Case # Case Name


26-1349 Timothy M. Martin v. Douglas F. Gansler


27-196 Deep Run Rifle & Revolver Club v.


M. Kenneth Begley, et al.


Counsel for Appellant Area of Law


Timothy Martin, pro se


Judge


Jurisdiction Weinstein/


Maryland Public Information Montgomery Acts applicability to a criminal case County


Samantha Smith 410-751-6500 Burns/Carroll Easements/Injunctions


County Issues


Did the trial court err in dismissing defendant’s request that the Office of the State’s Attorney for Montgomery County comply with state law MPIA 612, which requires the State to provide to the convicted defendant a copy of his file?


Did the trial court err in granting a permanent injunction against the defendant’s activities ruling that it constituted a noise nuisance and giving defendant 6 months to design and implement a noise abatement program, notwithstand- ing the fact that the Rifle & Revolver Club had been in existence at its present location for over 50 years and had preserved a “prescriptive easement” as to its activities?


28-400 E. Sinan Chabuk v. APR Condomimium, Inc.


29-1188 Stuart Mendelson v. Phillip Brown


30-1933 Stavely v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company


31-1274 MCR of America, Inc. d/b/a Mortgage Credit


Reports of America, Inc. v. J. William Greene


32-1357 Roger Scully v. Laszlo Tauber, M.D.


33-1494 Montgomery Village Foundation, Inc. and


Alan Post 301-738-3333 Civil Procedure


John F. McCable, Jr. 301-279-9500


Eastgate Homes Corporation Condominium Law/TRO v. Ralph Thomas Eillis & Vivian Fay Ellis


34-1107 George Martin v. Lincoln Benefit Life Company


35-1175 Joseph Schmidt v. David Hoyt, M.D.


Robert Jay Feldman 410-321-0040 Civil Procedure


Edward Lilly 410-649-2000 Malpractice/Evidence


Slip & Fall/ Hennegan/ Baltimore County Berger/ Baltimore County


36-1593 Kerry Ann Lockwood Warren Stephens 301-306-4300 Lombardi/Prince v. Centre Group, L.P., et al.


George’s County Summary Judgment


Beard/Montgomery County


Donohue/ Montgomery


E. Sinan Chabuk, pro se 301-963-0709


Maryland Condominium Act/ Attorneys Fees


Chapin/


Montgomery County


Glenn Cooper 301-656-7603 Rupp/Montgomery Negligence Procedure


County


David Titman 410-465-2656 McCurdy/ Insurance/Attorneys’ Fees


Did the trial court err by granting an initial judgment of $166 against defendant/appellant and thereafter amending the amount of the judgment to $974, which then entitled the plaintiff to seek an award of attorneys’ fees, which was granted by the court in the amount of $11,579?


Did the trial court err in finding that the appellant had not given notice pursuant to LGTCA § 5-304 in failing to rec- ognize the Montgomery County Division of Risk Management as an authorized entity to receive notice un- der the Act?


Baltimore City


Edward Blanton, Jr. 410-296-8160 Hennegan/ Arbitration/Attorneys’ Fees


Baltimore County


Did the trial court err in affirming an ALJ decision to award no attorneys’ fees to the insured who successfully obtained reversal of State Farm’s decision not to renew his automo- bile insurance policy?


Did the trial court err in modifying an arbitrator’s award without a finding of fraud, corruption, undue means, or mistake in law or fact, by setting aside an arbitrator’s award of attorneys’ fees because of counsel’s “obstructive, uncivil, pedantic, disrespectful and a disparagement of the process of arbitration?”


Did the trial court abuse its discretion in denying defendant’s motion to vacate a default judgment, which was ordered in response to plaintiff’s motion for immediate sanctions for defendant’s failure to appear at his scheduled deposition?


Did the trial court err as a matter of law when it held that it would be unreasonable to apply the covenants of Eastgate Homes Corp. to the facts and circumstances of this case, and in granting an injunction prohibiting homeowner from parking their pick up truck within the community’s bound- aries?


Did the trial court err in striking and vacating a default judgment when there was no finding of fraud, mistake or irregularity?


Did the trial court commit prejudicial error in permitting the defendant to introduce evidence that he had never been sued for medical malpractice prior to or since the filing of this case?


Did the trial court err in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment holding that as a matter of law the plain- tiff assumed the risk when she fell on an unsalted patch of ice in a snow storm in the parking lot at the U.S. Air Arena.


Spring 2001


Trial Reporter


33


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