Judge Abrams Orders Illegal Transaction

[renfred]

On July 12, 2006 Judge Karen H. Abrams ordered the specific performance of a contract which, if performed, would transfer illegally subdivided land in St. Mary’s County, Maryland(Case # 18C05000085). She was fully aware that the land was illegally subdivided when she issued the court order. The Maryland Court of Special Appeals affirmed her decision on October 18, 2007 (Case 916/2006), despite also being made abundantly aware that the land in question was illegally subdivided. The mandate from the MD Court of Special Appeals has not been issued as of yet, but when it does come down, it has the effect of forcing two parties to commit an illegal act.

An unreported appellate opinion regarding this very same "illegal subdivision/specific performance" problem was issued by the Maryland Court of Special Appeals on July 28, 2006 (Ellis v. Delauter 83/2005).

The St. Mary’s County Subdivision Ordinance (http://www.co.saint-marys.md.us/lugm/docs/currentSubdivisionordinance.pdf), Section 10.7 states that until a subdivision plat is approved, it is illegal for a lot to be “sold or transferred”.

Maryland Law is clear that a court cannot enforce an illegal contract. Futhermore, a contract is illegal “if either the formation or the
performance thereof is prohibited by constitution or statute.” Thorpe v. Carte, 252 Md. 523, 529 (1969)

This basically amounts to the court taking the St. Mary’s County Subdivision Ordinance, shredding it and throwing it in the garbage. What are laws if the courts will not enforce them or even abide by them themselves? It would seem that according to this new legal precedent, an individual could subdivide their land by deed, any which way that they want to, then sell off the illegally subdivided lots...All of this without the submission, approval, or recordation of a final subdivision plat.

This could open up a whole new realm of possibilities for developers in St. Mary’s County.

 

[renfred]

Contract is only as good as the Judge.

According to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, a ratified sales contract between two parties is no longer the controlling document in a real estate settlement.

For all of those developers and property flippers out there, if you decide that the contract you signed isn't in your best interest, and maybe you want to "tweak" it a little bit, there is a whole new set of tools to add to your war chest. According to the new Chief Judge of the Court of Special Appeals, the contract no longer controls the transaction. Krauser's view, as exemplified in unreported opinion 916/2006, is that it is "perfectly proper" for a settlement attorney to draw up settlement documents that are not in conformance with the contract, and it is "perfectly proper" for a settlement attorney to impose new conditions precedent that are not found in the contract.

"condition precedent n. 1) in a contract, an event which must take place before a party to a contract must perform or do their part. 2) in a deed to real property, an event which has to occur before the title (or other right) to the property will actually be in the name (vest) of the party receiving title. Examples: if the ship makes it to port, the buyer agrees to pay for the freight on the ship and unload it; when daughter Gracella marries she shall then have full title to the property."

condition precedent legal definition of condition precedent. condition precedent synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

Judge Timothy Meredith, who was one of three judgs on the panel that decided this case, likes to refer to these new condition precedents as "measures". To heck with black letter law, or well defind legal terms. Gray is better when you're trying to throw a case, while simultaneously attempting to cover your own behind.

In fact, it is not an unreasonable interpretation of opinion 916/2006 that the signed contract of two parties to a land transaction, and the terms to their ratified agreement are of no consequence, and not worth the paper that they are written on.

The MD real estate settlement attorney has now become the dynamic, controlling entity in real estate transactions. This is despite the view by many appellate judges and attorney diciplinary bodies' that real estate settlement attorneys are not really practicing law while "closing escrow" on a property. They are in some sort of a legal gray area.

For those kids out there in law school who are trying to decide which specialty field to go into, I would suggest real estate law. After all, the MD State Court system is extremely weak on disciplining this type of attorney, while simultaneously allowing them to act as a dynamic, controlling variable in real estate transactions. In other words, you are not really practicing law, but you have the ability to unilaterally alter a contract that you are not a party to. Think about the possibilities.

The real estate community should applaud the hard work of Master F. Michael Harris, Administrative Judge Karen H. Abrams, and the new Chief Judge of the MD Court of Special Appeals Peter B. Krauser for their extraordinary efforts, and their willingness to go above and beyond (even well established law) to create this new era of real estate transactions in the State of Maryland.

 

[ImnoMensa]

There he goes again. We're off and running.

Judge Abrams pulled Renfred's chain once more.

 

[godsbutterfly]

There he goes again. We're off and running.

Judge Abrams pulled Renfred's chain once more.

So I see. This time it's not just her but her associates as well. I haven't agreed with her decisions to let out the sex offenders and rapists she has released but I am not this on her every move as he is.

 

[Ken King]

The familiarity of the cases referenced here and elsewhere makes my believe that someone posting this information on here is a lawyer, possibly even with the first name of Alfred. Now as he is speaking of ethical behavior I wonder how ethical is it for a lawyer upon losing a case to bring it to a public forum and discuss the matter which should by all means be private between him and his client?

 

[godsbutterfly]

The familiarity of the cases referenced here and elsewhere makes my believe that someone posting this information on here is a lawyer, possibly even with the first name of Alfred. Now as he is speaking of ethical behavior I wonder how ethical is it for a lawyer upon losing a case to bring it to a public forum and discuss the matter which should by all means be private between him and his client?

Maybe he has either given up his practice or has been disbarred? Either way I hope he is immune from lawsuit or has his client' s permission to give out details because you do make an excellent point.

 

[Lenny]

The familiarity of the cases referenced here and elsewhere makes my believe that someone posting this information on here is a lawyer, possibly even with the first name of Alfred. Now as he is speaking of ethical behavior I wonder how ethical is it for a lawyer upon losing a case to bring it to a public forum and discuss the matter which should by all means be private between him and his client?

It's obvious the dude has the same self-fixation that JPC Sr exhibits in these forums. Sounds like Alfred isn't sitting with all four wheels on the tracks.

 

[johnjrval424]

The familiarity of the cases referenced here and elsewhere makes my believe that someone posting this information on here is a lawyer, possibly even with the first name of Alfred. Now as he is speaking of ethical behavior I wonder how ethical is it for a lawyer upon losing a case to bring it to a public forum and discuss the matter which should by all means be private between him and his client?

Actually, he's not discussing anything here that you couldn't read in the case jacket at the courthouse. It doesn't appear as though he is disclosing any confidential information which would be subject to the attorney/client privilege. Attorneys discuss cases all the time amongst themselves - if not for objective advice but to also bounce ideas.

I'm not defending this person by any stretch - I don't even know them - but there isn't anything wrong that I can see with what is posted.

Just my .02...

 

[Patch Tuesday]

I guess you all missed this...

Welcome to St. Mary's Today Online Edition!

 

[Ken King]

Actually, he's not discussing anything here that you couldn't read in the case jacket at the courthouse. It doesn't appear as though he is disclosing any confidential information which would be subject to the attorney/client privilege. Attorneys discuss cases all the time amongst themselves - if not for objective advice but to also bounce ideas.

I'm not defending this person by any stretch - I don't even know them - but there isn't anything wrong that I can see with what is posted.

Just my .02...

Does it matter that it can be read elsewhere, the point is should they be doing it if they were the attorney on the case?

I mean this person has been up in arms about ethical conduct of others so shouldn't they be beyond reproach in their conduct?

 

[johnjrval424]

Does it matter that it can be read elsewhere, the point is should they be doing it if they were the attorney on the case?

I mean this person has been up in arms about ethical conduct of others so shouldn't they be beyond reproach in their conduct?

Professional? Probably not (airing dirty laundry). Unethical? No. As I said, attorneys discuss cases all the time with people. If he has a personal beef with a judge, he should find more constructive ways of dealing with it than coming into a public forum and venting...I agree.

 

[Ken King]

Professional? Probably not (airing dirty laundry). Unethical? No. As I said, attorneys discuss cases all the time with people. If he has a personal beef with a judge, he should find more constructive ways of dealing with it than coming into a public forum and venting...I agree.

How about rule 1-9(c) Duties to former clients. It says

(c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter or whose present or former firm has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:

(1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client, or when the information has become generally known; or

2) reveal information relating to the representation except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client.

 

[johnjrval424]

How about rule 1-9(c) Duties to former clients. It says
Quote:
(c) A lawyer who has formerly represented a client in a matter or whose present or former firm has formerly represented a client in a matter shall not thereafter:

(1) use information relating to the representation to the disadvantage of the former client except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client, or when the information has become generally known; or

2) reveal information relating to the representation except as these Rules would permit or require with respect to a client.

The "information has become generally known" when the case is filed - as I said, you can go to the courthouse and read everything in there (except for any discovery materials such as interrogatories or requests for production of documents). There is nothing wrong with talking about a case with the general public. It's done all the time in the media.

"...reveal information relating to the representation" means the attorney can't divulge the terms of his/her representation of the client. There hasn't been any ethics violations here that I can see.

However, as I mentioned, on a professional level, it's not very flattering to him/her as a professional person to be on a public forum venting opinions and trying to solicit support for their position. But, as far as I can tell, they haven't broken any rules...

 

[renfred]

Judge Abrams,....STUCK?

The mandate from the MD Court of Special Appeals regarding CASE 916/2006 has been sitting at the St. Mary's County Court House for a month now, with no action being taken whatsoever. Why?

Well, Judge Abrams needs to recuse herself from the case for one. Number two, she can't order the sale of the property because that would constitute the court ordering an "illegal transacation". The property is an illegal subdivision, and ordering its sale would violate the St. Mary's County Subdivision Ordinance. Why did she order its transfer in the first place back in July of 2006? Wasn't that illegal? Why did the judges husband's colleagues up in Annapolis affirm the idiotic decision and fudge the facts?

Let's be reasonable here. They took those clear actions to sweep the mess under the rug. Now they're stuck.

Lucky for the group of not-so-ethical judges, the seller was advised by local counsel to sign over a power of attorney to have a BLAP (Boundary Line Adjustment Plat) done to the property, which would supposedly correct the illegal subdivision issue. So, until the BLAP is completed, signed and recorded, the property remains an illegal subdivision and the court cannot issue its order to have the seller sell it. What that also means is that if the seller refused to sign the BLAP, which she is under no obligation whatsoever to do, Judge Abrams and her husband's Annapolis buddy's would be looking very stupid right about now. I predict that they will finally take action on the MD COSA order once the BLAP is successfully completed...after Abrams recuses herself of course.

So for now, Judge Abrams continues to sit pretty and remains immune to any negative consequences of her and her husband's colleague's actions. So what happens if the BLAP doesn't go through? Sounds like more news to me.

www.theretainercheck.com

 

[MMDad]

So for now, Judge Abrams continues to sit pretty.

Now you think she's pretty? Are you hitting on her?

 

[renfred]

She sure knows how to create a beauty of a legal mess...that's for sure.

All she had to do was not grant a stay, back in November of 2005, and none of these facts would have probably ever come to light. Maybe it was a good thing. I guess it depends on who you are, and what vantage point you are looking at this from.

 

[smcop]

She sure knows how to create a beauty of a legal mess...that's for sure.

All she had to do was not grant a stay, back in November of 2005, and none of these facts would have probably ever come to light. Maybe it was a good thing. I guess it depends on who you are, and what vantage point you are looking at this from.

Your right, it's a big conspiracy. I would move to West Virginia!

 

[renfred]

smcop says "it's a big conspiracy"...

Your right, it's a big conspiracy. I would move to West Virginia!

www.theretainercheck.com

You must have read the website and actually understood what is going on in your home town of Leonardtown and in the State Capitol of Annapolis. Do you know what the word collusion means? It is related to the word conspiracy. Being someone who has researched this situation and published the results publicly on the internet, I am very comfortable and confident in saying that several judges and lawyers used "collusion" as a tool to cover up unethical conduct in your town.

Since you are an smcop, you ought to know how your local legal system works.

Congrats!

 

[5857dave]

www.theretainercheck.com

You must have read the website and actually understood what is going on in your home town of Leonardtown and in the State Capitol of Annapolis. Do you know what the word collusion means? It is related to the word conspiracy. Being someone who has researched this situation and published the results publicly on the internet, I am very comfortable and confident in saying that several judges and lawyers used "collusion" as a tool to cover up unethical conduct in your town.

Since you are an smcop, you ought to know how your local legal system works.

Congrats!

Do you know what the word libel means? If you have such a bad taste in your mouth about St. Mary's, why would you want to move here?

 

[renfred]

bad taste

Do you know what the word libel means? If you have such a bad taste in your mouth about St. Mary's, why would you want to move here?

I don't have a bad tase in my mouth about St. Mary's County at all.

The local legal system needed to have its business practices exposed so that folks don't go around believing something that isn't true, that Judge Abrams is fair. It is also extremely important for people to know that the judicial and marital relationship between Judge James A. Kenney III and Judge Karen H. Abrams has resulted in a three judge panel in Annapolis fabricating facts, altering the record, and flat out being intellectually dishonest. Not to mention the ethical integrity issues brought to light by Judge Abrams failing to disclose her financial conflict of interest with Daniel J. Guenther, and F. Michael Harris being the named trustee for the same property (41620 Fenwick Street, Leonardtown, Maryland).

Needless to say, the Leonardtown legal system needed to clean up its act, and exposing the undisclosed relationships was the first step. Just think, Abrams is now forced to disclose her financial relationship with Daniel J. Guenther, due to the recent MD Judicial Ethics Committee ruling (http://www.courts.state.md.us/ethics/pdfs/2007_10.pdf). That can't be a bad thing can it? For a judge to disclose her financial conflict of interest instead of concealing it? You do agree don't you? Is it okay for a judge to omit evidence in factual findings to deliberatley protect a subordinate judge and the named trustee on her property's purchase money mortgage? Of course you don't think so,...you are reasonable, not blinded by your power, money and ego. Right?

www.theretainercheck.com

The people of St. Mary's County are great, a good number of the lawyers and judges are great, the fishing and seafood are great,...its really a shame that several lawyers and judges decided to throw good judgement, the law, ethics, etc, out the window. They deserve to have their misdeeds made public, and unfortunately the MD Commission on Judicial Disabilites, and the MD Attorney Grievance Commission are simply organizations whose main purpose is to protect judges and lawyers and to sweep their unethical activities under the rug.