The Supreme Court of Maryland announced Monday that it will not be taking up a petition by District 2 Commissioner Thomasina Coates (D) to review the state appeals court’s opinion upholding a permanent injunction against her, bringing an end to nearly three years of litigation over the question of whether Coates is allowed to vote on the employment contract of County Administrator Mark Belton.
The order denying Coates’ petition for a writ of certiorari comes nearly four months after the Appellate Court of Maryland heard oral arguments in the case. As reported on TLR’s Facebook page, Coates filed her petition with the state supreme court Aug. 18.
As is customary, the court’s order did not provide an explanation for why the petition was rejected.
The denial means that the Appellate Court of Maryland’s opinion will remain the final word on the questions raised by District 3 Commissioner Amanda M. Stewart (D) and District 1 Commissioner Gilbert Bowling III (D) in their original lawsuit, filed at the end of December 2022. The lawsuit arose from a contentious closed session of the Board of Charles County Commissioners earlier that month, during which Coates, Commissioners’ President Reuben B. Collins II (D), and newly elected District 4 Commissioner Ralph E. Patterson (D) attempted to vote to fire Belton, despite the fact that the board had voted in June 2020 to bar Coates from voting on Belton’s contract following a confidential investigation by outside counsel that found Coates had discriminated against Belton and created a hostile work environment.
“I am glad that this matter has at long last successfully concluded,” Andrew D. Levy, counsel for Stewart and Bowling, told TLR following the order’s issuance.
John D. Perry, Coates’ counsel, told TLR that while the denial of certiorari signals an end to the litigation related to the question of Coates’ ability to vote on Belton’s contract, he said he and his client will be reviewing their “available legal options.”
“I’ll simply reiterate what was stated in the petition: that there were fundamental legal errors in the Appellate Court’s opinion and that the Appellate Court’s opinion, taken as a whole, opens the door to unwarranted judicial intrusion into the elected branches of government,” Perry said.
As of Nov. 30, 2024, the county had paid $1.5 million in legal fees to the law firms representing Coates, Bowling, Stewart, and Belton, as well as to firms representing the Board of County Commissioners as a whole, Collins, and Patterson, who were at various times named as parties in the litigation. TLR will be seeking a more up-to-date figure from the Office of the County Attorney.
Download the Documents Discussed in This Post
- “Notice of Order,” October 27, 2025
- “Opinion” by Nazarian, J., June 30, 2025
- Video of Oral Arguments, October 7, 2024 (external link)