Glen L. Wittstadt, Jr. and Lynne M. Wittstadt - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                          
               As previously indicated, petitioner took the position that              
          the effective date of his election to transfer from the                      
          Retirement System to the Pension System came after the final day             
          of his employment.  Petitioner's position in respect of this                 
          issue was consequential for two reasons: First, because it                   
          facilitated petitioners' principal argument that the Transfer                
          Refund was made because of petitioner's retirement; and second,              
          because it facilitated petitioners' ancillary argument that the              
          Transfer Refund was not made because of petitioner's election to             
          transfer from the Retirement System to the Pension System because            
          such election was invalid under Maryland State law.                          
               At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court denied                      
          petitioners' motion.  The Court took this action essentially for             
          two reasons:  First, and principally, because the record was so              
          incomplete so as to preclude a rational disposition of the case;             
          and second, because factual issues appeared to be in dispute.                
          Near the end of the hearing, the following colloquy took place               
          between the Court and petitioner:                                            
                    THE COURT:  * * *  Mr. Wittstadt, at this point, I                 
               am not clear what your position is with respect to the                  
               stipulation of facts.  But when this case was continued                 
               last time, and as I understand it from respondent's                     
               counsel that there are some documents, the Court does                   
               not now have those documents.  Without those documents,                 
               I couldn't come close--let the Court finish--couldn't                   
               come close to ruling in your favor on this motion.                      
                    A motion for summary judgment requires that there                  
               be no genuine material issue of fact in dispute.  So I                  
               don't have any facts or certainly anywhere near                         
               sufficient facts to rule in your favor.  Even if you do                 

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011