Author: JGL Law

The divorce and separation laws in Maryland have changed recently, reshaping options available to dissolve marriages. Let’s delve into the distinctions between limited divorce, legal separation, and an annulment.

Limited Divorce

Historically, Maryland provided couples with the choice between a limited divorce and an absolute divorce. A limited divorce allowed individuals to address crucial matters such as child custody, child support, alimony, and financial obligations while maintaining their marital status. This was particularly valuable for those lacking grounds for absolute divorce but needing financial relief and intervention from the court. Recent legal changes in Maryland eliminate the option of limited divorce for new cases raising questions about how the state’s trial and appellate courts will handle cases filed before October 1, 2023.

Legal Separation

Maryland law never formally recognized legal separation; a limited divorce was the closest thing to a legal separation. Despite this, couples can still create separation agreements in situations where reconciliation seems unlikely. These agreements, whether verbal or written, can serve as evidence if the couple later pursues divorce on grounds such as a six-month separation, irreconcilable differences, or mutual consent. Separation agreements address important issues such as child custody, financial support, health insurance, and property division while the spouses live apart. This is a contractual arrangement that can be modified or revoked, with legal consequences for violations.

Annulment

Annulment is a unique and rare legal action that declares a marriage null and void, as if it never existed. Individuals can file for an annulment in the county of residence or where the marriage ceremony took place. However, seeking an annulment is no simple task, as the grounds are challenging to prove. A marriage may be annulled if it is void or voidable.

Void Marriages — A marriage is considered void if, at the time of the ceremony, either party was legally married to someone else (bigamy) or if the parties are blood relatives (incest). Void marriages are always deemed invalid, and legal proceedings can be initiated by either party or a third party to declare the marriage void.

Voidable Marriages — A marriage is voidable if consent was obtained through abduction, fraud, duress, undue influence, or if either party lacked the mental capacity to fully comprehend and consent to the marriage contract (incapacity). Unlike void marriages, voidable marriages remain legally valid until a court declares them invalid, and only the victimized party has the right to challenge the marriage’s validity. If a couple continues to live together after the circumstances that made the marriage voidable cease to exist, the marriage cannot be annulled.

As Maryland’s divorce laws evolve, understanding the nuances of limited divorce, legal separation, and annulment is vital. Couples should carefully consider their circumstances and seek legal counsel to navigate the complexities and determine the most appropriate course of action for their situation.

The Power of Prenuptial Agreements

A prenuptial agreement provides couples with an opportunity to take control of their financial futures in the event of a divorce. By having a prenuptial agreement in place, couples can navigate separation and divorce with confidence and certainty, avoiding reliance on a judge to decide the fate of their assets. Though initiating a conversation about prenuptial agreements can be uncomfortable, the discussion will open communication about finances and set the stage for a healthy marriage.

Who Should Get a Prenuptial Agreement?

While prenuptial agreements can offer financial protection to a wide array of individuals, those in the following scenarios are most encouraged to consider a prenup:

• Significant premarital assets,
• Complicated Estate planning concerns,
• Transitioning employment,
• Pre-existing business interests.

Do I need an attorney?

Because of the nature of a prenuptial agreement, your interests may not necessarily be aligned with that of your soon-to-be spouse. Therefore, you should each retain independent attorneys who can assist you throughout the process.

Getting the Process Started

When discussing a prenuptial agreement with your partner, prioritize transparency and honesty. Communicate about your financial circumstances and how you envision sharing finances and assets during the marriage and in the potential post-marriage. Different approaches include:

1. Basic Discussions:
   • Couples discussing what they would like to see in a prenuptial agreement. Those interests can then be conveyed to attorneys to negotiate, prepare, and finalize agreement.
2. Mediation:
   • Couples sit down with a mediator and their attorneys to review and draft the prenuptial agreement.

Requirements of Prenuptial Agreements

Though there are many specific requirements, generally, a valid prenuptial agreement requires a full financial disclosure from both parties. A full disclosure ensures an accurate and complete understanding of each other’s assets and prevents later claims that essential information was unknown prior to entering into the prenuptial agreement. Additionally, the agreement must fair and reasonable to both parties and must be entered into voluntarily, with both parties having the capacity to understand the implications as well as the opportunity to fully review and understand said terms and implications. This means that prenuptial agreements should be prepared well in advance of a potential marriage to avoid any unnecessary rush. Finally, the agreement should be in writing and signed by both parties.

Limitations

While powerful, generally speaking, prenuptial agreements do have their limitations. It is important to consider limitations placed on prenuptial agreements specific to your state. In Maryland, prenuptial agreements cannot predetermine issues related to child custody and child support nor impose illegal requirements on a party or encourage a divorce.

Updates to your Prenuptial Agreement

Like any contract, prenuptial agreements require adherence to the terms for its intended goals to be achieved. Due to life changes, updates to the agreement to ensure adherence may be necessary to ensure the agreement remains relevant. If you fail to keep your prenuptial agreement updated with major events, you risk having ineffective terms.

Conclusion

A well-drafted and properly executed prenuptial agreement offers couples peace of mind regarding their financial future and helps to simplify disputes should separation and divorce arise. A timely and diligent approach to creating a prenuptial agreement can be challenging but provides significant benefits. If you or someone you know is considering a prenuptial agreement, consultation with an attorney experienced in the preparation of prenups is important. When used wisely, prenuptial agreements can contribute to a secure and transparent financial foundation for a lasting marriage.

Virginia (Gia) Grimm authored one of HR.com’s latest featured articles entitled “Employee Termination: Think Like A Plaintiff’s Attorney.”

While a number of counties in Maryland such as Montgomery and Prince George’s had an existing minimum wage rate higher than the federal minimum wage (which currently sits at $7.25 per hour), as of January 1, 2024, almost all employers in the state of Maryland are now required to compensate their employees at $15.00 an hour.

This new, across-the-board, Maryland state requirement came into effect when Maryland Governor Wes Moore signed Maryland Senate Bill 555, better known as the Fair Wage Act of 2023, into law in April 2023.

Importantly, the exceptions to the Fair Wage Act are very limited. For instance, small employers, defined as those with fourteen or fewer employees, now have to compensate employees at $13.40 an hour, unless required to pay a higher rate by county law or another locality requirement. Additionally, tipped workers must make at least $3.63 an hour (half the federal minimum wage), and with tips, now must earn a minimum of $15.00 an hour. So, if tipped workers are compensated, including with tips, at a rate less than $15.00 an hour, their employers have to fill in the gap until they get to at least $15.00 an hour. Finally, workers under the age of 18 must be paid at least at a rate of 85% of the minimum wage rate or $12.75 an hour.

As always, employers should make sure they are compensating employees consistent with all federal, state, and local laws and other regulatory requirements. Failure to follow all requirements can lead to hefty penalties for employers, including fines and up to double damages on top of the amount of compensation owed to their employees. As the Appellate Court of Maryland explained, employers “doing business in Maryland must be aware of the requirements affecting a Maryland business enterprise, including whether state and federal laws apply.” Pinnacle Grp., LLC v. Kelly, 235 Md. App. 436, 467 (2018).

JGL attorneys Tim Maloney and Kevin Redden represented Gwen Wright, a longtime Montgomery County Planning Board member who was fired. After her termination, the entire Montgomery County Planning Board resigned.

You can read the article here.

The Appellate Court of Maryland issued a reported opinion December 20, 2023, in favor of JGL’s client, the developer of the Suffrage Point development in Hyattsville. The Appellate Court determined that the Prince George’s Planning Board had not erred in approving our client’s Preliminary Plan of Subdivision for the development. Senior Counsel Alyse Prawde briefed and argued this case.

The case concerned important issues about the procedure for developers moving through the zoning and subdivision process. The Appellate Court of Maryland found that the pending appeal of the Conceptual Site Plan did not prohibit the Planning Board from approving our client’s Preliminary Plan of Subdivision. The court also determined that there was no requirement in the County’s Zoning Ordinance requiring a preliminary plan of subdivision to conform with a conceptual site plan.

Hear JGL Principal Veronica Nannis speak about the recent $345 Million Settlement Announced 12/19/2023. Veronica was lead counsel on this matter.

Settlement breaks record for largest recovery of its kind in U.S. history 

INDIANAPOLIS, Dec. 19, 2023 – The United States Department of Justice (DOJ) today announced a settlement with Indiana-based Community Health Network (Community) for $345 million for healthcare fraud claims on Medicare. The False Claims Act (FCA) case spanned 2008 to 2020. This historic settlement comes more than nine years after it was first filed. Community must also comply with a Corporate Integrity Agreement, ensuring five years of continual monitoring by the government. This is the second settlement with recidivist offender Community; the first was 2015 for $20.3 million.

The settlement comes after seasoned healthcare finance and operations executive Thomas Fischer sued his former employer, Community. Fischer is a whistleblower, or “relator,” under the FCA, who filed suit on behalf of the government based on detailed insider knowledge of fraud. Fischer’s complaint (PDF) included allegations that Community violated the federal Stark Law, which prohibits payments of any kind – including inflated salaries – to physicians to influence where they treat or refer patients. DOJ supported Fischer, intervening in 2019 with its own complaint (PDF).

Today’s $345 million settlement is reportedly nearly triple the largest prior Stark Law False Claims Act settlement.

“This historic settlement is thanks to the public-private partnership unique to the FCA,” said whistleblower attorney Veronica Nannis of Joseph Greenwald and Laake, which leads Fischer’s team with several other law firms. “Uncovering and prosecuting healthcare fraud takes skill, diligence and meticulous coordination with the government; all on display here.”

DOJ alleged Community illegally paid physicians inflated salaries: “After Bryan Mills became CHN’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), CHN embarked on an aggressive campaign to recruit physicians for employment.” Its complaint described the physicians’ excessive salaries as a “defensive” tool used to recruit physicians to “secure their referrals.” It warned, the Stark law “plays a key role in ensuring that services are reasonable and necessary, and not provided merely to enrich the parties in a financial relationship at the expense of federal health programs and their beneficiaries.”

Fischer stated, “I am grateful for this recovery. These claims are not mere technicalities; they directly affect patients, hospital employees and the high cost of healthcare. This puts money back into the healthcare system and is a victory for the Indiana taxpayer.”

“The government’s dedication over nearly 10 years is a testament to its commitment to eliminating fraud,” added Jay Holland, counsel for Fischer. Holland lauded the DOJ team, led by Arthur DiDio, and described it as “providing a master class in Stark Law litigation.”

Fischer’s Indianapolis attorney Kathleen DeLaney added, “Our local United States Attorney’s Office, led by Civil Chief Shelese Woods, contributed significantly, and stood by past statements that Medicare fraud will not be tolerated. This is justice served for Indianapolis.”

For DeLaney and Fischer’s other counsel, Tim McCormack, this has been a nearly 10-year journey.

“I could not be prouder of Mr. Fischer’s tenacity,” said McCormack. “Cases like this are vital to keeping financial incentives away from medical judgment. Without a brave insider like Mr. Fischer, willing to speak up, speak out, and then blow the whistle, Community likely would have continued to get away with its fraud.”

Much of the case continues. Today’s settlement is only for intervened claims by the United States. Team Fischer continues to pursue Community for similar fraud under Stark, Anti-kickback, employment and retaliation claims.

The case is U.S. and State of Indiana ex rel Fischer v. Community Health Network, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-1215-RLY-MKK. Fischer is represented by lead counsel Veronica Nannis, Jay Holland and Virginia Grimm, Joseph, Greenwald & Laake; Tim McCormack and Michael Smith, Preti Flaherty Beliveau & Pachios, LLP; Steve Greenfogel and Bruce Greenberg, Lite DePalma; and local and employment counsel Kathleen DeLaney, DeLaney & DeLaney LLC. The government’s team is led by Arthur DiDio of the DOJ, United States Attorney for the Southern District of Indiana Zachary A. Myers and Civil Chief for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of Indiana, Shelese Woods. 

JGL Partner, Reza Golesorkhi, is featured in Modern Luxury Magazine‘s Modern Man Spotlight.

Read his spotlight piece here (PDF)

JGL Attorneys Veronica Nannis and Timothy Maloney were quoted in the latest Law360 article “Marriott Can’t Use Class Waiver To Block Cert. In Breach Row.”

A Maryland federal judge reinstated certification for several classes of consumers in a lawsuit against Marriott and its information technology provider over a massive data breach in 2018. The breach affected around 133 million Starwood guests in the U.S. The judge found Marriott’s response to the litigation inconsistent with its argument that guests had agreed to pursue claims individually. The decision overturned a Fourth Circuit ruling that vacated the certification order, citing a “choice of law and venue” clause in a guest rewards contract. The judge concluded that Marriott had waived the clause and that it was ineffective to override the court’s discretion to certify a class. The dispute is part of a larger data breach class action involving millions of consumers. Marriott plans to seek leave to appeal the ruling.

Click here for more background regarding this matter.

JGL Senior Counsel Christopher Castellano was featured in Washington Parent with his article entitled “Navigating the Holidays as a Separated or Newly Divorced Parent: A Survivor Guide.” This article was featured in their December edition.

Click here to read the article (PDF)

Family law specialist David Bulitt was praised as the lawyer who “epitomizes stability and old-fashioned common sense” by Bethesda Magazine. David was recognized and listed under The Best of Potomac Readers’ Choice Winners as “Best Family Attorney,” as seen on page 32.

He is routinely listed among Washington DC’s top family law attorneys and was honored by Maryland’s Daily Record as a “Leader in the Law” for his work in the area of Alternate Dispute Resolution, earlier this year.