Credit: sundrawalex / iStockphoto.com. Maryland Court Follows Supreme Court's Gun Permit Ruling: 'Good and Substantial Reason' Requirement Also Unconstitutional
"We conclude that this ruling requires we now hold Maryland's 'good and substantial reason' requirement unconstitutional. And were the similarities between this requirement and New York's now stricken proper cause requirement not self-evident enough, the Bruen Court expressly noted that Maryland was one of six states to 'have analogues to the 'proper cause' standards,' citing Md. Pub. Safety § 5-306(a)(6)(ii) and quoting its 'good and substantial reason' language," Chief Justice Gregory Wells wrote on behalf of the appellate panel.
August 01, 2022 at 03:56 PM
4 minute read
The Maryland Court of Special Appeals has followed in the footsteps of the U.S. Supreme Court's newest precedent on firearm permit requirements, finding its own "good and substantial reason" requirement to be unconstitutional.
When applying for his 2020 carry permit renewal, William Rounds indicated on his Maryland application that his "good and substantial reason" for carrying a handgun was related the amount of cash he would carry with him to purchase silver from people he didn't know, according to Special Appeals Court's opinion filed Wednesday.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
'Lookback Window' Law for Child Abuse Cases Constitutional, State High Court Finds
6 minute read
What’s at Stake in Supreme Court Case Over Religious Charter School?
Federal Judge Pauses Trump Funding Freeze as Democratic AGs Plan Suit
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1GOP Now Holds FTC Gavel, but Dems Signal They'll Be a Rowdy Minority
- 2Houston-Based Law Firm Overcomes Defamation Suit for Website Warning
- 3The Time Is Now for Employers to Assess Risk of Employees’ Use of DeepSeek
- 4Big Law Partner Co-Launches Startup Aiming to Transform Fund Formation Process
- 5How the Court of Public Opinion Should Factor Into Litigation Strategy
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
