Maryland Family Law Maryland family law opinions and commentary
This is the fourth appeal to this Court by appellant, Marion S. Blades (“Marion”). The case was initiated in 2002 with the filing of a Complaint for Limited Divorce by Norman C. Blades, Jr (“Norman”). The parties were divorced on January 3, 2007 and Marion was awarded indefinite alimony, the amount of which is the subject of her current appeal.
I. Did the trial court err by not following the Court of Special Appeals direction to alleviate the disparity in income between the parties when it was directed back to the Circuit Court for correction?
II. Did the trial court err by saying that since the children are adults that they would be omitted from the hearing but then the judge allowed Mr. Hamburg (attorney for the Appellee) to bring the children up after several pre-trial agreements that the children were not going to be brought up?
III. Did the trial court err in it’s [sic] calculation only allowing $2,400 of rehabilitative alimony for only six months?
IV. Did the trial court err when it refused to consider the Family Law Article 11-106(b) factors, improperly determined the amount od [sic] income the Appellant could earn and failed to explain how it’s alimony award alleviated the unconscionable disparity better the parties income.
V. Did the trial court err in not including the Appellant’s marital debt and charge cards (Bank of America ($16,191.00), Sears ($16,367), GM ($15,273), Citi Premier ($11,487), Bank of America ($4,604 and $4590) all these expenses were used for supporting herself and her minor child at the time.
VI. Did the trail court err in not awarding attorney fee’s [sic] for Ms. McCann (45,000 + approximately 10,000 already paid), Cythinia [sic] Young (appeal’s attorney, $25,000 plus $2500 retainer plus $130 in court fees), Mr. Anthony Bartless [sic] ($13,000).
VII. Did the trial court err in not considering the Appellant and her minor children’s place of residence and the fact that the Appellant provided a place for them to live and financial support from 2002 until when the youngest was emancipated in June 2009.
VIII. Did the trial court err when it refused to make minimal (50/50) monetary award to Appellant base[d] on the equity in Rowland Drive property, not including the $38,000 marital money taken out of the equity of the property to pay off credit cards and for use by Appellee?
IX. Did the trial court err by allowing new evidence that was denied by Judge Harris in July 2nd, 2009 hearing, regarding the Food Lion deposition and new pictures that were acquired by the Appellee having his son steal from the Appellant?
X. Did the trial court err by not considering the vocational expert, Martin Krantiz’s opinion that the Appellant is unable to work at this time and imputing any money at all on the Appellant?
XI. Did the trial court err by only considering that two friends of the Appellant stated that they didn’t know of her having incontinence?
XII. Did the trial court err by saying that the Appellant can do Elderly Care when she can not [sic] lift on patient with all of her medical problems and it has been determined by a vocational expert that she is unable to perform work at this time?
XIII. Did the trial court err saying that only 40 hours per week can be considered under Tracey’s rule since the Appellee has testified that he gets paid 58 hours guaranteed Forman’s pay regardless of how many hours he works?
XIV. Did the trial court err saying that the Appellee can not [sic] “afford” to pay the Appellant alimony when the Appellee has over $12,550.00 per month income and the Appellant is expected to live on 9.56% of the Appellee’s salary? The trial court judge seems biased towards the Appellee since he is male. He seems to question everything the Appellant says and does but idolizes the Appellee because he makes a decent living,.[sic]
XV. Did the trial court err not considered [sic] the financial budget of the Appellant?
XVI. Did the trial court err by taking small portions of testimony of witnesses (Robin White and Margaret Burkindine). [sic]
XVII. Did the trial court err by saying that the Appellant could live off the sale of her home when the home was sold, not allowing for a home for the Appellant?
XVIII. Did the trial court err by making several false statements?
XIX. Did the trial court err by allowing Appellee’s attorney to keep bringing up the fact that Marion pickets [sic] Judge Harris’ decision and that he should be hearing the trial to cause animosity/bias from the court, towards the Appellant?
XX. Did the trial court err by not enforcing court order stating that Mr. Blades is to pay half of the termite damage to the home.?[sic]
XXI. Did the trial court err by saying that the Appellant can do Elderly Care when she can not [sic] lift on patients with all of her medical problems and it has been determined by a vocational expert that she is unable to perform work at this time?
