In a June 2012 trial, a jury awarded D.Edward Vogel, owner of Bengies Drive-In, an $838,000 verdict against a nearby Royal Farms to build an 800-foot long fence to block the light. That verdict was set aside a few months later by a Baltimore circuit judge. Vogel then took his case to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, which has just issued a decision: no fence for you.
According to the Baltimore Sun, Judge Andrea M. Leahy found that evidence presented to the jury “did not support a private nuisance action,” and the jury never should have found in his favor. From the sidelines the whole thing seems rather odd. If one of the two possible decisions the jury could have made was just plain wrong, then why entrust a jury with this to begin with? I wonder if the original judge, when giving his instructions to the jury, made a happy face when discussing a pro-RoFo verdict and a frowny face when discussing the pro-Bengies one.
Anyway, Vogel has not yet exhausted all of his options. He’s said he will appeal the decision to the Maryland Court of Appeals. But Leahy’s decision doesn’t bode well for him.
Latest posts by Robert OBrien (see all)
- Baltimore Woman Accused of Stealing from Local Business to Stock Her Own - December 8, 2017
- Manny Machado Is No Longer the Best; That’s Good News for O’s Fans - December 8, 2017
- Baltimore Ravens 2017: A Tragedy - October 23, 2017