A Litigation Budget is Essential. Run the Numbers With Us.

 

Filing or defending a lawsuit in Maryland's state or federal courts costs money. Don't go in blind, but work closely with your attorney to formulate a budget. We suggest this simple and direct approach:

1. Comprehensive Case Assessment:

• Begin by conducting a thorough assessment of your case. Collaborate closely with Young & Valkenet to identify the key legal issues, potential challenges, and the overall scope of the litigation. Understanding the intricacies of your case upfront allows for more accurate budgeting and helps anticipate potential hurdles.

2. Strategic Planning with Young & Valkenet:

• Leverage the extensive courtroom experience of Young & Valkenet to strategize for potential twists and turns in your litigation. Drawing on nearly 40 years of experience, they can often foresee the opposition's likely moves and develop preemptive strategies. By working closely with your legal team to plan for various scenarios, you can mitigate unforeseen challenges and streamline the litigation process, ultimately saving both time and money.

3. Ongoing Communication and Adaptability:

• Establish clear lines of communication with Young & Valkenet throughout the litigation process. Regular updates on case developments and ongoing discussions about strategy adjustments are crucial. By staying informed and maintaining open channels, you can make timely decisions, adapt your litigation budget as needed, and ensure that your legal team remains responsive to the evolving dynamics of the case.

Engaging with Young & Valkenet not only brings decades of courtroom experience but also the ability to anticipate and navigate the uncertainties of litigation effectively. This proactive approach can result in substantial cost savings by minimizing the impact of unexpected challenges and streamlining the overall legal process.

Fill out the contact form and tell us how we can help!

www.youngandvalkenet.com

Baltimore City Real Estate - Get Yourself Involved! It's a New Game!

 In Baltimore City, some sellers may attempt to cut corners, hoping to offload a property with undisclosed issues. This could range from structural problems to zoning violations. To avoid falling victim to such tactics, partner with a trustworthy real estate professional who conducts thorough due diligence and safeguards your interests. Transparency and integrity should be non-negotiable in every real estate transaction.

In the dynamic landscape of Baltimore City real estate, knowledge is your greatest defense. By staying informed, working with reputable professionals, and conducting due diligence, buyers and sellers can navigate the intricacies of real estate transactions and safeguard their investments for a prosperous future.

Baltimore's Mayor and City Council is initiating bold plans to recapture and rehabilitate large parts of the City. Are you in? Looking to bring your idea to fruition?

Our Firm has been deeply involved in Baltimore's complicated real estate market for almost 40 years. Our team can untangle the most complex issue, getting you to your investment goals!

www.youngandvalkenet.com

Our companion brokerage can also help you list, sell, buy and close on your real estate projects.

www.valkenetrealestate.com

Mediation - the cure for pandemic induced court delay in civil disputes.

 Mediation is growing in popularity among Maryland  trial lawyers. Civil matters are particularly well-suited to mediation sessions, where settlement positions can be traded, discussed and finalized with the help of a neutral mediator. 

The case for mediation in civil matters has been made stronger by the current pandemic, and resulting delays in the Maryland trial courts. By way of example, this Firm concluded a four-day trial in a circuit court. The last argument was made in February, 2020, shortly before the successive shut downs and periods of restricted access.

The case was tried after almost two years of pretrial discovery and motions practice. The parties to the case were relieved when the trial concluded, anticipating a court decision that would permit them to move beyond the dispute, and to more productive business endeavors. 

That was twenty-two months ago. We continue to await a decision.

The disruption of normal court activities has been so complete that this case, and many others, remain in judicial limbo. No decision, for the plaintiff or defendant, means that the case is effectively on hold. And since neither party has won or lost, there are no appeals to be lodged, briefed or argued.

In a separate case, this Firm recently obtained judgment for our client in an uncontested case. That case was filed thirty-four months ago

Litigating in Overtime - How to "undo" a final judgment and reported decision.

The law exists to give us finality. Litigants seek final dispositions of their business disputes, whether by mediation, arbitration, trial or appeal. Future conduct is often guided by a final decision by a court. As a law firm, we work hard to achieve litigated outcomes that benefit our clients. Recently, our work lead to a reported decision from the Maryland Court of Special Appeals. We both won for our specific client, and obtained broad statements of law that would guide similar cases involving others. The case was done, except that we were not done with the case.

My client was sued in the Circuit Court for breach of an alleged contract. The Plaintiff demanded significant money damages. Our client prevailed in the trial court, persuading the judge that a trial was not necessary. Our client received a summary judgment.  On appeal, the Court of Special Appeals affirmed the trial court-- issuing a reported decision.

Reported decisions are important. They represent a small percentage of cases decided on appeal. A reported case becomes part of Maryland’s permanent body of judge-made law. A reported case goes beyond resolution of the dispute between those particular litigants. A reported decision guides the future conduct of all similarly situated persons in Maryland, until the case is over-ruled or the law is modified by yet another case. This is how Maryland’s common law grows and evolves.

Trial lawyers, like us, really do enjoy winning. And we enjoy it just a bit more when the win also results in a reported decision.

In our recent case, however, our opponent filed a timely motion for reconsideration to the Court of Special Appeals, tolling the issuance of the Court’s mandate.  While the motion was pending, and before an opposition was due, counsel for the losing party made a settlement offer that would greatly benefit our client. But to accept the offer would require that we work with the other side to vacate a reported decision.

How does that work? My client was eager to accept the offer -- who wouldn’t want a check, despite being sued?  But the hangup, I thought, was: how do you vacate a reported decision?

The answer, it turns out, lies in Md. R. 17-404(f), which permits the Court plenary authority to dispose of cases that are resolved through the CoSA ADR division.  And so, with the assistance of the director of the CoSA ADR division, we submitted a consent order which was vetted and approved by the Chief Judge.  Within a matter of days, a consent order was issued by the CoSA vacating the reported decision, withdrawing the decision for reporting, and remanding the case with instructions for the Circuit Court to vacate its order and dismiss the case with prejudice.

Final judgment, then, need not impede a favorable settlement. A winner might do just a little better, and a loser might avert complete catastrophe, by continuing settlement negotiations right through the very end of a case.

Google is not your lawyer!

Justice can be yours.

It's a rebirth, a renaissance!

"Rest when you're weary. Refresh and renew yourself, your body, your mind, your spirit. Then get back to work."-- Ralph Marston

The day-to-day of law practice is non-stop. A law office has hundreds of "bosses," including clients, judges, and  court administrators. All are entitled to our best level of service. The rejuvenation of our office space reflects our desire to continue to better serve all of you.

After nine years in our space, walls were scuffed, carpets worn, and colors dulled. It was time to freshen up our space and slightly reconfigure a few rooms for increased efficiency and access.

The work is going smoothly because we have an existing back-bone of cloud services- our staff and attorneys can access all essential data remotely. Clients who need immediate access to their files can also utilize their client portal accounts.

We practice in the State and federal courts of Maryland and the District of Columbia. All of our federal court cases are immediately accessible through the court's on-line attorney access, and our clients have immediate access to the public on-line dockets. Similarly, both Maryland and D.C. courts have on-line facilities for filing, serving and review open cases.

Client and attorney meetings are being scheduled at the nearby Johns Hopkins Club and in shared conference space within our building. We remain fully accessible to all our clients and witnesses during the renovation!

The renovations should be done by early October. We look forward to your next visit, and appreciate your patience!

Pay when paid, or pay if paid? What's in your contract?

General contractors rely on others to complete their work on behalf of an owner, including masons, electricians, iron workers and countless suppliers of wood, steel and equipment. Payment by an owner to the general contractor then cascades like a waterfall to all who have put labor and materials into the project.

Except when it doesn't.

General contractors routinely include one of two types of payment provisions in contracts with sub-contractors and suppliers. The first is commonly called "pay-when-paid," and the second is called "pay-if-paid." Both clauses alter the traditional situation where a sub-contractor or materialman is entitled to immediate payment for delivery of work or product.

On May 24, 2018 Maryland's highest appellate court decided Young Electrical Contractors v. Dustin Construction, which provides an excellent summary of the difference between the two provisions. 

During the latter half of the twentieth century, general contractors began to include contingent payment provisions in their subcontracts. Although there apparently was no standard language, such a clause would typically provide that the general contractor was not obligated to pay the subcontractor until some specified number of days after the general contractor received payment under the prime contract from the owner of the project. Thus, for example, a window distributor that entered into a subcontract to supply windows for a project would not necessarily receive payment upon delivery of the windows, but would be required to await payment of the general contractor by the owner of the project

As is explained by the Court of Appeals, this "pay-when-paid" provision does not excuse the obligation to pay a sub-contractor, only the timing of the payment. And so a sub-contractor that has completed all its contract requirements might have to wait some time to receive payment. In the real world, extended delays put real companies and real employees out of work. This type of provision forces sub-contractors and suppliers to finance a project, to a certain extent.

A derivation of this clause says the sub-contractor or supplier will get paid if, and only if, the owner pays the general contractor. The "pay-if-paid" clause is a draconian provision (Draco was an ancient Greek politician who advocated that the most minor of infractions warranted the harshest punishment, usually death).  A small contractor that does a superlative job can go out of business if payment disputes among the general contractor and the owner do not resolve. It is not hard to imagine smaller  or marginally capitalized contractor having to withhold payroll for employees, miss loan payments, or simply go fishing.

Where our Nation's economic recovery is thin, it is even more important for a sub-contractor to avoid the uncertainty of "pay-if-paid." Some jobs are simply not worth that risk.

Do you know what's in your contract documents?

Maryland's Justice Reinvestment Act opens door to sentence reconsideration for many drug convicts.

With the newly enacted Justice Reinvestment Act those convicted of certain drug related crimes may seek reconsideration of their mandatory minimum sentences. The issue is explained well in this September 30, 2017 Baltimore Sun excerpt:

Eighty-one percent of those sentenced in Maryland to a mandatory minimum between 2013 and 2014 were black, according to a report of the Justice Reinvestment Coordinating Council, a state panel that studied options for criminal justice reform.
“The concept that the system can jail its way out of a drug scourge has been shown to be a massive failure,” Maryland Public Defender Paul DeWolfe said.

DeWolfe, whose office is expected to handle the vast majority of the motions, added that many people pleaded guilty to crimes “for fear that [they would] end up with a mandatory sentence” if they went to trial.

Before Sunday, repeat offenders of drug dealing crimes were subject to mandatory sentences with no chance of parole: 10 years for second-time offenders, 25 years for third-time offenders and 40 years for fourth-time offenders.

The new law repeals those minimums, and allow those already serving them to seek shorter sentences.

Most of those now eligible for reconsideration — roughly 80 percent — are serving 10-year sentences, according to the public defender’s office.

If you or a family member may be eligible for reconsideration of a mandatory minimum sentence already imposed, fill out the contact form on this page.  Ian Valkenet may be able to help!

The lawyers of Young & Valkenet

Defense of a Maryland lawsuit requires leadership.

Freddie Gray documents available for you to read!

The 400+ page record extract is available to the public. It is part of the States appeal of orders refusing to compel an officer to testify against others.

Follow this link to the appellate court website.

Expunge or shield your record before the job application.

Dumb mistakes carry long-term consequences.  Your misdemeanor conviction as a teenager will prevent you from getting certain jobs well into adulthood. Tickytack convictions have effectively barred a large portion of the population from meaningful jobs. To recapture this workforce Maryland’s General Assembly enacted substantial changes to the way “convictions” for minor offenses affect those convicted.  Effective October 1, 2015, the changes will both increase the availability of expungements, and create a new kind of protection – shielding – which has previously not existed in Maryland.

Changes to the Expungement law

 Prior to October 1, 2015, the law in Maryland prohibited expungement in certain situations where a defendant was convicted of a separate offense after the otherwise expungeable event.  Changes to the law removes that prohibition for all situations except probations before judgment.

Additionally, the law has been changed to permit folks convicted of crimes which, since the conviction, are no longer crimes (for instance: possession of less than 10 grams of marijuana, which was decriminalized in 2014), to expunge the former convictions.

The new “shielding” law

Under the new law, for certain “minor” crimes, Maryland permits someone who has been convicted, to petition to have their conviction “shielded” from the public.  The petition may be filed, at the earliest, three years after the completion of all the terms of their probation, parole, or mandatory supervision.  Convictions of crimes for which “shielding” is available are:

·         Disorderly conduct and disturbing the peace

·         Failure to obey a reasonable and lawful order
·         Malicious destruction of property
·         Trespass on posted property
·         Misdemeanor theft
·         Possession of certain controlled and non-controlled substances
·         Possession of drug paraphernalia
·         Driving without a license
·         Driving while license is canceled, suspended, refused, or revoked
·         Driving while uninsured
·         Prostitution

 “Shielding” is different than “expungement.”  Whereas an expungement compels destruction of all records of the incident, “shielding” merely hides the conviction from public view.  The conviction is still available to the police, health occupations boards, and certain employers and institutions that are subject to a statutory or contractual requirement to inquire into criminal background.  However, as to the public, and potential employers or educators, the law makes it illegal to compel disclosure on an application or in an interview.  It also makes it illegal for a potential employer or educator to refuse hire or admit an applicant solely based on the refusal to disclose shielded convictions.

Clean up your record, expunge or shield the past and get that job!

When truth cannot set you free, hire counsel.

We are often asked by potential clients accused of crimes, often referred by former clients, friends of the Firm or through AVVO.com, whether it is better to have private counsel or the public defender. The public defender exists to provide a basic criminal defense to those who cannot otherwise afford a lawyer.  And for the most part, the public defenders in Maryland do a fine job for their clients.

But sometimes, the public defender is just too overworked, as is demonstrated in this story out of Georgia.

As reported by Mother Jones in a story published August 6, 2015, Mr. Wyatt was re-arrested and charged for a crime that had already been prosecuted several years before. In fact, he had already served 179 days for the crime.  Yet, he sat in jail for another 110 days as the Georgia public defenders assigned to his case fumbled around, either ignoring his explanation of the prior case, or not promptly investigating the allegations.

Those who can afford their own defense counsel are truly fortunate- they receive personalized attention and prompt service by lawyers who often take their cause to heart.  But for those who cannot afford private pay counsel, the public defender can be hit-or-miss. Of course, the ordeal of Mr. Wyatt is an extreme outlier, but he could be any one of us.

Limited representation arrives in Maryland!

Here is the current reality in Maryland if you are served with a court summons and complaint:

• You didn't choose to get sued, and now you are forced to defend yourself and also assert your own claims against the folks suing you.
• Your money is tight, and legal fees are not part of your budget. And this is true whether you are an individual or owner of a corporate entity.
• You want to hire a lawyer to help through critical parts of your case, like drafting a court document or appearing for a deposition, settlement conference or motion hearing, but the lawyers you interview only quote fees to take over your entire case until the end--and you can't afford it!

Maryland's current court rules simply do not permit a lawyer to enter his appearance in your case for only one limited event- that one deposition or one court hearing.  The rules require entry of a general appearance which commits the lawyer to remain in your case to the end, unless he formally withdraws under a sometimes complicated process. The current rules do not guarantee against a lawyer being forced to continue in the engagement despite not getting paid by you. There are many examples where judges have required lawyers to stay in a case despite requesting to withdraw for non-payment.

As a result, you currently cannot hire a lawyer to appear with you for one limited event.

This will change on July 1, 2015 when the current rule is amended to permit the entry of a limited appearance under certain circumstances.  The guts of the new rule say that

[a]n attorney, acting pursuant to an agreement with a client for limited representation that complies with Rule 1.2(c) of the Maryland Lawyers' Rules of Professional Conduct, may enter an appearance limited to participation in a discrete matter or judicial proceeding...

 This is a huge deal for you, the consumer of legal services.  You may now  hire a lawyer to appear in court for one event.

How does it work?  First, you will have a written fee agreement with the lawyer that describes the limited purpose of the engagement. By way of example, an agreement may say "attorney agrees to appear for and with client at the motion hearing now scheduled for Monday..." And make sure the agreement anticipates some preparation time by the lawyer in advance of the hearing. You might also include language that covers unanticipated rescheduling of a hearing because of weather or illness.

Second, you will sign a form that gets filed in the court case which describes the limited engagement. The rule describes exactly what must be in the form, and you will just check a box and sign at the bottom. This form gives notice to everyone else involved in the case that your lawyer will only appear for a limited purpose at one event.

Third, you must pay your lawyer the agreed fee!  This part of the lawyer/attorney relationship does not change. But with the agreed limitation on the scope of his engagement, you will pay less!

We do anticipate some issues that the new rules cannot address, including how notices of limited engagement will be handled by the court clerks. The new rule means that the court's computer systems will have to change to track limited entries of appearance.  Even now, the court's computer system will continue to mail court notices to lawyers who have formally been withdrawn from cases, and so we do not expect the problem to lessen with this new rule. In fact, limited engagement lawyers should expect to receive continued court notices of events even when the limited engagement has ended.

And our beloved judges are another wild card.  They do have the authority (or, they believe they have the authority) to hold lawyers in cases to avoid prejudice to clients and the justice system, even when they have not been paid and requested to withdraw. It is conceivable that even where a proper limited engagement has been entered that a lawyer could be forced to continue in a case.

But these risks are slight, and we applaud Maryland's attempt to make civil justice more accessible and affordable to a broader range of folks.  You will still have to pay legal fees to hire a good lawyer suited to your limited event,  and you should expect to pay for the time a lawyer needs to prepare for the event. But with this new rule you may avoid having to shell over a traditionally large retainer that anticipates a long engagement.

Ian Valkenet joins the District of Columbia Bar

Ian Valkenet is now sworn to handle your cases in the District of Columbia.  This includes the Superior Court, where civil and criminal matters are tried before juries and judges, and the Court of Appeals.

Ian has been practicing law in the trial and appellate courts of Maryland, and in the federal trial and appellate courts for two years.

The District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Ian Valkenet joins the Firm!

Ian was born and raised in Baltimore. He attended Calvert Hall College High School as a McMullen Scholar, and was a member of several Championship and Nationally ranked varsity baseball and soccer teams.

Ian received his undergraduate degree from Boston College, where he majored in philosophy.

Ian is a graduate of the University of Baltimore School of Law,  where he was a member of the Thomas Tang National Moot Court Team that competed in Colorado. He also worked as a Rule 16 attorney for the Office of the Public Defender, handling dockets in the District Court of Baltimore City three days per week.

Ian has also served as a law clerk in the Felony Trials section of the Office of the Public Defender, and for Judge Clayton Greene, of the Maryland Court of Appeals. Prior to joining Young & Valkenet after graduation, Ian also worked as a law clerk for a Silver Spring based firm, working with experienced trial lawyers in civil rights, election fraud and criminal matters.

With Young & Valkenet, Ian will focus on trial practice and resolution of complex civil and criminal matters.