Legal Case Summary

international corporation at Al versus town of Forest Heights, Maryland at Al. Mr. Liskao? Liskao? Liskao? Yes, sir. Good to have you here, sir. Thank you, sir. Please, the court, James. Let's go for the plaintiff of Pellance. This case concerns Maryland's speed monitoring statute, so speed camera tickets. But what's that issue in this appeal has nothing to do with the operation of the cameras themselves or whether that's appropriate? What's that issue here is more fundamental. The first issue I'd like to talk about is service the process. The first last and only time that a defendant is served with process here is by first class mailed. And our Supreme Court since 1950 has shown through numerous cases has shown an increased concern with property rights and notice in regards to in-rem. Other seatings. The folks that are before us today are the ones who paid the $40 fine or whatever you want to call it. So the government says they had actual notice. The process is still defective and what the district court rolled below and what's not up for appeal here is that Maryland law does not find that preclusive to a lawsuit for civil rights action. And that's what this is. This is a claim under 1983. Maryland law. The district court cited a Maryland court of appeals case. Baker versus Montgomery County, which was also a class action lawsuit dealing with speed camera citations and what the court of appeals there said they basically said the issues were different in that case. They said the issues were not raised because the plaintiff should have sued as taxpayers that there was no standing. But the court also said, well, there's no reason to coddle bar. There's no preclusive effect of paying the citations because it's a $40 citation. People might pay these over and over and over again. But to bring it this case in this manner has not been precluded by the underlying payment. There's no judgment against those folks that have paid the citations. They may be arguing notice not raised due to

. I'm not arguing raised due to caught at all because it's it's not up for for debate here the appellate and appeal it and the district court found in the balance favor on the issue of preclusion. So there is no ratio to caught a part of it what we're what we're arguing about is is whether or not first class male alone by itself without posting publication or any attempts at personal servicer is a constitutional manner in which to serve a lawsuit. And it's not just for for speed camera tickets, although that's where the Maryland statute has it. But what the appellants would have this court do is basically rubber stamp that alone as being service of process for civil action when you're not talking about property. I mean, that's what the app police would. Excuse me sir. Yes. That's what the appellate position would be. You know, you basically you stick the complaint in an envelope and you mail it to the defendant. You never have a return. And you just say, well, I mailed it. I didn't post it. I didn't I didn't publish it. I didn't do anything else. I just mailed a copy of the complaint. Or that in this case, the civil citation to the defendant. Therefore, give me a judgment. And here's his last known address. And what we're talking about here's a money judgment. We're not talking about. We're not talking about an administrative proceeding like the MVA coming in and saying you didn't register your vehicle. The appoints on your license. We're not talking about that kind of proceeding. We're talking about two parties who have nothing to do with each other. The appellate is below our municipalities. The appellants below are folks that just happen to drive through those municipalities and received a citation in the mail. And that is called a citation

. You're calling it a complaint. It's a civil penalty. So it's not. Stop it. Stop on the front page of it or the top of it. It says citation. Yes, sir. It says it's a civil penalty. And if I'm using the terms that are changeably. It says it's a civil action. And it says that there's no criminal and criminal infraction for it. So what I think the court should. What is it? Two pages. It's one page and then it's on the back. Well, it's one of me. Yeah. It's one piece of paper though. But yes, it's two pages. And what we're dealing with is a lot of information. It does, sir. But the information provided other than the signature which I haven't addressed yet isn't the issue. The issue is that the appellees have attempted service by means of first class mail threatened a judgment which they would take. By means of first class mail alone. No other service attempt is made. There's no other proceeding where that's allowed or done. Any other civil action if I came to any court in in Maryland or in the federal system. I said, I'm mail to copy of of the civil action to the defendant

. Give me my judgment. He hasn't answered. That wouldn't fly anywhere. What kind of a presumption is there in the law that is placed in the mail and first class mail gets where it's supposed to go. There's a strong presumption that it gets where it's supposed to go. But we're talking about here service of process. We're talking about here's a little more important. A lot of people in the Bench entry criminal offenses for involved in mailings that were presumed have been received. Certainly. Mail fraud cases in the light. Certainly, but what we're talking about here is the initiation of a lawsuit. That's a little more important than the service of a notice of a proceeding. What we're talking about here is the initiation of a lawsuit allowing the appellate to take a default and then allowing the appellate to take that default, take that judgment and execute upon it. And we know that that's what they can do because the statute itself refers to owners of the motor vehicles as if the owner's vehicle goes past the camera. We wish you the owner's side days use these cameras. What in like school zones. Yes, sir and work zones work zone. But we're working on the highway. Yes for the safety of the worker. Yeah, and a lot of goal in both instances that we you agree with all that. I certainly do. We will slow down going through the school zone. We need people slow down going through the work zone. We certainly do. But what we're talking about here is the initiation of a lawsuit. The fact that it's been proven yet. What we're allowing the appellate to do is to put an envelope in the mail without doing anything else and to take a judgment

. They haven't proved anything about. The bunch of bots cited a Matthews versus the Eldridge. 1976 case. It's kind of a some balancing factors in it. And went and then went through them and analyzed. He certainly did. I don't think that the appropriate way to go through it. Because I think Malaine versus central. I think it's not bad law. That old case. The Matthews, the first Eldridge no longer the law. That has nothing to do with the service of process issue. And I think the service process has followed a different line of cases starting with Malaine in 1950, which said that. Basically notice to meet to process notice shall be reasonably calculated under all the circumstances to apprise the intent. And that's what Malaine central holding is. Malaine dealt with a property action dealt with bank accounts. And the only notice provided to the account holders that there was a judicial settlement was publication. The court says, well, you know, that's not exactly fair. That doesn't meet due process. You have to have notice reasonably calculated to apprise the parties of their rights. So a bunch at least mail them a copy of this. We're still talking about a property action. The court doesn't reduce what's required for an in person. A action it just brings in remactions into the fold of requiring actual due process and calls publication a fiction. That's what that case says. So what we have after Malaine is basically in remactions being treated more like in persona. But it doesn't reduce what in persona

. And none of even the in-rem cases that either the party sites. States mailing alone is sufficient even for an in-rem action. And the reason we have a difference between what traditionally we're called in-rem actions. And what traditionally we're called in persona. And we still do is because of the. Exactly what Malaine is talking about. Under all of the circumstances under the circumstances a property owner has the right to enjoy property. But they also have the responsibility to take care of that property. And that means that if something's posted on the door that says you haven't paid your mortgage. The bank's going to take it. You have an obligation to look for that notice. You can't just ignore your own your own real property or personal property. Same thing with the forfeiture. How about our decision in this plumber versus state of Maryland case involving revocation of a driver's license. In that case you have an administrative action. So the the defendant in that case already had a relationship with the administrative body. Asked asked the state for the privilege to operate a motor vehicle. Already had that relationship with the body with the administrative body. It's no different than if a doctor was getting their license revoked. It just happens to be more driver's licenses. That's that that's the central difference there. The the the defendant or I guess respondent in the plumber case. Already had that relationship already had a duty to respond to the NBA. Here we have we have a municipality or two municipalities and people have nothing to do with it. We're not talking about we're not talking about property within the municipality and there's no taxes paid on them. I don't know what the it's kind of the balancing test the judge must used in the district court. I'm guessing most people would think that their loss of their driver's license or loss of their medical license, which they received a notice by mail would be far more important to them than receiving a notice for a $40 citation

. What I think the Malayne case is telling us is that what we look at is the relationship between the party and the action or the underlying property. You already have a duty to if you're a physician you already have a duty to maintain your license. If you own property you already have a duty to maintain that property and to know what's going on with it. You already have a relationship with the bank that's taking it in most cases. You already have a relationship and a forfeiture action in many cases, but you're still you have a relationship to the collateral or the property and forfeiture action. You have to know where it is and know what the status of it is, but here you just have people driving in front of a speed camera. The different and forfeiture we don't look at or excuse me in a foreclosure we wouldn't look at what the property itself is. We wouldn't say well you know that house is really nice that's a $20 million mansion. This this fellow should get more due process than this guy with a $20,000 double wide. We don't look at it like that and I think the Supreme Court precedent is consistent with that that we look at what the relationship is between the person and the action. The defendant and the action here because as a property owner you know what's going on you have an obligation to know what's going on with your property and you have to follow up as a defendant and a in person a action. There's nobody but you if you don't actually receive constitutional notice. What are you supposed to do you don't know about it, but as a property owner you should know about it. You should know the bank's been foreclosed because you haven't paid them more. You should know you're about to be evicted because you haven't paid your rent. You should know what's what's posted the front door which mail to that property because you own it. But here you're talking about a defendant and a civil action. If this court allows the the app elite to get what they want here. What you're essentially going to to rubber. The rubber stamp is any civil action being sent by first class mail from a constitutional standpoint. The state of Maryland, Commonwealth of Virginia, any other state would be able to reduce the their statutory requirements for service process to just that. No return of service. You never get a return. All you'd have is first class mail. Maybe you have an affidavit of I mailed it. That would be it because that's all they they don't even have that. But that's all they could ever have is the affidavit if I mailed it

. And my clients the the parties pay the citations doesn't even do with what this court should decide because didn't have anything to do with the district court's decision because there's no preclusive effect. They pay the citation just to get rid of it. In most cases, they're not not going to look at it from a constitutional basis. That's what the district court held. That's not up for appeal. Well, what's up for appeal is whether or not first class mail and first class mail alone satisfies due process. And if we look at page 316 of the mlean case, Mr. Justice Jackson gives us a hint as to how he's he's thinking when he writes that opinion. And he says the ways in honor with tangible property are such that he usually arranges means to learn of a direct attack upon his possessory or proprietary rights. So he's saying the same thing. I am he's saying a little nicer than I am. But the truth of the matter is. What's what's that issue in the mulean case, which is is the leading case in the other case of the file. I just don't have that much time to talk about them. What's what's important is the the debtor or the defendants connection to the underlying action. And and we don't look at what's a $40 citation. We look at this is an in person in action. I'll try to address the second point in my rebuttal. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Liz go. Mr. Carpinski. Thank you. Thank you. Kevin Carpinski on behalf of the Apple E's. Town of Riverdale Park and the town of Forest Heights

. Let me start my argument, your honors, with correcting a statement made by my colleague. He indicated that this was a civil action resulting in a money judgment. And that is simply not a correct statement under the statute. There can never be a money judgment ever entered in this as it relates to this particular statute. And specifically, I'm referring to 29809, 21809, G, which says that if a person liable under this section does not pay the civil penalty or contest the violation. The administration may refuse to register or re-register the motor vehicle cited for the violation or may suspend the registration of the motor vehicle cited for the violation. There is never an occasion where a judgment is entered against the alleged violator. There are. There are. The vehicle runs to the vehicle. Run. Runs to the vehicle, your honor, and it's important to put these, these, the violators in three categories. The law is not a judgment that clogs title, the real estate, or ends up on somebody's credit rating or something of that. Absolutely not. And in fact, your honor, there is not even a Latvian associated with this. If I re-registered my vehicle today and I went out and got a speed camera ticket tomorrow, then the only recourse would be with two years from now when I have to re-register my vehicle in the state of Maryland. They would say, Mr. Carpensky, your vehicle has been flagged for a speed camera ticket you got two years ago, and you need to get that resolved before we'll go ahead and handle your registration. There's no Latvian involved, there's no penalty involved. It's $40, even if you don't pay it at any time. So really there are three categories of potential parties here. We have those that received the notice of citation and they paid it. They got it in the mail and I've gotten them. And it's either myself or my wife or my kids or someone is, you know, it's right there, date, time, vehicle, location, and I get it and I get it within two weeks and I go, well, either I was exceeding the speed limit more than 12 miles an hour. Someone of my family was, and I just pay it. So I actually got that citation. The second group that were all these people are? No, no

. The second group is the group that got the citation, so you know what, this is just flat out wrong. I wasn't speeding or I wasn't the operator or my vehicle had been stolen or as permitted under the statutory scheme. I can present any defense I want in district court to that action. And I go to district court and I go ahead and I defend it and say, for whatever reason, I shouldn't have to pay this $40 and that's the second category of people. And those people got the citation obviously as well because they availed themselves a due process. Those people are not before us, Your Honor, because although there were some that fell within that category, the district court found that they were barred by racetrata and appellants failed to appeal that portion of Judge Montz's order. The third group would be those who contend that they never received the notice citation. And I would note that none of the plaintiffs below or appellants here have asserted they did not receive the citation. But again, the only penalty for lack of better term is if you claim you didn't get the citation, would be that you need to get it resolved before your next registration period. So the deprivation of a property right is very, very minimal on the alleged violator or the owner of the vehicle. So you said to another state that they're out of state? Well, you're quite frankly, Your Honor, in all candor, we have very little recourse against out of state motors because the only recourse we have is regarding registration of the motor vehicle. So if it's sent to an out of state motors that has committed a violation, it's sent if they pay it, they pay it. If they don't pay it, there's really not much that can be done about it because it's not a motor vehicle. What's that? The out of state driver doesn't pay it, that's the end of it. That's the end of it. We don't have any authority over the vehicle or the registration of the vehicle. We have a equal protection problem. Well, no, not necessarily. Well, you treat your residents worse than you do people out of state. Well, that was not raised, Your Honor, but that's in fact what you're doing. Well, it's just that we just, because of the, it's more of an administrator proceeding. It's not a civil lawsuit. It's administrative much like an MBA proceeding. There's only so much authority that, that that the jurisdiction has. And because of the statutory scheme that it is really tied to registration of the vehicle, there is not much recourse for out of state. I guess in theory, you could report it to a collection agency. You could do something of that nature

. How much money your, must revenue, y'all generate, known as both? I don't know the exact numbers, Your Honor, but it's, it is a situation where it does generate a substantial amount of money, but that money has to be used as an offset. Most of it goes back to the state of Maryland for public safety programs. The other money has to be earmarked for public safety issues within the, the various jurisdictions. So, but- Are there other towns of Maryland that are doing this other just these two? Absolutely. I- It goes happening everywhere all over the state. It's happening all over the state, yes, Your Honor. Montgomery County- Is it only happening in these work zones and school zones? What if I'm driving up by 95? If they- If you're in a construction zone, what will happen is it will say that it is a photo-enforced construction area. And if you are going more than 12 miles an hour over what is the speed limit in that construction zone, yes, you can get- You can get a citation for that. Only if you have a state. Correct. Correct. And- But the statute requires that there has to be posting, in other words, that you're actually entering into an area that is- Is- is subject to photo-enforced- But it's the fact that they just- In this instance, they just sued your two clients. That's correct. That's how they got- That's correct. And there- There are other counties and there are other municipalities- There are other four sites- All their stuff goes to Philadelphia. Because- Well, it's- It's not in Philadelphia. No, but the reason why is because depending upon the jurisdiction, they use different vendors that assist with the operation of the speed camera systems and the equipment. So you may have- The combination of the Philadelphia. Right. And that part of the contract is who actually handles some of the billing. So four sites, she uses a contractor that has someone in Philadelphia. I have another client- Gathersburg or Chevy Chase Village that uses ACS out in New York. But then it's all really tied to the administrative services that are provided by the vendor who's- Who's providing- Under the federal and the statute- Does the- Can the state itself- With these- Camera areas- Make- Make that applicable on a particular section of the state highway or does the locality- And which the highways located have to go up the ordinance to make it applicable. The locality is your honor. So what happens here is if you're near- In a school zone or you're in a construction area, those are really where the speed monitoring systems are located. That's where they have to be posted. There's a posting period where you have to give 30 days of a warning period- Where you just give out warning citations. And then you can continue to do that. But generally the public safety here, the interest is- Is- It does whether you like these cameras or not. It makes people slow down and make some slow down and important areas where our kids are going to school. And where we got workers sitting out on I-95 and 495 doing work. So, you know, there's an- There's an important safety component to having these cameras offer. So, you just- A resident of the District of Columbia. You drove to one of these towns and you got one of these citations. You didn't pay it. And then you drive out in Maryland somewhere where there's- And you're pulled over for an effective pay-alike. And they're running your information through the computer while the troopers sitting there with you. Will this show up on that? No. Because with these citations, it doesn't affect your insurance. It doesn't affect your points. And it does not- It cannot affect your driving privileges under your driver's license. So, no. This would not show up as something that- I mean, that- That's how minimal the burden is on- On the owner of the vehicle. It does not even affect them in that regard. And so, no. You got pulled over in a different jurisdiction. Unlike if you failed to show up in traffic court for a mood- Moving violation where they could say that you failed to appear. That's not the case with the- With a speed monitoring citation. It would have no effect or no bearing on- On that particular. Follow-up on such easy questions. You did say that you don't pay this. Re-procussion. One of them at least. And the main one is- The main thing that I'm going to explain is that when you go to re-register your car, it will flag that you owe $40

. And then you can continue to do that. But generally the public safety here, the interest is- Is- It does whether you like these cameras or not. It makes people slow down and make some slow down and important areas where our kids are going to school. And where we got workers sitting out on I-95 and 495 doing work. So, you know, there's an- There's an important safety component to having these cameras offer. So, you just- A resident of the District of Columbia. You drove to one of these towns and you got one of these citations. You didn't pay it. And then you drive out in Maryland somewhere where there's- And you're pulled over for an effective pay-alike. And they're running your information through the computer while the troopers sitting there with you. Will this show up on that? No. Because with these citations, it doesn't affect your insurance. It doesn't affect your points. And it does not- It cannot affect your driving privileges under your driver's license. So, no. This would not show up as something that- I mean, that- That's how minimal the burden is on- On the owner of the vehicle. It does not even affect them in that regard. And so, no. You got pulled over in a different jurisdiction. Unlike if you failed to show up in traffic court for a mood- Moving violation where they could say that you failed to appear. That's not the case with the- With a speed monitoring citation. It would have no effect or no bearing on- On that particular. Follow-up on such easy questions. You did say that you don't pay this. Re-procussion. One of them at least. And the main one is- The main thing that I'm going to explain is that when you go to re-register your car, it will flag that you owe $40. So now you will re- Re-insurance, re-registration fee plus that, correct? Plus the $40 you didn't pay. You have to resolve the $40 citation. Correct. That means that you are informing the division of motor vehicles in your state That they have that citation. It has to be. Right? Because they are the ones who- The vision of motor vehicles are the ones who administer registration of car. So that information has to be connected to them to know that- That you owe $40, right? Correct. To the Maryland Department of Motor Vehicles. Okay, the state, right? That's how it is in Virginia. So if you come home and this book can happen here, these little places like you're talking about where you're applying, you come home, you have 12 of these citations. You see, I'm not paying any of them. But that's 12 times 40. At some point, couldn't the state of Maryland say, we're going to administratively take your license? Because you have 12 of these citations and there's an indication that you or someone in your car speed. They could administratively suspend the registration of the vehicle. They could not affect your driving license privileges because the statute does not- because we don't know who the operator would be. You could certainly suspend the voter, the registration for the vehicle. Oh, that car. Yeah. But you would not, you'd be at all from driving a car. Correct. That's correct. That's the way the statute is set up. So your honor, that is Judge Mott's did do a balancing test. But before we get to that balancing test, I mean, fundamentally, it starts with the Milan case, Milan case back in 1950. And, and it basically that case said that notice needs to be reasonably calculated to provide notice to affected individuals. And if that's the case, then due process is satisfied. And certainly, the only real defendant, the real plaintiffs we have in this case are the ones who paid the citations

. So now you will re- Re-insurance, re-registration fee plus that, correct? Plus the $40 you didn't pay. You have to resolve the $40 citation. Correct. That means that you are informing the division of motor vehicles in your state That they have that citation. It has to be. Right? Because they are the ones who- The vision of motor vehicles are the ones who administer registration of car. So that information has to be connected to them to know that- That you owe $40, right? Correct. To the Maryland Department of Motor Vehicles. Okay, the state, right? That's how it is in Virginia. So if you come home and this book can happen here, these little places like you're talking about where you're applying, you come home, you have 12 of these citations. You see, I'm not paying any of them. But that's 12 times 40. At some point, couldn't the state of Maryland say, we're going to administratively take your license? Because you have 12 of these citations and there's an indication that you or someone in your car speed. They could administratively suspend the registration of the vehicle. They could not affect your driving license privileges because the statute does not- because we don't know who the operator would be. You could certainly suspend the voter, the registration for the vehicle. Oh, that car. Yeah. But you would not, you'd be at all from driving a car. Correct. That's correct. That's the way the statute is set up. So your honor, that is Judge Mott's did do a balancing test. But before we get to that balancing test, I mean, fundamentally, it starts with the Milan case, Milan case back in 1950. And, and it basically that case said that notice needs to be reasonably calculated to provide notice to affected individuals. And if that's the case, then due process is satisfied. And certainly, the only real defendant, the real plaintiffs we have in this case are the ones who paid the citations. So one, we knew they actually got it. And one of the cases that we cited was more versus City of Gathersburg. So all these plaintiffs are in the category one. Correct. They have it. They got it. What you told me about the one they weren't. Well, the only ones that are here on appeal. That's what I thought. Yeah, because the plaintiffs. Well, there are two sets of plaintiffs that the second category is thrown out. Correct. Yes. So the only ones here, your honor, are those that received it and paid it. First category. Yes, sir. And more of versus City of Gathersburg. This court said something to the effect of you cannot complain of due process. If you did not avail yourself of the process in the first place. And this, in this particular instance, it's clear they received it. They elected not to go through the district court proceeding, which they could have had a full evidentiary hearing. They could have had a denovo hearing in our circuit court. If they wish to do so, they could have appealed that to our court of special appeals. They could have followed a petition for rid of social war to our court of appeals. They could have followed a petition for rid of social war to the Supreme Court. They were going to raise a constitutional issue. So all those, all that due process was available to individuals who unquestionably received the citations in the first place

. So one, we knew they actually got it. And one of the cases that we cited was more versus City of Gathersburg. So all these plaintiffs are in the category one. Correct. They have it. They got it. What you told me about the one they weren't. Well, the only ones that are here on appeal. That's what I thought. Yeah, because the plaintiffs. Well, there are two sets of plaintiffs that the second category is thrown out. Correct. Yes. So the only ones here, your honor, are those that received it and paid it. First category. Yes, sir. And more of versus City of Gathersburg. This court said something to the effect of you cannot complain of due process. If you did not avail yourself of the process in the first place. And this, in this particular instance, it's clear they received it. They elected not to go through the district court proceeding, which they could have had a full evidentiary hearing. They could have had a denovo hearing in our circuit court. If they wish to do so, they could have appealed that to our court of special appeals. They could have followed a petition for rid of social war to our court of appeals. They could have followed a petition for rid of social war to the Supreme Court. They were going to raise a constitutional issue. So all those, all that due process was available to individuals who unquestionably received the citations in the first place. And I think the cases that we cited in, in our brief, that followed Malaine with Tulsa professional collection of services. Menonite board of missions. Green versus Lindsey. They stand for, for really two important propositions. They stand for the proposition that in 1950 when Malaine was decided, the court did away with this analysis that we're going to worry about whether it's in persona, in rim, quasi in rim. The test is, whatever action it is, it is whether the notice is reasonably calculated to provide actual notice. Could you have a subgroup in the class that's before us now? I don't think the plaintiffs made this argument. Maybe they have the thing said. Where you did pay this $40 citation. But the only reason you paid it was your registration came up and there's this $40 citation on it. And that doesn't necessarily mean that you've got the notice in the mail the two years early. You just decided it's easier for me to pay the $40 now than to fight it. Wouldn't there be a subgroup that could be within this class that wouldn't necessarily have gotten actual notice? Yes. And I think, I think there are two points there, your honor. First is there's not a group that is before this court that falls in that category. And I believe that person would be able to try and seek recourse through the district court to say, look, I never got the notice. And we're asking the court to exercise its authority to revisionary authority to consider it if the person ultimately decided to do that. And the second point out of green and the other cases we've cited is that the Supreme Court has repeatedly said that regular mail is a reliable, less expensive way to go ahead and provide actual notice to people that are affected. And when you think about it in this case and you balance the fact that you're talking about $40. And you're talking about something that does not suspend someone's driving privileges. If you had to personally serve that person or you had to rely upon certified mail, that would be a tremendous burden upon any governmental agency to have to go ahead and do that. It just would be an owner's task, one, because personal service is tremendously expensive. And two, quite frankly, a lot of people don't pick up their certified mail. So regular mail is really the most reasonable, well calculated way for people to actually receive what is in the mail. And of course, the statute requires that for residents within the state of Maryland, they get it within two weeks out of state residents, get it within 30 days. There's not a tremendous amount of lag time between one and the other. The other issue that was raised on appeal relates to this electronic signature

. And I think the cases that we cited in, in our brief, that followed Malaine with Tulsa professional collection of services. Menonite board of missions. Green versus Lindsey. They stand for, for really two important propositions. They stand for the proposition that in 1950 when Malaine was decided, the court did away with this analysis that we're going to worry about whether it's in persona, in rim, quasi in rim. The test is, whatever action it is, it is whether the notice is reasonably calculated to provide actual notice. Could you have a subgroup in the class that's before us now? I don't think the plaintiffs made this argument. Maybe they have the thing said. Where you did pay this $40 citation. But the only reason you paid it was your registration came up and there's this $40 citation on it. And that doesn't necessarily mean that you've got the notice in the mail the two years early. You just decided it's easier for me to pay the $40 now than to fight it. Wouldn't there be a subgroup that could be within this class that wouldn't necessarily have gotten actual notice? Yes. And I think, I think there are two points there, your honor. First is there's not a group that is before this court that falls in that category. And I believe that person would be able to try and seek recourse through the district court to say, look, I never got the notice. And we're asking the court to exercise its authority to revisionary authority to consider it if the person ultimately decided to do that. And the second point out of green and the other cases we've cited is that the Supreme Court has repeatedly said that regular mail is a reliable, less expensive way to go ahead and provide actual notice to people that are affected. And when you think about it in this case and you balance the fact that you're talking about $40. And you're talking about something that does not suspend someone's driving privileges. If you had to personally serve that person or you had to rely upon certified mail, that would be a tremendous burden upon any governmental agency to have to go ahead and do that. It just would be an owner's task, one, because personal service is tremendously expensive. And two, quite frankly, a lot of people don't pick up their certified mail. So regular mail is really the most reasonable, well calculated way for people to actually receive what is in the mail. And of course, the statute requires that for residents within the state of Maryland, they get it within two weeks out of state residents, get it within 30 days. There's not a tremendous amount of lag time between one and the other. The other issue that was raised on appeal relates to this electronic signature. And I would just like to briefly discuss that issue. What you did that let me ask you is how many, how many states have the similar statute? How many states have similar statute? How many states are about doing this? You know, your honor, I don't know, I don't know the answer to that question. I think I'm getting from everybody else in the district that you've been using. Well, the lead dog in these other four cases. I hope you don't get anymore, but I don't know how many, how many states actually do use them? Certainly, Maryland started with one county and they've expanded it throughout the entire state to be able to be used. The appellants have argued that an electronic signature is not appropriate under the circumstances. And I would just raise two points. As the district court indicated in its opinion, Maryland has adopted the Electronic Transaction Act, which is in the commercial law article at 21106, which basically provides that an electronic signature has the same force and effect as a handwritten signature. Judge King had raised the Matthews versus Eldridge analysis, which has been used ever since that decision for a due process analysis. And when you apply those factors, it's clear that an electronic signature is entirely appropriate and meets the minimum standards of due process. The first prong is whether the private interests that will be affected by the official action. And in this particular case, we're talking about the civil penalty of 40 bucks with no late fee, doesn't affect your insurance, doesn't affect your driving license status, and there are no points. On the other hand, the countervailing benefit from the government's perspective is health and safety. Making our motorists slow down around areas where we have kids and we have construction workers and we have other individuals that may be vulnerable. The risk of an erroneous deprivation of a right. Well, that clearly weighs in favor of the apolies, too. There is no significant deprivation for the reasons I've already stated. And this notice is sent out within two weeks. It provides you the date time, speed and location of the alleged violation. Tell us you can pay it or you can contest it. As your honor pointed out, there's a very lengthy description on the second page or the backside of it that tells you exactly what it is and what it means and how it can be challenged. And then the third is is the administrative burden of having having this handwritten signature as opposed to an electronic signature and it would be a significant burden. I don't know the exact numbers, your honor, but there are a lot of these citations that get issued throughout the state to require a person to hand write that rather than review it on a computer, approve it and go and have an electronic signature. There would be a tremendous burden, particularly when a lot of these citations are not necessarily mailed out from the local jurisdiction itself. I see that my time is up unless your honors have any questions I will submit. Thank you very much. Thank you

. And I would just like to briefly discuss that issue. What you did that let me ask you is how many, how many states have the similar statute? How many states have similar statute? How many states are about doing this? You know, your honor, I don't know, I don't know the answer to that question. I think I'm getting from everybody else in the district that you've been using. Well, the lead dog in these other four cases. I hope you don't get anymore, but I don't know how many, how many states actually do use them? Certainly, Maryland started with one county and they've expanded it throughout the entire state to be able to be used. The appellants have argued that an electronic signature is not appropriate under the circumstances. And I would just raise two points. As the district court indicated in its opinion, Maryland has adopted the Electronic Transaction Act, which is in the commercial law article at 21106, which basically provides that an electronic signature has the same force and effect as a handwritten signature. Judge King had raised the Matthews versus Eldridge analysis, which has been used ever since that decision for a due process analysis. And when you apply those factors, it's clear that an electronic signature is entirely appropriate and meets the minimum standards of due process. The first prong is whether the private interests that will be affected by the official action. And in this particular case, we're talking about the civil penalty of 40 bucks with no late fee, doesn't affect your insurance, doesn't affect your driving license status, and there are no points. On the other hand, the countervailing benefit from the government's perspective is health and safety. Making our motorists slow down around areas where we have kids and we have construction workers and we have other individuals that may be vulnerable. The risk of an erroneous deprivation of a right. Well, that clearly weighs in favor of the apolies, too. There is no significant deprivation for the reasons I've already stated. And this notice is sent out within two weeks. It provides you the date time, speed and location of the alleged violation. Tell us you can pay it or you can contest it. As your honor pointed out, there's a very lengthy description on the second page or the backside of it that tells you exactly what it is and what it means and how it can be challenged. And then the third is is the administrative burden of having having this handwritten signature as opposed to an electronic signature and it would be a significant burden. I don't know the exact numbers, your honor, but there are a lot of these citations that get issued throughout the state to require a person to hand write that rather than review it on a computer, approve it and go and have an electronic signature. There would be a tremendous burden, particularly when a lot of these citations are not necessarily mailed out from the local jurisdiction itself. I see that my time is up unless your honors have any questions I will submit. Thank you very much. Thank you. We appreciate it. Mr. Lischko. Kind of sort of interesting. Some of council's arguments about what we're talking about, whether it's money judgment or something else. I think the statute makes it clear that it's not just a money judge that it's not just an administrative citation to the car. Both of the, all three of the portions of the statute that talk about what the MBA can do say that they may not that they shall and nothing in the statute itself says this is all we're talking about. These are the only potential penalties. Nothing says that. In fact, the statute itself says that if the owner receives a citation and the driver wasn't driving the vehicle, the owner can mail in an affidavit and say, well, here's the driver. And then a citation can issue against the driver. So the, the, the, the, Apple is reading the statute basically reads that part of it out, out of the statute because there's no sanction against the driver who's getting the citation. Basically, they're getting mail that they need not respond to and if they do, oh, well, but if they don't, they go to court, there's no, there's no sanction. That, that reading doesn't make any sense. I think what we're clearly dealing with is, is a money judgment. You have non-resident drivers receiving these citations. I think the, it's the, I think the court has to read the statute to give it meaning. To say, what did the, what did the legislature mean? What did Maryland General Assembly mean? And I think it's clear that what you, where do you read in that you get a, the results in this judgment against anybody. It's being filed in Maryland's district court, which is a trial court and it's being adjudicated there and the court is entering something that says $40. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. We're dealing with a judgment. We're dealing with the money judgment. There's nothing the statute that precludes any of these jurisdictions from, from seeking to enforce their judgments through the full faith and credit of, of the United States of the various states and say, well, this is a Maryland judgment. I'd like to enter it against Mr. So-and-so who lives out of state? Oh, and we have a Maryland resident who is, who is driving. I'd like to, I'd like to garnish his wages. I'd like to, to lean his house

. We appreciate it. Mr. Lischko. Kind of sort of interesting. Some of council's arguments about what we're talking about, whether it's money judgment or something else. I think the statute makes it clear that it's not just a money judge that it's not just an administrative citation to the car. Both of the, all three of the portions of the statute that talk about what the MBA can do say that they may not that they shall and nothing in the statute itself says this is all we're talking about. These are the only potential penalties. Nothing says that. In fact, the statute itself says that if the owner receives a citation and the driver wasn't driving the vehicle, the owner can mail in an affidavit and say, well, here's the driver. And then a citation can issue against the driver. So the, the, the, the, Apple is reading the statute basically reads that part of it out, out of the statute because there's no sanction against the driver who's getting the citation. Basically, they're getting mail that they need not respond to and if they do, oh, well, but if they don't, they go to court, there's no, there's no sanction. That, that reading doesn't make any sense. I think what we're clearly dealing with is, is a money judgment. You have non-resident drivers receiving these citations. I think the, it's the, I think the court has to read the statute to give it meaning. To say, what did the, what did the legislature mean? What did Maryland General Assembly mean? And I think it's clear that what you, where do you read in that you get a, the results in this judgment against anybody. It's being filed in Maryland's district court, which is a trial court and it's being adjudicated there and the court is entering something that says $40. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. We're dealing with a judgment. We're dealing with the money judgment. There's nothing the statute that precludes any of these jurisdictions from, from seeking to enforce their judgments through the full faith and credit of, of the United States of the various states and say, well, this is a Maryland judgment. I'd like to enter it against Mr. So-and-so who lives out of state? Oh, and we have a Maryland resident who is, who is driving. I'd like to, I'd like to garnish his wages. I'd like to, to lean his house. I'd like to, to, to levy upon property. There's nothing in the statute that says that. What we have is we have a penalty of $40 issuing. So, and Maryland statutory law dealing with collections. I'm not, I'm going to make sure on, or are you saying that all these. In addition of a traditional money judgment application against real estate, carnage, one of wages. That this, that locality here would have the authority to do that. I think so. I don't see why not. They have the district court, which is not their court. That's the Maryland court, Maryland's courts. Entering a judgment, they're favor saying, you're, you have to pay the, you have to pay the locality $40. I don't see how that could not be a judgment. I don't see how, how that could not be collected upon. The statute, the statute says you can, you may be able to do this. You may be able to do that, but it doesn't preclude any, any sort of collection action. And in fact, you're going to have a piece of paper signed by a judge. It says $40 against the defendant. That sounds like a judgment to me from any court I've ever heard of. I don't see how that's not a judgment. You know, I think one, one, one area, you said all of these types of cases go before judge. Yeah, all of them. If, if they're contested, they would go before a judge. If they're pay, they don't end up there, but they would eventually be ruled upon by a judge. And, and the judge would sign the order, the final order, standing $40. So that's a, that's a money judgment. So what, what you're dealing with is mailing out process for money judgment using first class mail

. I'd like to, to, to levy upon property. There's nothing in the statute that says that. What we have is we have a penalty of $40 issuing. So, and Maryland statutory law dealing with collections. I'm not, I'm going to make sure on, or are you saying that all these. In addition of a traditional money judgment application against real estate, carnage, one of wages. That this, that locality here would have the authority to do that. I think so. I don't see why not. They have the district court, which is not their court. That's the Maryland court, Maryland's courts. Entering a judgment, they're favor saying, you're, you have to pay the, you have to pay the locality $40. I don't see how that could not be a judgment. I don't see how, how that could not be collected upon. The statute, the statute says you can, you may be able to do this. You may be able to do that, but it doesn't preclude any, any sort of collection action. And in fact, you're going to have a piece of paper signed by a judge. It says $40 against the defendant. That sounds like a judgment to me from any court I've ever heard of. I don't see how that's not a judgment. You know, I think one, one, one area, you said all of these types of cases go before judge. Yeah, all of them. If, if they're contested, they would go before a judge. If they're pay, they don't end up there, but they would eventually be ruled upon by a judge. And, and the judge would sign the order, the final order, standing $40. So that's a, that's a money judgment. So what, what you're dealing with is mailing out process for money judgment using first class mail. None of the cases cited so that first class mail buy and of itself, the only. You don't get noticed that it won't go before judge. If you don't get noticed, it will go before judge. Because it was all the back of this one is citation that you owe it. That's not how you get a default. The judge will sign the order. And then all of them go before judge. That's why I asked you. Well, if you pay it, it wouldn't go before a judge. That, that was why I was trying to express. But don't pay it. You're saying it goes before judge. Yeah, and the judge will sign the sign off on it. I don't know what provisions this day. I mean, in the, the, the statute itself. Yeah, what's what's what provision says that the whole statute says it goes to the district court. So I, it doesn't say goes to the district court judge, but it says it goes to the district court. What default judgment. What, what does it say there? You know, it, it made it doesn't know. No, you do a whole lot of reading into it. But, but I mean, that's generally how, how judgments are entered, not by the clerk and not by the, the plaintiff, the plaintiff doesn't enter the judgment. That provision is only for people who can test it. You get due process right to raise your question. I don't see anything where it says that if you don't respond at all, it goes before judge for default judgment. Didn't say that. That would just be my general understanding of how courts work. I see I'm out of time

. None of the cases cited so that first class mail buy and of itself, the only. You don't get noticed that it won't go before judge. If you don't get noticed, it will go before judge. Because it was all the back of this one is citation that you owe it. That's not how you get a default. The judge will sign the order. And then all of them go before judge. That's why I asked you. Well, if you pay it, it wouldn't go before a judge. That, that was why I was trying to express. But don't pay it. You're saying it goes before judge. Yeah, and the judge will sign the sign off on it. I don't know what provisions this day. I mean, in the, the, the statute itself. Yeah, what's what's what provision says that the whole statute says it goes to the district court. So I, it doesn't say goes to the district court judge, but it says it goes to the district court. What default judgment. What, what does it say there? You know, it, it made it doesn't know. No, you do a whole lot of reading into it. But, but I mean, that's generally how, how judgments are entered, not by the clerk and not by the, the plaintiff, the plaintiff doesn't enter the judgment. That provision is only for people who can test it. You get due process right to raise your question. I don't see anything where it says that if you don't respond at all, it goes before judge for default judgment. Didn't say that. That would just be my general understanding of how courts work. I see I'm out of time. I'm your honor. Judge King is the lead judge. So if he will give all the questions, I would, I would, I think my best. You know, my if he can have his 30 seconds, the line ups is that right. Took your 30 seconds. I think it's a money judgment. I think it's pretty obvious. It's money judgment. And you're, you're mailing out process. I didn't touch on the affidavit problem. But that is what secures the judgment. And that's not testimony. You wouldn't send, you wouldn't send the affiant to jail. You wouldn't allow him to purge himself with an e-signature. So that's, it says it's an affidavit. It's not. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. We'll come down and, uh, great council and take a quick break. The son of a court takes the brief reset.

international corporation at Al versus town of Forest Heights, Maryland at Al. Mr. Liskao? Liskao? Liskao? Yes, sir. Good to have you here, sir. Thank you, sir. Please, the court, James. Let's go for the plaintiff of Pellance. This case concerns Maryland's speed monitoring statute, so speed camera tickets. But what's that issue in this appeal has nothing to do with the operation of the cameras themselves or whether that's appropriate? What's that issue here is more fundamental. The first issue I'd like to talk about is service the process. The first last and only time that a defendant is served with process here is by first class mailed. And our Supreme Court since 1950 has shown through numerous cases has shown an increased concern with property rights and notice in regards to in-rem. Other seatings. The folks that are before us today are the ones who paid the $40 fine or whatever you want to call it. So the government says they had actual notice. The process is still defective and what the district court rolled below and what's not up for appeal here is that Maryland law does not find that preclusive to a lawsuit for civil rights action. And that's what this is. This is a claim under 1983. Maryland law. The district court cited a Maryland court of appeals case. Baker versus Montgomery County, which was also a class action lawsuit dealing with speed camera citations and what the court of appeals there said they basically said the issues were different in that case. They said the issues were not raised because the plaintiff should have sued as taxpayers that there was no standing. But the court also said, well, there's no reason to coddle bar. There's no preclusive effect of paying the citations because it's a $40 citation. People might pay these over and over and over again. But to bring it this case in this manner has not been precluded by the underlying payment. There's no judgment against those folks that have paid the citations. They may be arguing notice not raised due to. I'm not arguing raised due to caught at all because it's it's not up for for debate here the appellate and appeal it and the district court found in the balance favor on the issue of preclusion. So there is no ratio to caught a part of it what we're what we're arguing about is is whether or not first class male alone by itself without posting publication or any attempts at personal servicer is a constitutional manner in which to serve a lawsuit. And it's not just for for speed camera tickets, although that's where the Maryland statute has it. But what the appellants would have this court do is basically rubber stamp that alone as being service of process for civil action when you're not talking about property. I mean, that's what the app police would. Excuse me sir. Yes. That's what the appellate position would be. You know, you basically you stick the complaint in an envelope and you mail it to the defendant. You never have a return. And you just say, well, I mailed it. I didn't post it. I didn't I didn't publish it. I didn't do anything else. I just mailed a copy of the complaint. Or that in this case, the civil citation to the defendant. Therefore, give me a judgment. And here's his last known address. And what we're talking about here's a money judgment. We're not talking about. We're not talking about an administrative proceeding like the MVA coming in and saying you didn't register your vehicle. The appoints on your license. We're not talking about that kind of proceeding. We're talking about two parties who have nothing to do with each other. The appellate is below our municipalities. The appellants below are folks that just happen to drive through those municipalities and received a citation in the mail. And that is called a citation. You're calling it a complaint. It's a civil penalty. So it's not. Stop it. Stop on the front page of it or the top of it. It says citation. Yes, sir. It says it's a civil penalty. And if I'm using the terms that are changeably. It says it's a civil action. And it says that there's no criminal and criminal infraction for it. So what I think the court should. What is it? Two pages. It's one page and then it's on the back. Well, it's one of me. Yeah. It's one piece of paper though. But yes, it's two pages. And what we're dealing with is a lot of information. It does, sir. But the information provided other than the signature which I haven't addressed yet isn't the issue. The issue is that the appellees have attempted service by means of first class mail threatened a judgment which they would take. By means of first class mail alone. No other service attempt is made. There's no other proceeding where that's allowed or done. Any other civil action if I came to any court in in Maryland or in the federal system. I said, I'm mail to copy of of the civil action to the defendant. Give me my judgment. He hasn't answered. That wouldn't fly anywhere. What kind of a presumption is there in the law that is placed in the mail and first class mail gets where it's supposed to go. There's a strong presumption that it gets where it's supposed to go. But we're talking about here service of process. We're talking about here's a little more important. A lot of people in the Bench entry criminal offenses for involved in mailings that were presumed have been received. Certainly. Mail fraud cases in the light. Certainly, but what we're talking about here is the initiation of a lawsuit. That's a little more important than the service of a notice of a proceeding. What we're talking about here is the initiation of a lawsuit allowing the appellate to take a default and then allowing the appellate to take that default, take that judgment and execute upon it. And we know that that's what they can do because the statute itself refers to owners of the motor vehicles as if the owner's vehicle goes past the camera. We wish you the owner's side days use these cameras. What in like school zones. Yes, sir and work zones work zone. But we're working on the highway. Yes for the safety of the worker. Yeah, and a lot of goal in both instances that we you agree with all that. I certainly do. We will slow down going through the school zone. We need people slow down going through the work zone. We certainly do. But what we're talking about here is the initiation of a lawsuit. The fact that it's been proven yet. What we're allowing the appellate to do is to put an envelope in the mail without doing anything else and to take a judgment. They haven't proved anything about. The bunch of bots cited a Matthews versus the Eldridge. 1976 case. It's kind of a some balancing factors in it. And went and then went through them and analyzed. He certainly did. I don't think that the appropriate way to go through it. Because I think Malaine versus central. I think it's not bad law. That old case. The Matthews, the first Eldridge no longer the law. That has nothing to do with the service of process issue. And I think the service process has followed a different line of cases starting with Malaine in 1950, which said that. Basically notice to meet to process notice shall be reasonably calculated under all the circumstances to apprise the intent. And that's what Malaine central holding is. Malaine dealt with a property action dealt with bank accounts. And the only notice provided to the account holders that there was a judicial settlement was publication. The court says, well, you know, that's not exactly fair. That doesn't meet due process. You have to have notice reasonably calculated to apprise the parties of their rights. So a bunch at least mail them a copy of this. We're still talking about a property action. The court doesn't reduce what's required for an in person. A action it just brings in remactions into the fold of requiring actual due process and calls publication a fiction. That's what that case says. So what we have after Malaine is basically in remactions being treated more like in persona. But it doesn't reduce what in persona. And none of even the in-rem cases that either the party sites. States mailing alone is sufficient even for an in-rem action. And the reason we have a difference between what traditionally we're called in-rem actions. And what traditionally we're called in persona. And we still do is because of the. Exactly what Malaine is talking about. Under all of the circumstances under the circumstances a property owner has the right to enjoy property. But they also have the responsibility to take care of that property. And that means that if something's posted on the door that says you haven't paid your mortgage. The bank's going to take it. You have an obligation to look for that notice. You can't just ignore your own your own real property or personal property. Same thing with the forfeiture. How about our decision in this plumber versus state of Maryland case involving revocation of a driver's license. In that case you have an administrative action. So the the defendant in that case already had a relationship with the administrative body. Asked asked the state for the privilege to operate a motor vehicle. Already had that relationship with the body with the administrative body. It's no different than if a doctor was getting their license revoked. It just happens to be more driver's licenses. That's that that's the central difference there. The the the defendant or I guess respondent in the plumber case. Already had that relationship already had a duty to respond to the NBA. Here we have we have a municipality or two municipalities and people have nothing to do with it. We're not talking about we're not talking about property within the municipality and there's no taxes paid on them. I don't know what the it's kind of the balancing test the judge must used in the district court. I'm guessing most people would think that their loss of their driver's license or loss of their medical license, which they received a notice by mail would be far more important to them than receiving a notice for a $40 citation. What I think the Malayne case is telling us is that what we look at is the relationship between the party and the action or the underlying property. You already have a duty to if you're a physician you already have a duty to maintain your license. If you own property you already have a duty to maintain that property and to know what's going on with it. You already have a relationship with the bank that's taking it in most cases. You already have a relationship and a forfeiture action in many cases, but you're still you have a relationship to the collateral or the property and forfeiture action. You have to know where it is and know what the status of it is, but here you just have people driving in front of a speed camera. The different and forfeiture we don't look at or excuse me in a foreclosure we wouldn't look at what the property itself is. We wouldn't say well you know that house is really nice that's a $20 million mansion. This this fellow should get more due process than this guy with a $20,000 double wide. We don't look at it like that and I think the Supreme Court precedent is consistent with that that we look at what the relationship is between the person and the action. The defendant and the action here because as a property owner you know what's going on you have an obligation to know what's going on with your property and you have to follow up as a defendant and a in person a action. There's nobody but you if you don't actually receive constitutional notice. What are you supposed to do you don't know about it, but as a property owner you should know about it. You should know the bank's been foreclosed because you haven't paid them more. You should know you're about to be evicted because you haven't paid your rent. You should know what's what's posted the front door which mail to that property because you own it. But here you're talking about a defendant and a civil action. If this court allows the the app elite to get what they want here. What you're essentially going to to rubber. The rubber stamp is any civil action being sent by first class mail from a constitutional standpoint. The state of Maryland, Commonwealth of Virginia, any other state would be able to reduce the their statutory requirements for service process to just that. No return of service. You never get a return. All you'd have is first class mail. Maybe you have an affidavit of I mailed it. That would be it because that's all they they don't even have that. But that's all they could ever have is the affidavit if I mailed it. And my clients the the parties pay the citations doesn't even do with what this court should decide because didn't have anything to do with the district court's decision because there's no preclusive effect. They pay the citation just to get rid of it. In most cases, they're not not going to look at it from a constitutional basis. That's what the district court held. That's not up for appeal. Well, what's up for appeal is whether or not first class mail and first class mail alone satisfies due process. And if we look at page 316 of the mlean case, Mr. Justice Jackson gives us a hint as to how he's he's thinking when he writes that opinion. And he says the ways in honor with tangible property are such that he usually arranges means to learn of a direct attack upon his possessory or proprietary rights. So he's saying the same thing. I am he's saying a little nicer than I am. But the truth of the matter is. What's what's that issue in the mulean case, which is is the leading case in the other case of the file. I just don't have that much time to talk about them. What's what's important is the the debtor or the defendants connection to the underlying action. And and we don't look at what's a $40 citation. We look at this is an in person in action. I'll try to address the second point in my rebuttal. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Liz go. Mr. Carpinski. Thank you. Thank you. Kevin Carpinski on behalf of the Apple E's. Town of Riverdale Park and the town of Forest Heights. Let me start my argument, your honors, with correcting a statement made by my colleague. He indicated that this was a civil action resulting in a money judgment. And that is simply not a correct statement under the statute. There can never be a money judgment ever entered in this as it relates to this particular statute. And specifically, I'm referring to 29809, 21809, G, which says that if a person liable under this section does not pay the civil penalty or contest the violation. The administration may refuse to register or re-register the motor vehicle cited for the violation or may suspend the registration of the motor vehicle cited for the violation. There is never an occasion where a judgment is entered against the alleged violator. There are. There are. The vehicle runs to the vehicle. Run. Runs to the vehicle, your honor, and it's important to put these, these, the violators in three categories. The law is not a judgment that clogs title, the real estate, or ends up on somebody's credit rating or something of that. Absolutely not. And in fact, your honor, there is not even a Latvian associated with this. If I re-registered my vehicle today and I went out and got a speed camera ticket tomorrow, then the only recourse would be with two years from now when I have to re-register my vehicle in the state of Maryland. They would say, Mr. Carpensky, your vehicle has been flagged for a speed camera ticket you got two years ago, and you need to get that resolved before we'll go ahead and handle your registration. There's no Latvian involved, there's no penalty involved. It's $40, even if you don't pay it at any time. So really there are three categories of potential parties here. We have those that received the notice of citation and they paid it. They got it in the mail and I've gotten them. And it's either myself or my wife or my kids or someone is, you know, it's right there, date, time, vehicle, location, and I get it and I get it within two weeks and I go, well, either I was exceeding the speed limit more than 12 miles an hour. Someone of my family was, and I just pay it. So I actually got that citation. The second group that were all these people are? No, no. The second group is the group that got the citation, so you know what, this is just flat out wrong. I wasn't speeding or I wasn't the operator or my vehicle had been stolen or as permitted under the statutory scheme. I can present any defense I want in district court to that action. And I go to district court and I go ahead and I defend it and say, for whatever reason, I shouldn't have to pay this $40 and that's the second category of people. And those people got the citation obviously as well because they availed themselves a due process. Those people are not before us, Your Honor, because although there were some that fell within that category, the district court found that they were barred by racetrata and appellants failed to appeal that portion of Judge Montz's order. The third group would be those who contend that they never received the notice citation. And I would note that none of the plaintiffs below or appellants here have asserted they did not receive the citation. But again, the only penalty for lack of better term is if you claim you didn't get the citation, would be that you need to get it resolved before your next registration period. So the deprivation of a property right is very, very minimal on the alleged violator or the owner of the vehicle. So you said to another state that they're out of state? Well, you're quite frankly, Your Honor, in all candor, we have very little recourse against out of state motors because the only recourse we have is regarding registration of the motor vehicle. So if it's sent to an out of state motors that has committed a violation, it's sent if they pay it, they pay it. If they don't pay it, there's really not much that can be done about it because it's not a motor vehicle. What's that? The out of state driver doesn't pay it, that's the end of it. That's the end of it. We don't have any authority over the vehicle or the registration of the vehicle. We have a equal protection problem. Well, no, not necessarily. Well, you treat your residents worse than you do people out of state. Well, that was not raised, Your Honor, but that's in fact what you're doing. Well, it's just that we just, because of the, it's more of an administrator proceeding. It's not a civil lawsuit. It's administrative much like an MBA proceeding. There's only so much authority that, that that the jurisdiction has. And because of the statutory scheme that it is really tied to registration of the vehicle, there is not much recourse for out of state. I guess in theory, you could report it to a collection agency. You could do something of that nature. How much money your, must revenue, y'all generate, known as both? I don't know the exact numbers, Your Honor, but it's, it is a situation where it does generate a substantial amount of money, but that money has to be used as an offset. Most of it goes back to the state of Maryland for public safety programs. The other money has to be earmarked for public safety issues within the, the various jurisdictions. So, but- Are there other towns of Maryland that are doing this other just these two? Absolutely. I- It goes happening everywhere all over the state. It's happening all over the state, yes, Your Honor. Montgomery County- Is it only happening in these work zones and school zones? What if I'm driving up by 95? If they- If you're in a construction zone, what will happen is it will say that it is a photo-enforced construction area. And if you are going more than 12 miles an hour over what is the speed limit in that construction zone, yes, you can get- You can get a citation for that. Only if you have a state. Correct. Correct. And- But the statute requires that there has to be posting, in other words, that you're actually entering into an area that is- Is- is subject to photo-enforced- But it's the fact that they just- In this instance, they just sued your two clients. That's correct. That's how they got- That's correct. And there- There are other counties and there are other municipalities- There are other four sites- All their stuff goes to Philadelphia. Because- Well, it's- It's not in Philadelphia. No, but the reason why is because depending upon the jurisdiction, they use different vendors that assist with the operation of the speed camera systems and the equipment. So you may have- The combination of the Philadelphia. Right. And that part of the contract is who actually handles some of the billing. So four sites, she uses a contractor that has someone in Philadelphia. I have another client- Gathersburg or Chevy Chase Village that uses ACS out in New York. But then it's all really tied to the administrative services that are provided by the vendor who's- Who's providing- Under the federal and the statute- Does the- Can the state itself- With these- Camera areas- Make- Make that applicable on a particular section of the state highway or does the locality- And which the highways located have to go up the ordinance to make it applicable. The locality is your honor. So what happens here is if you're near- In a school zone or you're in a construction area, those are really where the speed monitoring systems are located. That's where they have to be posted. There's a posting period where you have to give 30 days of a warning period- Where you just give out warning citations. And then you can continue to do that. But generally the public safety here, the interest is- Is- It does whether you like these cameras or not. It makes people slow down and make some slow down and important areas where our kids are going to school. And where we got workers sitting out on I-95 and 495 doing work. So, you know, there's an- There's an important safety component to having these cameras offer. So, you just- A resident of the District of Columbia. You drove to one of these towns and you got one of these citations. You didn't pay it. And then you drive out in Maryland somewhere where there's- And you're pulled over for an effective pay-alike. And they're running your information through the computer while the troopers sitting there with you. Will this show up on that? No. Because with these citations, it doesn't affect your insurance. It doesn't affect your points. And it does not- It cannot affect your driving privileges under your driver's license. So, no. This would not show up as something that- I mean, that- That's how minimal the burden is on- On the owner of the vehicle. It does not even affect them in that regard. And so, no. You got pulled over in a different jurisdiction. Unlike if you failed to show up in traffic court for a mood- Moving violation where they could say that you failed to appear. That's not the case with the- With a speed monitoring citation. It would have no effect or no bearing on- On that particular. Follow-up on such easy questions. You did say that you don't pay this. Re-procussion. One of them at least. And the main one is- The main thing that I'm going to explain is that when you go to re-register your car, it will flag that you owe $40. So now you will re- Re-insurance, re-registration fee plus that, correct? Plus the $40 you didn't pay. You have to resolve the $40 citation. Correct. That means that you are informing the division of motor vehicles in your state That they have that citation. It has to be. Right? Because they are the ones who- The vision of motor vehicles are the ones who administer registration of car. So that information has to be connected to them to know that- That you owe $40, right? Correct. To the Maryland Department of Motor Vehicles. Okay, the state, right? That's how it is in Virginia. So if you come home and this book can happen here, these little places like you're talking about where you're applying, you come home, you have 12 of these citations. You see, I'm not paying any of them. But that's 12 times 40. At some point, couldn't the state of Maryland say, we're going to administratively take your license? Because you have 12 of these citations and there's an indication that you or someone in your car speed. They could administratively suspend the registration of the vehicle. They could not affect your driving license privileges because the statute does not- because we don't know who the operator would be. You could certainly suspend the voter, the registration for the vehicle. Oh, that car. Yeah. But you would not, you'd be at all from driving a car. Correct. That's correct. That's the way the statute is set up. So your honor, that is Judge Mott's did do a balancing test. But before we get to that balancing test, I mean, fundamentally, it starts with the Milan case, Milan case back in 1950. And, and it basically that case said that notice needs to be reasonably calculated to provide notice to affected individuals. And if that's the case, then due process is satisfied. And certainly, the only real defendant, the real plaintiffs we have in this case are the ones who paid the citations. So one, we knew they actually got it. And one of the cases that we cited was more versus City of Gathersburg. So all these plaintiffs are in the category one. Correct. They have it. They got it. What you told me about the one they weren't. Well, the only ones that are here on appeal. That's what I thought. Yeah, because the plaintiffs. Well, there are two sets of plaintiffs that the second category is thrown out. Correct. Yes. So the only ones here, your honor, are those that received it and paid it. First category. Yes, sir. And more of versus City of Gathersburg. This court said something to the effect of you cannot complain of due process. If you did not avail yourself of the process in the first place. And this, in this particular instance, it's clear they received it. They elected not to go through the district court proceeding, which they could have had a full evidentiary hearing. They could have had a denovo hearing in our circuit court. If they wish to do so, they could have appealed that to our court of special appeals. They could have followed a petition for rid of social war to our court of appeals. They could have followed a petition for rid of social war to the Supreme Court. They were going to raise a constitutional issue. So all those, all that due process was available to individuals who unquestionably received the citations in the first place. And I think the cases that we cited in, in our brief, that followed Malaine with Tulsa professional collection of services. Menonite board of missions. Green versus Lindsey. They stand for, for really two important propositions. They stand for the proposition that in 1950 when Malaine was decided, the court did away with this analysis that we're going to worry about whether it's in persona, in rim, quasi in rim. The test is, whatever action it is, it is whether the notice is reasonably calculated to provide actual notice. Could you have a subgroup in the class that's before us now? I don't think the plaintiffs made this argument. Maybe they have the thing said. Where you did pay this $40 citation. But the only reason you paid it was your registration came up and there's this $40 citation on it. And that doesn't necessarily mean that you've got the notice in the mail the two years early. You just decided it's easier for me to pay the $40 now than to fight it. Wouldn't there be a subgroup that could be within this class that wouldn't necessarily have gotten actual notice? Yes. And I think, I think there are two points there, your honor. First is there's not a group that is before this court that falls in that category. And I believe that person would be able to try and seek recourse through the district court to say, look, I never got the notice. And we're asking the court to exercise its authority to revisionary authority to consider it if the person ultimately decided to do that. And the second point out of green and the other cases we've cited is that the Supreme Court has repeatedly said that regular mail is a reliable, less expensive way to go ahead and provide actual notice to people that are affected. And when you think about it in this case and you balance the fact that you're talking about $40. And you're talking about something that does not suspend someone's driving privileges. If you had to personally serve that person or you had to rely upon certified mail, that would be a tremendous burden upon any governmental agency to have to go ahead and do that. It just would be an owner's task, one, because personal service is tremendously expensive. And two, quite frankly, a lot of people don't pick up their certified mail. So regular mail is really the most reasonable, well calculated way for people to actually receive what is in the mail. And of course, the statute requires that for residents within the state of Maryland, they get it within two weeks out of state residents, get it within 30 days. There's not a tremendous amount of lag time between one and the other. The other issue that was raised on appeal relates to this electronic signature. And I would just like to briefly discuss that issue. What you did that let me ask you is how many, how many states have the similar statute? How many states have similar statute? How many states are about doing this? You know, your honor, I don't know, I don't know the answer to that question. I think I'm getting from everybody else in the district that you've been using. Well, the lead dog in these other four cases. I hope you don't get anymore, but I don't know how many, how many states actually do use them? Certainly, Maryland started with one county and they've expanded it throughout the entire state to be able to be used. The appellants have argued that an electronic signature is not appropriate under the circumstances. And I would just raise two points. As the district court indicated in its opinion, Maryland has adopted the Electronic Transaction Act, which is in the commercial law article at 21106, which basically provides that an electronic signature has the same force and effect as a handwritten signature. Judge King had raised the Matthews versus Eldridge analysis, which has been used ever since that decision for a due process analysis. And when you apply those factors, it's clear that an electronic signature is entirely appropriate and meets the minimum standards of due process. The first prong is whether the private interests that will be affected by the official action. And in this particular case, we're talking about the civil penalty of 40 bucks with no late fee, doesn't affect your insurance, doesn't affect your driving license status, and there are no points. On the other hand, the countervailing benefit from the government's perspective is health and safety. Making our motorists slow down around areas where we have kids and we have construction workers and we have other individuals that may be vulnerable. The risk of an erroneous deprivation of a right. Well, that clearly weighs in favor of the apolies, too. There is no significant deprivation for the reasons I've already stated. And this notice is sent out within two weeks. It provides you the date time, speed and location of the alleged violation. Tell us you can pay it or you can contest it. As your honor pointed out, there's a very lengthy description on the second page or the backside of it that tells you exactly what it is and what it means and how it can be challenged. And then the third is is the administrative burden of having having this handwritten signature as opposed to an electronic signature and it would be a significant burden. I don't know the exact numbers, your honor, but there are a lot of these citations that get issued throughout the state to require a person to hand write that rather than review it on a computer, approve it and go and have an electronic signature. There would be a tremendous burden, particularly when a lot of these citations are not necessarily mailed out from the local jurisdiction itself. I see that my time is up unless your honors have any questions I will submit. Thank you very much. Thank you. We appreciate it. Mr. Lischko. Kind of sort of interesting. Some of council's arguments about what we're talking about, whether it's money judgment or something else. I think the statute makes it clear that it's not just a money judge that it's not just an administrative citation to the car. Both of the, all three of the portions of the statute that talk about what the MBA can do say that they may not that they shall and nothing in the statute itself says this is all we're talking about. These are the only potential penalties. Nothing says that. In fact, the statute itself says that if the owner receives a citation and the driver wasn't driving the vehicle, the owner can mail in an affidavit and say, well, here's the driver. And then a citation can issue against the driver. So the, the, the, the, Apple is reading the statute basically reads that part of it out, out of the statute because there's no sanction against the driver who's getting the citation. Basically, they're getting mail that they need not respond to and if they do, oh, well, but if they don't, they go to court, there's no, there's no sanction. That, that reading doesn't make any sense. I think what we're clearly dealing with is, is a money judgment. You have non-resident drivers receiving these citations. I think the, it's the, I think the court has to read the statute to give it meaning. To say, what did the, what did the legislature mean? What did Maryland General Assembly mean? And I think it's clear that what you, where do you read in that you get a, the results in this judgment against anybody. It's being filed in Maryland's district court, which is a trial court and it's being adjudicated there and the court is entering something that says $40. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck. We're dealing with a judgment. We're dealing with the money judgment. There's nothing the statute that precludes any of these jurisdictions from, from seeking to enforce their judgments through the full faith and credit of, of the United States of the various states and say, well, this is a Maryland judgment. I'd like to enter it against Mr. So-and-so who lives out of state? Oh, and we have a Maryland resident who is, who is driving. I'd like to, I'd like to garnish his wages. I'd like to, to lean his house. I'd like to, to, to levy upon property. There's nothing in the statute that says that. What we have is we have a penalty of $40 issuing. So, and Maryland statutory law dealing with collections. I'm not, I'm going to make sure on, or are you saying that all these. In addition of a traditional money judgment application against real estate, carnage, one of wages. That this, that locality here would have the authority to do that. I think so. I don't see why not. They have the district court, which is not their court. That's the Maryland court, Maryland's courts. Entering a judgment, they're favor saying, you're, you have to pay the, you have to pay the locality $40. I don't see how that could not be a judgment. I don't see how, how that could not be collected upon. The statute, the statute says you can, you may be able to do this. You may be able to do that, but it doesn't preclude any, any sort of collection action. And in fact, you're going to have a piece of paper signed by a judge. It says $40 against the defendant. That sounds like a judgment to me from any court I've ever heard of. I don't see how that's not a judgment. You know, I think one, one, one area, you said all of these types of cases go before judge. Yeah, all of them. If, if they're contested, they would go before a judge. If they're pay, they don't end up there, but they would eventually be ruled upon by a judge. And, and the judge would sign the order, the final order, standing $40. So that's a, that's a money judgment. So what, what you're dealing with is mailing out process for money judgment using first class mail. None of the cases cited so that first class mail buy and of itself, the only. You don't get noticed that it won't go before judge. If you don't get noticed, it will go before judge. Because it was all the back of this one is citation that you owe it. That's not how you get a default. The judge will sign the order. And then all of them go before judge. That's why I asked you. Well, if you pay it, it wouldn't go before a judge. That, that was why I was trying to express. But don't pay it. You're saying it goes before judge. Yeah, and the judge will sign the sign off on it. I don't know what provisions this day. I mean, in the, the, the statute itself. Yeah, what's what's what provision says that the whole statute says it goes to the district court. So I, it doesn't say goes to the district court judge, but it says it goes to the district court. What default judgment. What, what does it say there? You know, it, it made it doesn't know. No, you do a whole lot of reading into it. But, but I mean, that's generally how, how judgments are entered, not by the clerk and not by the, the plaintiff, the plaintiff doesn't enter the judgment. That provision is only for people who can test it. You get due process right to raise your question. I don't see anything where it says that if you don't respond at all, it goes before judge for default judgment. Didn't say that. That would just be my general understanding of how courts work. I see I'm out of time. I'm your honor. Judge King is the lead judge. So if he will give all the questions, I would, I would, I think my best. You know, my if he can have his 30 seconds, the line ups is that right. Took your 30 seconds. I think it's a money judgment. I think it's pretty obvious. It's money judgment. And you're, you're mailing out process. I didn't touch on the affidavit problem. But that is what secures the judgment. And that's not testimony. You wouldn't send, you wouldn't send the affiant to jail. You wouldn't allow him to purge himself with an e-signature. So that's, it says it's an affidavit. It's not. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. We'll come down and, uh, great council and take a quick break. The son of a court takes the brief reset