Paul William Grimm

Lopez v. XTEL Construction Group, LLC

District Court, D. Maryland · 2011-06-15 · cited 7×

In Lopez v. XTEL Construction Group, LLC, plaintiffs moved to enforce an oral settlement agreement reached during February 2011 conference calls with the magistrate judge, under which defendants would pay $10,000 in installments to resolve the claims, with default judgment as a consequence for nonpayment. The court first addressed whether the magistrate judge should recuse under 28 U.S.C. § 455 due to participation in the settlement discussions, concluding that no disqualification was required because all knowledge stemmed from judicial proceedings without any extrajudicial source of bias. The court granted the motion, holding that the parties formed a complete, enforceable oral agreement with mutual assent on February 17, 2011, as confirmed by counsel's affidavit, contemporaneous notes, and the court's own records canceling the trial.

procedure

Mezu v. Morgan State University

District Court, D. Maryland · 2011-04-01

This case involves a discovery dispute in Mezu v. Morgan State University, where the plaintiff sought production of confidential personnel and FMLA-related documents from the defendant university. The court had previously ordered that the documents could be inspected at defense counsel's office, but the parties disagreed on the reasonable cost for copying and shipping them to the plaintiff's counsel. The court denied the plaintiff's motion to compel production at a lower cost, ruling that the defendant's reduced rate of $0.13 per page totaling $730.08 was reasonable, as it accounted for confidentiality requirements under Maryland law, and there was no evidence supporting the plaintiff's claim of inability to afford it. The plaintiff must pay this amount plus shipping if she wishes to obtain the copies.

procedurelabor & employment

Richardson v. Sexual Assault/Spouse Abuse Resource Center, Inc.

District Court, D. Maryland · 2011-02-08 · cited 5×

This case concerns a discovery dispute in which plaintiff Patrick Richardson sought production of his ex-wife Sherri Richardson's file from defendant SARC, a sexual assault and spouse abuse resource center, and related individual defendants. Defendants asserted psychotherapist-patient privilege for most of the documents and attorney-client privilege for a subset, submitting the file for in camera review. The court held that the psychotherapist-patient privilege protects confidential communications and treatment notes even when provided by unlicensed counselors under the supervision of licensed professionals, that the attorney-client privilege applies to the relevant pages, and that neither privilege was waived by limited disclosures or by putting mental condition at issue. The court ordered production only of the non-privileged pages that were responsive to the requests.

procedure

Kennedy v. Villa St. Catherine's, Inc.

District Court, D. Maryland · 2010-04-30 · cited 3×

United States v. Moradi

District Court, D. Maryland · 2010-04-16

Corsair Special Situations Fund, L.P. v. Engineered Framing Sys., Inc.

District Court, D. Maryland · 2010-03-16 · cited 1×

Affiliations

Decision record

Paul William Grimm

Affiliations

Decision record