Case Name/Case # The Wellington
Company, Inc. v.
Appellant C ounsel/ Area of Law
Richard S. Basile, Esq. 301-441-4900
Hosein M. Shakiba Breach of Contract 500-00521
Judge/ Jurisdiction
Judge Not Listed Anne Arundel County
Issues
This case arises from efforts to collect a debt secured by real property under a Deed of Trust. After a bench trial, the Court granted the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants find- ing that the Deed of Trust is a security instrument and not a contract. Therefore, the Court found that there is no basis for an action at law for breach of contract in connection with a Deed of Trust. The issue on appeal is whether failure to comply with
the terms of a Deed of Trust gives rise to a breach of contract claim.
Nathan Adam Gowen Christopher M. Kerns, Esq. v. Robert Blankenship 202-529-3178 501-971
Punitive Damages Eric M. Johnson Montgomery County
Appellant/Defendant Nathan Adam Gowen alleges that he suffers from mental illness, including major depressive dis- order with psychotic features and bipolar disorder. This case arises from an E-Bay auction involving an automobile that Gowen was selling and his alleged acceptance of a $10,000.00 deposit in connection therewith. After he did not deliver the vehicle, Gowan was sued for the deposit and the Court made a substantial punitive-damages award against him as well as ordering the return of the deposit. Because of Gowen’s mental condition, his counsel was
unable to effectively communicate with him or call him to the stand at trial. Therefore, the Appellant claims that he was unable to defend himself during the punitive-damages stage. The Appellant had requested a continuance until his
condition improved in order to allow him to testify but that motion was denied. On appeal, the Appellant raises due process and other concerns as a result of his inability to testify in the punitive-damages phase.
Laurence Ballard v. Walter S. Booth, Esq. State of Maryland 502-1081
301-913-0070
Second Amendment/ Administrative Law
Nelson Rupp Montgomery County
The plaintiff in this case is a retired Montgomery County Po- lice Officer who alleges that as a result of some complications involving his medications, he was involved in an incident with his wife that resulted in his pleading not guilt with an accepted stipulation of facts to one count of false imprison- ment. As a result of his plea, he was placed on probation for a period of five years which was served and his conviction was thereafter stricken. Prior to the start of the probationary period, 17 firearms were surrendered by the plaintiff and ordered by the court not to be destroyed but to be stored at a local firearms dealer at the plaintiff’s expense. After his conviction was stricken, the plaintiff filed
suit for the return of the firearms because he is now legally entitled to own them. The Court, after finding that there is nothing that would prevent the Plaintiff from going out on his own and legally purchasing firearms, held that nev- ertheless, under the circumstances of this case, the Court would deny the motion to return the property. On appeal, the plaintiff argues that there is no legal impediment to the return of his property and that therefore, the 17 firearms should be returned.
58 Trial Reporter Spring 2008
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 |
Page 65 |
Page 66