Rules for exceptions

[ProSeDadinMD]

What is the name of your state? MD

Exceptions.- Within ten days after recommendations are placed on the record or served pursuant to section (e) of this Rule, a party may file exceptions with the clerk. Within that period or within ten days after service of the first exceptions, whichever is later, any other party may file exceptions. Exceptions shall be in writing and shall set forth the asserted error with particularity. Any matter not specifically set forth in the exceptions is waived unless the court finds that justice requires otherwise.

(g) Requirements for excepting party.- At the time the exceptions are filed, the excepting party shall do one of the following: (1) order a transcript of so much of the testimony as is necessary to rule on the exceptions, make an agreement for payment to ensure preparation of the transcript, and file a certificate of compliance stating that the transcript has been ordered and the agreement has been made; (2) file a certification that no transcript is necessary to rule on the exceptions; (3) file an agreed statement of facts in lieu of the transcript; or (4) file an affidavit of indigency and motion requesting that the court accept an electronic recording of the proceedings as the transcript. Within ten days after the entry of an order denying a motion under subsection (g) (4) of this section, the excepting party shall comply with subsection (g) (1). The transcript shall be filed within 30 days after compliance with subsection (g) (1) or within such longer time, not exceeding 60 days after the exceptions are filed, as the master may allow. For good cause shown, the court may shorten or extend the time for the filing of the transcript. The excepting party shall serve a copy of the transcript on the other party. The court may dismiss the exceptions of a party who has not complied with this section.

Lets see who here agrees with me. I was at the courthouse yesterday, and picked up a copy of the transcript on CD. While I was there, the lady inthe transcript section told me that somebody else had been in regarding this case yesterday morning, checking on the prices. No transcript had been ordered, although she said that it wouldn't show if it has been done previously and was on CD or cassette. My CD states on it that it is not certified for court use. Based on the rules above(and they had a copy of the second part there in the office), my thought is that ...her ... lawyer has not followed the proper rules. When I went to the Masters office to check on this, I was told by his assistant that they "believe" that there is a ten day window from the time that the exceptions are filed untill they have to prove that they ordered the transcripts.

Who is right?

 

[LdiJ]

What is the name of your state? MD

Lets see who here agrees with me. I was at the courthouse yesterday, and picked up a copy of the transcript on CD. While I was there, the lady inthe transcript section told me that somebody else had been in regarding this case yesterday morning, checking on the prices. No transcript had been ordered, although she said that it wouldn't show if it has been done previously and was on CD or cassette. My CD states on it that it is not certified for court use. Based on the rules above(and they had a copy of the second part there in the office), my thought is that ...her ... lawyer has not followed the proper rules. When I went to the Masters office to check on this, I was told by his assistant that they "believe" that there is a ten day window from the time that the exceptions are filed untill they have to prove that they ordered the transcripts.

Who is right?

I think that you are over-reacting to a technicality. I think that the master's assistant is likely to be correct. The have 30-60 days to submit the transcripts.

 

[fairisfair]

I think that you are over-reacting to a technicality. I think that the master's assistant is likely to be correct. The have 30-60 days to submit the transcripts.

I thought they same thing when I read it. Wow, I think I have been agreeing with you much to often lately.

 

[LdiJ]

I thought they same thing when I read it. Wow, I think I have been agreeing with you much to often lately.

------------------

 

[ProSeDadinMD]

Sorry, it took me a bit to get my thoughts together. In addition to this, I’m dealing with my mom, who just got diagnosed with early/mid-stage Alzheimer’s, and needs placement into an assisted living facility, so I am kind of on overload.

The main reason that I brought up the rules regarding the timeline was that I am fully cognizant of the fact that if the situation were reversed, …she … would jump on that like a starving dog on a pot roast. I was just saying what it looked like it meant to me in the second section.

I’m a little hesitant to try to get any kind of filing extension for my answers, because I don’t doubt that whey would do everything in their power to stop it, and I’m not even positive that I need to file an answer(the assistant asked me if I planned on filing an answer, but couldn’t say for sure that I needed to). I’ll be spending every moment that I am not dealing with my mom this weekend writing my answers.

On a side note, while I was at the courthouse, waiting to see the assistant to see where things stood, one of the 2 court reporters who was present at the 4/3 hearing walked past me. She stopped, did a double take, then said hello to me by name. I said that I wasn’t sure that it was a good thing or a bad thing that I stood out in her mind. She laughed and said sometimes that goes both ways, but in my case, it was all good. She told me that she thought I had done a great job, considering, and that I should give serious consideration to going into the legal field.