Rounds v. Maryland National Capital Park & Planning Commission
75 A.3d 987
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2013Background
- Plaintiffs (Rounds, Gaither, et al.) own parcels accessed historically by "Farm Road" and allege a ten-foot right-of-way; they claim the Maryland–National Capital Park and Planning Commission (the Commission) and various private parties took steps to eliminate access and rescinded or refused to reissue property addresses.
- Developers (Brown, the Areys) and counsel (MHG; Riggs) are alleged to have submitted plats and surveys misrepresenting the road and title, leading to the Commission’s approval of Plat 21707 and removal of Farm Road from mapping/plats.
- Plaintiffs sought multiple forms of relief in a 2011 Amended Complaint: Counts 1–4 against the Commission (state constitutional and takings claims); Counts 5–11 (declaratory easement theories) against various landowners and defendants; Counts 12–13 (wrongful interference, slander of title) against some defendants.
- The trial court dismissed all counts: Counts 1–4 as to the Commission for failure to comply with the Local Government Tort Claims Act (LGTCA) notice requirement; Counts 5–11 for failure to join all adjacent property owners; Counts 12–13 as time-barred. Dismissals were made with varying prejudice as to different defendants.
- On appeal, the court (Maryland appellate court) reviewed (de novo for dismissals) and affirmed: it held the LGTCA notice applies to suits against the Commission for state constitutional torts, plaintiffs failed to show good cause to excuse late notice, plaintiffs failed to join necessary adjacent owners for declaratory easement claims, and claims for wrongful interference and slander accrued before plaintiffs filed (time-barred).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Applicability of LGTCA notice to state constitutional torts | LGTCA notice does not apply to state constitutional torts; alternatively, good cause excuses late notice because they relied on County Executive/Commission communications | LGTCA notice applies; plaintiffs failed to give timely notice and showed no good cause | LGTCA notice applies to suits against the Commission for state constitutional torts; plaintiffs did not show good cause; Counts 1–4 dismissed for lack of timely notice |
| Good-cause to excuse LGTCA notice | Plaintiffs relied on Commission’s shifting explanations and solicited County Executive’s assistance, justifying delay | Plaintiffs did not notify anyone in Commission authority within 180 days; no prejudice shown to defendants but plaintiffs lacked diligence | Abuse of discretion not shown; plaintiffs did not prosecute with ordinary diligence nor show misleading conduct that caused delay; no good cause |
| Joinder of necessary parties for declaratory easement claims (Counts 5–11) | Plaintiffs alleged other adjacent owners "agreed not to contest" the relief, so dismissal for nonjoinder was improper | Plaintiffs failed to name or join all adjacent owners; nondisclosure is conclusory and precludes disposition without all interested parties | Dismissal proper: plaintiffs failed to identify and join all persons with interests; conclusory allegation insufficient; Counts 5–11 dismissed for nonjoinder |
| Accrual date / statute of limitations for wrongful interference and slander (Counts 12–13) | Accrual on Nov. 20, 2007 (when Commission refused to issue addresses) | Accrual earlier (e.g., Plat approval Aug. 3, 2000 or developer actions in ~1994–2003) | Court holds accrual occurred on or before 2003 (and plat approval put plaintiffs on inquiry notice); claims are time-barred (did not meet 3-year and 1-year limitations) |
Key Cases Cited
- Gomez v. Jackson Hewitt, Inc., 427 Md. 128 (standard for de novo review of motion to dismiss)
- Forster v. Office of Public Defender, 426 Md. 565 (pleading limited to four corners; reject conclusory allegations)
- Longtin v. Prince George’s County (Longtin II), 419 Md. 450 (standard and good-cause framework for LGTCA notice)
- Ashton v. Brown, 339 Md. 70 (LGTCA coverage of constitutional torts discussed)
- O & B, Inc. v. Md.-Nat’l Capital Park & Planning Comm’n, 279 Md. 459 (Commission characterized as State agency entitled to sovereign immunity)
- Poole v. Coakley & Williams Const., Inc., 423 Md. 91 (discovery rule for accrual of claim)
- Bacon v. Arey, 203 Md. App. 606 (inquiry notice regarding Farm Road issues; accrual analysis)
- City of Bowie v. MIE Properties, Inc., 398 Md. 657 (joinder and the need to bind nonparties to prevent multiplicity of litigation)