Preview:

Moore v. Norouzi, et al.; Mendelson et ux. v. Brown et al. Nos. 126 & 127, September Term 2000

HEADNOTE: LOCAL GOVERNMENT TORT CLAIMS ACT; NOTICE REQUIREMENTS; THIRD PARTY CLAIMS ADMINISTRATOR; SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE; WAIVER Notice to a third party claims administrator acting on behalf of a local government constitutes substantial compliance with the notice requirements set out in the Local Government Tort Claims Act and in any event, good cause exists to waive the notice requirements.

Circuit Court for Montgomery County

Case Nos. 01487 & 001188 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF MARYLAND Nos. 126 & 127 September Term, 2000

ROBERT MOORE v. MOSTABA NOROUZI, ET AL.

STUART C. MENDELSON ET UX. v. PHILLIP GEORGE BROWN ET AL.

Bell, C.J. Eldridge Raker Wilner Cathell Harrell Battaglia JJ. Opinion by Bell, C.J. Cathell, J., Dissents

Filed: September 25, 2002

In these consolidated appeals, we have been asked to address whether: by notice to a third party claims administrator acting on behalf of a local government, the petitioners, Robert Moore ("Moore") and Stuart C. Mendelson ("Mendelson")1 actually complied with the notice requirement of the Local Government Tort Claims Act ("LGTCA"), Md. Code (1974, 1998 Repl. Vol., 2000 Cum. Supp.)

Download Moore v. Norouzi.pdf

Maryland Law