Author: JGL Law

In this episode of JGL LAW FOR YOU, JGL attorneys Chris Castellano and David Bulitt discuss the impact of social media on family law litigation.

JGL Senior Counsel, The Baltimore Sun recently asked Michal Shinnar to comment on recent developments in the Internal Affairs Division:

The Maryland State Police is moving the unit’s sworn investigators to barracks across the state and bringing in new commanders, the agency confirmed Monday. Police spokeswoman Elena Russo said in a Monday statement that the moves are a part of “plans to rebuild and strengthen our IAD to provide quality and timely services to our personnel and to the communities we serve.” She cast the move as part of a broader effort by the superintendent to improve the statewide law enforcement agency alongside his “commitment to ensuring excellence.”

While sworn investigators are being rotated back out to the Field Operations Bureau, the Internal Affairs Division’s civilian personnel will “remain consistent,” Russo’s statement said. The steps by the superintendent, Colonel Roland L. Butler Jr., follow recent news of a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice to remedy what the proposed consent decree calls “unintentional discrimination against African American and female applicants” through the state police testing process. It also comes amid ongoing litigation alleging racial discrimination against troopers of color, which a federal judge allowed to move forward last month.

The department did not directly answer questions about what spurred the moves but said Monday it was unrelated to the DOJ consent decree and the lawsuit. An agency-wide personnel order sent Friday listed the following transfers out of the Internal Affairs Division: two corporals, one detective sergeant, six sergeants, one lieutenant and one captain. The only sworn members being transferred into Internal Affairs on that personnel order were a captain and a lieutenant. The moves go into effect Wednesday, according to the order. The agency said Monday evening that administrative investigations would be conducted by state police personnel, and that “serious cases” would be “temporarily assigned to our seasoned investigators.”

Russo said administrative investigations will continue to be overseen by the Internal Affairs Division command staff. A website for the Internal Affairs Division lists nine full-time investigators who “are geographically assigned to local barracks statewide.” If that holds true, it’s possible those nine were the two corporals and seven detective sergeants transferred out. The website does not list civilian roles in the division. In a Friday email to the agency’s staff, Butler addressed the changes with similar wording to Russo’s statement. He said the agency was “currently implementing plans to rebuild and strengthen our IAD to provide quality and timely services to all,” calling it “another step taken in our commitment to ensuring excellence.

“Best practices, along with the feedback we receive, will remain instrumental in improving our processes moving forward,” Butler wrote. “Thank you for your trust and patience as we preserve our legacy as ‘Maryland’s Finest.’ “A state government website shows Internal Affairs falling under Butler’s purview, in the Office of Secretary, or the Office of the Superintendent, as itis referred to in budget documents. That part of the budget, which also include diversity initiatives, legal counsel, the media team and others, made up roughly 7.6% of the agency’s overall $615.3 million budget in the current fiscal year, according to a state analysis of the agency’s budget. The department’s recently announced proposal to resolve the Justice Department investigation includes $2.75 million being set aside for prospective troopers who were discriminated against, as well as improvements to physical and written hiring tests.

The consent decree, which lays out those terms, is subject to approval in federal court. According to that document, filed in U.S. District Court, 19 Black applicants and 29 female applicants would have been hired if not for the discrimination tests. At the time the Justice Department announced the investigation, the U.S. Attorney for Maryland, Erek L. Barron, told The Baltimore Sun that the probe would examine how the agency hires, promotes, trains, disciplines, and makes special opportunities available to employees.

Micha Shinnar, an attorney representing troopers of color in the lawsuit seeking class-action status, noted that their complaint alleges “the numerous and serious ways that Internal Affairs was engaged in discrimination against officers of color at Maryland State Police.” Her clients, three current and former troopers, alleged a longstanding pattern of discrimination through discipline, retaliation, and the denial of promotions. They are seeking policy changes, a monitor to oversee the agency and individual relief.

Among other things, the complaint argued troopers of color were disciplined for minor or nonexistent policy violations, with punishments that exceeded recommendations and investigations that took long periods of time. One plaintiff in the complaint, for example, was suspended for 301 days during an investigation into an alleged one-hour error in his timecard, according to the complaint. “We hope Maryland State Police will take all steps to ensure this discrimination stops,” Shinnar said.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a household phrase and is only growing in ubiquity. The tools implementing “AI” are increasingly being used to assist with various tasks, such as writing music, creating images, and even answering legal questions.

There is no question that AI has and will continue to usher in a new age of convenience and the sense that one can tackle any issue they are faced with. However, the sense of confidence provided by AI carries with it significant risk and for individuals seeking to represent themselves whilst using AI tools, doing so can be to their detriment. Let’s explore the potential dangers of AI in the context of handling your divorce case.

1. AI Lacks Personal Knowledge of Your Unique Situation

No two divorces are the same. While technology is advancing, AI lacks the ability to understand subtle facts and law in order to employ unique strategy decisions. Meaning, a computer can’t think like a human. This is because the result of any AI prompt is derivative of prior circumstances known to the AI database. Therefore, using AI tools may prevent you from developing a strategy specific to your set of facts. For example:

• Child Custody Issues: Determining the best interests of the child in a custody dispute is not a simple task. Maryland courts consider a variety of legal factors. Assuming AI tools are able to accurately determine the legal factors, applying your unique facts to those legal factors weighed in the context of your case and your opposing party’s position is a task that AI is unable to perform at a level necessary for your case.
• Property Division: Maryland is an “equitable distribution” state, meaning property acquired during the marriage is divided fairly, but not necessarily equally. Like with custody cases, Maryland courts consider several legal factors and again, AI may not accurately balance the equities of parties in order to deal with assets like retirement accounts, family businesses, or real estate holdings.

2. AI Cannot Navigate Court Procedures and Legal Nuances

The divorce process in Maryland involves an understanding of specific legal procedures, statutes, rules, and decades of case law. While AI can help you generate forms or define legal concepts, it is oftentimes a flawed process that leads to obvious inaccuracies.

• Filing and Documentation: Mistakes in filing forms or drafting motions can lead to significant adverse outcomes, including the risk of a court ordering that you pay attorneys fees due to your submission of documents to the court that contain inaccuracies.
• Courtroom Representation: If your divorce proceeds to court, AI cannot represent you. While the concept may make for an interesting movie premise, the reality is that you are “on your own” in front of the Court and AI as a crutch is unavailable to you.

3. AI is Likely to be “Out of Date” on Maryland-Specific Family Law Concepts

While AI can pull from vast amounts of legal data, it is likely to be out of date when it comes to recent changes or updates in Maryland family law. Laws and court rulings change over time, and even a small change in legislation or case law can impact the outcome of your divorce.

For example, Maryland has recently seen a change to the grounds for divorce and AI systems are unlikely to be updated to incorporate these changes, which will have a significant impact on any prompt you submit.

4. AI is Incapable of Drafting a Long-Term Successful Agreement

Divorce settlements can have long-lasting effects on your finances, property, and parenting arrangements. Mistakes made during the negotiation and drafting process due to a reliance on AI can be difficult and expensive to correct after the fact. For instance:

• Child Support and Alimony: Calculating child support or alimony involves multiple factors, and AI may not consider all the nuances required by Maryland law. A miscalculation in these areas could leave you financially vulnerable or locked into an unfair agreement.
• Enforceability of Agreements: If you use AI to draft a separation agreement, they may not meet the legal standards required by Maryland courts, a concern that may only be apparent months or years after the fact and lead to significant and costly litigation in the future.

Conclusion: The Value of Legal Expertise in Maryland Divorce Cases

While AI can be a helpful supplement in some areas of life, it is not a substitute for professional legal advice, particularly in the arena of your domestic legal case. Maryland’s family law system is complex, and the stakes are too high to rely solely on AI-generated information or documents. A skilled family law attorney can provide personalized advice, an understanding of the legal system, and the ability to advocate for your rights in a way that AI simply cannot. If you’re considering representing yourself in a Maryland divorce with the help of AI, caution is warranted. The potential pitfalls are numerous, and the long-term consequences can be severe. By working with an experienced family law attorney, you can ensure that your rights are protected, your case is handled properly, and you can move forward with your life on solid legal footing.

If you have questions about your divorce or need assistance with your case, feel free to contact our office. We’re here to help you through this challenging time with the expertise and care you deserve.

JGL Principal Lindsay Parvis has just been named to the 2025 Lawdragon Leading Family Lawyers guide. Lawdragon has published guides to the most elite U.S. lawyers since 2005. The 500 Family Law honorees are selected through submissions, journalistic research and editorial vetting from a board of peers. The recognition is published online at lawdragon.com

The Maryland Supreme Court has ruled that the future of Harborplace, a revitalization project of five new buildings — a mix of retail, office and residential space — along a completely reimagined waterfront promenade in Baltimore, will be decided by voters. A lower court judge previously ruled the ballot question was unconstitutional.

Tim Maloney, Alyse Prawde and Kevin Redden represented the Harborplace developer, MCB HP Baltimore LLC, before the Supreme Court, arguing that ballot Question F is constitutional and should appear on the ballot. Now, voters will be able to decide whether the developer will be able to execute plans to rebuild the Baltimore Inner Harbor.

Click here to read the complete article in The Baltimore Banner.

What’s a QDRO?

It’s a Qualified Domestic Relations Order, used to transfer retirement from one spouse to another in a divorce (or for child support or alimony). It can go by different names (Court Order Acceptable for Processing/COAP or Domestic Relations Order/DRO), based upon the type of retirement plan involved.

For this blog, I’ll use QDRO for all types of orders just to keep things simple. Please know, though, that QDROs and retirement transfers are not at all simple.

Why is a QDRO needed?

A QDRO transfers retirement from one spouse (the spouse who holds the account or participates in the pension plan) to the ex-spouse.

Not all retirement assets require a QDRO. IRAs are an example of a retirement plan that (usually) allows a transfer using the plan’s form instead of a court order. This is where doing your homework about what kind of plan it is and what type of order is needed can pay off.

What type of retirement plans need a QDRO?

Pensions and 401k-type plans are the most common.

What does a QDRO transfer?

Pensions (defined benefit plans): A QDRO is used to transfer some of the monthly pension payment to the ex-spouse, as well as the right to survivor benefits (so, benefits paid after the death of the employee) after divorce.

Other types of retirement (defined contribution plans): A QDRO is used to transfer a lump sum to the ex-spouse, and may keep them entitled to survivor benefits until the transfer is complete.

Why not just cash out retirement to pay my ex?

Because this can have big – and unnecessary – tax consequences & early withdrawal penalties. Your ex may have the option to cash out some of the retirement when the QDRO is processed by the retirement plan, but that’s their decision and the tax consequences are theirs.

When should I get a QDRO prepared?

If settling your divorce with an agreement, ideally the QDRO is prepared and signed at the same time. If not then, then as soon as possible after. Again, ideally, before the divorce is granted.

If settlement is not an option and you will have a trial, then ideally give the Judge a QDRO during your divorce trial. Or, have it prepared right after the appeal period has passed.

Delay is not a QDROs friend. Ex’s move and lose track of addresses (which are needed). If the retirement plan doesn’t calculate gains and losses, documents may no longer be available to do the calculation. Worse yet, exes pass away or retire, without orders in place, so retirement may not go where it’s supposed to, leaving exes to fight with an estate or having to collect money from their ex.

Who prepares the QDRO?

Sometimes your divorce attorney will.

Sometimes they will hire an attorney to draft the QDRO, while the divorce attorney handles communications with your ex or ex’s attorney and files the QDRO with the Court.

What’s not a good idea: preparing a QDRO yourself. Many plans have form QDROs. Filling in and using the form may get the desired outcome or it may lead to unintended consequences. When retirement is one of the biggest assets many people have, it’s not worth gambling with “fill in the blank”.

What steps are involved?

Usually:

1. A settlement agreement or Judgment of Absolute Divorce that spells out what’s to be transferred.
2. Preparing the QDRO. This may also involve having the draft QDRO reviewed & approved by the retirement plan (which may require a fee for review).
3. Trying to get your ex to sign off on the QDRO. If unsuccessful, skip to #4.
4. Submitting the QDRO to the Court.
5. Getting the QDRO back from the Court & getting certified copies.
6. Submitting certified copies of the QDRO (and usually other documents, like settlement agreement and Judgment of Absolute Divorce) to the retirement plan.
7. Awaiting the plan to review, process and accept the QDRO. If rejected, then starting back at #2 with a revised QDRO that meets the plan’s requirements.

Conclusion

It’s not worth gambling with retirement. Working with an experienced family attorney and QDRO attorney can help you protect your retirement interests, which are often one of the most valuable assets in divorce.

Michal Shinnar, one of the attorneys representing those plaintiffs, said her case is broader than the settlement, which appears specific to hiring. Her clients allege that officers of color faced harsher disciplinary action than white troopers and were promoted less often, among other claims.

She said her clients’ suit does not preclude them from benefiting from the settlement. U.S. District Court Judge Brendan Hurson earlier this month rejected the state’s motion to dismiss the case.

“Overall, we see this as a very positive thing for our case,” Shinnar, of the firm Joseph Greenwald and Laake, told The Daily Record.

Click here to read “Maryland State Police seeks $2.75M to settle claims of racial discrimination”

The FBI raided the offices of public sector IT contractor Carahsoft on Sept. 24, 2024. The raid of Carahsoft’s Reston, Va. headquarters appears linked to allegations that the major federal contractor had for years violated a cornerstone law that makes it illegal to arrange agreements between competitors to control prices for services provided to the government.

Carahsoft is under investigation alongside SAP, Accenture and other firms for allegedly violating the False Claims Act, which involved efforts to defraud government agencies for years. Frustration has mounted among DOJ lawyers, who claimed in court proceedings that the government’s document requests and inquiries appeared to be delayed or unfulfilled by Carahsoft. For more than a year, Carahsoft has not fulfilled requests to produce transaction records (including but not limited to the communications, solicitations, proposals, quotes, bids, award notices, orders, purchase orders, and invoices) for even a single project for the Justice Department and others involved.

According to Jay Holland, the Justice Department may have reached a tipping point in its investigation and decided the best course of action was to raid the company to preserve evidence. False Claims Act investigations vary case by case, but if a raid was launched, he said, it’s a sign that a significant amount of investigative work was carried out prior to that. “They’re not going to start out by raiding companies headquarters,” Holland said. The DOJ “would have done a significant amount of investigation … and determined that the gravity of the case warranted it.”

Read “FBI’s Carahsoft raid tied to years of price fixing allegations with other vendors” on the Nextgov/FCW website.

For most, social media is now a ubiquitous tool that connects us to friends, family, and the world. We share our triumphs and tribulations, often in real-time. But in the emotionally charged arena of a divorce action, seemingly harmless posts, photos, and comments could have significant consequences. This blog entry will explore the hidden dangers lurking behind your social media posts and provide some general ideas on how to navigate your digital landscape during a divorce.

While seemingly innocuous, your online activity can be, and often is, used as evidence in divorce proceedings. Here’s how:

• Proof of Adultery or Inappropriate Behavior: Photos and posts documenting romantic relationships, late-night outings, or even suggestive comments can be used as evidence of adultery or other behavior. Even if the posts are not public, they are generally susceptible to discovery through subpoenas or forensic analysis.
• Financial Discrepancies: Exhibiting lavish purchases, vacations, or new assets while claiming financial hardship in court can damage your credibility to a judge.
• Parental Fitness Concerns: Posts depicting excessive partying, including alcohol use, even if it is responsible, can often lead to questions being raised about parental fitness. Caution should be employed when your posts depict routine partying, drinking, etc.
• Contradictory Statements: Statements made on social media can contradict statements made under oath or in legal documents. For instance, the claim that you are unable to work due to health reasons and therefore you need support, but you post pictures of a recent ski-trip may cause a court to question your credibility.
• Evidence of Harassment or Disparaging Remarks: Using social media to harass, threaten, or disparage your spouse can not only negatively impact your case but can also lead to separate legal issues, such as protective orders. Additionally, in the event that custody is at issue, it can lead to you being viewed in an adverse light due to your perceived inability to show proper judgment.
• Location and Activity Tracking: Check-ins, location tags, and posts about your activities can be used to establish your whereabouts and contradict claims about your schedule or parenting time.

The best approach to social media during a divorce is caution. This does not mean avoiding social media altogether, but rather, being more judicious with how and what you post. Here are some essential tips:

• Privacy Settings Are Not Foolproof: Increasing your privacy settings is a good first step, but does not guarantee your protection. Assume anything you post can be seen by the court.
• Refrain from Posting About Your Divorce: Avoid discussing your case, your spouse, or any related matters online. This includes venting your frustrations, celebrating perceived victories, or seeking advice from friends.
• Think Before You Post: Before you post, consider the potential implications, including foreseeable comments. Ask yourself: Could this be misinterpreted or used against me?
• Preserve Evidence: Just as social media can be a tool used against you, it is one that you can wield as well. Therefore, if you believe your spouse’s social media activity is relevant to your case, take screenshots and preserve them in a secure location. This information should be shared with your attorney.
• Consult with Your Attorney: Before making any decisions regarding social media, including pausing your social media presence, discuss your concerns and strategies with your Maryland family law attorney who can provide you with specific advice based on your case.

Conclusion:

Navigating a divorce is already complex and emotionally challenging. Don’t let social media exacerbate vulnerabilities in your case. By understanding the potential benefits and pitfalls of social media, you can take proactive steps to protect yourself and minimize your risks. If you are considering or involved in a divorce in Maryland, contact an experienced family law attorney to discuss your case and develop a comprehensive legal strategy. Your online activity matters – treat it with the seriousness it deserves.

On the heels of the federal court decision allowing JGL’s class action race discrimination suit against MSP to go forward, JGL is glad to see that DOJ’s investigation into discrimination at MSP warranted MSP seeking approval to pay a $2.75 million settlement.

Click to read full details and Jay Holland’s quote in this Washington Post article (PDF)

This coming term, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether former firefighter Karyn Stanley can proceed with her disability claims under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) against her former employer, the City of Sanford, Florida.

Ms. Stanley is a retiree, who was forced to retire because of symptoms related to her Parkinson’s Disease. Ms. Stanley, who receives disability retirement from the city, filed suit under the ADA claiming that the city’s retirement benefits plan discriminates based upon disability. When Ms. Stanley first started with the department, the City’s plan granted retirees free health insurance until age 65, but the plan subsequently changed, covering disabled retirees for only two years after leaving the city’s employ.

The ADA states that employers cannot “discriminate against a qualified individual on the basis of disability in regard to … terms, conditions, and privileges of employment.” The ADA specifically defines who is a “qualified individual” that is subject to its protections. People qualify if they “can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individual holds or desires[.]”

So, what does “holds or desires” mean? The federal appeals courts, the lower courts directly below the U.S. Supreme Court, are split on this issue. The Sixth, Seventh, and Ninth Circuits agree with the Eleventh Circuit’s holding in Ms. Stanley’s case that the ADA does not apply to former employees because they neither hold (currently fill) nor desire to hold (aka are applicants for) positions of employment. The Second and Third Circuits hold otherwise that the ADA does apply to former employees because the ADA must be read consistent with Title VII, the federal law that prohibits employment discrimination based upon race, color, religion, sex, gender and national origin, which allows former employees to pursue discrimination claims. The Supreme Court will almost certainly resolve and put an end to this circuit court split. Given the Supreme Court’s recent leanings on employment claims before it, I do not expect Ms. Stanley to prevail. Thereafter, employees’ only hope may be that a friendlier Congress is in place to make the final decision by amending the ADA.

NBC News covered the recent Federal court decision which allows the discrimination suit against the Maryland State Police (MSP) to proceed. The lawsuit alleges that the state police agency has a longstanding pattern of discrimination against officers of color. Officers who work at the MSP describe it as a racist work environment.

“We want a police force that promotes officers based on merit, that holds officers accountable for true misconduct and doesn’t mete out discipline in truly discriminatory ways,” said Michal Shinnar, who represents Byron Tribue, a current officer, along with two other current and former officers who are suing the department. All say they have been victims of discrimination and retaliation that have affected their careers.

“This is not the story of one individual like Mr. Tribue who has been harmed by discrimination. These are patterns and practices that exist in the Maryland State Police,” Shinnar said.

The officers who are suing the department said they hope this will become a class action lawsuit in which additional officers can get involved.

You can view the news clip here.