Depositions
707-00663 Sarah Daniel v.
Eddy & Eckhardt Architects, Inc., et al.
Michael L. Smith (301) 925-2001 Trevor M. Ashbarry, Esq. (202) 530-8100 Negligence
Te Honorable David A. Boynton Circuit Court for Montgomery County
Appellant filed a complaint alleging negligence against
Appellees based upon her exposure to numerous chemicals which caused her severe physical and emotional injuries. Te question presented is whether the court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
Te plaintiff
argues that summary judgment is inappropriate in a case where professional negligence is alleged and where material facts related to meeting the standard of care are necessarily in dispute.
708-01699
R&D 2001, LLC., et al. v.
Douglas Rice, et al.
Timothy Guy Smith (301) 854-5433 Civil Procedure
Te Honorable Durke Tompson Circuit Court for Montgomery County
Tis matter arises from two cases. One was filed in
Montgomery County and the other was filed in Howard County.
Both cases addressed various conveyances by
Appellee of his interest in properties and/or businesses to Appellants. Te Appellants appeal based upon the trial court’s refusal to allow them to file an amended complaint and the court’s dismissal of their conspiracy count.
John M. Quinn (301) 762-1696 Trusts and Estates
Te Honorable Robert A. Greenberg Circuit Court for Montgomery County
Tis case arises out of a declaratory judgment action brought by the Appellee personal representative of an estate and trust. Te question on appeal is whether the trial court erred when it precluded evidence that the decedent intended that his Trust and Estate planning documents would treat his two daughters equally in the distributions from his Trust and Estate, when the actual language of the Trust was ambiguous.
709-1017 Paul F. Stitzel v.
State of Maryland, et al.
Kent N. Oliver Kendall A. Desaulniers (301) 790-1234 Civil Procedure/Property Law
Te Honorable Donald E. Beachley Circuit Court for Washington County
Tis case arises from the Court’s nullification of a deed by declaratory judgment and the entry of a money judgment against Appellant. Te question presented is whether the trial court erred in declaring null and void the Appellant’s deed on the ground that the conveyance was a violation of the enabling statute and applicable regulations.
710-1004 and 1567 Sharon Elaine Jarels v.
Steven J. Geyer, et al.
62 Trial Reporter / Winter 2011
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 |
Page 67 |
Page 68