Case # Case Name 09-395 Michael A. Funk t/a


10-452 Elemer Mihalyi v. American Honda Motor Company


11-812 Elizabeth Azarian v.


Counsel for Appellant Area of Law


MA Funk Company v. Worker’s Comp Michael Paul Ferraro


Judge Jurisdiction


Patricia McDonald 410-653-3061 Cahill/Baltimore County


Robert J. Zakroff 301-986-5770 Kavanaugh/ Product Liability/ Nissan v. Nave


Barry J. Rosenthal 301-251-6200 Thompson/


Jeffrey W. Witte, M.D. Medical Malpractice/Procedure Montgomery County


Montgomery County


Issues


Did the trial court err in denying employer’s motion to dismiss for claimant’s failure to timely file a transcript?


Did the trial court err in disqualifying plaintiff’s expert witness in a seatbelt failure and design case by improperly applying the Nave v. Nissan decision to this case?


Did the trial court err in permitting the defendant, Dr. Jeffrey Witte, to cross-examine plaintiff’s expert on mat- ters relating to the Certificate of Qualified Expert, and in dismissing plaintiff’s case because plaintiff’s expert witness devoted more than 20% of his professional activities to tes- timony in personal injury cases?


12-1134 Mercury Trust, et al. v. Kamren Ahadpour


Steven M. Truitt 202-220-1200 Scrivener/ Civil Procedure


13-1112 Ericka C. Coleman, et al. v. Marvin Ellin 410-727-1787 Schirmer’s Pool and Spa Motor Vehicle Tort Action


14-318


Robert Reese v. Ernest Reese


Kurt Berlin 202-347-3520 Real Property & Procedure


Montgomery County


Smith/Prince George’s County Clarke/Prince George’s County


Does the defendant’s testimony in a proceeding, which con- clusively establishes that he perjured himself in a previous proceeding, constitute clear and convincing evidence of extrinsic fraud to warrant that the judgment in the previ- ous proceeding be vacated?


Did the trial court err in granting summary judgment to defendant who admitted negligence in allowing a defective hose to flood I-95 with a highly toxic substance which stopped traffic for hours resulting in a severe rear-end mo- tor vehicle accident causing plaintiff’s injuries?


After evidence that a defendant did not receive a motion for summary judgment because it was sent to an incorrect address, did the trial court err in declining to amend a sum- mary judgment order, which imposed sanctions? Does the circuit court have jurisdiction over real property situated outside of Maryland, and can it award title to real property to one party against the interest of another without the lien holder being identified and without evidence as to whether any other parties had ownership interests?


15-1352 Douglas R. Walker v. Erie Insurance Exchange


Browne L. Kooken 301-627-1920 Lombardi/Prince Insurance/Motor Vehicle


George’s County


Where an insured had contracted to occasionally remove snow from an apartment complex, which ended up being a third party defendant in a personal injury action when a resident fell on the snow and ice, did the trial court err in ruling that the insured’s insurance compancy owed no duty of defense or coverage for its policyholder under either an auto or homeowners policy on the basis that the insured’s conduct constituted a “business activity excluded by the policy?”


16-629 Thomas Reid v. 17-1487 Robert Moore v. Mostaba Norouzi, et al. John B. Stolarz 410-532-7200 Strausberg/ Harborview Marina, Inc. Negligence/Causal Relationship Baltimore City Harvey A. Kirk 410-539-6379 Rupp/


Montgomery County


Did the trial court err in not granting a new trial to plain- tiff where the jury found the defendant negligent, but awarded no damages to the plaintiff.


Plaintiff was a passenger on a Montgomery County owned and operated bus, which was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Did the trial court err in finding that the plaintiff had not given notice pursuant to LGTCA § 5-304, in fail- ing to recognize Trigon Administrators, Inc. as the corporate agent of the county, and in failing to address the issues raised by the Court of Appeals in footnote 6 of Williams v. Maynard, 359 Md. 379?


18-1198 Patricia Danielewicz v. Diana Arnold


Jefferson Wright 410-727-6464 Caroom/ Estates and Trusts


Anne Arundel County


Plaintiff was a beneficiary under a trust and a remainder- man under a life estate and sued the officers and directors of a closely held corporation for breach of fiduciary duty and negligence. Did the trial court err in dismissing the claim holding that corporate officers and directors owe no fiduciary duty to a beneficiary of a trust holding stock in the absence of actual fraud, and also in ruling that the Com- plaint did not state facts sufficiently to establish a dilution of the value of plaintiff’s stock interest?


Spring 2001 Trial Reporter


(Continued on page 12) 31


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56