Maryland Lawyer Blog

The Chicago Board of Education and a youth center settled $14.7 million lawsuit with a man who became a quadriplegic after hitting his head on the side of the trampoline. The injury occurred when the man was 13 years-old. Underscoring how slow the wheels of justice can be, the man is not 31.

Plaintiff had what I thought was a tough case at trial because Illinois law sets a high bar for "contact" participant sport injuries, requiring willful or wanton conduct which is certainly a tougher standard than ordinary negligence.

I have always disliked this judicially created exception to the usual "reasonable person" standard in Illinois so I'm a glad to see that this incredibly sympathetic plaintiff was able to get a meaningful recovery.

The Maryland Lawyer Blog gets a spike of traffic whenever the bar exam passes. The 2010 Maryland bar was no exception. Students after taking the bar obviously spend a lot of time surfing the web, trying to find tea leaves as to whether or not they are going to pass the bar. My two cents: I think you will pass. If you don't - remember I think you will - you can take it again.

• What to Do Just Before Taking the Bar (advice)
• Maryland Bar Results for July 2009
• Maryland Bar Examiners Website
• Last July's Results

Little Ash Wednesday controversy in Iowa that is a very big deal to some: After a lunch while prosecuting an attempted murder case, the prosecutor went to Ash Wednesday mass and returned with ash on his forehead.

For mainstream Catholics, this is one of the few ways we have to publicly celebrate our faith. Many faiths of the world have ways you can, for lack of a better phrase, wear your religion on your sleeve at trial. Jewish lawyers have yarmulkes, female Muslim lawyers have headscarfs, some Sikh attorneys have turbans, etc. Would a judge every ask any of these people to remove their religious garb? Of course not. Yet, in this case, the judge asked the prosecutor to remove his ashes. The prosecutor removed the ashes and the trial continued.

Do I think this was unfair? Yes. But the judge was in a no-win situation. It would also be unfair the state of Iowa to piggyback off of the prosecutor's show of piety because religious faith does influence jurors. (If you have any doubt about this, read the section on religion in David Ball and Don Keenan's book Damages.) So, on balance, I think the judge did the right thing and picked the integrity of a serious criminal trial over the prosecutor's expression of faith. Still, I don't like it.

This is one of those situations where you would really hate to be a judge.

The Maryland Court of Appeals unanimously affirmed a jury award against the Baltimore City Police Department in Houghton v. Forrest on Friday. Here were the facts:

Houghton observed a drug sale on North Eutaw Street in Baltimore City through a security camera feed. Three persons participated in the sale: the drug dealer, a male purchaser, and an alleged female purchaser who was wearing a white shirt or coat. As the transaction was being completed, Houghton contacted an arresting team, comprising Officer Timothy Williams and another officer, and instructed them to arrest the participants in the sale. The arresting team took the dealer and the male purchaser into custody, finding drugs on each of them, but the alleged female purchaser had left the scene. Houghton then witnessed, through the video feed, the alleged female purchaser embrace a second woman nearby. Houghton assumed that the embrace concealed the transfer or sale of drugs from the female purchaser to the second woman. This second woman was wearing a black jacket, dark jeans, and carrying a red umbrella. Houghton moved the camera back to the arrest, and in doing so, lost sight of the second woman.

After monitoring the arrest, Houghton scanned the area for the female purchaser and the second woman. The female purchaser was no longer in view, but Houghton could see someone whom he believed to be the second woman. In fact, the person in Houghton’s view was Forrest, who was standing some distance away at a nearby bus stop. Forrest was wearing different colored pants and jacket than the second woman, though both were carrying red umbrellas. Houghton instructed Williams to arrest Forrest. Williams approached Forrest, and asked if she had “anything illegal” on her person; Forrest said she did not, and consented to a search of her person. The search revealed no contraband, but Houghton nonetheless instructed Williams to arrest Forrest. Williams suggested that Houghton review the video footage to make certain that Forrest was indeed the second woman. Houghton did not do so, but nonetheless confirmed that Forrest was to be arrested. Williams handcuffed and arrested Forrest, over Forrest’s protests, and placed her with the other arrestees. Forrest testified at trial that she overheard Williams discussing the possibility that he may have arrested the wrong person, and that Williams was instructed to take her into custody nonetheless. Forrest was moved to Central Booking, though she was not summoned to court and charges against her were eventually dismissed.

The jury awarded $171.60 in actual damages, $180,000.00 in compensatory damages, and no punitive damages.

Plaintiff in this case was put in just an awful situation. Can you imagine how you would feel? Still, I can't help but wonder about how long her pain and suffering was in this case. I have clients who are in physical pain every day of their lives and have accumulated large medical bills and get a similar recovery.

I'm not condemning this verdict and it is worth nothing that everything I know about this case is quoted in the facts above. You have to sit on a jury to know what you think the real value of the case is. It seems overwhelmingly likely that the jury really liked the Plaintiff and did not like the police officer. All I'm saying is that my greatest sympathies clearly lean towards people whose lives have been changed forever from physical injury.

You can read the full opinion here.

And then there was one. The Maryland Daily Record reports that there is just one partner left at Lord & Whip.

Lord & Whip's slogan is "A Century's Perspective: A Modern Approach." No matter how good of a lawyer the last remaining partner may be, it might be a good idea to pull this sign down if he is under 130 years-old.

I've probably reported on this story so much because Lord & Whip was involved in one of our first big wrongful death cases when we started this law firm. Lord & Whip had nice offices - albeit in Charles Center South on 36 Charles Place, a building I have never particularly liked, mostly because I don't like the elevators. Lord & Whip seemed like a good firm, they had a good reputation and seemed to run professional shop. If you had told me then that they would have one partner in 2010, I would have said you are crazy. I guess this is life as a lawyer for many in this new legal economy.

• Lord & Whip Partnership Fight Settles
• December Lord & Whip Defection News
• Original Story of Lord & Whip Legal Battle Among Partners

A class-action suit alleges that Facebook's new privacy settings exposes Facebook users to "identity theft, harassment, embarrassment, intrusion and all types of cyber crime."

I really can't think of a dumber lawsuit. Couldn't these victims just get off Facebook?

Add victims of violent crime in with roofers, landscapers, and chiropractors as the big winners of the twin blizzard. Baltimore had a very unBaltimorelike streak of 9 consecutive days without a homicide report.

The Maryland Daily Record has a story on the chaos caused by the court closings during the twin blizzards.

Walmart took a $812,000 verdict in Baltimore City in a case where an employee was found to be wrongfully accused of conspiring with shoplifters, according to the Maryland Daily Record.

What is interesting is that substantially the same case was tried in front of the same judge in September and a mistrial was granted because the jury was deadlocked. It is amazing how two different jury panels can see the same case so differently.

The plaintiffs' law firm is one I associate with defense work: Kerr McDonald. Walmart's lawyer was the highly regarded - on both sides of the v - Christopher R. Dunn, with DeCaro, Doran, Siciliano, Gallagher & DeBlasis.

There is a story on in Insurance & Financial Advisor on legal battles that have ensued since the tragedy in Towson last year when a New York lawyer killed his family and himself in a hotel room.
There is a battle for whether there should be a payout on a $5 million life insurance and, if so, who should get the money. The estates of the children and wife have brought a wrongful death claim against the father's estate and a third party is also making a claim against the estate, claiming to be a victim of a Ponzi scheme by the father.

This is just a depression awful story follow-up story of a more depressing and more awful story.

The Maryland Daily Record reports that the former Lord & Whip P.A. partner who sought to dissolve the firm has settled the claim.

The lawsuit had made some pretty interesting charges about how Lord & Whip broke up. Lord & Whip may still be a good law firm but it certainly a shell of its old self, down now to three lawyers. You can't help but wonder what Lord & Whip themselves - who founded the firm 104 years ago - would think of this and, for me, I start think about the demise of my law firm which I hope happens long after I'm gone.

You can read my original post here which has a link to the Complaint that was filed in Baltimore City Circuit Court.

You can find the names of the parties involved by reading the Complaint or going to the Daily Record article. My general rule is that nothing is served by naming names. These folks had their little battle and the final score will preserved online for all time. Just not on my blog because these people are not public figures that should have their professional battles played out of the public. I realize every media outlet does this but I think it the wrong play. Because in situations like this, you never really know who the real good guys and bad guys are even if you did, you would understand the history of what happened.

So let's hope the go all Ari Gold on us and they hug it out. Either way, let's let this story go quietly.

Among the folks struggling in this economy are local and national bar associations. The granddaddy of them all is the American Bar Association (ABA). JD Journal reports that the ABA will cut in half the cost of dues for solo practitioners, government lawyers, lawyers working for nonprofits, and judges.

I think every courthouse in Maryland is closed yet again tomorrow. Incredibly,
Baltimore County and Howard County are packing it in for Friday as well.

For a lot of Maryland law firms, this is a lost week.

The Huffington Post reports that Congressman Darrell Issa sent a statement to reporters headlined: "First Question for President Obama: Did You Lie About Moving Forward on Malpractice Reform?"

All of which begs the question: who is Darrell Issa? Honestly, he sounds made up. On a multiple choice question, I would have guessed American Idol contestant. But certainly I would get the question right now and I'll remember him as the guy who distorted what the President said on medical malpractice.

This congressman is in favor of ignoring the independence of the judiciary because he thinks malpractice reform is more important than upholding the separation of powers that I'm sure he otherwise believes is sacrosanct. I disagree for lots of reasons, but people smarter than I believe we need malpractice reform so I'm not attacking the view. But does anyone think the President of the United States actually lied because he promised to support malpractice reform? You can't change the words around of what someone says - "defensive medicine" to "malpractice reform" and then accuse them of lying. Particularly if the person you are accusing is the President of the United States.

Note for the record: I took a lot of exception to President's Bush's policy. But I never thought he was a liar and I never liked the "he just doesn't care" nonsense. The temptation to make everything personal seems to be a trap too many politicians fall into regularly.

Announced closings as of 6:00 a.m:

Anne Arundel County Circuit Court closed
Anne Arundel County District Court closed
Baltimore City Circuit Court closed
Baltimore City District Court closed
Baltimore County District Court closed
Calvert County Circuit Court closed
Calvert County District Court closed
Carroll County District Court closed
Charles County Circuit Court and Clerk's Office closed
Charles County District Court closed
Harford County Circuit Court closed
Harford County District Court closed
Howard County Circuit Court closed
Howard County District Court closed
Montgomery County Circuit closed
Montgomery County District Court closed
Prince George's County Circuit Court closed
Prince George's County District Court closed

The Maryland Daily Record reports that Maryland judges will forgo pay raises for the second straight year.

What do Maryland judges make? Maryland Court of Appeals Chief Judge Robert M. Bell earns $181,352 a year while other Court of Appeals judges make $162,352. Court of Special Appeals Chief Judge Peter B. Krauser is paid $152,552, while other judges on the CSA earn $149,552. Maryland Circuit Court judges are paid $140,352. State District Court judges are paid $127,252 although top District Court Judge Ben C. Clyburn earns $149,552.

Today's heroes: (1) Maryland Court of Appeals, (2) Maryland Court of Special Appeals, (3) Allegany County District Court (open at 12 noon), Carroll County Circuit Court and Juvenile Court (open at 10). - opening at 10 a.m. Every other Maryland court is closed!

From the Wall Street Journal Law Blog:

The night of Bush v. Gore, Scalia called to see if Ginsburg was alright. She wasn’t. But the fact that he cared enough to call her demonstrates unseen inner workings of those who make up the highest court.

If a case goes to the Supreme Court, you can assume that reasonable minds can differ on what the outcome should be. In this case, if you want to predict how I would vote, pick however you think Justice Scalia would vote. And then put me down for the opposite. But some of the people I like the most have different political views than I do. So it is very cool to think there is real camaraderie like this on the Supreme Court between the two political extremes.

The Maryland Daily Record reports that MICPEL - long a leader in Maryland legal education - would cease operations at the end of February due to financial troubles.

John Cord writes about this on the Daily Record's Generation J.D. Blog.