On February 5, the Wicomico Circuit Court threw out a case against the City of Salisbury by someone named Henry L. Vinyard. The on-line report lists it as an “other tort” suit. That must mean it was not for a car crash. The yellow pages list “Henry L. Vinyard” as a lawyer in Salisbury.
Inquiring minds want to know is this a suit by that lawyer and what was the case about? Whatever it was must have happened before January 17, 2008, when the case was filed. Why was it “dismissed with prejudice”? And why wasn’t the City’s attorney in the case from Paul Wilber’s law firm?
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
17 comments:
It means a settlement was reached and part of the settlement bars the plantiff from filing anymore cases on that claim.
9:39-YOU ARE WRONG!
Where did you go to law school -- the case was dismissed on a motion; here's the docket entry from the on-line site:
Case called for hearing. Plaintiff present with Counsel, James Emche. Counsel, Christine T. Altemus, present on behalf of City of Salisbury, Maryland. Arguments heard. Defendant's Montin for Summary Judgment; argued and granted. Order thereon, filed. Case dismissed with prejudice.
PS - I was in court that day; were you?
I'm not sure what happened, but Debbie Campbell was there during the case. I'm not sure if she was involved or just there watching because I was in another court room and did not get to watch the case. Ask Debbie I'm sure she will tell you.
Joe:
Street talk is that it was a typical slip and fall scam -- "I didn't see" the banana peel, ice patch, oil spot, etc. -- and he was probably chasing an ambulance and didn't bother to look where his feet were going!
Interesting point:
In many matters (this "tort" case defended by the City's insurance is just one type) the City attorney's law firm is not the one that does the real work. Other things include personnel matters and environment cases. Most likely the City is paying much more for legal services than the $300,000 or so that goes to Wilber's firm (can't remember the full name) each year, that does not even include cases like this and many other things that are "extras".
10:55 --
If Ms. Campbell was in the courtroom, it was probably to find out why Mr. Vinyard had sued the City. Barrie and Comegys don't want her and the public to know what's happening. Under the Comegys-Smith-Barrie rules, other members of the Council can't talk to department heads, and it would be improper for her to call Vinyard.
Let's reelect Ms. Campbell to protect our right to good and open government. And let's elect Bob Caldwell, not Bubba, as the mayor for that reason.
Anon 1004
I'm telling you what it means.
When a case is dismissed either with or without prejudice it simply means, for whatever reason, usually a settlement, the case will now not be heard in front of a judge or a jury.
key words are 'with' or 'without' prejudice--one you can re-file the suit and the other means you cannot.
Amateur lawyer commentators:
If the "defendant's" motion for a summary juddgment is granted, like here, it usually means the the "plaintiff's" claim is bogus, not that there has been any settlement. May be the plaintiff, Mr. Vinyard (the local attorney) or Mr. Emche (the local attorney's attorney) can give us the full details.
Don't assume the case was dismissed, as in "lost" by the one bringing the suit. Dismissed with prejudice does not carry with it the idea or connotation that a lawsuit was thought to be frivolous and therefore "dismissed".
When a case is settled, it is usually ended with a paper signed by the attorneys. That does not appear to be what happened in this case. It looks like the judge threw it out of court.
how many law suits are against SPD? what is the total amount?
I remember Henry falling and breaking his arm. Don't know where it happened though.
1:59-
While chasing an ambulance???
I dont'know what the dismissed with prejudice means but I do know where it happened and why? It was on ice in the area at the back of the city parking lot. THE CITY HAD NOT taken any action in clearing the ICE off the payment/road for a couple days. It melted and refroze and melted and refroze. It was rough & hard to walk on. SEVERAl People fell but now got hurt like he did. The CITY didn't realize they owned the property-they thought someone else did so they didn't clean off the ice. It wasn't a banana peel Be care what you incinuate it might happen to you ....
8:53 --
Wait, wait, don't tell me.
The judge said that this legal type "assumed the risk" by walking on the ice.
That's elementary, my dear Watson.
Well Joe, I know little more than when the post was written, the majority of people who write on these blogs are either stupid, uninformed, or both, I count four possible informative answers, and thank goodness for Ms. Campbell, she is our "watcher" she does try to keep on top of the city's clandestine administration, good for us...Thanks Deb.
Post a Comment