Appellate Watch by Walter E. Laake


Walter E. Laake, Jr. is a partner in the firm Joseph, Greenwald & Laake, P.A. of Greenbelt. He received his J. D. from the Univ. of Maryland School of Law. Mr. Laake holds the office of Vice President of MTLA, and is a Member of its Board of Governors and a member of its President’s Club as an Eagle. Mr. Laake is a Past President of the Prince George’s County Bar and serves on its Trial Courts Judicial Nominating Commission. He is also a member of the Attorney Grievance Commission’s Inquiry Panel, the TLPJ, and a Lifetime member of ATLA. His practice includes professional negligence, product liability, and employment law.


The Appellate Watch Program and articles in the quarterly Trial Reporter have been a part of MTLA member services for three years. Appellate Watch was instituted for several reasons: First, the Program alerts our Amicus Committee about any cases and issues of importance to the MTLA. Second, members are advised of the issues pending before the Court of Special Appeals. Finally, due to the gracious assistance of Court of Special Appeals Clerk, Leslie Gradet, MTLA is able to provide members with copies of appellate briefs cited in these articles. To obtain a copy of a brief at nominal cost, contact MTLA’s Executive Director, Robert Lembo. Please use the order form that appears at the end of Appellate Watch.


Case # Case Name 168-2583-01 Demetriou v


Town of Ocean City 169-2606-01 Jobst v Maryland State Police


Counsel for Appellant Area of Law


Michael Milne


410-494-4455 Workers’ Compensation/ Burden of Proof


Lisa O’Mara 410-494-9000


Administrative Law/ Burden of Proof


170-2608-01 American Pool Management, James R. Forrester et al v Larry W. Brown


410-539-5040


Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal


171-2665-01 John Bricker, Jr., v Larry Warch, et al.


172-2670-02 William MacDonald v Mayor and City Council of Baltimore


173-2673-01 Elbert Sallie, et al. v


Tax Sale Investors, Inc., et al


Larry Polen 410-337-5535


Malicious Prosecution/ Burden of Proof


Anne E. Hoke 410-539-1200


Workers’ Compensation/ Police Officer/Duty Status


Andrew D. Freeman 410-962-1030


Insurance Coverage/ Evictions


174-2685-01 Herman Atwood Henry v William H. Pattison, Jr. Nedith Johnson Henry


410-943-0707


Domestic Relations/ Civil Procedure


175-2692-001 Thomas W. Moreland, Maureen Quinn et. ux. v Aetna U.S. Healthcare, Inc.


410-263-0060


HMO Subrogation/ Statute of Limitations


Judge Lamasney, Prince George’s County Judge Johnson, Dorchester County


Judge Kaplan, Baltimore City


Baltimore City


Judge Sweeney, Howard County


Judge Fader,


Circuit Court for Baltimore County


Judge Daniels, Baltimore County Judge Jurisdiction Worchester County Issues


The Workers’ Compensation Commission found the claimant’s hernia to be work-related. Did the trial court err in failing to grant the claimant’s Motion For Judgment when the employer and insurer failed to present medical evidence that work was not the cause of the claimant’s hernia?


Did the trial court err in reversing the administrative law judge who found that the Maryland State Police officer had been discharged from service without due process protec- tion, i.e. a termination hearing?


Did the trial court err in reversing the Workers’ Compen- sation Commission, holding that the claimant in riding with an inexperienced, unlicensed driver, who had failed his motor vehicle examination, constituted “willful miscon- duct” rendering him ineligible for benefits?


Did the trial court err in finding that the Great American Insurance Company’s adjuster, Larry Warch, was merely “over zealous” in seeking to have the claimant prosecuted for insurance fraud after the Insurance Commissioner found insufficient evidence to bring such charges?


Did the trial court err in holding that a uniformed police officer was not “on duty” following his shift, en route to his


home?


Did the trial court err in granting Hartford Insurance Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment holding that there was no liability insurance coverage for Tax Sale Inves- tors, Inc. to pay the judgment entered against them for wrongful eviction?


Did the circuit court have authority to re-open a proceed- ing and to modify a judgment that had been affirmed on appeal without modification or remand?


In this case, an HMO subrogation payment was made in 1991, but the law establishing the illegality of HMO sub- rogation provisions was not effective until 2000. Under this circumstance, did the trial court err in applying the three- year statute of limitations on a claim for unjust enrichment and negligent misrepresentation?


36 Trial Reporter


(Continued on page 38) Spring 2003


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  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64