Legal Opinion
Muthukumarana v. Montgomery County
Court of Appeals of Maryland
Decided August 26, 2002No. 83, 84, Sept. Term, 2001PublishedCited by 89 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARRELL, Judge.
These two cases, Fried v. Archer, No. 84, September Term, 2001, and Muthukumarana v. Montgomery County, No. 83, September Term, 2001, share a common issue: whether local government emergency telephone system employees (specifically operators, dispatchers, and managers) owe an individual tort duty to persons in need of their services, and, if so, under what circumstances the employees may be held liable for the negligent performance of that duty.1 These cases also present *457other issues which we shall address, but at the core of both is this shared issue.
Following our examination…
2Cases cited56 opinions
- Cuffy v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- De Long v. County of ErieNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
- Williams v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- Ashton v. BrownCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
- Henry S. Bloomgarden v. Charles B. CoyerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by89 opinions
- Maryland v. PringleSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Lee v. ClineCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004
- Cooper v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
- Remsburg v. MontgomeryCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
- Hines v. FrenchCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2004
84 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.