Buck v. Folkers

Murphy, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Article IV, § 22 of the Constitution of Maryland, relating to “Circuit Courts” in the judicial circuits of Maryland, provides in pertinent part: “Where any Term is held, or trial conducted by less than the whole number of said Circuit Judges, upon the decision or determination of any point, or question, by the Court, it shall be competent to the party, against whom the ruling or decision is made, upon motion, to have the point, or question reserved for the consideration of the three Judges of the Circuit, who shall constitute a court in banc for such purpose; and the motion for such reservation shall be entered of record, during the sitting, at which such decision may be made; and the several Circuit Courts shall regulate, by rules, the mode and manner of presenting such points, or questions to the Court in banc, and the decision of the said Court in banc shall be the effective decision in the premises, and conclusive, as against the party, at whose motion said points, or questions were reserved; but such decision in banc shall not preclude the right of Appeal, or writ of error to the adverse party, in those cases, civil or criminal, in which appeal, or writ of error to the Court of Appeals may be allowed by Law... .” We have previously recognized that “[rjeview by a court in banc in the counties is a procedure long authorized, but rarely used.” State Roads Commission v. Smith, 224 Md. 537, 540 , 168 A. 2d 705, 706 (1961). 1 Despite the relative paucity of our previous holdings concerning Article IV, § 22, certain principles are well established. The decision of the court en banc is conclusive, final, and non-appealable by the party who sought the en banc review (the moving party). Board of Medical Examiners v. Steward, 207 Md. 108 , 113 A. 2d 426 ¹⁸⁷ (1955), Shueey v. Stoner, 47 Md. 167 (1877).

See also Tyler v. Board of Supervisors of Elections, 213 Md. 37 , 131 A. 2d 247 (1957). As to that party, a reservation of points or questions for consideration by the Court en banc is a substitute for an appeal to the Court of Appeals. Costigin v. Bond, 65 Md. 122 , 3 A. 285 (1886). Each of these decisions limited the non-appealability effect to “the party, at whose motion said points, or questions were reserved.” Article IV, §