Maryland Business Litigation Lawyer BlogNew Maryland Landlord-Tenant Law Effective October 1, 2023
Published on:
Summary of Recent Changes to Maryland Employment Law
Employers must be aware of, and revise their employment-related documents to reflect, the recent changes to Maryland and federal law. One of a Company’s most powerful way to deter future litigation is by ensuring that its agreements, handbooks, and policies are legally compliant.
Published on:
New Maryland Landlord-Tenant Law Effective October 1, 2023
New Maryland Landlord-Tenant Law Effective October 1, 2023
Published on:
New Maryland Landlord-Tenant Law Effective October 1, 2023
Calling Law Enforcement or Emergency Services No Longer Grounds for Termination
Published on:
New Maryland Landlord-Tenant Law Effective June 1, 2023
Pet Protections During Evictions
Published on:
What Do I Need To Do To File a Failure to Pay Rent Case in Baltimore City?
What do I need to do to file a Failure to Pay Rent Case in Baltimore City? Baltimore City landlords must comply with registration, inspection, and licensing requirements before initiating Nonpayment of Rent actions in rent court.
Published on:
Understanding The Limits of Your Fiduciary Powers – United Bank v. Buckingham
Being appointed an agent under a financial power of attorney, or as a Court-appointed guardian, comes with a significant delegation of authority. However, it is important to know that such delegation of power is not without limits. For example, an agent can only exercise powers specifically granted under the power of attorney document. And, in the case of a guardianship, the guardian is obligated to periodically account for the Court of their efforts on behalf of the ward. And, of course, a fiduciary under either scenario cannot abuse their power or use their power unlawfully.
Published on:
Interesting Tax Option for Maryland Entities
After the enactment of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in 2017, the limitation on an individual’s ability to itemize tax deductions resulted in higher income tax for many Maryland business owners. On May 8, 2020, Maryland enacted legislation allowing pass through entities (primarily LLCs, partnerships and S corporations) to elect to pay tax on a member’s distributive share at the entity level. As a result, the taxable gross income of individuals receiving distributive shares of the entities net income is less. In addition, the election creates a federal income tax deduction for the business that is not subject to the $10,000 itemized deduction limit established by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
Published on:
WeWork. WeLitigate.
WeWork. WeLitigate.
Published on:
The Statutory Right to Purchase Shareholder Stock in the Dissolution of a Close Corporation
The Statutory Right to Purchase Shareholder Stock in the Dissolution of a Close Corporation
Published on:
Weird Science: Maryland’s New Test for the Admissibility of Expert Testimony
WEIRD SCIENCE: MARYLAND’S NEW TEST FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF EXPERT TESTIMONY.
Published on:
The Waiting Was the Hardest Part: The Court of Appeals Finally Makes Clear that a Breach of Fiduciary Duty Claim Exists Under Maryland Law
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.
Published on:
Five Most Common Legal Pitfalls for Marketing Entrepreneurs
Marketing entrepreneurs’ greatest strengths are their creativity and vision. It is this vision that drives many to take the leap to start their own agency/consultancy or join a start-up venture to market an exciting new product. Unfortunately, most marketers are not well-versed in the intricate legal issues involved with starting a business. This can lead to a variety of problems, especially as the venture begins to become successful. A common misconception is that good legal advice is often too expensive for the early stages of a business venture. This is not the case – provided the right counsel is selected. To ensure the success of any new venture, marketers should take steps to avoid the following common pitfalls:
Published on:
Securities Litigation Update: Cyan V. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund
In the midst of the Great Depression, Congress enacted two laws to shore up practices that were considered to have led in part to the Market Crash of 1929: the Securities Act of 1933 (“1933 Act”), which governs initial securities offerings; and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (“1934 Act”), which governs all subsequent trading. The 1933 Act permits both state and federal courts to hear claims brought under that Act, and bars defendants from removing such claims to federal court. The 1934 Act, however, grants federal court exclusive jurisdiction to hear claims brought under that Act.
Published on:
Silverman Thompson’s Ned Parent Publishes Article on Undue Influence in MSBA Bar Bulletin
Ned Parent, a member of Silverman Thompson’s Business Litigation Group, published an article in the September 2017 issue of the Maryland State Bar Association’s “Bar Bulletin” publication. Mr. Parent’s article discussed the “undue influence” standard used in Caveat proceedings (the formal term used for proceedings challenging the validity of a Will). Specifically, the article discussed the challenges in successfully proving undue influence in such proceedings, and suggested possible solutions to address those challenges.