Subrogation suit dismissed based on contractual limitations period in arbitration clause
November 22nd, 2011
In Vigilant Insurance Company v. American Mechanical Services of Maryland, LLC, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed a subrogation action by an insurance company against a contractor on the grounds that the claim was barred by a contractual limitations period. Vigilant sued American Mechanical Serv…
Read More
Read More
Share
Legal malpractice in D.C.: the common knowledge exception to the requirement of expert opinion
November 17th, 2011
In Carranza v. Fraas, No. 05-0117 (D.D.C. Oct. 31, 2011), Judge Urbina granted summary judgment on legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty claims, due to the plaintiffs’ lack of expert testimony supporting some of their claims, and the plaintiffs’ lack of admissible evidence to support their last remainin…
Read More
Read More
Maryland Premises Liability: Nightclub subject to suit for injuries to patron beaten on dance floor
November 16th, 2011
In Troxel v. Iquana Cantina, LLC, No. 820, September Term, 2010 (Md. App. October 3, 2011), plaintiff was a patron at a nightclub, where on a “college night” he was attacked and beaten on the dance floor by several unknown individuals. The Circuit Court granted summary judgment to the defendants, holding that th…
Read More
Read More
Categories: Maryland
Confidential Settlements are Discoverable to Determine Joint Tortfeasor Status and Contribution
November 15th, 2011
In Richard Tempel, et al. v. Elena L. Murphy, et al., No. 1199 Sept. Term 2010 (Oct. 28, 2011), the Court of Special Appeals addressed two questions: (1) whether a non-settling defendant has a right to inspect the settling defendants settlement agreements prior to judgment; and (2) whether Plaintiffs’ evidence of the…
Read More
Read More
STATUTORY IMMUNITY FOR PROPERTY OWNERS IN LEAD PAINT CASES HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL
October 31st, 2011
In Zi’Tashia Jackson, et al, v. The Dackman Company, et al., No. 131, Sept. Term 2008 (Oct. 24, 2011), the Court of Appeals declared that the provisions in the Reduction of Lead Risk in Housing Act (Md. Code Ann. Environment sec. 6-801, et seq.) which grant the owners of certain rental properties, under specified cond…
Read More
Read More
Maryland Act construed to include loss of overtime pay in loss of “wage earning capacity”
October 31st, 2011
In Montgomery County v. Deibler, ___ A.2d. ___ (Md. Oct. 27, 2011), the Maryland Court of Appeals considered the issue whether the term “wage earning capacity” in L.E. sec. 9-615(a)(1) includes the capacity to earn overtime compensation so that the Commission may include such compensation in the determination of…
Read More
Read More
Twombly Motion Resolves Civil Rights Claim Arising From Suspicion of Shoplifting
October 31st, 2011
Shoplifting can cause retailers to incur costs far greater than simply the value of the items stolen. Even when the store and its employees act in the utmost good faith, someone accused of shoplifting can turn around and sue the store. These suits sometimes include claims of racial discrimination. Until recently, it was dif…
Read More
Read More
Partner John O. Easton, Esq., selected for the 2012 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America
October 31st, 2011
Congratulations to Partner John O. Easton, Esq., for his selection as in the 2012 Edition of Baltimore and Washington’s Best Lawyers, in the area of Professional Malpractice Law (Defendants). This list is excerpted from the 2012 edition of The Best Lawyers in America. Lawyers are chosen for inclusion based solely on a…
Read More
Read More
Categories: News
Swigert Settlement Does Not Extinguish Non-Settling Party's Claim for Contribution, Even In Absence Of A Cross-Claim
October 31st, 2011
In the consolidated appeals of Wycinna L. Spence v. Emerson R. Julian, Jr., et al., No. 2764 Sept. Term 2009 and Emerson R. Julian, Jr., et al. v. Mercy Medical Center, Inc., et al., No. 1511, Sept. Term 2010 (Oct. 26, 2011), the Court of Special Appeals addressed whether a non-settling defendant has a right to pursue a cla…
Read More
Read More
Employment discrimination: A Title VII retaliation claim must allege objectively deterrent action
September 23rd, 2011
In Cook v. Billington, 2011 U.S. Dist. Lexis 88284 (D.D.C. Aug. 9, 2011), the United States District Court for the District of Columbia emphasized that to successfully state a claim for retaliation under Title VII, an employee must allege that when he or she engaged in, or attempted to engage in, a protected activity, his o…
Read More
Read More
Categories: Employment Discrimination
