Court Opinion

ID: 9773894
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 18:02:24.622091+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:58.812508
License: Public Domain

MURPHY, J., dissenting, which BELL, C.J. and ELDRIDGE, J. join.
In my opinion, it is unfair to extend the holding of Walzer v. Osborne to cases in which, before filing the motion to dismiss on the ground that the plaintiff failed to file a sufficient “certificate of qualified expert,” the defendant—as a result of pre-trial discovery that preceded the “Walzer” motion—had already been provided with all of the information required by CJ § 3-2A-04(b). I would therefore reverse the judgment of the Circuit Court and direct that the case be remanded for a determination of whether the case at bar is such a case. If it is, the Petitioners should not be denied their day in court.
Chief Judge BELL and Judge ELDRIDGE have authorized me to state that they join this dissenting opinion.