In this Rule, "administrative judge" includes the chief Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, the Chief Judge of the Appellate Court, and the chief judge of an orphans' court.
The request for review pursuant to this Rule shall be filed within 30 days after the custodian's final decision. It shall be in writing and served on the custodian. The request shall identify the judicial record requested and shall set forth with particularity the reasons why the custodian's decision was incorrect.
The custodian shall file a written response within 30 business days after service of the request and shall have the burden of (A) sustaining the decision to deny inspection, production, or creation of the requested judicial record or to delay a decision on the request, and (B) justifying the proposed fee, if that is in dispute.
If the dispute concerns a case record, notice record, or license record filed in a court, the request shall be filed in the court where the judicial record was filed and shall be addressed to the administrative judge of that court.
The clerk shall docket the request as a miscellaneous filing for administrative review by the administrative judge and not as a judicial proceeding. No fee shall be charged for filing or processing the request.
If the dispute is over an administrative record of which a judge, other than an administrative judge, is the custodian, the request for administrative review shall be addressed to the administrative judge of the court. If the dispute is over an administrative record of which the administrative judge is the custodian, there shall be no administrative review, but the requester may seek judicial review pursuant to Rule 16-933.
Committee note: When acting solely in the capacity of custodian, the judge's decision is an administrative, not a judicial one, and is subject to review by the administrative judge, who has general supervision over the judges of the court. See Rule 16-105(b)(1). Where the custodial judge is the administrative judge, however, the problem of administrative review is more difficult. Of the various options considered, the Court has decided to allow further review to be through a judicial proceeding pursuant to Rule 16-933.
If the dispute is over the creation of a judicial record pursuant to Rule 16-919, the inspection of an administrative record other than one subject to section (d) of this Rule, or a proposed fee, the request shall be filed with the SCA who, personally or through a designee, shall proceed in accordance with the procedures set forth in subsection (c)(3) of this Rule and make the final administrative decision.
Md. R. Ct. Admin. 16-932
This Rule is new.