In a significant ruling, the court confirmed the legality of a geofence warrant used by county police to investigate the theft of farm equipment. Despite objections regarding its specificity and probable cause, the warrant was found to adhere to the Fourth Amendment, highlighting the delicate balance between using investigative tools and protecting privacy rights.
Michael Berman looks at whether, how and for what purpose unreported opinions can be cited in the state of Maryland court system. He previews the Respondent’s Brief in Mooney v. State, No. 0032, Sept. Term, 2023.
Learn how a federal district court changed the forum for a motion to quash a subpoena from the district where compliance is required to the district where the action is pending.
In an employment case, an untimely spoliation motion was denied in Smith v. Wormuth. Find out why courts are unsympathetic to motions that try to reargue substantive issues under the guise of spoliation and why it's important to understand the timing for filing these motions.
Michael Berman reports that Maryland is on the brink of enhancing online data privacy for its residents with the proposed Maryland Online Data Privacy Act of 2024, now under the legislative microscope as HB0567 and SB0541. In a state known for its balanced approach, as Senate President Bill Ferguson puts it, Maryland aims to learn from others, striking a harmony between innovation and privacy. This proposed legislation is not just another bill; it's a reflection of Maryland's commitment to consumer protection in the digital age. By establishing a comprehensive regulatory framework for online and biometric data, the bill targets a meaningful impact on small businesses, defining clear roles for data controllers and processors. It's about granting Maryland residents the power to control their personal data, from deletion rights to opting out of targeted advertising, all while ensuring that the digital ecosystem's integrity remains uncompromised. As Maryland looks to others for inspiration, it also sets a precedent, joining a growing trend of states advocating for stronger data privacy laws.
The US District Court of Maryland has several procedures to expedite discovery disputes.
The Supreme Court of Maryland adopted an amendment to Maryland Rule 2-433, which governs sanctions in Maryland state courts. Amended Maryland Rule 2-433(b) abandons the shallow “safe harbor” rule.
The proposed rule, posted in the 219th Report of the Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure would have tracked the federal sanctions rule, Fed.R.Civ.P. 37(e). The Supreme Court did not follow that approach; however, it did adopt “reasonable anticipation” of litigation as the event triggering the common-law duty to preserve.