Maryland Appellate Attorney
Différence entre kamagra et cialis continuez à lire ceci .. Comment utiliser kamagra 100mg oral jelly
Effet du kamagra sur les femmes https://www.kamelef.mobi/kamagra-ou-viagra.html kamagra 100 mg effets secondaires
reaction du viagra https://www.avisoef.com/utilisation-du-viagra/ peyronie et viagra
Our experienced appellate attorneys can help you prepare for your civil appeal by conducting research, drafting briefs and petitions, preparing the record, and arguing your case before the proper appellate court. It takes a different skill set to be a successful appellate attorney and many top-notch litigators have turned to the Grafton Firm for assistance with their cases. We can work with you on a case by case basis, assisting only where needed. We can handle the appeal from start to finish or assist you in drafting the briefs and preparing to argue the case yourself.
Qui connait kamagra cliquez maintenant Quand prendre le kamagra
faut-il une ordonnance pour obtenir du viagra cliquez simplement sur le document suivant achat viagra toulouse
Hurley, et al. v. CBS Corporation, et al., Slip Op. No. 14-2049 (May 6, 2016) (United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants where plaintiffs failed to establish the requisite proximity, frequency, and regularity to establish exposure to toxic asbestos).
Harper, et al v. CBS Corporation, et al., Slip Op. No. 14-2049 (May 6, 2016) (United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirming the grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants where plaintiffs failed to establish the requisite proximity, frequency, and regularity to establish exposure to toxic asbestos)
Smith v. Singer (Slip Op. No. 4151, Sept. Term 2012), cert. denied 442 Md. 196 (Mar. 30, 2015) (Appellee) (Maryland Court of Special Appeals affirming grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants where plaintiff lacked sufficient circumstantial evidence of causation to present his case to the jury).
Roy v. Dackman, 445 Md. 23 (2015) (Appellee) (Maryland Court of Appeals upholding exclusion of medical expert on grounds that he was unqualified to offer testimony regarding the source of toxic exposure and because he lacked a sufficient factual basis to support his opinions regarding causation)
Edwards v. Roberta, Slip Op. No. 2173, Sept. Term 2012 (Jan. 24, 2014) (Maryland Court of Special Appeals affirming grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants finding that the executed release was not affected by the unconstitutionality of the immunity provisions in the Reduction of Lead Risk in Housing Act).
West v. Rochkind, 212 Md. App. 164, 66 A.3d 1145 (2013), cert. denied 2013 Md. LEXIS 807 (Md., Oct. 21, 2013) (Appellee) (upholding the grant of summary judgment in our favor on the grounds that the proposed experts were properly excluded and the plaintiff could not continue to trial without direct evidence of causation)
City Homes v. Hazelwood, 210 Md. App. 615, 63 A.3d 713 (2013), cert. denied 69 A.3d 476 (Md., Jul. 5, 2013) (Appellant) (vacating a multi-million dollar jury verdict, finding it was an abuse of discretion to allow certain medical expert testimony)
Butler v. S&S Partnership, 207 Md. App. 60 (2012), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, 2013 Md. LEXIS 836 (Md., Nov. 26, 2013) (Appellee) (upholding the grant of summary judgment in our favor regarding alleged violations of the Consumer Protection Act)
Passero v. Camp Springs Lodge No. 2332, Slip Op. No. 1250, Sept. Term 2010 (Feb. 21, 2012) (Appellee) (affirming the trial court’s decision to grant our motion for a new trial after an unqualified expert was allowed to testify on behalf of the Plaintiff/Appellant)
Fairway Courtyards II v. Columbia Roofing, Slip Op. No. 1915, Sept. Term 2010 (May 10, 2010) (Maryland Court of Appeals denying plaintiff’s petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of the applicable statute of limitations in defective construction case).
*These cases were argued as Of Counsel to the law firm of Parler & Wobber, LLP.