Posted on July 15, 2023 in Family Law

The Child Support Administration is required by law to review the Child Support Guidelines every 4 years to ensure that application of the Child Support Guidelines results in appropriate child support awards. The Child Support Administration must report its findings and recommendations to the General Assembly. During the 2020 Legislative Session, the General Assembly passed changes to Maryland’s child support laws, some of which took effect on July 1, 2022. One year later, this post discusses the changes to Maryland’s child support laws and the impact of these developments.

Changes to the Child Support Guidelines

Effective July 1, 2022, the schedule of basic child support obligations increased for parents with a combined adjusted actual income greater than $19,200 per year. This change recognizes that the costs of raising children have increased.

Prior to July 1, 2022, the Child Support Guidelines provided a schedule of basic child support obligations for parents with a combined adjusted actual income between $100 and $15,000 per month. Under the old version of the statute, the court was authorized to use its discretion to set the amount of child support when the combined adjusted actual income of the parents exceeded $15,000 per month. For parents with a combined adjusted actual income between $100 and $1,200 per month, the old version of the statute provided a basic child support obligation of $20 to $150 per month, based on resources and living expenses of the obligor and the number of children due support.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 12, 2023 in Divorce

If you are considering filing for divorce in Maryland, your filing must include the grounds, or basis, for the divorce. Beginning this fall, selecting the grounds when filing for divorce will become an easier determination. During the 2023 Legislative Session, the General Assembly passed bills eliminating limited divorce in Maryland and changing the grounds available for an absolute divorce. On May 16, 2023, Governor Moore signed Senate Bill 36,which was cross-filed with House Bill 14, into law. The new version of Md. Code, Family Law § 7-103 will become effective on October 1, 2023, and will apply to all divorce cases filed on or after that date.

Current Law through September 20, 2023

Maryland law currently provides for two different types of divorce: limited divorce and absolute divorce. An absolute divorce is a permanent end to the marriage. An absolute divorce severs all legal ties between the parties and allows the parties to resume use of a former name or remarry if they choose. In contrast, a limited divorce does not end the marriage. A limited divorce allows a person who does not satisfy the grounds for absolute divorce and cannot reach an agreement with their spouse to ask the court to order temporary relief regarding child custody, child support, alimony, and use of real or personal property. Because a limited divorce is not a permanent end to the marriage, the court may revoke a limited divorce at any time if both spouses jointly request that the limited divorce be revoked. The differences between these two types of divorce and the grounds for each are explained in more detail in Common Questions about Divorce in Maryland.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 07, 2023 in Divorce

Use and possession applies to the family home and family use personal property.

What is considered the "family home"?

In Maryland, the "family home" is statutorily defined as real property in the State that was (1) used as the principal residence of the parties when they lived together, (2) is owned or leased by one or both of the parties at the time of the divorce proceeding, and (3) is being used or will be used as a principal residence by one or both of the parties and a child.

A "family home" does not include real property that was (1) acquired before marriage, (2) acquired by inheritance or gift from a third party, or (3) excluded by a valid agreement.

What is considered "family use personal property"?

The term "family use personal property" is also statutorily defined in Maryland and refers to anything tangible that is used primarily for family purposes.  It is limited to only property that was acquired during the marriage of the parties.  Examples of family use personal property include cars, furniture and furnishings, household appliances, and electronics.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on July 03, 2023 in Divorce

In Maryland

Ideally, parties in a divorce proceeding work cooperatively to determine and divide their marital real property and reduce the terms to what will become a portion of a written marital settlement agreement. By proceeding in this fashion, the parties can agree on who has title to the real property owned, who will retain the title to real property, and then work to effectuate the transfer or retention of the same.  Even if one party has already formally instituted divorce proceedings in a Maryland court, it is important to remember that the possibility of reaching an agreement is always available and can often be the best vehicle for a quicker and more affordable way to a final divorce.

If an amicable resolution is not a possibility, then the parties will leave the fate of their real property to a Maryland court.  If a piece of real property is both marital and titled jointly a court can order use and possession (depending on custody of minor children), order the property to be sold or pursuant to the Maryland Annotated Code, Family Law § 8-205:

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 27, 2023 in Divorce

Who are the parties in a Peace Order proceeding?

In a Peace Order proceeding, the person who filed a Petition for Peace Order is called the “Petitioner,” and the person against whom the Petition was filed is called the “Respondent.”

What acts can be grounds for a Peace Order in Maryland?

A person can file a Petition for a Peace Order based on any of the following acts:

• An act that causes serious bodily harm;
• An act that places the Petitioner or Petitioner’s employee in fear of imminent serious bodily harm;
• Assault in any degree;
• False imprisonment;
• Harassment;
• Stalking;
• Trespass;
• Malicious destruction of property;
• Misuse of telephone facilities and equipment;
• Misuse of electronic communication or interactive computer service;
• Revenge porn; or
• Visual surveillance.

 Are Peace Order records open to the public?

In Maryland, most court records are open to the public. Records of Peace Order proceedings are included among the types of records that are open to the public.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 22, 2023 in Divorce

Who are the parties in a Protective Order proceeding?

In a Protective Order proceeding, the person who filed a Petition for Protective Order is called the “Petitioner,” and the person against whom the Petition was filed is called the “Respondent.”

What are the acts of abuse that can be grounds for a Protective Order in Maryland?

As defined in the Protective Order statute, “abuse” means any of the following acts:

• An act that causes serious bodily harm;
• An act that places a person eligible for relief in fear of imminent serious bodily harm;
• Assault in any degree;
• Rape or sexual offense;
• Attempted rape or sexual offense;
• False imprisonment;
• Stalking; or
• Revenge porn.

Are Protective Order records open to the public?

In Maryland, most court records are open to the public. Records of Protective Order proceedings are included among the types of records that are open to the public.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 30, 2023 in Criminal Defense

What is Your Right to Remain Silent?

Most people are familiar with Miranda warnings from TV police procedurals and movies: you have the right to remain silent, any statement you make may be used against you, and you have the right to an attorney. In practice however, many people don’t invoke their right to silence or to an attorney. They may think that refusing to speak to police makes them look guilty, or simply wish to assist law enforcement with their investigations. Additionally, police are allowed to lie about the evidence against you, and can withhold information that, if revealed, might cause the interviewee to invoke their right to remain silent. Thus, speaking to the police without an attorney creates a very real risk that a person, even an innocent person, may unwittingly make incriminating statements to police.

The recent news coverage of the October 2021 shooting on the "Rust" film illustrates this point. Alec Baldwin, a wealthy, A-list celebrity, presumably with access to world-class lawyers, waived his Miranda rights and spoke to police without an attorney just hours after the gun he was holding discharged, killing one person, and injuring another. Baldwin’s response makes sense – he had just witnessed a terrible accident, and he wanted to help police understand what happened. For approximately one hour Baldwin spoke to police without an attorney present, describing details of the incident and on set gun protocols. He was not informed until the end of the interview that one of the victims had died. With involuntary manslaughter charges against Baldwin announced just last week, it isn’t yet clear what, if any, role Baldwin’s statement will play in the prosecutor’s case. However, the admissions he made during his police interview will likely foreclose defense strategies that may have otherwise been available to his attorneys.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on April 12, 2021 in Business Counseling, Litigation & Transactions

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.

Recently, the Court of Appeals issued an opinion that provides yet more useful guidance for fiduciaries.  In United Bank v. Richard Buckingham, et al., the Court answered the following two certified questions from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland: (1) whether changing beneficiaries on a life insurance policy constitutes a conveyance under the Maryland Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act; and (2) whether a guardian of property has the authority to change beneficiaries for a life insurance policy of the ward.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on March 29, 2021 in Business Counseling, Litigation & Transactions

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.

Single member LLCs, partnerships and S corporations are the most likely beneficiaries of the pass-through election and they should carefully consider their options.  C corporations and Schedule C taxpayers that are ineligible for taxation at the entity level should seek counsel to determine if restructuring may be beneficial.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 19, 2021 in Business Counseling, Litigation & Transactions

WeWork.  WeLitigate.

We Holdings LLC and We Company (collectively “WeWork”) is a privately held company that leases office space on a short-term basis.  Following a failed IPO in 2019, the company was faced with a liquidity crisis.  In response, the board of directors formed a special committee (the “Special Committee”) to evaluate strategic alternatives to the IPO and to negotiate a potential transaction to save the company.  The Special Committee was comprised of two directors.  Together, the two Special Committee members and entities affiliated with them held over 34 million shares of WeWork.

On October 22, 2019, the Special Committee entered into a Master Transaction Agreement with Softbank Group (“SBG”) which contemplated a tender offer, equity financing, and debt financing.  On November 22, 2019, SBG made a tender offer to purchase shares from WeWork.  Issues arose shortly thereafter and on April 1, 2020, SBG terminated the tender offer.  On April 7, 2020, at the direction of the Special Committee, WeWork filed suit against SBG.  WeWork’s co-founder, Adam Neumann, also filed suit.  The suits were consolidated by the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the “Court”) into In re WeWork Litigation (“WeWork”).

Continue Reading ››