Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County
Case No. C-02-CV-21-000509 IN THE SUPREME COURT
Argued: May 5, 2023
OF MARYLAND*
No. 32
September Term, 2022
______________________________________
COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND
v.
COMCAST OF CALIFORNIA, MARYLAND,
PENNSYLVANIA, VIRGINIA, WEST
VIRGINIA, LLC, ET AL.
______________________________________
Fader, C.J.,
Watts,
Hotten,
Booth,
Biran,
Gould,
Eaves,
JJ.
Pursuant to the Maryland Uniform Electronic Legal Materials
______________________________________
Act (§§ 10-1601 et seq. of the State Government Article) this
document is authentic.
PER CURIAM ORDER
2023-05-09 12:15-04:00 ______________________________________
Filed: May 9, 2023
Gregory Hilton, Clerk
* At the November 8, 2022 general election, the voters of Maryland ratified a constitutional
amendment changing the name of the Court of Appeals of Maryland to the Supreme Court
of Maryland. The name change took effect on December 14, 2022.
*
IN THE
COMPTROLLER OF MARYLAND
*
SUPREME COURT
v.
*
OF MARYLAND
COMCAST OF CALIFORNIA,
*
MARYLAND, PENNSYLVANIA,
No. 32
VIRGINIA, WEST VIRGINIA, LLC,
*
ET AL.
September Term, 2022
*
PER CURIAM ORDER
Upon consideration of the filings by the Comptroller of Maryland, the appellant,
Comcast of California, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, LLC, et al., the
appellees, and amici curiae supporting both parties, and oral argument conducted on May
5, 2023,
Whereas, on September 10, 2021, the appellees filed an amended complaint in the
Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County seeking a declaratory judgment that Maryland’s
Digital Advertising Gross Revenues Tax, Title 7.5 of the Tax-General Article, is
unconstitutional; and
Whereas, on October 12, 2021, the Comptroller moved to dismiss the amended
complaint. The Comptroller argued, among other things, that the circuit court lacked
jurisdiction over the action because the appellees had failed to exhaust their administrative
remedies. On March 14, 2022, following a hearing, the circuit court denied that aspect of
the Comptroller’s motion to dismiss and permitted all but one count of the amended
complaint to proceed; and
Whereas, on April 5, 2022, the Comptroller and the appellees each filed motions for
summary judgment. The Comptroller again argued, among other things, that the circuit
court lacked jurisdiction over the action because the appellees had failed to exhaust
administrative remedies. The appellees argued that the Maryland Digital Advertising
Gross Revenues Tax violates the United States Constitution and the Maryland Declaration
of Rights, and sought a declaration to that effect; and
Whereas, in an order entered on October 21, 2022, after a hearing, the circuit court
granted the appellees’ motion for summary judgment as to counts one, six, and eight of the
amended complaint, and denied the Comptroller’s motion for summary judgment. In a
final declaratory judgment order entered on November 18, 2022, the circuit court declared
that the “Maryland Digital Advertising Gross Revenues Tax violates the Supremacy Clause
of the United States Constitution and the Internet Tax Freedom Act (Count One), the
dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution (Count Six), and the First
Amendment to the United States Constitution (Count Eight)”; and
Whereas, the Comptroller noted an appeal from the circuit court’s judgment and
thereafter sought review in this Court by filing a petition for writ of certiorari, which this
Court granted; and
Whereas, contemporaneous with the petition for writ of certiorari, the Comptroller
filed a motion to stay enforcement of the circuit court’s declaratory judgment pending
appeal. In the motion, the Comptroller argued that a stay was needed to prevent
interference with the tax assessment and collection process before the appellees had
2
exhausted their administrative remedies. Upon consideration of the motion to stay and the
response filed by the appellees, the Court denied the motion; and
Whereas, on May 5, 2023, this Court held oral argument,
Now, therefore, for reasons to be stated later in an opinion to be filed, this 9th day
of May 2023, the Supreme Court of Maryland, a majority of the Court concurring, HOLDS
that the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County lacked jurisdiction over this action because
the appellees failed to exhaust their administrative remedies; and it is therefore
ORDERED, that the following orders of the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County
are hereby VACATED: (1) the March 14, 2022 order denying in part the Comptroller’s
motion to dismiss; (2) the October 21, 2022 order granting in part the appellees’ motion
for summary judgment and denying the Comptroller’s motion for summary judgment; and
(3) the November 18, 2022 final declaratory judgment; and it is further
ORDERED, that this action is remanded to the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel
County with directions to dismiss the action; and it is further
ORDERED, that costs are to be paid by the appellees and the mandate is to issue
forthwith.
/s/ Matthew J. Fader
Chief Justice
3
483 Md. 485
294 A.3d 1108
Comptroller v. Comcast
Decided May 9, 2023
Court of Appeals of Maryland · decided 2023-05-09
Decided 2023-05-09