Verdict . News

Nov 25, 2025•4 min read

•Assignment of a contract containing an arbitration clause doesn't automatically assign that clause to related agreements

Maryland Supreme Court Limits Automatic Assignment of Arbitration Clauses

The Supreme Court of Maryland ruled in *Lyles v. Santander Consumer USA Inc.* that arbitration agreements in one contract don't automatically transfer when that contract is assigned, unless the assignment language specifically includes them. The decision clarifies the limited role of circuit courts in arbitration disputes and establishes new precedent for multi-contract arrangements.

•Circuit courts' role in arbitration petitions is limited to determining whether a valid arbitration agreement exists, without jury involvement

•Supreme Court of Maryland affirmed District Court jurisdiction for underinsured motorist claims under $30,000

Maryland Supreme Court Upholds District Court Jurisdiction in UIM Claims

The Supreme Court of Maryland ruled that District Courts have jurisdiction over underinsured motorist claims when damages sought are $30,000 or less. The decision in *Bowens v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company* clarifies jurisdictional boundaries for insurance contract disputes based on pleading amounts.

•Court applied section 4-401(1) of Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article, focusing on amount demanded in pleadings

•Maryland Supreme Court rules sentences not legally 'imposed' until entire sentencing proceeding concludes

Maryland High Court: Sentences Not 'Imposed' Until Hearing Ends

The Supreme Court of Maryland ruled in *Reyes v. State* that criminal sentences are not legally imposed under Maryland Rule 4-345 until the entire sentencing proceeding concludes. The decision allows trial courts to modify sentences during hearings without triggering double jeopardy protections or violating state sentencing rules.

•Trial courts can modify sentences during hearings without violating Maryland Rule 4-345 or double jeopardy protections

•Supreme Court dismissed appeal as moot after tenants vacated and landlord obtained required license

Maryland Supreme Court Dismisses Rent Escrow Case as Moot

The Supreme Court of Maryland dismissed an appeal in Wilson v. Tanglewood Venture, LP, finding no live controversy remained after tenants vacated their units and the landlord obtained proper licensing. The case raised important questions about whether tenants must pay rent into escrow when rental properties lack required local licenses.

•Case involved rent escrow statute and whether tenants must pay into escrow for unlicensed properties

•Court ruled respondent failed to preserve appellate issue regarding timing requirements for protective order hearings

Maryland Supreme Court Clarifies Protective Order Due Process Standards

The Supreme Court of Maryland issued a comprehensive ruling in Clarke v. Gibson addressing key procedural requirements in domestic violence protective order cases. The court established new standards for appellate preservation, due process service requirements, and evidence sufficiency for final protective orders.

•Supreme Court held that service of temporary protective order alone satisfies constitutional due process requirements

•Nebraska Supreme Court issued ruling in State v. Kruger on November 21, 2025, clarifying evidence admissibility standards

Nov 21, 2025•4 min read

Nebraska Supreme Court

Nebraska Supreme Court Clarifies Evidence Rules in State v. Kruger

The Nebraska Supreme Court issued a ruling in State v. Kruger on November 21, 2025, establishing key precedents for evidence admissibility standards and appellate review procedures in criminal cases. The decision clarifies when trial courts have discretion in evidentiary matters and sets standards for reviewing criminal convictions.

•Court held that judicial discretion in evidence matters applies only when specifically provided by Nebraska Evidence Rules

•Court establishes that Nebraska Evidence Rules control admissibility, with judicial discretion limited to specific circumstances outlined in the rules

Nov 21, 2025•4 min read

Nebraska Supreme Court

Nebraska Supreme Court Clarifies Evidence Standards in State v. Kruger

The Nebraska Supreme Court issued a decision in State v. Kruger on November 21, 2025, establishing clear guidelines for evidence admissibility and appellate review standards in criminal proceedings. The ruling clarifies when judicial discretion applies versus mandatory rule application under Nebraska Evidence Rules.

•Decision clarifies appellate review standards, requiring abuse of discretion review when evidence rules grant trial court discretion

Nov 21, 2025•4 min read

•Maryland Supreme Court rejected joint recommendation for four-month reciprocal discipline

Maryland High Court Imposes Stricter Discipline Than Federal Suspension

The Maryland Supreme Court rejected a joint recommendation for reciprocal discipline and imposed stricter sanctions on attorney Tristan Wade Gillespie than the four-month federal suspension he received. The court determined that corresponding discipline requires indefinite suspension due to differences in reinstatement standards between state and federal courts.

•Court found federal suspension insufficient due to different reinstatement requirements

•Illinois Supreme Court unanimously upheld trial court's use of Pattern Jury Instructions 11.49 and 11.50 for threatening public official charges

Nov 20, 2025•5 min read

Illinois Supreme Court

Illinois Supreme Court Upholds Jury Instructions in Threat Case

The Illinois Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the use of standard pattern jury instructions in a criminal case involving threats against a public official. The November 2025 decision in *People v. Williams* resolved questions about proper jury instruction procedures for threatening public official charges under Illinois law.

•Case involved defendant Isaiah J. Williams who was convicted after threatening Deputy Nicholas Albarran during arrest and transport