Inlet Associates v. Harrison Inn Inlet, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Maryland
1DissentRobert M. Bell, Judge
In Zdravkovich v. Bell Atlantic-Tricon Leasing Corp., 323 Md. 200, 592 A.2d 498 (1991), Judge Chasanow, the author of the majority opinion, speaking for the Court, made several insightful comments concerning the application of Maryland Rule 1-341. Beginning the assessment of counsel fees discussion, he observed:
*272“Rule 1-341 can be an effective tool for the deterrence of unnecessary or abusive litigation. Unfortunately, like many tools, if improperly used or if abused, it is capable of inflicting excessive or unwarranted injury.”
Id., 323 Md. at 209, 592 A.2d at 503. Concluding that discussion,…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Richard L. Zaldivar v. City of Los Angeles, and Margaret Salazar, Intervenors-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
- Eastway Construction Corp. v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Barquis v. Merchants Collection Assn.California Supreme Court · 1972
- Natural Design, Inc. v. Rouse Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1984
- Wilbert J. Sheets, Cross-Appellant v. Yamaha Motors Corporation, U.S.A. And Yamaha Motor Co. Ltd. Of Iwata, Japan, Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.