Legal Opinion
Brown v. Washington/Baltimore Cellular, Inc.
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided July 20, 2000No. CIV. A. DKC 99-3357, 99-3786PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
CHASANOW, District Judge.
Plaintiffs, wireless telephone subscribers, bring these two class actions against Defendants Washington/Baltimore Cellular, Inc., Washington/Baltimore Cellular Limited Partnership, and Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc. (collectively known as “Cellular One”) to recover allegedly unlawful late fee charges. Plaintiffs seek damages pursuant to United Cable Television v. Burch, 354 Md. 658, 732 A.2d 887 (1999), in which the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the legal rate of interest is six percent unless otherwise provided by the General Assembly.…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Caterpillar Inc. v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Metropolitan Life Insurance v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- In Re Katherine Susan LoweCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1996
- United Cable Television of Baltimore Ltd. Partnership v. BurchCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1999
- Sanderson, Thompson, Ratledge & Zimny v. AWACS, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Gilmore v. Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2001
- Stone Street Capital, Inc. v. McDonald's Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 2003
- National Ass'n of State Farm Agents, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2002
- Castro v. COLLECTO, INC.District Court, W.D. Texas · 2009
- Christensen v. Phillip Morris, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2002