Martino Law

Martino Law I assist in family law cases focusing on agreements, financial cases, and mediation. I am an attorney with over 25 years of experience.

If you are going through a difficult time, I can be a stabilizing force to help you get out of your situation. I am diligent and conscientious. I do not grandstand or play upon your fears. I will be honest with you about your legal matter, and I will be honest when dealing with the court and the opposing side, but I will always advocate for your interests. In advocating for your interests, keep in

mind that a judge will tune out if he or she believes that we are not being reasonable, so it is paramount that we prepare a strategy that has a chance to be successful. In developing a strategy for your case, we will realistically discuss the prospects of your case, even if it means telling you something that you do not want to hear.

06/24/2026

Couples still walk into my office convinced that living together for seven years made them married. Maryland does not recognize common-law marriage formed inside the state, full stop. I wrote about In re L.E.S., where Ohio drew its own line on the question. The recurring problem is what Maryland does with a common-law marriage validly formed somewhere that allows it. That one turns on where the couple actually met the other state's requirements. Here is the piece, and why the answer surprises people.

https://bit.ly/4dSExoT

06/24/2026

Maryland made divorce easier to obtain than most contracts you sign. Six months of separation, or mutual consent, and the marriage is over. Nobody should be nostalgic for fault grounds and the ugliness they bred. The honest point is different. The law now treats the most consequential promise most people make as the simplest to exit, while the hard part, dividing property and raising children, gets no shortcut at all.

06/23/2026

A final protective order in Maryland issues on a preponderance of the evidence, the lowest civil standard, and it carries real consequences. The respondent surrenders fi****ms, can be removed from the home, and lives under conditions that surface in later custody fights. Clients treat the interim and temporary stages casually and regret it. Show up to the final hearing with witnesses and documents. The order that issues there governs far more than the seven days the temporary one covered.

06/23/2026

In Cisco Systems v. Doe, decided today, Falun Gong practitioners alleged that Cisco built the surveillance system China used to identify, detain, and torture them. The conduct alleged is appalling. The Court, in a 6-3 opinion by Justice Barrett, still held that they cannot sue. Federal courts may not create new causes of action under the Alien Tort Statute for aiding and abetting violations of international law, and the Torture Victim Protection Act reaches only those who commit torture, not those who help. Justice Sotomayor called it a new low point.

This is the same separation-of-powers move the Court has made for more than a decade. Creating a remedy for damages is Congress's job. When a statute says nothing about aiding-and-abetting liability, the answer is to ask Congress to write it in, not to ask judges to read it in. The instinct to give these plaintiffs a forum is understandable. The Constitution still assigns that choice to the branch that can be voted out.

06/23/2026

The Court decided Blanche v. Lau today, and lawful permanent residents should pay attention. Muk Choi Lau has held a green card since 2007. He left the country briefly while facing a state charge, and when he returned, a border officer treated him not as a resident coming home but as someone seeking admission for the first time. That distinction is everything. A returning resident is generally considered already admitted. Charge him with inadmissibility instead, and the burden, the procedure, and the stakes all shift against him.

The Court held that the immigration statute does not require border officers to prove a disqualifying crime by clear and convincing evidence at the moment of reentry. Justice Jackson dissented, warning that the ruling hands officers a blank check over roughly twelve million green card holders.

The majority has the better of the text. Congress did not write a clear-and-convincing standard into that provision, and courts cannot supply one it omitted. The practical warning still stands. Any permanent resident with a pending charge should think hard before leaving the country, because the trip home is the moment the government's leverage is greatest.

06/23/2026

Three years after Tyler v. Hennepin County held that the government cannot keep the surplus when it sells your home for back taxes, the Court told us today what that surplus actually is. In Pung v. Isabella County, a Michigan family owed $2,241.93. The county sold their home, assessed at $194,400, for $76,008 at auction and tried to keep the difference. After Tyler, it could not. The open question was the baseline: whether the surplus is measured against the auction price or the home's fair market value.

The Court chose the auction price. The owner gets back what the sale brought minus the tax debt, not the gap between a bargain auction and what the house was really worth. The majority read "just compensation" against the long history of tax sales and declined to turn every foreclosure into a fair-market-value fight.

It is the more restrained reading, and I think the right one. The Constitution forbids the government from pocketing your equity. It does not guarantee the price a willing buyer would have paid on a good day. Owners who want full value have a simpler path. Redeem before the sale, or push for a better auction.

06/23/2026

The Supreme Court handed down Landor v. Louisiana today, and the facts are hard to read. Guards held a Rastafarian prisoner down and shaved off his dreadlocks after he handed them a Fifth Circuit decision protecting his religious practice. They threw the printout in the trash. Six justices, with Justice Gorsuch writing, still held that RLUIPA does not let Damon Landor sue those officials for money damages in their personal capacities. The statute rests on Congress's spending power, and a funding condition binds the state that accepts federal funds, not the individual employee who broke the law. Justice Jackson dissented for the three liberals.

The reasoning is textually sound, and the result is bleak. A man whose rights were plainly violated walks away with no remedy for damages against the people who violated them. That gap belongs to Congress to close, not the Court. If lawmakers want personal-capacity liability under Spending Clause statutes, they have to say so.

06/23/2026

Some Maryland parents finish a custody case and discover that the fighting has not ended. They are back to arguing over pickups, holidays, and which activity the child joins. A parenting coordinator is built for exactly that. It is a neutral professional, often a therapist or a lawyer, appointed to help high-conflict parents carry out a custody order on a day-to-day basis. The coordinator does not rewrite custody. They help parents communicate, settle small recurring disputes, and avoid going to court over every disagreement. For some families, it is a lifeline. For others, it is one more cost they do not need. The honest test is simple. If you and your co-parent can handle routine decisions without a referee, you do not need one. If every exchange becomes a standoff, a coordinator can save you money and spare your children the crossfire.

06/23/2026

Election cases are sitting on the Court's docket as the term closes, which is a good moment to revisit Callais Comes to Alabama. The Court vacated a districting map on the shadow docket, with no argument and little explanation, and reshaped a state's representation in the process. Whatever lands this week on voting and election rules will sit on top of that posture. If you want to understand how the Court is handling election law right now, start there. Here is the piece.

https://bit.ly/4u9vzcF

06/23/2026

Opinion day at the Supreme Court, and the case I am watching is Trump v. Slaughter. The question is whether the President can fire members of independent agencies at will, which means whether Humphrey's Executor survives. Chief Justice Roberts called that 1935 precedent "a dry husk" at argument. A ruling for the President would reshape the administrative state and signal how this Court treats ninety-year-old precedents it finds inconvenient. The Federal Reserve has been carved out as special. Almost nothing else has.

Address

1997 Annapolis Exchange Parkway, Suite 300
Annapolis, MD
21401

Opening Hours

Monday 9am - 5pm
Tuesday 9am - 5pm
Wednesday 9am - 5pm
Thursday 9am - 5pm
Friday 9am - 5pm

Telephone

+14107778043

Website

,

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Martino Law posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Martino Law:

Shortcuts

Share

Category