T. M. v. University of Md. Medical System Corporation · ¶15

Meanwhile, back in state court, T. M. appealed the consent order to the Appellate Court of Maryland and raised similar arguments. About four months later, T. M. moved to stay the pending appeal in the Appellate Court of Maryland, contending that a stay was warranted to “prevent inconsistent rulings” because both the state appeal and the pending federal lawsuit were “based on the same facts and events.” Motion to Stay in No. 1:23–cv–1684, ECF Doc. 81– 1, p. 1. The Appellate Court of Maryland granted the stay, which remains in effect.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.