Maryland’s Supreme Court will hear arguments on Friday regarding the state’s digital advertising tax, which targets companies like Amazon, Google, and Facebook. The tax applies to gross revenue from digital ads earned by companies with over $100 million in annual revenue.

The Act imposes a tax on companies with over $100 million in global annual gross revenue from digital ads earned in Maryland, ranging from 2.5% to 10%. Plaintiffs challenged the Act, alleging violations of the Commerce Clause, First Amendment, and preemption by the Internet Tax Freedom Act.

Untitled-design-4-1024x576
Anne Arundel County Circuit Judge Alison L. Asti’s ruled that the online tax contravenes the federal Internet Tax Freedom Act’s ban on discriminatory taxes on online services, given that Maryland does not impose a similar tax on non-digital advertising. The Circuit Court, in its ruling, stated that digital advertising is akin to traditional advertising and, as a result, Maryland’s DAT is discriminatory under the ITFA.  The Comptroller has appealed, arguing that this ruling ignores substantial and fundamental distinctions between the operations of digital advertising platforms and traditional advertising methods.

If you are overwhelmed by debt, filing bankruptcy is often the best possible solution. A successful bankruptcy can wipe out all of your unsecured debt and give you a fresh start financially. Unfortunately, the process of filing for bankruptcy is not free. Between attorney’s fees and court filing fees bankruptcy can be pretty expensive, which is a major concern for people who are already under financial stress.

In this post, we will look at how much it can cost to file for bankruptcy in Maryland. We will look at the going rate currently charged by Maryland bankruptcy attorneys and the filing fees for both Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcy.

Court Filing Fees for Bankruptcy

This post was originally written in 2008.  We do not know of any active Chantix suicide lawsuits that are pending in 2023.

What the Chantix Suicide Lawsuits Were About

Chantix (varenicline) is a prescription medication developed by Pfizer to help people quit smoking. It works by reducing nicotine cravings and blocking the pleasurable effects of smoking. It worked well and Pfizer was printing money from the sales of the drug.  However, since its approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2006, Chantix was been linked to several serious side effects, including suicidal thoughts and behaviors, depression, and other neuropsychiatric issues.

This week, the Maryland Appellate Court issued an unreported opinion in Montgomery Mall Condo, LLC vs. Peking Palace Corp.  We usually do not summarize unreported opinions because you technically cannot cite unreported opinions.  But that line is getting more blurred in 2023. This case addresses the application of res judicata and collateral estoppel doctrines in a case, which are issues of interest to Maryland personal injury lawyers.  This case involves a breach of lease and a breach of guaranty claim but the doctrines are applied with equal force in injury cases. This case also underscores that while many people did well economically during the COVID pandemic, some businesses were destroyed.

Facts of Montgomery Mall Condo, LLC vs. Peking Palace Corp

Montgomery Mall, a really great mall back in the day, entered into a lease agreement with Peking Palace, a restaurant business owned by Liu. As part of the agreement, Liu personally guaranteed the full payment and performance of Peking Palace’s obligations under the lease.

Today, The Maryland Appellate Court decided Love v. State, a case that presents interesting issues of how courts deal with lesser included offenses.

Focus of the Appeal

The primary focus of this appeal is the legal concept of a lesser included offense. Everyone who has watched television or read about criminal trials in a newspaper understands the basic idea.  But what does it really mean, and how does the law deal with this concept.  In this case, the court pinpoints the two critical issues from the start:  1) “What exactly is a lesser included offense?” and 2) “Can a lesser included offense exist in a trial even if it has not been explicitly and independently charged?” A functional question also arises: “How should a trial judge handle a lesser included offense that has not been explicitly and independently charged when submitting issues to the jury for their determination?”

The Maryland Appellate Court decided in the Matter of Mark McCloy, a handgun permit case.

In 1999, Mark McCloy pleaded guilty to witness tampering in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. He was sentenced to six months of home detention and five years of probation.

In 2015, McCloy applied for a Maryland Handgun Qualification License (HQL). The Maryland State Police (MSP) approved his application. McCloy used this license to purchase several firearms. When he applied for a renewal of his HQL in 2021, police did another background check and discovered his 1999 conviction. The MSP sent McCloy a letter informing him of the permit denial and his right to appeal the decision.

According to a recent Jury Verdict Research analysis, based on plaintiffs’ verdicts nationally over the last ten years, the overall median award for foot injuries is $98,583. Multiple fractures to the same foot increase the median to $144,000. In foot injury cases where both feet are fractured, the median rises to $296,940.

Another Jury Verdict Research study found that 39% of the foot injury cases that go to verdict involved auto, truck, or motorcycle accidents. In fact, a full 11% of these injuries were in motorcycle accident cases. This is incredibly high given the number of driver miles on a motorcycle versus the number logged in cars and trucks. Then again, your risk of dying in a motor vehicle accident is 28 times more likely if you are riding a sports bike than if you are enjoying the comforts of a car or truck. (The lesson, as always: don’t ride a motorcycle.)

foot injury settlements
Overall, according to one study, the average (as opposed to the median) foot injury award was $703,703. Thirteen percent of foot injury awards were in excess of $1 million.

Last month, the Maryland Appellate Court involved an interesting landlord-tenant dispute involving the Maryland Security Deposit Act.

Security Deposit Law in Maryland

Before we get to the case, let’s talk about security deposits in Maryland. Security deposit laws in the state of Maryland play a crucial role in protecting the rights and interests of both landlords and tenants.

The Maryland Supreme Court today affirmed the denial of a Petition for Post-Conviction DNA Testing filed by a person convicted of several criminal offenses, including murder. The petitioner had requested DNA testing of scientific identification evidence related to their conviction, but the court found that the petitioner had not met the two conditions required by the Post-Conviction DNA Testing Statute.

Facts of Satterfield v. State

A man drove to Dundalk to pick up his daughter from her grandparents’ home. As he unlocked the back door to enter the home, he was attacked from behind by a person who grabbed him around the throat. The attacker had a shirt pulled over their face, but the victim described them as having big arms. Two other men wearing Yankees baseball caps and armed joined the attacker in the alley, where they demanded money from the victim, beat him, took $3,000 from him, and asked for more money.

Financial difficulties can be overwhelming. Considering bankruptcy is a challenging decision. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the available bankruptcy options in Maryland, the processes involved, and the implications of each choice. Our goal is to equip you with the knowledge necessary to make an informed decision about your financial future to find a path to get back to where you should be.

Bankruptcy in Maryland