CALL US: (301) 986-5200

Civil Litigation

Civil Litigation

  • Representing a Montgomery County home developer, successfully obtained a court order striking down the constitutionality of a Moratorium enacted by the Town of Chevy Chase, which was barring the issuance of building permits for the construction of any single-family house in the Town of Chevy Chase.
  • Sued the perpetrators of a Ponzi scheme involving more than $55 million taken from at least 116 people. W&N successfully obtained an injunction preventing the defendants from transferring, pledging or selling any of their assets as well as an order requiring an accounting of all of the monies
  • Successfully obtained $820,000 judgment for printer/copier business based on customer’s failure to pay for printing services.

  • Monias v. Endal (Md. Court of Appeals 1993) :
    W&N successfully obtained a $911,000 jury verdict for a client in a medical malpractice case for failure to diagnose breast cancer which ultimately changed existing law in Maryland. W&N changed Maryland law with this decision so that all victims can now recover for economic loss resulting from their shortened life expectancy caused by the negligence of another. Four years later, the District of Columbia followed suit and, relying on Monias, adopted the same rule of law.
  • American Pool Service Inc, v. Hunt (Md. Court of Special Appeals 1996) :
    W&N successfully defended a large swimming pool management company in a claim filed by the EEOC under the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) for refusing to hire a deaf lifeguard. The EEOC attempted to force this defendant to hire a deaf lifeguard, even though it posed substantial risk of harm to innocent children and patrons. Following lengthy administrative hearings and appeals, with expert testimony from the insurance and aquatic safety industries, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals rejected the EEOC’s position and held that our client did not violate the ADA.
  • B. Frank Joy Co., v. Issacs (Md. Court of Appeals 1994) :
    W&N successfully represented a man injured in a work-related accident. After the parties had reached a settlement agreement paying the injured worker more than $100,000 in damages, the insurance company sought to rescind the settlement agreement. W&N successfully enforced the settlement agreement, requiring the payment of all of the damages. The insurance company appealed. The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed the summary judgment and held that insurance company could not rescind the settlement agreement.
  • Bragg Enterpises v. McGirt (Md. Court of Special Appeals 1988) :
    In 1988, W&N successfully represented a door-to-door vacuum cleaner salesman who was rendered a paraplegic in a motor vehicle accident, but denied workmen’s compensation benefits because he signed an “independent contractors” agreement. After several large D.C. Law firms declined to represent hi because his insurance policy limits were $20,000, our client received more than $400,000 in worker’s compensation benefits that no other law firm even considered.
  • Vollmer v. Schwartz, (2011, 2013, 2014) :
    W&N successfully defended a Chevy Chase family against a civil action filed by their adjoining neighbor who sought a an injunction seeking to block them from building a house on their own property and preventing them from using a common driveway easement between their two properties which provided the only access to their home.
    After losing, the recalcitrant neighbor then filed a second civil action against our clients seeking another injunction to block them from using the common driveway easement between their two properties in the home they were now living in. On appeal, the Court of Special Appeals affirmed the entry of the summary judgment.
    To enforce their clients’ rights under the driveway easement, W&N obtained a judgment in favor of their clients where the court ordered the defendant to pay 50% of the cost of the repairs and maintenance required by the easement and obtained a judgment in favor of their clients for attorney’s fees against the neighbor. On appeal, the Court of Special Appeals affirmed the entry of the judgment and award of attorney’s fees.

Contact