Posted on February 13, 2020 in Personal Injury

Propane vaporizers are mechanical devices that convert liquid propane (LPG) to propane gas.  Essentially, a propane vaporizer is a boiler that heats the liquid propane to the point where the propane turns to gas.

Propane vaporizers are used in many industrial settings.  For example, a business may need to convert large quantities of liquid propane to propane gas to heat an industrial oven or kiln.

When set up and operated properly, propane vaporizers are safe and effective.  However, if the installation is done incorrectly or if the vaporizer is operated improperly, an explosion and fire can result.

At Silverman Thompson, we have extensive experience litigating and settling catastrophic injury matters, including the following matter:

Settlement – Negligence (Propane Explosion Resulting In Burns)

$601,500

Case: Anonymous vs. Anonymous (Confidential Settlement)

Settlement Date: November 25, 2019

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 31, 2020 in Medical Malpractice

A wrongful birth medical malpractice case alleges that a heath care provider such as a doctor (such as an OBGYN or radiologist), hospital or laboratory was negligent by failing to properly inform a pregnant mother that her fetus had some serious medical condition, so that the mother would have had an opportunity to terminate the pregnancy.

One type of wrongful birth claim involves the failure of an obstetrician or lab to properly report a positive blood test called a quadruple screen, which screens for a number of prenatal abnormalities such as Down Syndrome.  Another type of wrongful birth claim involves the failure of a radiologist to properly report that a sonogram shows Spina Bifida or certain markers, sometimes called hard and soft markers, for Down Syndrome.

Most states, like Maryland and the District of Columbia have recognized the ability of a mother to bring a wrongful birth medical malpractice claim.  Usually, the mother is allowed to claim the extraordinary cost of raising the child which, for a child with Down Syndrome, can be millions and millions of dollars.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 02, 2019 in Family Law

Bagley remains precedent in "above-the-guidelines" cases

Bagley v. Bagley, 98 Md. App. 18 (1993)

In Bagley, the Court of Special Appeals was asked to review the findings and recommendations of a Domestic Relations Master which were adopted by the Circuit Court for Montgomery County. This case, like Voishan and your current case, was an above-the-guidelines case as the father of the parties’ minor children recorded an annual income of over $507,360.  The master made the recommendation that the father pay $2,722 in child support per month; this recommendation was subsequently adopted by the trial court.

The CSA first established that an accurate application of the child support guidelines works to maintain a child’s standard of living as if the parents had not been divorced.  In order to assist in the determination of a child support obligation in an above-the-guidelines case, the CSA developed a list of considerations that should "circumscribe and guide the trial judge’s discretion."  The considerations include: "1) the purpose of the Income Shares Model underlying the guidelines, i.e., maintain the children at the same standard of living they would have enjoyed absent the parties’ divorce; 2) the financial circumstances of each party; 3) each party’s station in life; 4) the age and physical condition of the parties; 5) the costs of educating the child; 6) the need for consistency of support awards; 7) the maximum in the schedule is the minimum for combined incomes above the schedule; and 8) the result of extrapolation from the schedule."  The CSA concluded its analysis by determining that the Bagley children are "entitled to every expense reasonable" for a child with income relative to their fathers,  and the trial judge should be "cognizant that a child’s needs, like an adult’s, increase proportionally with their opportunity to participate in educational, cultural, and recreational activities" which "builds upon itself creating new opportunities."

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 29, 2019 in Family Law

Voishan remains precedent in "above-the-guidelines" cases.

• Voishan v. Palma, 327 Md. 318 (1992).

In Voishan, the Court of Appeals addressed a mother’s Motion to Modify Child Support.  The trial court granted the mother’s motion and ordered the father to double the amount of support he was paying for the parties’ only minor child.  Evidence was presented in support of the motion for modification which revealed that the father was earning $145,000 per year and the mother was earning $30,000 per year.  The combined adjusted actual income of the parties was therefore $175,000 a year or $14,583 per month.  At the time, the Maryland Child Support Guidelines established through Md. Family Law Code Ann. § 12-204(e) only set guidelines for a combined adjusted actual income of $10,000 per month.  In order to address cases, such as this, where the parties monthly income exceeded the guidelines, the legislature provided trial court’s with the discretion to set the amount of child support under Md. Family Law Code Ann. § 12-204(d).

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 25, 2019 in Family Law

A Custody Evaluator is appointed by a Court pursuant to Maryland Rule 9-205.3.  Pursuant to the Maryland Rule there are mandatory elements of a Custody Evaluation as set forth in 9-205.3(f)(1) and optional elements as set forth in 9-205.3(f)(2).  Mandatory elements, subject to any protective order of the court, a custody evaluation shall include: (A) a review of the relevant court records pertaining to the litigation; (B) an interview with each party; (C) an interview of the child, unless the custody evaluator determines and explains that by reason of age, disability, or lack of maturity, the child lacks capacity to be interviewed; (D) a review of any relevant educational, medical, and legal records pertaining to the child; (E) if feasible, observations of the child with each party, whenever possible in that party’s household; (F) factual findings about the needs of the child and the capacity of each party to meet the child’s needs; and (G) a custody and visitation recommendation based upon an analysis of the facts found or, if such a recommendation cannot be made, an explanation of why. Optional elements include, subject to subsection (f)(3) of this Rule, at the discretion of the custody evaluator, a custody evaluation also may include: (A) contact with collateral sources of information; (B) a review of additional records; (C) employment verification; (D) an interview with any other individual residing in the household; (E) a mental health evaluation; (F) consultation with other experts to develop information that is beyond the scope of the evaluator’s practice or area of expertise; and (G) an investigation into any other relevant information about the child’s needs. Maryland Rule 9-205.3(f)(1)(G) specifically provides the custody evaluator is to provide "a custody and visitation recommendation based upon an analysis of the facts found or, if such a recommendations cannot be made, an explanation of why".

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 22, 2019 in Divorce

The U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 838.103 provides “Self-only annuity means the recurring unreduced payments under CSRS or FERS to a retiree with no survivor annuity payable to anyone. Self-only annuity also includes the recurring unreduced phased retirement annuity payments under CSRS or FERS to a phased retiree before any other deduction. Unless the court order expressly provides otherwise, self-only annuity also includes any lump-sum payments made to the retiree under 5 U.S.C. 8343a or 8420a.” While the Gross annuity “means the amount of monthly annuity payable to a retiree or phased retiree after reducing the self-only annuity to provide survivor annuity benefits, if any, but before any other deduction. Unless the court order expressly provides otherwise, gross annuity also includes any lump-sum payments made to the retiree under 5 U.S.C. 8343a or 8420a”.  The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) will apply the martial share formula to the gross annuity UNLESS the Order states otherwise, see U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Part 838.306 (b) which states “the standard types of annuity to which OPM can apply the formula, percentage, or fraction are phased retirement annuity of a phased retiree, or net annuity, gross annuity, or self-only annuity of a retiree. Unless the court order otherwise directs, OPM will apply to gross annuity the formula, percentage, or fraction directed at annuity payable to either a retiree or a phased retiree.”  Gross Annuity is the default.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 23, 2019 in Appeals - State & Federal

On August 28, 2019, in a landmark decision, the Court of Appeals abrogated the long standing rule that a defendant could not be convicted based solely on the testimony of the defendant’s accomplices. (State v. Jones, No. 52, September Term, 2018). Jones was charged with the murder of Mr. Sandeep Bhulari. The investigation led to six suspects. Fingerprints discovered at the crime scene implicated four of the suspects. Jones was implicated solely by the accounts of three of the suspects. The trial, those three suspects testified pursuant to plea agreements. In addition to their testimony, the State presented testimony from detectives and forensic experts and offered physical evidence. None of the physical evidence directly implicated Jones. Jones was convicted of conspiracy to commit armed carjacking. Jones appealed.

The Court of Special Appeals held that the accomplices’ testimony was not independently corroborated by other evidence and that the accomplice corroboration rule had been violated. However, the panel of the Court of Special Appeals suggested that the Court of Appeals reconsider the accomplice corroboration rule.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 14, 2018 in Business Counseling, Litigation & Transactions

Marketing entrepreneurs’ greatest strengths are their creativity and vision. It is this vision that drives many to take the leap to start their own agency/consultancy or join a start-up venture to market an exciting new product. Unfortunately, most marketers are not well-versed in the intricate legal issues involved with starting a business. This can lead to a variety of problems, especially as the venture begins to become successful.  A common misconception is that good legal advice is often too expensive for the early stages of a business venture. This is not the case – provided the right counsel is selected. To ensure the success of any new venture, marketers should take steps to avoid the following common pitfalls:

1. Delaying discussion of legal issues until past the start-up phase. It’s all too common (and tempting) to ignore legal issues involved with starting a business. The instinct is to wait until your company receives additional funding or has a problem to hire an attorney. But having legal counsel during the start-up is essential to preventing large and costly problems that could ultimately derail your business.

   Continue Reading ››

 Posted on May 01, 2018 in Business Counseling, Litigation & Transactions

In the midst of the Great Depression, Congress enacted two laws to shore up practices that were considered to have led in part to the Market Crash of 1929: the Securities Act of 1933 ("1933 Act"), which governs initial securities offerings; and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 ("1934 Act"), which governs all subsequent trading. The 1933 Act permits both state and federal courts to hear claims brought under that Act, and bars defendants from removing such claims to federal court. The 1934 Act, however, grants federal court exclusive jurisdiction to hear claims brought under that Act.

In 1995, Congress passed the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act ("Reform Act") to curb apparent abuses of plaintiff’s use of the class action vehicle in litigation involving nationally traded securities. The Reform Act included substantive reforms in both state and federal court, and procedural reforms only in federal court. The Reform Act fell prey to the law of unintended consequences, and, following its passage, plaintiffs began circumventing the obstacles imposed by the Reform Act by filing securities class actions in state court. To prevent the run-around of the Reform Act, Congress responded in 1998 with the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998 ("SLUSA"). In relevant part, SLUSA provided an exception to the 1933 Act’s general rule that state and federal courts exercise concurrent jurisdiction over claims brought under that Act. Following the passage of SLUSA, a split developed between state and federal courts as to whether SLUSA deprived state courts of subject matter jurisdiction over cases involving "covered class actions" (actions in which damage are sought on behalf of 50 of more people) asserting only 1933 Act claims.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on February 16, 2018 in Criminal Defense

I recently represented a young man in Harford County Circuit Court who was charged with Possession of Child Pornography.  I am former prosecutor and career full time criminal defense attorney practicing exclusively criminal law for 22 years.  I have defended scores of individuals charged with Possession and/or Distribution of Child Pornography and have blogged many times about the increasingly harsh penalties that are being sought by both state and federal prosecutors in these cases.  The granting of probation before judgment in these cases is almost unheard of in recent times.

My client was just 18 years old when he was charged in this case.  He was caught up in the typical investigation that we see in these cases.  Undercover police officers identify a computer that shares child pornography on file sharing programs such as bitTorrent and watch it until a computer with an IP address within their jurisdiction connects to it and downloads Child Pornography.  The police will then subpeona the user data for that IP address and execute a search and seizure warrant looking for the device or devices that were used to download the illegal material.

Continue Reading ››