SOLESKY v. Tracey
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
1DissentRubin, J.
I respectfully dissent from part II of the panel majority’s opinion. To be sure, the incident of April 28, 2007, was horrific. In my judgment, however, the circuit court correctly concluded that the evidence presented at trial by the plaintiffs was legally insufficient to sustain a verdict against the landlord. As a consequence, the circuit court properly granted the landlord’s motion for judgment under Maryland Rule 2-519 at the close of the plaintiffs’ case. See Veytsman v. New York Palace, Inc., 170 Md.App. 104, 112, 906 A.2d 1028 (2006).
The majority begins its opinion by stating that…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Dias v. City and County of DenverCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- Fowler v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1965
- Pahanish v. Western Trails, Inc.Court of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1986
- Matthews v. Amberwood Associates Ltd. Partnership, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1998
- Hiner v. MojicaMichigan Court of Appeals · 2006
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.