More Categories

Rule 2-551 – In Banc Review

May 13, 2021 | Civil Prodcedure, Maryland

(a) Generally. When review by a court in banc is permitted by the Maryland Constitution, a party may have a judgment or determination of any point or question reviewed by a court in banc by filing a notice for in banc review. Issues are reserved for in banc review by making an objection in the manner set forth in Rules 2-517 and 2-520. Upon the filing of the notice, the Circuit Administrative Judge shall designate three judges of the circuit, other than the judge who tried the action, to sit in banc.
(b) Time for Filing. Except as otherwise provided in this Rule, the notice for in banc review shall be filed within ten days after entry of judgment. When a timely motion is filed pursuant to Rule 2-532, 2-533, or 2-534, the notice for in banc review shall be filed within ten days after (1) entry of an order denying a motion pursuant to Rule 2-533 or disposing of a motion pursuant to Rule 2-532 or 2-534 or(2) withdrawal of the motion. A notice for in banc review filed before the withdrawal or disposition of any of these motions does not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction to dispose of the motion. If a notice for in banc review is filed and thereafter a party files a timely motion pursuant to Rule 2-532, 2-533, or 2-534, the notice for in banc review shall be treated as filed on the same day as, but after, the entry of a notice withdrawing the motion or an order disposing of it.
(c) Memoranda. Within 30 days after the filing of the notice for in banc review, the party seeking review shall file four copies of a memorandum stating concisely the questions presented, any facts necessary to decide them, and supporting argument. Within 15 days thereafter, an opposing party who wishes to dispute the statement of questions or facts shall file four copies of a memorandum stating the alternative questions presented, any additional or different facts, and supporting argument. In the absence of such dispute, an opposing party may file a memorandum of argument.
(d) Transcript. Promptly after the filing of memoranda, a judge of the panel shall determine, by reviewing the memoranda and, if necessary, by conferring with counsel, whether a transcript of all or part of the proceeding is reasonably required for decision of the questions presented. If a transcript is required, the judge shall order one of the parties to provide the transcript and shall fix a time for its filing. The expenses of the transcript shall be assessed as costs against the losing party, unless otherwise ordered by the panel.
(e) Hearing and Decision. A hearing shall be scheduled as soon as practicable but need not be held if all parties notify the clerk in writing at least 15 days before the scheduled hearing date that the hearing has been waived. In rendering its decision, the panel shall prepare and file or dictate into the record a brief statement of the reasons for the decision.
(f) Motion to Shorten or Extend Time Requirements. Upon motion of any party filed pursuant to Rule 1-204, any judge of the panel may shorten or extend the time requirements of this Rule, except the time for filing a notice for in banc review.
(g) Dismissal.

(1)Generally. The panel, on its own initiative or on motion of any party, shall dismiss an in banc review if (A) in banc review is not permitted by the Maryland Constitution, (B) the notice for in banc review was prematurely filed or not timely filed except as provided in subsection (g)(2) of this Rule, or (C) the case has become moot. The panel may dismiss if the memorandum of the party seeking review was not timely filed.
(2)Judgment Entered After Notice Filed. A notice for in banc review filed after the announcement or signing by the trial court of a judgment but before entry of the judgment on the docket shall be treated as filed on the same day as, but after, the entry on the docket.
(h) Further Review. Any party who seeks and obtains review under this Rule has no further right of appeal. The decision of the panel does not preclude an appeal to the Court of Special Appeals by an opposing party who is otherwise entitled to appeal.

Md. R. Civ. P. Cir. Ct. 2-551

This Rule is new, is consistent with Md. Const., Art. IV, ยง 22, and replaces former Rule 510.

Adopted April 6, 1984, eff. July 1, 1984. Amended April 7, 1986, eff. July 1, 1986; Nov. 1, 2001, eff. Jan. 1, 2002; December 13, 2016, eff. April 1, 2017.

HISTORICAL NOTES

2001 Orders

The November 1, 2001, order rewrote the second sentence of section (e), which previously read: “In rendering its decision, the panel shall file a brief statement of the reasons for the decision or shall dictate the reasons into the record.

2016 Orders

The December 13, 2016, order, amended the Rule to provide that a notice for in banc review may be filed within 10 days after the withdrawal of certain post-judgment motions; to provide that a notice for in banc review filed before the withdrawal or disposition of these motions does not deprive the trial court of jurisdiction to dispose of the motion; to provide that if a notice for in banc review is filed before certain post-judgment motions are filed, the notice shall be treated as filed on the same day as, but after, the entry of a notice withdrawing the motion or an order disposing of it; to provide that a notice for in banc review filed after the announcement or signing by the trial court of a judgment but before entry of the judgment on the docket shall be treated as filed on the same day as, but after, the entry on the docket; and to make certain conforming and stylistic changes.