Mark Oakley

Mark W. Oakley is an established litigation attorney concentrating on civil litigation, personal injury, construction law, and criminal and traffic defense. He also advises business clients, negotiates and drafts contracts, and handles a variety of litigation matters at all levels of the state and federal court systems. Mr. Oakley is trained and certified in the collaborative practice of law. Mr. Oakley is a graduate of the University of Maryland School of Law (J.D. 1987), and the University of Maryland, College Park (B.A. 1984). He is a member of the Maryland State Bar Association, the District of Columbia Bar, and the Bar Association of Montgomery County. He is admitted to practice before the Court of Appeals of Maryland, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Authored the winning brief in the case of 1986 Mercedes v. State of Maryland, a precedent-setting decision limiting the State’s power to forfeit private property.

• Free Consultation
• Credit Cards Accepted
  Visa, MasterCard, Discover
• Contingent Fees
  I handle personal injury claims on a contingent fee basis, meaning if there is no recovery, you do not owe me a legal fee.

District of Columbia

District of Columbia Bar

Since 1989

Maryland

Since 1988

University of Maryland - Baltimore

J.D. (1987) | Law

1984 - 1987

University of Maryland - College Park

B.A. (1984) | English

1980 - 1984

District of Columbia Bar

Member

1989 - Current

Maryland State Bar Association

Member

1988 - Current

Bar Association of Montgomery County

Member

1988 - Current

Q. My husband was arrested and charged with assault on me after I called the police. I made a mistake. Please help!

April 5, 2024

A: First, your husband needs a lawyer. Second, you can only do two things: communicate to the State’s Attorneys Office your desire to not go forward with charges against your husband and your intent to invoke your privilege not to testify against your spouse; and then invoke your privilege on the trial date. A spouse can only invoke their privilege one time during the marriage, so if you’ve done this before, you can’t do it again with the same spouse.

Q. Hello, can a Disclaimer of Inheritance be signed electronically in Maryland? Thank you so much.

March 20, 2024

A: Yes, but before you do so, make sure that the disclaimer achieves the results you want it to achieve. A disclaimer by law is treated as if the person disclaiming died before the decedent. If the Will directs that a deceased heir’s share be distributed “per stripes”, or by some other method, the share may go to a person or persons you did not intend. Other methods of redirecting an unwanted inheritance include an agreement among heirs or legatees named under the Will.

Q. My current employer sent my form 1095C to a another employee with the same first name and exposed my SS#, can I sue?

March 15, 2024

A: Perhaps there is a federal or state governmental agency that has regulatory authority to impose a fine or other sanction for failing to safeguard employees’ personally identifiable information. You would need to consult an employment lawyer in your area as to the existence of such a legal requirement and the process for filing a complaint.

As for a direct civil claim for monetary damages, you would need to have suffered actual out-of-pocket damages to support such a claim. Mere upset over someone else seeing your SSN is not sufficient. I assume this mistake came to light when your co-employee notified you or your employer that they had received the wrong tax form. That certainly suggests they are not a risk to misuse the information and that the disclosure went no further. There was a time not too long ago that SSNs were widely disclosed, starting with people’s Medicare number on all their medications, and acting as a person’s driver’s license number in many states. While those uses have been ended, mere disclosure—while concerning— is not necessarily going to lead to identity theft.

You are right to be upset at the carelessness of your employer and whomever failed to be more careful about matching names and addresses, but this sounds like mere negligence and somewhat predictable given two employees with the same name. Bringing this issue up with your employer and insisting on implementing some procedures that will prevent this from happening in the future is certainly warranted. ... Read More