Case # Case Name 131-38-01


Counsel for Appellant Area of Law


Christine Ann Bentley v. Paul Victor Jorgensen Alan Carroll, et al.


301-293-6822


Medical malpractice/ Sexual abuse of an infant/ Jury Instructions


Judge


Jurisdiction Tisdale/


Frederick County Issues


In a case initially tried in December 1997, plaintiff alleged that defendant doctors knew that the 13-year-old plaintiff had been sexually abused since infancy, but had taken no steps to report their knowledge or suspicions. As a result, the abuse continued. On appeal, the court of appeals re- versed and remanded the case to the trial court with jury instructions as requested by the plaintiff. Did the trial court err in failing to grant plaintiff’s re-


quested jury instructions and in failing to provide the jury with the portion of the statute that sets forth a physician’s responsibilities?


132-41-01 Philip N. Long Kenneth G. Macleay


Concrete Contractors, et al. Worker’s Compensation v. William Yeager


Stepler/ Frederick County


Did the trial court err in barring the employer’s expert wit- ness, Dr. Apostolo, from testifying when the witness’ opinion did not conform to the requirement of the Labor and Employment Art. § 9-721 and when he had not per- sonally examined the plaintiff? Also, did the court err in barring employer’s psychiatrist, Dr. Spodak, from testify- ing concerning the AMA’s Combined Values Chart? Finally, did the court abuse its discretion in denying the employer’s motion to compel the claimant to attend an orthopedic IME?


133-281-01 Delta Installation Group, Robert D. Clark Inc., et al. v.


(410) 744-5802 Gary S. Meadows


135-365-01 Joshua Singleton v. Jerry Travers, et al.


136-967-01 Derryl Chalk v.


Worker’s Compensation George S. Jarosinski


(410) 669-5070


Motor Vehicle/ C&JArticle 10-104


Harold P. Dwinn New Baltimore City Board (410) 665-6000


of School Commissioners Minor’s Right to Recover for Medical Expenses


137-1023-01 Tavon Cuffee, et al. v. Charles W. Wagner


138-1050-01 James F. Rauch v. Barbara J. McCall


Rodney M. Gaston (410) 783-9030


Motor Vehicle/Evidence Cynthia E. Young


(410) 269-7699


Domestic Relations/ Attorneys Fees


139-1186-01 Wendy Massey, a minor, Harvey S. Wasserman Matricianni/ et al. v.


(410) 547-0202


S&S Partnership, et al. Damages/Post- Verdict Reduction


140-1189-01 Suzette Hemmings v. Pelham Wood Limited Liability LP, et al.


Laurence A. Marder (410) 539-6633


Negligence/ Inadequate Security


Turnbull/ Baltimore City Baltimore City Davis/ Wicomico County Ryan/Harrington/ Montgomery County


Did the trial court err in excluding photographs of plaintiff’s automobile, which were taken after the rescue personnel had removed the top of the motor vehicle?


Did the trial court err in allowing only $1,202 in legal fees where the prevailing party had spent over $52,000 in legal fees to obtain benefits in excess of $294,000?


Did the trial court abuse its discretion in reducing the jury’s economic damages award of $149,000 to $54,400 relying on defense economic testimony as to the present value of the award, which was specifically rejected by the jury?


Court granted summary judgment for landlord. Tenant ap- pealed arguing that the landlord was on actual notice of a dangerous situation and took no steps to make the pre- mises safe. Tenant alleges landlord had notice of a prior incident with the identical method of entry and did nothing to se- cure the property or the sliding glass doors to the apartments. Did the trial court err granting summary judgment on behalf of the landlord, notwithstanding the fact that the assailant who gained entry through the deceased’s sliding glass door did so following a prior similar incident?


141-2993-99 James G. Hadley v. Henry James Kyle, et al. Constance A. Camus Montgomery County


(301) 627-7700 Validity of an Attachment Before Judgment


46 Trial Reporter


Did the trial court err in holding that a writ of attachment before judgment was invalid to attach money identified in a bank account when the name and address of the deposi- tor was the same, but the social security number was different?


Winter 2003 Murdoch/ Baltimore County


Did the trial court err in dismissing Derryl Chalk’s claim for pre and post-majority medical expenses?


Dudley/ Howard County Murphy/ Baltimore County


Is the plaintiff’s expert witness, a psychologist, a “physi- cian” under the Labor and Employment Art. § 9-721, and capable of evaluating a permanent impairment in accor- dance with the Commission’s regulations?


Did the trial court err in ruling that plaintiff’s §10-104 evidence was insufficient to establish a causal connection?


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  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60