Case # Case Name 203-1710-02 Esther Goelman v


Counsel for Appellant Area of Law


Keith E. Schwartz Dr. Stanley Klatsky, et al. (410) 539-6087


Civil Procedure/ Summary Judgment/ Jury Instructions


204-1770-02 Tarus Whytsell, et al v Fairfax County School Board, et al.


Timothy E. Howie (301) 486-1200


Jurisdiction/ Motion to Dismiss


205-1772-02 Washington Metropolitan Cheryl C. Burke Area Transit Authority


(202) 962-2557


v Kenneth D. Hewitt Worker’s Compensation/ Attorney’s Fees/Penalty


206-1636-02 Roy H. Peck v


Forest City Residential, Inc., et al.


207-1869-02 Tara Trainer, et al v Fateh Hraky


208-1997-02 L. Chris Lampros v Gelb & Gelb, P.C.


Jonathan S. Beiser (301) 770-3737


Premises Liability/ Summary Judgment


Joseph A. Miklasz (410) 768-3337


Medical Malpractice/ Evidentiary Ruling


Charles E. Iliff, Jr. (410) 685-1166


Oral Contract/ Sharing Legal Fees


Woodward/ Montgomery County Heard/ Baltimore City McGuckian/ Montgomery County


Lamasney/Prince George’s County


Lamasney/Prince George’s County


Judge Jurisdiction


Cahill, Baltimore County


Issues


Did the trial court err in not granting Plaintiff ’s Summary Judgment nor granting Plaintiff requested Jury Instruction with respect to the “before & after” photos run in an ad in the Baltimore magazine by Defendant plastic surgeon whose preprinted consent form limited disclosure of the photos to “scientific and educational purposes”?


In this motor vehicle claim for UIM coverage against Plaintiff ’s employer and insurer, did the trial court err in granting the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction without allowing Plaintiff’s the right


to conduct discovery?


Did the Commission err and did the trial courts err in awarding Plaintiff’s counsel a 20% penalty for late pay- ment of legal fees and an additional 20% penalty for the late payment of the penalty in this Worker’s Compensation case?


Did the trial court err in granting Summary Judgment for the Defendant who created a breach in the otherwise se- cure parking garage adjacent to the Wisconsin Condominium whereby five assailants attacked and bru- tally beat the Plaintiff who was heading to his automobile?


Did the trial court err in failing to direct a verdict for the Plaintiff in this claim of medical negligence on the issue of lack of informed consent and in precluding Plaintiff’s coun- sel from cross-examining the Defendant on his deposition testimony regarding standard of care and informed consent?


Attorney Lampros had shared offices with the law firm of Gelb & Gelb, for over 30 years in D.C. and customarily referred the firm negligence cases for which legal fees would be shared for their joint representation. The issue in this case had to do with a wrongful death claim settled prior to suit for more than $850,000 in which Gelb and Gelb re- fused to share legal fees with the Plaintiff and brought its own action in Montgomery County, Maryland for declara- tory judgment. Did the trial court err in overruling Lampros’ issues as to jurisdiction and in granting Summary Judgment for Gelb and Gelb?


209-2136-02 Tracey Stewart v Daniel Goddard


Leonard A. Orman


(410) 962-0400 Motor Vehicle Accident/ Liability/No Damages


210-2242-02 Myung-Sup Kim, M.D. v Conrad W. Varner Walter L. Rankin, et al.


(301) 631-1800


Medical Malpractice/Failure to Grant Directed Verdict


211-2376-02 Paulette Oglesby v Department of Labor,


Hillary Galloway Davis Waxter, Baltimore City (410) 494-9000


Licensing and Regulation Employer-Employee/ Untimely Suspension


212-2368-02 Reginald Smith, Jr., et al Peter G. Angelos/ v Lead Industries


Edward J. Lilly Association, Inc., et al.


(410) 649-2000 Product Liability/ Lead Paint Manufacturers


McCurdy/ Baltimore City


Leasure/Allegany County


Heard/Baltimore City


Did the trial court err in permitting Defendant to intro- duce doctors’ records into evidence without foundation or cross-examination, in refusing to declare a mistrial after it was learned that the Defendant had spoken to one of the jurors during a break in the case, and in failing to order a new trial after a jury found negligence and causal relation- ship but awarded no monetary damages?


Did the trial court err in failing to grant a directed verdict on the issue of causal relationship, i.e. the “But For test” in this case of claimed medical malpractice in an elderly pa- tient resulting in her wrongful death and a jury verdict of $320,000?


Did the ALJ below err in failing to find that the agency imposed a suspension of the employee more than five work days after it became aware of the alleged misconduct which is contrary to State Personnel and Pensions Article 11-106 (c) Suspension-(1)?


Did the trial court err in dismissing Plaintiff ’s 522 para- graph complaint against Defendants, and their trade associations, for alleged fraud, product design defect, neg- ligence and strict liability in the sale and distribution of lead-based pigments in paint by ruling in part that “lead” is a basic element and cannot be “designed”?


34


Trial Reporter


(Continued on page 36) Summer 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