Appellate

Published on: May 24, 2024

Silverman Thompson Scores Remand in Third Circuit that Revives Client’s Complaint Against Business Rival for Tortious Interference

In fall 2021, Silverman Thompson filed suit in federal court in Pennsylvania on behalf of a provider of inmate communication services for prisons. The suit alleged that just as Silverman Thompson’s client was about to finalize a contract with a county prison, the incumbent service provider and business rival used illegal, anti-competitive tactics to scuttle the deal and secure a renewal of its contract with the prison. After extensive preliminary motions practice, the district court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim, but gave Silverman Thompson’s client the opportunity to amend. Confident in its claims as drafted by Silverman Thompson, the client elected to stand on the complaint and appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

After briefing and oral argument in the Third Circuit led by Silverman Thompson attorneys, the client’s choice was vindicated in December 2023 when the appeals court issued an opinion vacating the dismissal and remanding for further proceedings in the district court to more fully evaluate whether the complaint stated claims under Pennsylvania common law.

On remand, the district court re-examined whether the complaint adequately alleged “independently actionable conduct” by the business rival sufficient to state a claim for tortious interference. Finding that the complaint had adequately alleged defamation of Silverman Thompson’s client as a means of preventing it from getting the contract, the court denied the motion to dismiss the tortious interference claim. The case will now go forward to discovery.

Continue reading →

Published on: April 9, 2024

How to File an Appeal in Maryland State Court ─ Circuit Court

By Todd Hesel

You’ve just lost your case in a Maryland trial court and want to appeal – how do you do it? For the purpose of this article, we’ll assume your case is in a Maryland circuit court (different rules may apply if you’re in the district court). We’ll also assume your case allows a direct appeal; most, but not all, cases are of this type. We’ll further assume you want to exercise your right of appeal to Maryland’s intermediate appellate court, called the Appellate Court of Maryland. In very limited cases, there may be a right of direct appeal to the Supreme Court of Maryland. A litigant can also try to skip the intermediate appellate court and go straight to the Supreme Court, but that’s rare. These two situations are beyond the scope of this article.

How to Appeal a Circuit Court Decision in Maryland

With those qualifications out of the way, we can get down to business. Fortunately for lawyers and litigants, filing an appeal is relatively easy. Maryland Rule 8-201 states that, subject to an exception not addressed here, “the only method of securing review by the Appellate Court is by the filing of a notice of appeal within the time prescribed in Rule 8-202.” So, what’s a notice of appeal? It’s a simple document that informs the lower court of a party’s intention to appeal. Rule 8-201 states that “[i]t is sufficient that the notice be substantially in the following form”:

Continue reading →

Published on: August 31, 2020

The Waiting Was the Hardest Part: The Court of Appeals Finally Makes Clear that a Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Exists Under Maryland Law

By William Sinclair

On July 14, 2020, the Maryland Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Plank v. Cherneski, (Misc. No. 3, Sept. Term 2019) (July 14, 2020), which finally harmonized Maryland case law as to the existence of a standalone “breach of fiduciary duty” claim. The Court held that such a claim exists under Maryland law and that its elements are: “(1) the existence of a fiduciary relationship; (2) breach of the duty owed by the fiduciary to the beneficiary; and (3) harm to the beneficiary.” The Court stressed that the nature of the fiduciary relationship and available remedies are fact specific and considered on a case-by case basis. “If a plaintiff describes a fiduciary relationship, identifies a breach, and requests a remedy recognized by statute, contract, or common law applicable to the specific type of fiduciary relationship and the specific breach alleged, a court should permit the count to proceed.” The remedy available depends on the specific fiduciary relationship at issue.

Running Down a Dream: The Facts and Procedural History

In Plank, the defendant James Cherneski was “a former professional soccer player who invented and patented a non-slip athletic sock.” In April 2011, together with Sanford Fisher and Jeff Ring, Mr. Cherneski established Trusox, LLC to produce and distribute the patented sock. In October 2013, the plaintiff William H. Plank, II acquired a 20% membership interest in Trusox by investing $1.5 million in the company, leaving Cherneski with a 65% membership interest, and Fisher and Ring each owning 7.5% of the company. In late 2015, minority members of the company became dissatisfied with Cherneski’s management of Trusox, and in June 2016, “Messrs. Fisher and Plank, filed an action against Mr. Cherneski and Trusox, alleging, among other things, that Mr. Cherneski was violating the Operating Agreement, had engaged in unlawful conduct related to investors and employees, and had breached contractual and fiduciary duties.” The complaint alleged nine causes of action, one of which, as relevant hereto, was breach of fiduciary duty.

Continue reading →

Published on: February 8, 2016

Spoliation – The oft mispronounced Rule of Evidence that Every Business Person Needs to Know

By William Sinclair

The Court of Special Appeals of Maryland issued an opinion this week that serves as a reminder that a party’s simple failure to preserve evidence can sometimes snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The case (and link) is Cumberland Insurance Group v. Delmarva Power.
Continue reading →

Published on: May 30, 2015

Won’t Get Fooled Again: Changes to Appellate Font and Spacing Rules

By William Sinclair

We all know the little tricks to stuffing the most content into the allotted number of pages of your appellate brief (currently 50 for the Court of Appeals and 35 for the Court of Special Appeals) – decreasing the line spacing, decreasing the margins, decreasing the kerning, decreasing the height of the text, etc. Well, you’re not fooling anybody: As noted by the Maryland Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure in its 187th Report, “Appellate judges, in Maryland and elsewhere, are regrettably familiar with those tactics and legitimately complain about them.” The Committee has finally had enough, and is urging the Court of Appeals to amend the Maryland Rules to combat the problem.
Continue reading →

Published on: April 22, 2015

Time Is On (Your) Side: A Proposed Change to Maryland Appellate Rule 8-412(c)

By William Sinclair

As the appellant in the Maryland appellate courts, when should you file your brief? Currently, it’s within 40 days after the clerk notifies you that the court has filed the record. Sounds easy enough, except the current Maryland Rules don’t actually require the clerk to send such a notice. In fixing that little problem, however, the Rules Committee is considering working in a smidge more time for practitioners to get their briefs in.
Continue reading →