Court Opinion

ID: 9751719
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 16:55:22.575796+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:26:57.665285
License: Public Domain

PAUL E. ALPERT, Judge,
Specially Assigned, dissenting.
I dissent. No doubt a strict and literal reading of Rule 8-602(d) would be consistent with the majority’s theory of this case. I believe, however, that we must look to the rule’s intent, i.e., to save premature appeals.' The trial judge in his opinion concluded “that the division was to be one-half of the marital portion of the pension. Counsel shall prepare an appropriate declaratory judgment____” The declaratory judgment does nothing more than reflect and implement the trial judge’s decision. The majority is absolutely correct when they state, “The trend, in Maryland and nationally, is to remove the technical hurdles that sometimes frustrate access to the courts.” Op. at 826. I would continue that trend.