Smith v. Freeland Community Ass'n

BISHOP, Judge. Dennis G. Smith, appearing pro se, attempts to appeal an order of the Circuit Court for Baltimore County that (1) prevented him from presenting additional evidence on an administrative appeal to the Circuit Court from the County Board of Appeals, and (2) dismissed his appeal for failure to comply with Maryland Rule B12. The appellees, Freeland Community Association, Inc., et al. and People’s Counsel for Baltimore County, were protestants and intervenors in the zoning action. As we explain later in this opinion the only issue before us is the denial of the appellant’s motion to strike the dismissal of the administrative appeal.

Facts On December 7, 1979, appellant, a contract purchaser, filed with the Baltimore County Zoning Commissioner a Petition for Special Exception for a golf course and related uses for certain property located in northern Baltimore County. On January 22, 1980, a hearing was held before the Deputy Zoning Commissioner of Baltimore County. Almost nine months later, on October 14, 1980, the Deputy Zoning ⁴⁶ Commissioner issued an order denying appellant’s petition for a special exception. On October 15,1980, appellant filed an appeal to the County Board of Appeals; on September 10, 17 and 29, and November 17, 1981, a hearing was conducted before that board.

On January 8, 1982, the County Board of Appeals affirmed the order of the Deputy Zoning Commissioner denying the petition for special exception. On February 5, 1982, appellant filed an order for appeal to the circuit court in accordance with Chapter 1100, sub-title B of the Maryland Rules of Procedure. On February 16,1982, in accordance with Maryland Rule B2 e, appellant filed the petition to accompany the appeal. On February 24, 1982, and March 12, 1982, respondents, Freeland and People’s Counsel filed answers to the petition.

On June 1, 1982, in a five page letter to the County Administrative Judge, appellant requested, in accordance with Maryland Rule BIO, “the right to present additional pertinent evidence before the assigned judge....” That letter, to which supporting documents were appended, described his involvement as an undercover agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation in producing evidence that ultimately resulted in the resignation of the former chairman of the County Board of Appeals. In the letter, appellant contended that two of the three members of the County Board of Appeals, who had heard his appeal from the Zoning Commissioner, had been closely associated with the deposed chairman and, therefore, could not have given his case a fair and impartial hearing. Appellant requested an immediate hearing on his request to produce additional evidence. On June 21,1982, appellant filed a second request for a hearing on the issues raised in the letter, which he referred to as a motion to be permitted to present additional evidence on appeal.

On June 23, 1982, Freeland filed a motion to dismiss on the basis of the appellant’s failure to comply with Maryland Rule B12, which requires that: ⁴⁷ “Within 30 days after being notified by the clerk of the filing of the record, the appellant shall file a memorandum setting forth a concise statement of all issues raised on appeal and argument on each issue, including citations of legal authorities and references to pages of the transcript and exhibits relied on.” The motion alleged that appellant had until June 16,1982, to file the required memorandum and that he failed to do so. The certificate of service of the motion to dismiss certified that on June 21, 1982, a copy of the motion was mailed to the appellant. Although the order dismissing the appeal is dated June 22,1982, the day before the filing of the petition, it is clear that the judge signed the order pursuant to the motion and not sua sponte. On June 25, 1982, appellant filed a motion to strike the order dismissing the appeal and a response to the motion to dismiss, along with a request for a hearing.

This did not toll the running of the time for appealing the order dismissing the administrative appeal. On June 28, 1982, Freeland filed a “Motion Ne Recipiatur And/or Answer to Motion to Strike Order Dismissing Appeal.” In response to a request for an “Order Revising Prior Order Dismissing Appeal” the trial judge noted: “Ct