former

Rule 22 of the Rules Governing Admission to

the Bar of Maryland (2015).

Rule 19-104 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Rule 19-104 is derived from current RGAB

22 with style changes and the addition of

provisions concerning sealing, shielding,

quashing, and enforcing subpoenas.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 100 – STATE BOARD OF LAW EXAMINERS

AND CHARACTER COMMITTEES

Rule 19. 19-105.

CONFIDENTIALITY

(a) Proceedings Before Committee or Board;

General Policy Accommodations Review

Committee; Character Committee; or Board

Except as provided in sections (b),

(c), and (d) of this Rule, the proceedings

before the Accommodations Review Committee

and its panels, a Character Committee, and

the Board, and the including related papers,

evidence, and information, are confidential

and shall not be open to public inspection or

subject to court process or compulsory

disclosure.

(b)

Right of Applicant

-83-

(1) Right to Attend Hearings and Inspect

Papers

Except as provided in paragraph (2)

of this section, an An applicant has the

right to attend all hearings before a panel

of the Accommodations Review Committee, a

Character Committee, and the Board, and the

Court pertaining to his or her application

and, except as provided in subsection (b)(2)

of this Rule, to be informed of and inspect

all papers, evidence, and information

received or considered by the panel,

Committee or the Board pertaining to the

applicant.

(2) Exclusions

This section Subsection (b)(2) of

this Rule does not apply to (A) papers or

evidence received, or considered, or prepared

by the National Conference of Bar Examiners,

a Character Committee, of or the Board if the

Committee or Board, without a hearing,

recommends the applicant's admission; (B)

personal memoranda, notes, and work papers of

members or staff of the National Conference

of Bar Examiners, a Character Committee, or

the Board; (C) correspondence between or

among members or staff of the National

Conference of Bar Examiners, a Character

Committee, or the Board; or (D) character

reports prepared by the National Conference

of Bar Examiners; or (D) an applicant's bar

examination grades and answers, except as

authorized in Rule 8 19-207 and Rule 13 19212.

(c)

When Disclosure Authorized

The Board may disclose:

(1) statistical information that does not

reveal the identity of an individual

applicant;

(2) the fact that an applicant has passed

the bar examination and the date of the

examination;

-84-

(3) if the applicant has consented in

writing, any material pertaining to an the

applicant that the applicant would be

entitled to inspect under section (b) of this

Rule if the applicant has consented in

writing to the disclosure;

(4) for use in a pending disciplinary

proceeding against the applicant as an

attorney or judge, a pending proceeding for

reinstatement of the applicant as an attorney

after suspension or disbarment, or a pending

proceeding for original admission of the

applicant to the Bar, any material pertaining

to an applicant requested by:

(A) a court of this State, another

state, or the United States;

(B) Bar Counsel, the Attorney Grievance

Commission, or the attorney disciplinary

authority in another state;

jurisdiction State responsible for

investigating the character and fitness of an

applicant for admission to the bar of that

jurisdiction, or

(D) Investigative Counsel, the

Commission on Judicial Disabilities, or the

judicial disciplinary authority in another

jurisdiction for use in;

(i) a pending disciplinary proceeding

against the applicant as an attorney or

judge;

(ii) a pending proceeding for

reinstatement of the applicant as an attorney

after disbarment; or

(iii) a pending proceeding for

original admission of the applicant to the

Bar;

(5) any material pertaining to an

applicant requested by a judicial nominating

commission or the Governor of this or any

other State, a committee of the Senate of

-85-

Maryland, the President of the United States,

or a committee of the United States Senate in

connection with an application by or

nomination of the applicant for judicial

office;

(6) to a law school, the names of persons

individuals who graduated from that law

school who took a bar examination, and

whether they passed or failed the

examination, and the number of bar

examination attempts by each individual;

(7) to the Maryland State Bar Association

and any other bona fide bar association in

the State of Maryland, the name and address

of a person an individual recommended for bar

admission pursuant to Rule 10 19-209;

NOTE: Delete or amend subsection (c)(8) as

needed, depending on the Court’s

determinations re: the Professionalism Center

and Course.

(8) to each entity selected to give the

course on legal professionalism required by

Rule 11 19-210, the name and address of a

person an individual recommended for bar

admission pursuant to Rule 10 19-209;

(9) to the National Conference of Bar

Examiners, the following information

regarding persons individuals who have filed

applications for admission pursuant to Rule 2

19-202 or petitions to take the attorney's

examination pursuant to Rule 13 19-213: the

applicant's name and any aliases, applicant

number, birthdate, Law School Admission

Council number, law school, date that a juris

doctor or equivalent degree was conferred,

bar examination results and pass/fail status,

and the number of bar examination attempts;

(10) to any member of a Character

Committee, the report of any Character

Committee or the Board following a hearing on

an application; and

(11) to the Child Support Enforcement

Administration, upon its request, the name,

-86-

Social Security number, and address of a

person an individual who has filed an

application pursuant to Rule 2 19-202 or a

petition to take the attorney's examination

pursuant to Rule 13 19-213.

Unless information disclosed pursuant to

paragraphs subsections (c)(4) and (5) of this

section Rule is disclosed with the written

consent of the applicant, an applicant shall

receive a copy of the information and may

rebut, in writing, any matter contained in

it. Upon receipt of a written rebuttal, the

Board shall forward a copy to the person

individual or entity to whom the information

was disclosed.

(d) Proceedings and Access to Records in

the Court of Appeals

(1) Subject to reasonable regulation by

the Court of Appeals, Bar Admission

ceremonies shall be open.

(2) Unless the Court otherwise orders in

a particular case:

(A) hearings in the Court of Appeals

shall be open, and

(B) if the Court conducts a hearing

regarding a bar applicant, any report by the

Accommodations Review Committee, a Character

Committee, or the Board filed with the Court,

but no other part of the applicant's record,

shall be subject to public inspection.

(3) The Court of Appeals may make any of

the disclosures that the Board may make

pursuant to section (c) of this Rule.

(4) Except as provided in paragraphs

subsections (d)(1), (2), and (3) of this

section Rule or as otherwise required by law,

proceedings before the Court of Appeals and

the related papers, evidence, and information

are confidential and shall not be open to

public inspection or subject to court process

or compulsory disclosure.

-87-

Source: This Rule is new derived from former

Rule 19 of the Rules Governing Admission to

the Bar of Maryland (2015).

Rule 19-105 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

This Rule is derived from former RGAB 19

with style changes. The State Board of Law

Examiners recommends that more references

to the National Conference of Bar Examiners

be included in the Rule. References to the

judicial nominating commission of other

States, governors of other States, and the

President of the United States are added. At

the request of law schools, added to

subsection (c)(6) is the permitted disclosure

to a law school of the number of times an

individual graduate of that law school took

the bar examination.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

Rule 2. 19-202. APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION

AND PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY

(a)

By Application

A person An individual who meets the

requirements of Rules 3 and 4 Rule 19-201 or

had the requirement of Rule 19-201 (a)(2)

waived pursuant to Rule 19-201 (b) may apply

for admission to the Bar of this State by

filing with the Board an application for

admission, accompanied by the prescribed fee,

with the Board.

Committee note: The application is the first

step in the admission process. These steps

include application for admission, proof of

character, proof of graduation from an

-88-

approved law school, application to take a

particular bar examination, and passing of

that examination.

(b)

Form of Application

The application shall be on a form

prescribed by the Board and shall be under

oath. The form shall elicit the information

the Board considers appropriate concerning

the applicant's character, education, and

eligibility to become a candidate for

admission. The application shall require the

applicant to provide the applicant’s Social

Security number and shall include an

authorization for to release of confidential

information pertaining to the applicant’s

character and fitness for the practice of law

to a Character Committee, the Board, and the

Court.

(c)

Time for Filing

(1) Without Intent to Take Particular

Examination

At any time after the completion of

pre-legal studies, a person an individual may

file an application for the purpose of

determining to determine whether there are

any existing impediments, including reasons

pertaining to the individual’s character and

the sufficiency of pre-legal education, to

the applicant's qualifications for admission.

Committee note: Subsection (c)(1) of this

Rule is particularly intended to encourage

persons whose eligibility may be in question

for reasons pertaining to character and

sufficiency of pre-legal education to seek

early review by the Character Committee and

Board.

(2) With Intent to Take Particular

Examination

An applicant who intends to take the

examination in July shall file the

application no later than the preceding

January 16 or, upon payment of the required

-89-

late fee, no later than the preceding May 20.

An applicant who intends to take the

examination in February shall file the

application no later than the preceding

September 15 or, upon payment of the required

late fee, no later than the preceding

December 20.

(3)

Acceptance of Late Application

Upon written request of the

applicant and for good cause shown, the Board

may accept an application filed after the

applicable deadline for a late filing

prescribed in subsection (c)(2) of this Rule.

If the applicant intends to take a particular

bar examination, the applicant shall also

show good cause under Rule 19-204 (c) for

late filing of a petition. If the Board

rejects the application for lack of good

cause for the untimeliness, the applicant may

file an exception with the Court within five

business days after notice of the rejection

is mailed.

(d) Preliminary Determination of

Eligibility

On receipt of an application, the

Board shall determine whether the applicant

has met the pre-legal education requirements

set forth in Rule 3 19-201 (a) and in Code,

Business Occupations and Professions Article,

§10-207. If the Board concludes that the

requirements have been met, it shall forward

the character questionnaire portion of the

application to a Character Committee. If the

Board concludes that the requirements have

not been met, it shall promptly notify the

applicant in writing.

(e) Updated Application

If an application has been pending for

more than three years since the date of the

applicant’s most recent application or

updated application, the applicant shall file

with the Board an updated application prior

to filing a petition to take a scheduled

examination. The updated application shall

-90-

be under oath, filed on the form prescribed

by the Board, and accompanied by the

prescribed fee.

(e) (f) Withdrawal of Application

At any time, an applicant may withdraw

as a candidate for admission by filing with

the Board written notice of withdrawal with

the Board. No fees will be refunded.

(f) (g) Subsequent Application

A person An applicant who reapplies

for admission after an earlier application

has been withdrawn or rejected pursuant to

Rule 5 19-203 must retake and pass the bar

examination even if the person applicant

passed the examination when the earlier

application was pending. If the person

applicant failed the examination when the

earlier application was pending, the failure

will shall be counted under Rule 9 19-208.

Source: This Rule is derived as follows:

Section (a) is in part derived from the

first sentence of former Rule 2 b and in part

new.

Section (b) is new.

Section (c) is derived from former Rule 2

a, 2 b, and f.

Section (d) is in part derived from former

Rule 2 g and in part new.

Section (e) is derived from former Rule 2

Section (f) is new. from former Rule 2 of

the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar of

Maryland (2015).

Rule 19-202 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Rule 19-202 is derived from current RGAB

2 with some changes. The Committee note

following current Rule 2 (a) is deleted as

superfluous. The Committee note following

current Rule 2 (c) is deleted, but the

examples of “impediments” are added to the

text of the Rule.

-91-

In subsection (c)(2), the concept of a

deadline followed by a “late” deadline is

replaced by one deadline per examination.

The reference to lack of good cause for

untimeliness is added to subsection (c)(3)

for clarity, and to distinguish this

rejection from any other rejection of an

application. The time for filing an

exception is clarified to read, “within five

business days after notice of the rejection

is mailed.”

Section (e) is new. It requires the

applicant to file an updated application if

the applicant’s most recent application has

been pending for more than three years.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

Rule 5. 19-203.

CHARACTER REVIEW

(b) (a) Investigation and Report of

Character Committee

(1) On receipt of a character

questionnaire forwarded by the Board pursuant

to Rule 2 19-202 (d), the Character Committee

shall (A) through one of its members,

personally interview the applicant, (B)

verify the facts stated in the questionnaire,

contact the applicant's references, and make

any further investigation it finds necessary

or desirable, (C) evaluate the applicant's

character and fitness for the practice of

law, and (D) transmit to the Board a report

of its investigation and a recommendation as

to the approval or denial of the application

for admission.

(2)

If the Committee concludes that

-92-

there may be grounds for recommending denial

of the application, it shall notify the

applicant and schedule a hearing. The

hearing shall be conducted on the record and

the The hearing shall be recorded verbatim by

shorthand, stenotype, mechanical or

electronic audio recording methods,

electronic word or text processing methods,

or any combination of those methods. The

applicant shall have the right to testify, to

present witnesses, and to be represented by

counsel an attorney. A transcript of the

hearing shall be transmitted by the Committee

to the Board along with the Committee's

report. The Committee's report shall set

forth findings of fact on which the

recommendation is based and a statement

supporting the conclusion. The Committee

shall mail a copy of its report to the

applicant, and a copy of the hearing

transcript shall be furnished to the

applicant upon payment of reasonable charges

costs.

Hearing by Board

If the Board concludes after review of

the Character Committee's report and the

transcript that there may be grounds for

recommending denial of the application, it

shall promptly afford the applicant the

opportunity for a hearing on the record made

before the Committee. The Board, in its

discretion, may permit additional evidence to

be submitted. The Board shall mail a copy of

its report and recommendation to the

applicant and the Committee. If the Board

decides to recommend denial of the

application in its report to the Court, the

Board shall first give the applicant an

opportunity to withdraw the application. If

the applicant withdraws the application, the

Board shall retain the records. Otherwise,

it If the applicant elects not to withdraw

the application, the Board shall transmit to

the Court a report of its proceedings and a

recommendation as to the approval or denial

of the application together with all papers

relating to the matter.

-93-

(d) (c)

Review by Court

(1) If the applicant elects not to

withdraw the application, after After the

Board submits its report and adverse

recommendation the Court shall require the

applicant to show cause why the application

should not be denied.

(2) If the Board recommends approval of

the application contrary to an adverse

recommendation by the Character Committee,

within 30 days after the filing of the

Board's report, the Committee may file with

the Court exceptions to the Board's

recommendation. The Committee shall mail

copies of its exceptions to the applicant and

the Board.

(3) Proceedings in the Court under this

section (c) of this Rule shall be on the

records record made before the Character

Committee and the Board. If the Court denies

the application, the Board shall retain the

records.

(a) (d)

Burden of Proof

The applicant bears the burden of

proving to the Character Committee, the

Board, and the Court the applicant's good

moral character and fitness for the practice

of law. Failure or refusal to answer fully

and candidly any question set forth in the

application or any relevant question asked by

a member of the Character Committee, the

Board, or the Court is sufficient cause for a

finding that the applicant has not met this

burden.

(e)

Continuing Review

All applicants remain subject to

further Character Committee and Board review

and report until admitted to the Bar.

Source: This Rule is derived as follows:

Section (a) is in part derived from the

first sentence of former Rule 2 d and in part

new.

-94-

Section (b) is in part derived from former

Rule 4 b and in part new.

Section (c) is in part derived from former

Rule 4 c and in part new.

Section (d) is in part derived from former

Rule 4 c and in part new.

Section (e) is in part derived from former

Rule 4 d. from former Rule 5 of the Rules

Governing Admission to the Bar of Maryland

(2015).

Rule 19-203 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Rule 19-203 is derived from current RGAB

5 with style changes and a clarification of

the existing requirement that a hearing

conducted by a Character Committee be on the

record supplemented by any additional

evidence that the Board, in its discretion,

may allow.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

Rule 6. 19-204.

EXAMINATION

(a)

PETITION TO TAKE A SCHEDULED

Filing

An applicant may file a petition to

take a scheduled bar examination if (1) the

applicant (1) is eligible under Rule 4 19-201

to take the bar examination, and (2) the

applicant has applied for admission pursuant

to Rule 2 19-202, and (3) the application has

not been withdrawn or rejected pursuant to

Rule 5 19-203. The petition shall be under

oath, and shall be filed on the form

prescribed by the Board, and accompanied by

-95-

the prescribed fee.

(b)

Request for Test Accommodation

An applicant who seeks a test

accommodation under the ADA for the bar

examination shall file with the Board an

"Accommodation Request" on a form prescribed

by the Board, together with any the

supporting documentation that the Board

requires. The form and documentation shall

be filed no later than the deadline stated in

section (c) of this Rule for filing a

petition to take a scheduled bar examination.

The Board may reject an accommodation request

that is (1) substantially incomplete or (2)

filed untimely if the untimeliness makes the

granting of the accommodation impracticable.

Committee note: An applicant who may need a

test accommodation is encouraged to file an

Accommodation Request as early as possible.

Cross reference: See Rule 6.1 19-205 for the

procedure to appeal a denial of a request for

a test accommodation.

(c)

Time for Filing

A petitioner An applicant who intends

to take the examination in July shall file

the petition no later than the preceding May

20. A petitioner An applicant who intends to

take the examination in February shall file

the petition no later than the preceding

December 20. Upon written request of a

petitioner an applicant and for good cause

shown, the Board may accept a petition filed

after that deadline. If the Board rejects

the petition for lack of good cause for the

untimeliness, the petitioner applicant may

file an exception with the Court within five

business days after notice of the rejection

is mailed.

(d) Affirmation and Verification of

Eligibility

The petition to take an examination

shall contain a signed, notarized statement

-96-

affirming that the petitioner applicant is

eligible to take the examination. No later

than the first day of September following an

examination in July or the fifteenth day of

March following an examination in February,

the petitioner applicant shall cause to be

sent to the Office of the State Board of Law

Examiners a an official transcript that

reflects the date of the award to the

applicant of a Juris Doctor degree to the

petitioner qualifying degree under Rule 19201.

(e) Voiding of Examination Results for

Ineligibility

If an applicant who is determined by

the Board not to be eligible under Rule 4 19201 takes an examination, the applicant’s

petition will shall be deemed invalid and the

applicant’s examination results will shall be

voided. No fees will shall be refunded.

(f)

Certification by Law School

Promptly following each bar

examination, the Board shall submit a list of

petitioners applicants who identified

themselves as graduates of a particular law

school and who sat for the most recent bar

examination to the law school for

certification of graduation and good moral

character. Not later than 45 days after each

examination, the law school dean or other

authorized official shall certify to the

Board in writing (1) the date of graduation

of each of its graduates on the list or shall

state that the petitioner applicant is

unqualifiedly eligible for graduation at the

next commencement exercise, naming the date;

and (2) that each of the petitioners

applicants on the list, so far as is known to

that official, has not been guilty of any

criminal or dishonest conduct other than

minor traffic offenses and is of good moral

character, except as otherwise noted.

(g)

Refunds

If a petitioner an applicant withdraws

-97-

the petition or fails to attend and take the

examination, the examination fee will shall

not be refunded except for good cause shown.

The examination fee may not be applied to a

subsequent examination unless the petitioner

applicant is permitted by the Board to defer

taking the examination or the applicant

establishes good cause for the withdrawal or

failure to attend.

Source: This Rule is new, except that

section (a) is derived from former Rule 5 (a)

derived from former Rule 6 of the Rules

Governing Admission to the Bar of Maryland

(2015).

Rule 19-204 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Amendments to current Rules 6 and 9 of

the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar of

Maryland were proposed at the request of the

State Board of Law Examiners.

To allow the Board sufficient time to

process a petition to take an examination, in

light of increases in the number of

candidates and the number of requests for

accommodation under the Americans With

Disabilities Act, the time for filing the

petition was changed from 20 days before the

scheduled examination to no later than the

preceding May 20th for the July examination

or the preceding December 20th for a February

examination. A sentence permitting the Board

to reject an incomplete or untimely request

is added.

In section (c), the time for filing an

exceptions is clarified to read, “within five

business days after notice of the rejection

is mailed.”

The requirement set forth in current

Rule 6 (f) that a certain certification by

the applicant’s law school be included in the

petition was deleted. In its place were

added new sections (d) and (e). New section

(d) requires the applicant to affirm the

-98-

applicant’s eligibility to take the

examination and provide an official law

school transcript to the Board within a

certain time after the examination. New

section (e) voids the examination results of

any applicant who is found to have been

ineligible to take the examination.

In section (g), Refunds, a provision

pertaining to good cause for withdrawal of

the petition or failure to attend the

examination is added.

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 – ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 200 – ADMISSION TO THE BAR

Rule 7. 19-206.

(a)

BAR EXAMINATION

Scheduling

The Board shall administer a written

examination twice annually, once in February

and once in July. The examination shall be

held on two successive days. The total

duration of the examination shall be not more

than 12 hours nor less than nine hours,

unless extended at the candidate’s request

pursuant to Rules 19-204 and 19-205. At

least 30 days before an examination, The the

Board shall publish and have posted on the

Judiciary website notice of the dates, times,

and place or places of the examination no

later than the preceding December 1 for the

February examination and no later than the

preceding May 1 for the July examination.

(b)

Purpose of Examination

The purpose of the bar examination is

to enable candidates for admission to

demonstrate their capacity to achieve mastery

of foundational legal doctrines, proficiency

-99-

in fundamental legal skills, and competence

in applying both to solve legal problems

consistent with the highest ethical

standards. It is the policy of the Court

that no quota of successful examiners

applicants be set, but that each examinee

applicant be judged for fitness to be a

member of the Bar as demonstrated by the

examination answers. To this end, the

examination shall be designed to test the

examinee’s knowledge of legal principles in

the subjects on which examined and the

examinee’s ability to recognize, analyze, and

intelligibly discuss legal problems and to

apply that knowledge in reasoning their

solution. The examination will not be

designed primarily to test information,

memory, or experience.

(c)

Format and Scope of Examination

The Board shall prepare the

examination and may adopt the MBE and the MPT

as part of it. The examination shall include

an essay test. The Board shall define by

rule the subject matter of the essay test,

but the essay test shall include at least one

question dealing in whole or in part with

professional conduct.

(d)

Grading

(1) The Board shall grade the

examination and, shall by rule, shall

establish a passing grades for the

examination. The Board, by rule, may provide

by rule that an examinee applicant may

satisfy the MBE part of the Maryland

examination requirement by applying a grade

on an MBE taken in another jurisdiction state

at the same examination.

(2) At any time before it notifies

examinees notifying applicants of the

results, the Board, in its discretion and in

the interest of fairness, may lower, but not

raise, the passing grades it has established

for any particular administration of the

examination.

-100-

Source: This Rule is derived as follows:

Section (a) is derived from former Rule 7

a, and b.

Section (b) is derived from former Rule 7

Section (c) is derived from former Rule 7 d

and e.

Section (d) is derived from former Rule 7

e. from former Rule 7 of the Rules Governing

Admission to the Bar of Maryland (2015).

Rule 19-206 was accompanied by the following Reporter’s

note.

Rule 19-206 is derived from current RGAB

7 with style changes. Section (b), Purpose

of Examination, is revised in accordance with

Recommendation 8 of the Professionalism

Center Bar Admission Task Force.

Mr. Frederick told the Committee that Rule 19-102 was

proposed to be changed as a result of the recommendations of the

Maryland Professionalism Center Bar Admission Task Force.

modification should be made to subsection (c)(4)(C) of Rule 19105.

The word “jurisdiction” has been stricken, and the word

“State” has been inserted.

He had discussed this issue with

Jeffrey Shipley, Esq., Secretary of the Board of Law Examiners,

and Mr. Armstrong.

The reason for the change is that if someone

applies for admission to the federal bar, it is not unusual for

there to be an investigation as to the person’s fitness for

practice in the federal bar.

It may not be on the person’s

initial application, but it may well be on his or her subsequent

application.

Mr. Frederick had represented people who had been

in those circumstances, and Mr. Shipley would be in a difficult

position in responding to that without having the broader

-101-

language in subsection (c)(4)(C).

The broader language would be

consistent with the rest of the language in the Rule.

The Chair asked whether anyone had an objection to this

change.

By consensus, the Committee approved of the change to

subsection (c)(4)(C).

Mr. Frederick pointed out that the remainder of the changes

of the Rules in Agenda Item 5 are derived from the Bar Admission

Task Force Report of the Commission on Professionalism.

consensus, the Committee approved Rules 19-102, 19-103, 19-104,

19-202, 19-204, and 19-206 as presented and Rule 19-105 as

amended.

Agenda Item 6. Consideration of proposed new Rule 19-753 (Duty

of Clerk of Court of Appeals Upon Attorney’s Suspension,

Termination, or Reinstatement) and Related Issues

_________________________________________________________________

Mr. Frederick presented Rule 19-753, Duty of Clerk of Court

of Appeals Upon Attorney’s Suspension, Termination, or

Reinstatement, for the Committee’s consideration.

MEMORANDUM

Members of the Rules

Committee

FROM

Sandra F. Haines, Esq.,

Reporter

DATE

September 1, 2015

SUBJECT

(1) Proposed Rule 19-753

(2) “Relation back” Issue

The Style Subcommittee observed that the

Rules in proposed new Title 19 contain

numerous inconsistent provisions pertaining

-102-

to notices given by the Clerk of the Court of

Appeals when an attorney has been suspended,

disbarred, reinstated, decertified, or

recertified. The Style Subcommittee

suggested that there be one Rule governing

all such notices and that, as applicable,

other Rules in Title 19 contain a provision

requiring the Clerk to comply with that Rule.

Proposed new Rule 19-753 is recommended

by the Attorneys and Judges Subcommittee to

implement that proposal.

The overarching philosophy of Rule 19753 is that, for the protection of the

public, whenever an attorney becomes

ineligible to practice law, notice of the

ineligibility should be promptly and widely

disseminated. When the attorney is permitted

to practice again, prompt notice should be

given to all recipients of the prior notice.

In the course of the Attorneys and

Judges Subcommittee’s consideration of Rule

19-753, two additional issues arose:

(1) Should Rule 19-753 also include

notification of an injunction issued by a

circuit court judge under the Title 19

equivalent of current Rule 16-776, even

though the injunction is not an order of the

Court of Appeals?

(2) In conjunction with the

Subcommittee’s recommendation that

notification of an attorney’s decertification

for failure to file an IOLTA or pro bono

reporting form be included in Rule 19-753,

the Subcommittee discussed the issue of

whether there should be a “relation back”

provision included in Title 19 so that any

actions taken by a recertified attorney

during the time the attorney was decertified

would not be considered the unauthorized

practice of law. The Subcommittee was evenly

split on this question and requests guidance

from the full Committee.

SFH:cdc

-103-

MARYLAND RULES OF PROCEDURE

TITLE 19 - ATTORNEYS

CHAPTER 700 - DISCIPLINE, INACTIVE STATUS,

RESIGNATION

Rule 19-753. NOTICE OF DUTY OF CLERK OF

COURT OF APPEALS UPON ATTORNEY’S SUSPENSION,

TERMINATION, OR REINSTATEMENT

(a)

(1)

Striking Name of Attorney

Upon the entry of an Order of the

Court of Appeals suspending, or terminating,

or reinstating an attorney’s authority to

practice law in this State, including a

suspension or reinstatement or reinstatement

pursuant to except an Order of

Decertification or Recertification pursuant

to Rule 19-409 or 19-503 or a suspension

pursuant to Rule 19-606 [19-215, 19-216, or

19-217] the Clerk of the Court of Appeals

shall (1) strike the name of the attorney

from the register of attorneys maintained by

the Clerk.

(2)

Replacing Name of Attorney

Upon the entry of an Order of the

Court of Appeals reinstating an attorney’s

authority to practice law, the Clerk shall

replace the name of the attorney on the

the Order.

(b)

Notice

Upon the entry of an order of the

Court of Appeals suspending, terminating, or

reinstating an attorney’s authority to

practice law in this State, including a

suspension or reinstatement pursuant to an

Order of Decertification or Recertification

under Rule 19-409 or 19-503 or a suspension

or reinstatement under Rule 19-606, the Clerk

shall:

-104-

(2) (1) send a copy of the order to the

attorney;

(3) (2) post notice of the order on the

Judiciary website; and

(4) (3) send notice of the order to:

(A) the Clerk of the Court of Special

Appeals;

(B) the Clerk of each Circuit Court;

Court;

(D) the Clerk of the United States

Supreme Court;

(E) the Clerk of the U.S. Court of

Appeals for the Fourth Circuit;

(F) the Clerk of the U.S. District

Court for the District of Maryland;

(G) the Register of Wills for each

county;

(H) the State Court Administrator;

(I) the trustees of the Client

Protection Fund;

(J) the Office of Administrative

Hearings; and

(K) unless the suspension, termination,

or reinstatement is solely pursuant to Rule

[19-215, 19-216, or 19-217]:

(i) the National Lawyer Regulatory

Data Bank of the American Bar Association;

and

(ii) the disciplinary authority of

every other jurisdiction in which the Clerk

knows the attorney is admitted to practice.

(b) (c)

Notice Upon Request

In addition to the persons listed in

subsection (a)(4) (b)(3) of this Rule, the

-105-

Clerk may send notice of the order to other

persons who have requested such notice.

Form of Notice

The Clerk may send the notice under

subsection (a)(4) (b)(3) of this Rule in

electronic or paper form.

Source: This Rule is new.

Mr. Frederick said that the memorandum from the Reporter

pertaining to Rule 19-753 raises an interesting question.

The

changes to the Rule are not controversial and essentially address

the question of whom the Clerk of the Court of Appeals is

required to inform if an attorney’s privilege to practice law is

in some way inhibited.

The question raised in the Attorneys and

Judges Subcommittee that drew a split was what are the

consequences to the client for an act made by an attorney, while

the attorney’s privilege to practice law was inhibited and then

restored.

Mr. Frederick said that he would give the Committee some

examples of this situation.

When an attorney changes his or her

address, the attorney needs to notify two separate entities.

One is the Court of Appeals of Maryland, and one is the Client

Protection Fund.

If an attorney only notifies one out of the

two, this is a problem.

notification.

of Appeals.

Not everyone knows about the dual

In many cases, the attorneys will notify the Court

The problem is that the Client Protection Fund sends

the bills for the money that has to be paid to the Fund.

It also

sends the questionnaire pertaining to Interest on Lawyers’ Trust

Accounts (“IOLTA”) and the questionnaire pertaining to the

-106-

attorney’s pro bono activities based on the addresses that the

Fund has.

If a young attorney leaves a law firm on bad terms,

and the firm throws away that attorney’s mail, the young attorney

being so new may not realize that he or she has not gotten any

bills from the Fund, or the law firm had always paid those bills

for the young attorney, so the attorney did not even know that

these bills were being sent to him or her.

The young attorney’s

privilege to practice law is suspended.

Mr. Frederick noted that this is not a difficult problem to

correct.

The attorney pays the money that is owed, including the

interest accrued, files a petition, and on the next Thursday, the

Clerk of the Court either presents the petition to the senior

Judge or has the authority from the senior Judge to reinstate the

attorney and restore the attorney to the practice of law.

However, if the attorney who had been unknowingly suspended from

the practice of law files a complaint in the Circuit Court for

Montgomery County on the last day before the statute of

limitations runs, the defense attorney may move to strike the

complaint.

The question is whether some kind of retroactivity

would be available for first-time miscreants who are suspended

for other than a violation under section (c) of Rule 8.4,

Misconduct.

If an attorney had been through this previously, the

attorney would have no excuse if it happened again.

However,

should the position be that everyone is supposed to know and

follow the Rules?

Judge Mosley hypothesized the same situation, but instead of

-107-

the attorney being in a civil case, it is a criminal case, and

the judge sentences the miscreant attorney’s client to the

Department of Corrections.

Mr. Frederick responded that this is

another example of what has happened.

that are prepared.

Another example is deeds

Deeds are self-correcting, but they self-

correct in six months, so for 179 days, if something odd happens,

it could cause a problem.

Mr. Frederick expressed the view that

this Rule is more for the protection of the public than the

attorney, although the cases that he had seen almost always had

been attorneys who were new to the practice of law and who got

caught in snags between law firms that had either fired the

attorney or were angry at the attorney for leaving the law firm.

This does not happen if the firm is of a higher caliber or if the

attorney uses his or her home address when the attorney

originally registers unless the attorney has moved.

pointed out by Judge Mosley is a real one.

The problem

A whole series of bad

results could happen to the client.

The Chair said that there are different scenarios in which

an attorney’s authority to practice law can be suspended or

terminated.

One scenario involves a case of pure discipline of

the attorney that goes to the Attorney Grievance Commission

(“AGC”).

One scenario is not paying the necessary money to the

Client Protection Fund or not reporting one’s Social Security

number.

Ms. Bessie Decker, Clerk of the Court of Appeals, had

told the Chair that in a case that goes through the AGC where the

attorney is suspended or disbarred, Ms. Decker strikes the name

-108-

from the registry of attorneys.

She said that she does not

actually erase the name; she puts a red circle around it, noting

that the person is disbarred or suspended.

for Client Protection Fund suspensions.

She does not do this

She sends a notice.

She

strikes the attorney’s name or puts it back only for cases that

have gone through the AGC.

If the attorney has not paid his or

her Client Protection Fund dues, Rule 16-811.6, Enforcement of

Obligations, provides that the attorn

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.