800-385-2243
- Home
- Our Firm
- Attorneys
- Eric Bacaj
- Gregory P. Bailey
- Justin A. Batoff
- Erin D. Brooks
- Hayley Cassedy
- Amy B. Chappell
- Phillip J. Closius
- Mark Edelson
- Renee Gast
- E. Philip Hanlon
- Andrew M. Harvey
- Marshall T. Henslee
- Todd Hesel
- Emily Kamp
- Richard M. Karceski
- Steven N. Leitess
- Michael J. Levin
- Christopher Macchiaroli
- Meredith McKinnon
- Christopher J. Mincher
- Joseph F. Murphy Jr.
- Pierce Murphy
- Cary Murray
- Kurt Nachtman
- Andrew Norman
- Ethan S. Nochumowitz
- Edward P. Parent
- Ira Rainess
- Patrick R. Seidel
- Monica L. Scherer
- Keira Sherper
- Ilona Shparaga
- Steven D. Silverman
- Laura A. Simmons
- Kathleen Hanlon Sinclair
- William Sinclair
- Andrew G. Slutkin
- Andrea L. Smith
- Creston P. Smith
- Kerri L. Smith
- Avery Strachan
- Brian G. Thompson
- Nathan Volke
- Jason Wasserman
- Megan Weaver
- Andrew C. White
- Ramsay M. Whitworth
- Rian Wieser
- Alexander Williams, Jr.
- Joseph R. Woolman, III
- Practice Areas
- Administrative Law & Defense of Professionals
- Appeals - State & Federal
- Baltimore City Liquor Board Processes
- Business Counseling, Litigation & Transactions
- Business Formation
- Contract Litigation
- Asset-Based Lending and Commercial Financing
- Alternative Finance
- Securities
- Business Divorce: Partnership & Shareholder Disputes
- Bankruptcy, Receivership, Insolvency & Creditors’ Rights
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property Law
- Employment Litigation & Counseling
- Outside General Counsel Legal Services
- Complex Civil Litigation
- Criminal Defense
- Divorce
- Driving Under the Influence
- Estates, Trusts, Probate & Fiduciary Litigation
- Family Law
- Federal Crimes & White Collar Crimes
- Legal Malpractice
- Medical Malpractice
- Personal Injury
- Real Estate
- Sports, Entertainment & Gaming Law
- Tax Controversy Litigation
- Victim’s Rights
- How We Can Help in an Injury Case
- How We Can Help in a Criminal Case
- Sexual Abuse of Minors
- Suspected Abusers – By Name – Bishop Accountability Only
- Suspected Abusers Named in the Attorney General’s Report
- Alleged Abusers – By Name – Archdiocese Website
- Alleged Abusers in the Archdiocese of Baltimore – Organized by School
- Summary: Maryland Attorney General’s Report on Child Sexual Abuse in the Archdiocese of Baltimore
- Scholarships
- Firm News
- Case Results
- Blog
- Contact
Trusted for Integrity.
Chosen for Results.
Recent Blog Posts
Federal Judge Blocks FTC Non-Compete Ban, Leaving Agreements Enforceable
On August 20, 2024, U.S. District Judge Ada Brown of the Northern District of Texas struck down a proposed rule by the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) that sought to impose a nationwide ban on non-compete agreements. Ryan, LLC v. FTC, –F. Supp.3d – (N.D. Tex., Aug. 20, 2024). The decision halts what would have been a significant shift in employment law across the country had the rule taken effect.
In granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff-intervenor, Judge Brown found that the FTC lacked the statutory authority to implement a nationwide ban on all non-compete agreements. She further found that even if the FTC did have such authority, it failed to adequately justify its decision to impose a blanket ban. According to Judge Brown, "the Commission’s lack of evidence as to why they chose to impose such a sweeping prohibition … instead of targeting specific, harmful non-competes, renders the Rule arbitrary and capricious."
The proposed rule, which was scheduled to take effect on September 4, 2024, aimed to eliminate what the FTC described as an "unfair restraint" on employees nationwide. FTC Chair Lina M. Khan defended the initiative, arguing that non-compete clauses depress wages, stifle innovation, and diminish the American economy.
Petition Dismissed, Violation of Probation Closed Satisfactorily – Failure to Perform Contract
Attorney: Creston Smith
Baltimore City Circuit Court
August 26-30
Case Dismissed – Theft Under $1,500 and Contributing to the Condition of a Child
Attorney: Creston Smith
Queen Anne County Circuit Court
August 26-30
Not Criminally Responsible – Second-Degree Malicious Burning
Attorney: Brian Thompson
Baltimore County Circuit Court
August 26-30
Case Dismissed – Failure to Perform Contract
Attorney: Brian Thompson
North Avenue District Court
August 26-30
60 Days Suspended, 3 Years Supervised Probation – DUI
Attorney: Eric Bacaj
Howard County District Court
August 26-30
Probation Before Judgement, 3 Years Supervised Probation – Second-Degree Assault and DUI
Attorney: Patrick Seidel
Glen Bernie District Court
August 19-23
5 Years Suspended all but 1 Year, 2 Years Supervised Probation – Handgun on Person
Attorney: Creston Smith
Baltimore City Circuit Court
August 19-23
Supreme Court of Maryland Reiterates Important Clarification to Rules of Contract Interpretation
If you’ve litigated a contract dispute in Maryland, you’ve likely referred to the "four corners" rule, which means the reviewing court interprets a contract based on the language within the document itself. If that language is unambiguous, the terms of the agreement control regardless of the parties’ subjective intent. A court considers "parol" or extrinsic evidence (evidence outside the contract itself) only if the terms of the contract are ambiguous. This foundational rule of contract interpretation appears in many cases, so a litigator could hardly be faulted for describing it this way. See, e.g., Walton v. Mariner Health of Maryland, Inc., 391 Md. 643, 660 (2006). But, as two recent Maryland Supreme Court opinions make clear, it’s not exactly right.
In Lithko Contracting, LLC v. XL Insurance America, Inc., 2024 WL 3407452 (Md. July 15, 2024), the Court clarified that review of a contract’s language does not occur "in a vacuum," and may include consideration of the "contract’s character, purpose, and the facts and circumstances of the parties at the time of execution." Indeed, consideration of this "relevant context may necessarily require consultation of evidence beyond the ‘four corners.’" (Emphasis added.) What a reviewing court can’t do, absent ambiguity in the contract, is consider parol or extrinsic evidence "of the parties subjective intent." (Emphasis added.)
Silverman Thompson Secures Four-Year Sentence Despite Maximum Sentence of Over 100 Years
Silverman Thompson attorneys Brian Thompson, Riane White, and Patrick Seidel recently scored a major victory for a married couple facing a 30-count indictment for serious felonies, including armed robbery, extortion, and use of a firearm in the commission of a crime of violence. They faced maximum sentences of over 100 years if convicted on all counts. To make matters worse, the entire incident was caught on surveillance video. Silverman Thompson represented the husband and coordinated closely with the wife’s defense team.
The facts of this case were unusual. Our client and his wife were defrauded out of over $500,000 by someone they considered a friend. The money was supposed to be used for a business investment. Instead of investing the money, their former friend used the funds for expensive vacations and luxury purchases including nine cars, two of which were valued at almost $200,000 each.
Awards + Recognition
Downtown Baltimore
Baltimore, MD 21202 Map + Directions
Washington D.C.
Washington DC 20006
From our offices in Baltimore, Annapolis, Towson, and Washington, D.C., we provide representation for clients throughout the state of Maryland and beyond, including Bel Air, Fallston, Abingdon, White Marsh, Middle River, Parkville, Essex, Rosedale, Perry Hall, Overlea, Carney, Dundalk, Hampton, Lutherville, Timonium, Cockeysville, Phoenix, Reisterstown, Owings Mills, Randallstown, Pikesville, Milford Mill, Woodlawn, Catonsville, Ellicott City, West Friendship, Clarksville, Columbia, Fulton, Elkridge, Brooklyn Park, Linthicum Heights, Ferndale, Glen Burnie, Pasadena, Severn, Severna Park, Arnold, Cape Saint Claire, Edgewater, Crownsville, Crofton, Odenton, Bowie, Laurel, and Snow Hill.
Results listed are not a guarantee or indication of future case results.
Your Privacy Choices