This page contains a Flash digital edition of a book.
Criminal Law


Appellate Watch


Cary J. Hansel


734 – 692 Barry J. Nace v. Tamara Miller


Deborah Whelihan, Esquire (202) 296-4747 Civil Procedure


Te Honorable Eric M. Johnson Circuit Court for Montgomery County


Among other issues on appeal, this case raises the interesting question of whether it is appropriate for a circuit court to dismiss a case based on an inconvenient forum argument and order that the case be sent back to another circuit court which had previously dismissed the case after having found that the initial forum was inconvenient.


736-812 John Doe v.


Buccini Pollin Group, Inc.


Frederick Miller, Esquire (410) 484-8102 Worker’s Compensation


Te Honorable Stuart Berger Circuit Court for Baltimore City


735 – 2118 Garrett P. Tollenger v. State of Maryland


Clay M. Barnes, Esquire (410) 321-0818 MVA/Negligent Design Te Honorable Emory A. Plitt, Jr. Circuit Court for Harford County


Te surviving parents of a child killed in a motor vehicle accident sued two drivers and the state (for negligent design). Te case against the government was dismissed on immunity grounds.


Te issue on appeal is whether dismissal was


appropriate given the explicit waiver of any immunity found in the Maryland Tort Claims Act.


Te issue on appeal is whether the following chain of events and resulting injury is compensable: Doe and a female coworker argued over the use of a piece of workplace equipment as Doe struggled to gain control of it, his hand came into contact with her hand. Te female co-worker became enraged and conspired with her boyfriend to kill doe. After Doe left work, the female and her boyfriend are alleged to have followed Doe 13 miles to his home where the boyfriend shot Doe, rendering him a quadriplegic.


737-00530 H.T. Barberis, Inc. v. Laundry Unlimited


Bruce E. Kauffman, Esquire (410) 823-5700 Civil Procedure


Te Honorable John P. Miller Circuit Court for Baltimore City


At issue is whether an award of greater than the ad damnum is permissible absent amendment of the Complaint.


Trial Reporter / Summer 2011 57


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