News

The Gibson-Banks Center for Race and the Law featured in The Maryland Carey Law Summer 2024 Magazine

|

Maryland Carey Law Summer 2024 Magazine

The Maryland Carey Law Summer 2024 Magazine highlights the important work of The Gibson-Banks Center for Race and the Law, named after our esteemed Of Counsel Larry S. Gibson and Taunya Lovell Banks, both legendary and influential legal scholars and the first Black man and Black woman to become tenured full professors at the law school.

A historian of the civil rights movement, Larry authored Young Thurgood, a detailed biography studying Thurgood Marshall’s early years in Maryland. He is working on the companion volume, which will examine Marshall’s life from 1938 to 1954. Rather than format the book chronologically, Gibson tells Marshall’s story geographically with chapters on each of the Southern states where Marshall made an impact.

News

Eleven Shapiro Sher Attorneys Recognized by Best Lawyers

|

We are pleased to announce that Shapiro Sher is once again well represented in Best Lawyers in America®, one of the most respected guides to the U.S. legal industry. The newly released 2025 edition lists the following eleven attorneys in their respective practice areas:

  • David B. Applefeld: Commercial Litigation, Construction Litigation
  • William E. Carlson: Corporate Law, Biotechnology and Life Sciences Practice
  • Scott W. Foley: Commercial Litigation
  • Larry S. Gibson: Civil Rights Law
  • J. Patrick Gill: Banking and Finance Law (“Ones to Watch” designation)
  • Richard M. Goldberg: Bankruptcy and Creditor-Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law, Bankruptcy Litigation
  • Ann Clary Gordon: Real Estate Law
  • Renée S. Lane-Kunz: Employment Law (Management)
  • Paul Mark Sandler: Commercial Litigation, White Collar Criminal Defense, and Personal Injury Litigation (Defense and Plaintiff)
  • Joel I. Sher: Bankruptcy and Creditor-Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law
  • Daniel J. Zeller – Bankruptcy and Creditor-Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law; Bankruptcy Litigation
Best Lawyers is the oldest peer-review publication company in the legal profession. Its lists are developed through extensive confidential peer-review surveys involving tens of thousands of attorneys throughout the country. To learn more about the company’s methodology, click here.
Insights

Understanding the MAR Residential Contract of Sale

|

An agreement to buy or sell real property in Maryland must be in writing, and Buyers and Sellers of residential real estate typically use standardized form contracts to document the transaction. The Maryland Association of Realtors Residential Contract of Sale (the “Contract”) is the most used form contract. The provisions of this Contract are legally binding on the parties and are often required by law, but many are not negotiable. It is therefore important for Buyers and Sellers to understand what they agree to before signing the Contract.

· With limited exceptions, the Seller of a single-family home must provide a property condition disclosure statement or a property condition disclaimer statement to the Buyer before the sale. In the disclosure statement, the seller must identify known defects and other information regarding the condition of the property. These disclosures must be accurate, as they may create liability for the Seller if all known defects are not disclosed. Alternatively, many Sellers choose to provide a disclaimer statement. A Seller who elects to provide a disclaimer statement sells the property “as is” and is only required to identity “latent” or hidden defects, which cannot be discovered by a prudent Buyer who chooses to inspect the property.

· If negotiated and agreed to by the parties, the Buyer can condition their purchase upon an inspection of the property. These inspections often include the structural and mechanical elements of the property, mold, lead paint, radon, and termites. The contingencies and the terms thereof will be formalized in an addendum to the main Contract.

· The Contract also contains default provisions and remedies. In the event the Buyer fails to make full settlement or otherwise defaults, the Buyer may forfeit their Deposit and be liable to the Seller for damages caused by the default. If the Seller fails to make full settlement or otherwise defaults, the Buyer may have the legal right to enforce the contract and require the Seller to transfer the property, or alternatively to recover damages.

· If any disputes arise before, during, or within one (1) year after settlement, the parties are required to participate in a mediation session sponsored by the Maryland Association of Realtors before filing a lawsuit in court.

· If a lawsuit is filed, the prevailing party is entitled to recover their costs and attorney fees in addition to any damages or other relief they receive.

If you have questions about the subject of this post, Maryland real estate law, or have encountered any issues when buying or selling residential real property in Maryland, please reach out to Patrick J. L. Dillon, Esquire, pjld@shapirosher.com, (410) 385-4270.

Insights

Changes to The Maryland Insurance Article Affecting Public Adjusters

|

The Maryland General Assembly recently approved several amendments to the Subtitle of the Maryland Insurance Article (“Ins.”) applicable to licensed public adjusters (Ins. § 10-401-416).  These new amendments – established in 2024 Maryland Laws Chapter 826 (House Bill 36) – modify Sections 10-411(h) and 10-414(e)-(f) and become effective October 1, 2024.

These changes:

·       Modify the statutory language that all public adjuster contracts must include (Ins. § 10-411);

·       Extend the insureds’ right of recission from three (3) business days to ten (10) from the date the public adjuster contract is signed (Ins. § 10-411);

·       Establish a time period in which public adjusters may not solicit or attempt to solicit clients (Ins. § 10-414(e)); and

·       Establish a notice requirement if a public adjuster enters into a public adjuster contract within seventy-two (72) hours
of a loss giving rise to a claim ((Ins. § 10-414(f)).

Contract Language Changes: As of October 1, 2024, Ins. § 10-411(h) requires that all public adjuster contracts include a statement that:

1.         The insured has the right to rescind or cancel the contract within ten (10) business days after the date the contract is signed;

2.         The notice of rescission or cancellation shall be in writing and mailed or delivered to the public adjuster at the address stated in the contract within ten (10) business days after the date                 the contract is signed;

3.         If the insured exercises the right to rescind or cancel the contract, the public adjuster shall, within fifteen (15) business days after the public adjuster receives the notice, return anything                of value given by the insured under the contract; and

4.         A public adjuster, or anyone acting on behalf of a public adjuster, may not solicit or attempt to solicit a client
between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.

Hours Of Solicitation Changes: As of October 1, 2024, Ins. § 10-414(e) prohibits public adjusters from soliciting or attempting to solicit a client between the hours of 8:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m.

Reporting Requirement Changes: As of October 1, 2024, Ins. § 10-414(f) requires that a public adjuster who enters into a public adjuster contract during, or within seventy-two (72) hours after, the loss giving rise to an insurance claim provide notice to the Insurance Commissioner that the public adjuster has entered into the contract.  This notice (available here) must be electronically submitted within one (1) business day after entering into the contract.

More information on these changes is provided in the Maryland Insurance Administration’s recent bulletin, Bulletin 24-18.

News

The FTC’s New Non-Compete Rule

|

While non-compete agreements have historically been viewed as a means to protect a businesses’ proprietary information, the Federal Trade Commission has recently, with the support of numerous states, finalized a rule determining that non-compete agreements are an unfair method of competition and violate Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”).

The final rule[1], passed on April 24, 2024, and set to go into effect on September 4, 2024 (“effective date”), prohibits employers from entering into new non-compete agreements after the effective date. The rule also prohibits employers from enforcing existing non-compete agreements with any employee who is not a senior executive[2]. Additionally, the rule requires that employers notify all workers that their non-compete agreements are no longer in effect and will not be enforced[3]. Any violation of this rule may be reported to the Bureau of Competition at the Federal Trade Commission. The FTC may thereafter initiate investigations and bring enforcement actions against employers for violations of the rule. The use of a non-compete agreement may expose the business to FTC action and/or civil tort claims from aggrieved employees.

Currently, there are lawsuits pending in multiple jurisdictions challenging the FTC’s authority to enact this ban on non-compete agreements. Businesses and employers should follow the course of the litigation surrounding the enactment of the rule and prepare to send the required notices, should the rule remain intact, by the effective date, September 4, 2024.

A link to the full text of the final rule may be found here: Federal Register :: Non-Compete Clause Rule.

[1] 16 CFR § 910.2 and § 910.6

[2] A “senior executive” is defined as a worker who earns more than $151,164.00 annually who is in a “policy-making position.” Less than 1% of workers are estimated to be “senior executives” under the new rule.

[3] The FTC has provided model language that employers may use to notify their employees.

News

Five Shapiro Sher lawyers cited in Chambers USA 2024

|

This year’s edition of Chambers USA, a preeminent guide to the country’s legal industry, names five of our firm’s attorneys and two of our practice groups in its annual roundup of leading Maryland lawyers and law firms.

The following attorneys are cited in their respective practice areas:

  • Alex J. Brown – Insurance
  • William E. Carlson – Corporate/M&A and REITs: Maryland Counsel
  • Richard M. Goldberg – Bankruptcy/Restructuring
  • Paul Mark Sandler – Litigation: General Commercial (Senior Statesperson)
  • Joel I. Sher – Bankruptcy/Restructuring

The guide also names Shapiro Sher among select Maryland firms practicing bankruptcy and insurance law.

Chambers USA is a division of Chambers & Partners, which publishes selective annual guides to the most respected law firms and lawyers in the US, Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Its rankings are read by industry-leading companies and organizations worldwide.

Insights

Making the Case – Eastland Food: A Needed Course Correction

|

Article in the Maryland Bar Journal proposing proper application of Section 2-405.1 to a case on appeal.

Subscribers may read the piece here after logging in.