• Firm Overview
  • Overview
  • Brief History
• Areas of Practice
  • Administrative Law
  • Antitrust
  • Banking & Finance
  • Bankruptcy and Creditors' Rights
  • Business and Transactional Matters
  • Construction
  • Contracts and Contract Disputes
  • Criminal Law
  • Education Law
  • Employment Law
  • Estates and Trusts
  • Franchise Law
  • Government
  • Insurance
  • Litigation:  Trial and Appellate
  • Mediation and Arbitration
  • Military Law
  • Personal Injury Matters
  • Professional Liability
  • Real Estate
  • Real Estate Litigation
  • Tax and Tax Controversies
  • Technology and Intellectual Property
• Roster
  • Firm Administration
  • Partners
  • Associates
  • Of Counsel
  • Support Staff
• Careers
  • Attorneys
  • Support Staff
• Home
• Contact Us
  • Contact Us
  • Directions and Area Hotels
  • RMG Mail Server
• Recent Developments
  • Firm Publications
  • Upcoming & Past Events
  • Awards and Rankings
  • Court Decisions
  • Firm Announcements

Court Decisions

• In Office of the Public Defender v. State, decided April 16, 2010, the Maryland Court of Appeals agreed with the position advanced by Andy Baida, who was retained as special counsel for the State of Maryland, by holding that a trial court has the authority to order the Public Defender to represent an indigent individual upon finding that the individual cannot afford a lawyer and that the Public Defender's previous indigency determination was erroneous.  Andy was asked to represent the State of Maryland because the Public Defender's position in this case was supported by a formal opinion of the Office of the Maryland Attorney General expressing the view that a trial court may not order the Public Defender's Office to represent an individual it has deemed ineligible for representation.  An article about the decision can be viewed here.

• In Proctor v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, decided on March 12, 2010, Andy Baida successfully argued before the Maryland Court of Appeals that the Maryland Tort Claims Act's $200,000 damages limitation does not apply to a negligence claim filed against WMATA seeking $7 million in damages for catastrophic injuries which his client suffered as a result of being hit by a WMATA bus.  An article from The Daily Record about this decision may be viewed here.

• In Booth v. Shepard, Andy Baida successfully argued before the Maryland Court of Special Appeals that his client in this medical malpractice case was entitled to have a jury decide whether her health care providers breached the standard of care and caused the permanent injuries she suffered following their attempts to give her a regional nerve block.  In a decision issued on September 3, 2009, the Court of Special Appeals vacated the judgment of the Circuit Court for Baltimore City and held that there was a sufficient factual basis from which a jury could conclude that the health care providers were negligent in excessively sedating the patient, thereby rendering her unable to warn them that they were about to inflict the nerve injury which she ultimately suffered when they injected a needle into her neck during the attempted block.

• In Freed v. D.R.D. Pool Service, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals on July 6, 2009 reversed the decision of the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County and remanded the case for a jury to decide whether a five-year-old boy, Connor Freed, experienced conscious pain and suffering before drowning in a Crofton Country Club pool.  Andy Baida and Doug Furlong successfully argued that the Circuit Court erroneously concluded that there was no evidence that the child experienced any pain and suffering since no one saw the child drown.  Citing expert testimony about the physical process that a healthy individual such as the child in this case experiences while drowning, the appellate court held that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to decide the extent to which the child suffered.  An article from The Daily Record about this decision may be viewed here.  

• In Giordano v. Sherwood, decided on April 2, 2009, Andy Baida persuaded the District of Columbia Court of Appeals to overturn a $600,000 judgment that had been entered against his client, Dr. Joseph Giordano, on the ground that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury verdict that Dr. Giordano was negligent in performing a procedure known as a lumbar sympathectomy.  Noting that negligence need not be proven with certainty, the Court of Appeals concluded that the jury verdict nevertheless could not be sustained because it was based on speculation and conjecture that the procedure failed to comply with the standard of care. 

• K. Hovnanian Homes of Maryland, LLC v. FRON-DJW, LP (June 2008).  Gerry Gaeng, assisted by James Crossan, obtained summary judgment in favor of a national home builder seeking to recover the deposit it paid under a lot purchase agreement.  The sale never closed because of the seller’s failure to obtain governmental approvals that were a condition to the builder’s obligation to buy.  Notwithstanding the seller’s claims of waiver and “legal impossibility,” the Circuit Court for Cecil County, Maryland ordered the seller to pay the Mr. Gaeng’s client the $950,000 deposit and an additional $250,000 in liquidated damages for the seller’s failure to return the deposit when demand was made.

• Monk v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2008-64 (March 17, 2008).  Caroline Ciraolo successfully argued to U.S. Tax Court that Mr. Monk did not own a bar in Baltimore, Maryland, despite the fact that Mr. Monk reported the business on his personal tax returns, and therefore was not responsible for unreported income, unsubstantiated expenses or penalties.

• Henderson's Corner & 355, LLC v. Sovereign Bank (January 2008).  Ben Rosenberg represented Sovereign Bank in a dispute with Aris Mardirossian, a prominent Montgomery County real estate developer, which an arbitrator decided in favor of the Bank. Mr. Mardirossian claimed damages of $1,200,000 as a result of the Bank's alleged failure to act in good faith under a 20-year lease of a site for a proposed branch in Gaithersburg, Maryland. After hearing two days' of testimony from six witnesses and considering almost 100 exhibits, the arbitrator held that the Bank's refusal to consent to a change in the design of the proposed building demanded by the Montgomery County Planning Commission was not a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing under the lease. Mr. Mardirossian was represented by DLA Piper, one of the world's largest law firms.

• Olde Severna Park Improvement Association, Inc. v. Gunby. Andrew H. Baida successfully argued before the Court of Appeals of Maryland that his clients' ownership of waterfront property on the Severn River includes the riparian right to build a walkway and pier. The Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County had invalidated the homeowners' building permit on the ground that the Olde Severna Park Improvement Association rather than the homeowners owned the right to build improvements into the river. In a unanimous decision issued December 3, 2007, the Court of Appeals held that this case presented no exception to the settled rule that the conveyance of land adjacent to a body of water such as a river presumptively carries with it the grantor's riparian rights. The Court of Appeals' decision can be found here.

 

• In Patton Boggs LLP v. Deveney, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals on May 22, 2007 affirmed an arbitration award which Ben Rosenberg, Steve Wrobel, Andy Baida, and Jim Crossan successfully litigated and defended, requiring Patton Boggs LLP to pay two of its former partners $4.1 million, plus post-judgment interest in excess of $460,000.  The award represented the former partners' share of more than $12.8 million in legal fees that Patton Boggs received from the settlement of claims filed against Pan American World Services and the government of Libya by the families of six crewmembers of Pan Am flight 103, which exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988.  After Patton Boggs refused to give the former partners their portion of the legal fees, the two attorneys retained  Rosenberg | Martin | Greenberg, which won the case in arbitration, again in the Circuit Court for Montgomery County, and once more in the Court of Special Appeals, with the result that Patton Boggs is required to pay the former partners their share of the collected fees and any future Pan Am 103 fees that Patton Boggs receives.  An article from The Daily Record about this decision may be viewed here.

 

• Beatty v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service, T.C. Memo. 2007-167 (Judge Chiechi) - Caroline D. Ciraolo persuaded the United States Tax Court that her client was entitled to innocent spouse relief pursuant to 26 U.S.C. 6015(f) with respect to 11 years of joint tax returns.  The Court held that the Internal Revenue Service abused its discretion in denying Mrs. Beatty's administrative claim for relief.  As a result of this decision, Mrs. Beatty is relieved of more than $725,000 of federal income tax, penalties and interest.  The Memorandum Findings of Facts and Opinion can be viewed here.

• Smith v. American Healthcare Institute,  Howard County Human Rights Commission.  Steven Wrobel successfully defends a small business against charges of discrimination in the workplace before the Howard County Human Rights Commission.  The Decision may be viewed here.
  

• Swam v. Upper Chesapeake Medical Center, Inc., Court of Appeals of Maryland.  Benjamin Rosenberg and Andrew H. Baida successfully persuaded the Court of Appeals, Maryland's highest court, to reverse the Circuit Court for Harford County and to order the reinstatement of their client's claims against the Upper Chesapeake Medical Center for injuries she sustained when she was stuck with an exposed, contaminated hypodermic needle while waiting for her father's surgery.  The Circuit Court dismissed those claims on the ground that they were filed too late with the Circuit Court, even though they were timely filed with the Maryland Health Claims Arbitration Office.  In a decision likely to have ramifications in a variety of other cases, the Court of Appeals held that filing the claim with the Health Claims Office tolled the running of the statute of limitations.

• Flurry v. Flurry, Circuit Court for Howard County, September 2006.  T. Christine Pham represented Page Flurry, Personal Representative of the Estate of Gertrude P. Flurry in an action claiming that the defendant fraudulently obtained a deed for the family home from his mother.  The jury awarded the Estate $325,000 in compensatory damages and $150,000 in punitive damages.  The Court later granted a declaratory judgment in favor of the Estate, voided the deed, and transferred the property back to the Estate.  After election of remedies, the Estate obtained title to the property and $150,000 in punitive damages against the defendant.

 

• Imgarten v. Bellboy Corp., 383 F.Supp.2d 825, 838 (D.Md. 2005). David Wyand, along with co-counsel, represented Mr. Imgarten, an employee suing for substantial unpaid commissions under the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law.  Mr. Imgarten received a jury verdict in his favor of over 1 million dollars.  The Court later awarded Mr. Imgarten just under a half of a million dollars in attorneys fees and costs, along with prejudgment interest of approximately a quarter of a million dollars.