 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Kane v. Schulmeyer5/12/1998 ed a deviation in favor of rigidly forcing plaintiffs in transitory actions to sue defendants where they lived or worked are less compelling now and, as the Commission to Revise the Annotated Code noted in 1973, the relaxation of the rigid standard should create no serious inconvenience to defendants. Maryland is a small State with a good network of roads, highways, and public accommodations. In a multi-defendant breach of contract case, when there is no single venue applicable to all defendants, it is not inherently unreasonable to allow the plaintiff to sue the defendants where the cause of action arose, in this case where the debt was expected to be paid. If, in any particular case, that venue proves to be inconvenient, the defendant may seek to have it changed under Maryland Rule 2-327 (c) or, in the District Court, under Maryland Rule 3-326(b). For these reasons, we disavow the suggestion in Bakas that the "where the cause of action arose" provision in 6-201(b) is not generally applicable to breach of contract actions, and we vacate the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals.
JUDGMENT OF COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS VACATED; CASE REMANDED TO THAT COURT FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON OTHER ISSUES RAISED IN THAT COURT; COSTS IN THIS COURT TO BE PAID BY RESPONDENTS; COSTS IN COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS TO ABIDE THE RESULT IN THAT COURT.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Maryland Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|