Legal Opinion

Wernsing v. General Motors Corp.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided February 3, 1984No. 38, September Term, 1983PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RODOWSKY, Judge.

In this personal injury action, reported as General Motors Corp. v. Wernsing, 54 Md.App. 19, 456 A.2d 939 (1983), the Court of Special Appeals held that the trial court had abused its discretion by denying a new trial sought by defendants because of juror misconduct. A dictionary had been used in connection with deciding proximate causation during jury deliberations. We granted the plaintiffs’ petition for certiorari and shall affirm. While, on the facts of this case, we agree that a new trial is required as mandated by the Court of Special Appeals, we do not entirely accept…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Oxtoby v. McGowanCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  2. Williams v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
  3. Kelly v. Huber Baking Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1924
  4. Ford v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1859
  5. Browne v. BrowneCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1864

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. United States Surgical Corporation v. Ethicon, Inc. And Johnson & Johnson Hospital Services, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
  2. Adkins v. ALUMINUM COMPANY OF AM.Washington Supreme Court · 1988
  3. Buck v. Cam's Broadloom Rugs, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
  4. Jenkins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2003
  5. Miller v. USAA Casualty Insurance Co.Utah Supreme Court · 2002

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API