Case # Case Name 176-061-02 Kurt Orwick v


Counsel for Appellant Area of Law


Kurt Orwick


Alan Moldawer, Pers. Rep. 352-332-9370 of Estate of Dana B. Orwick


177-069-02 John E. Hammen v Michael Marshall Baltimore County Police Department, et al.


410-685-2022


Personnel Board/ Surveillance Tape


178-082-02 Patricia Bonner v Ira L. Fedder, et al.


179-094-02 Karen Mae Seltzer, et al. v Donna M. Stanley


Brian Kim 202-463-1999


Medical Malpractice, Release/Settlement


Richard R. Page Wyrough 301-627-4600


Will Caveat/ “Dead Man’s Statute”


180-135-02 Tru Rol Company, Inc., William S. Tostanoski et al. v Arnold C. Yox


410-752-1114


Workers’ Compensation/ Limitations


181-334-02 Preston Carter v Senate Masonry, Inc.


Thomas E. Walker 301-441-2420


Construction Litigation/ Last Clear Change


182-520-02 Michael L. Kabik, et ux. v Steven Leventhal Veronica Marie Ramaty


301-656-5800 Civil Procedure/Mistrial Judge Beard, Montgomery County Judge Smith, Prince George’s County Judge Cox, Baltimore County Judge Bloom, Anne Arundel County Judge Levitz, Baltimore County


Judge Jurisdiction


Judge McGuckian, Montgomery County


Judge Cadigan, Baltimore County Issues


In this will caveat case, did the Orphan’s Court err in not admitting the hospital records and nurse’s notations on the day the will was signed and in granting a Motion for Judg- ment at the close of appellant’s case?


Did the Baltimore County Board of Appeals wrongfully deny a claimant access to surveillance videotapes taken of him prior to his administrative hearing?


Did the trial court err in granting defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and in ruling that the plaintiff’s claim was barred because she settled an underlying motor vehicle accident case when she was aware of the medical malprac- tice in her treatment from those injuries?


Did the trial court violate the “dead man’s statute” in al- lowing witnesses to testify as to conversations with the decedent in this will caveat case?


Did the trial court err in finding that the statute of limita- tions in an occupational deafness case did not begin to run


until the claimant became disabled as defined by the Act?


Did the trial court err in granting defendant’s judgment NOV and vacating a jury award of $216,000 holding that the evidence did not support the jury’s finding of last clear chance, i.e. defendant failing to warn of falling cinder blocks?


Did the trial court err in refusing to give either a new trial or a corrected instruction when plaintiff objected to defendant’s closing argument that it would be a financial hardship on “any individual” making $40,000 a year if a large judgment was entered against her? Defense counsel Hammond argued: “If a person makes $40,000 a year and is able to save $3,500 in a year...it would take you 40 years to save the amount of money that plaintiffs are asking you to award them in this case.” The jury verdict was $3,500.


183-578-02 Deborah Podgurski v Mark W. Oakley OneBeacon Insurance Company


301-424-8081


Workers’ Compensation/ Subrogation Issue


Judge Dwyer, Frederick County


If a third party recovery can be reduced by a defendant filing bankruptcy in a tort case, can a Workers’ Compensa- tion lien be similarly reduced? The Circuit Court for Frederick County held that a Workers’ Compensation lien cannot be reduced.


(Continued on page 40)


Rehabilitation Experts of Maryland, Inc. (REx) (301) 962-6800


Vocational Expert and Life Care Planning Services


Steven D. Shedlin, M.Ed., CRC Lianne Friedman, M.A., CRC


Over 45 years of combined case management and courtroom experience. Qualified in circuit and federal district courts throughout Maryland, the DC metro area and the mid-Atlantic region.


38 Trial Reporter 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