Legal Case Summary

Michael Pense v. MD Dept of Public Safety


Date Argued: Tue Jan 29 2019
Case Number: 18-1554
Docket Number: 14527124
Judges:Diana Gribbon Motz, Robert B. King, James A. Wynn Jr.
Duration: 48 minutes
Court Name: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

Case Summary

**Case Summary: Michael Pense v. MD Dept of Public Safety** **Docket Number:** 14527124 **Court:** [Specify Court, e.g., Maryland Circuit Court] **Date:** [Specify Date of Judgment] **Judges:** [List any judges involved] **Parties Involved:** - **Plaintiff:** Michael Pense - **Defendant:** Maryland Department of Public Safety **Background:** Michael Pense filed a lawsuit against the Maryland Department of Public Safety (MD DPS), alleging [briefly outline the nature of the claim—e.g., wrongful termination, discrimination, failure to accommodate, etc.]. The dispute arises from events occurring on [specify date or time frame], where Pense claims [provide details regarding the plaintiff's allegations]. **Facts:** - Michael Pense was employed by the MD Department of Public Safety in the capacity of [specify job title or role]. - [Include relevant facts about the employment duration, any incidents leading to the lawsuit, and specifics on the actions taken by the MD DPS that led to the claims.] - Pense asserts the actions of the MD DPS were [unlawful/unfair/discriminatory], leading to [consequences experienced by Pense, such as emotional distress, loss of income, etc.]. **Legal Issues:** The key legal issues in this case revolve around: 1. [Issue 1: e.g., whether the MD DPS adhered to proper employment protocols] 2. [Issue 2: e.g., compliance with state or federal employment laws, such as anti-discrimination statutes] 3. [Any other pertinent legal questions that the case raises] **Arguments:** - **Plaintiff's Argument:** Michael Pense contends that the MD DPS acted improperly by [summarize the plaintiff's main arguments, including any evidence presented, witness testimonies, etc.]. - **Defendant's Argument:** The Maryland Department of Public Safety counters that [briefly outline the defense’s position, including their reasoning and any legal precedents cited to support their case]. **Decision:** The court’s ruling on the matter was delivered on [specify date]. The decision included: - [Briefly summarize the court’s findings, any rulings made—e.g., whether the court found in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant.] - [Mention any orders given by the court—such as reinstatement, damages awarded, etc.] **Conclusion:** The case of Michael Pense v. MD Dept of Public Safety highlights [summarize the significance of the verdict on the legal landscape, public policy implications, or future cases]. As a result of this ruling, [discuss any potential impacts on similar employment cases or state regulations]. **Next Steps:** [If applicable, indicate any options for appeal, further proceedings, or next steps for either party.] (Note: This summary is a mock-up and should include actual case details once available for accuracy.)

Michael Pense v. MD Dept of Public Safety


Oral Audio Transcript(Beta version)

no audio transcript available