Case Name: Vincent J. BECCIO v. CAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al.
Court: Court of Appeals of Maryland
Jurisdiction: Maryland
Decision Date: 1993-03-12
Citations: 329 Md. 600
Docket Number: No. 100
Parties: Vincent J. BECCIO v. CAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Maryland Reports
Volume: 329
Pages: 600–600

Head Matter:
620 A.2d 939
Vincent J. BECCIO v. CAM CONSTRUCTION COMPANY et al.
No. 100,
Sept. Term, 1992.
Court of Appeals of Maryland.
March 12, 1993.
Janet D. Bacot, Arnold, Bacot, Gay & Tingle, P.A., on brief, Baltimore, for petitioner.
Rudolph L. Rose, P.C., P. Matthew Darby, Severn E.S. Miller, Semmes, Bowen & Semmes, on brief, Baltimore, for respondent.
Argued before MURPHY, C.J., ELDRIDGE, RODOWSKY, McAULIFFE, CHASANOW, KARWACKI and ROBERT M. BELL, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
For reasons stated by Judge Diana G. Motz for the Court of Special Appeals in CAM Construction v. Beccio, 92 Md.App. 452, 608 A.2d 1264 (1992), the judgment is affirmed.
JUDGMENT AFFIRMED, WITH COSTS.