Court of Special Appeals of Maryland· 10/6/2014

Francis v. Johnson

Citations

219 Md. App. 531
101 A.3d 494
2014 Md. App. LEXIS 118

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

speculating, in dicta, that “[i]t could be argued that, similar to an inconsistent verdict claim, this type of argument [pertaining to duplicative damages] is waived if not brought to the attention of the court when the verdict is rendered”
speculating, in dicta, that “[i]t could be argued that, similar to an inconsistent verdict claim, this type of argument [pertaining to duplicative damages] is waived if not brought to the attention of the court when the verdict is rendered”
speculating, in dicta, that “[i]t could be argued that, similar to an inconsistent verdict claim, this type of argument [pertaining to duplicative damages] is waived if not brought to the attention of the court when the verdict is rendered”
“The Maryland appellate courts have made clear that there can be only one recovery of damages for one wrong or injury.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Graeff

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

36 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.