Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, OWENS-ILLINOI

CourtCourt of Appeals of Maryland
Writing for the CourtSubmitted to MURPHY; ELDRIDGE
Citation602 A.2d 1182,325 Md. 665
Parties, et al. v. William ZENOBIA, Sr., et al. ,
Decision Date01 September 1991
Docket NumberOWENS-ILLINOI,INC,No. 66

Page 665

325 Md. 665
602 A.2d 1182
OWENS-ILLINOIS, INC., et al.
v.
William ZENOBIA, Sr., et al.
No. 66, Sept. Term, 1991.
Court of Appeals of Maryland.
March 11, 1992.
On Motion for Reconsideration.

[602 A.2d 1183]

Page 666

Gardner M. Duvall, Harry S. Johnson, Patrick C. Smith, John G. Billmyre, Whiteford, Taylor & Preston, C. Robert Loskot, John G. Sakellaris, Bernstein, Sakellaris & Ward, Baltimore, John J. Nagle, III, Margaret E. Swain, Barbara M. Gaughan, Power & Mosner, P.A., Towson, all on brief, for petitioners/cross respondents.

Thomas V. Monahan, Jr., Toni-Jean Lisa, Goodell, DeVries, Leech & Gray, Baltimore, amicus curiae, for Maryland Ass'n of Defense Trial Counsel.

Clifford C. Cuniff, Baltimore, for respondents/cross petitioners.

Peter G. Angelos, Patricia J. Kasputys, Timothy J. Hogan, Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos, Baltimore, amicus curiae, for The Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos.

Page 667

Gary I. Strausberg, Janet & Strausberg, Paul B. Bekman, Israelson, Salisbury, Clements & Bekman, Baltimore, amicus curiae, for Maryland Trial Lawyers' Ass'n.

Robert Dale Klein, Wharton, Levin & Ehrmantraut, Annapolis, Malcolm E. Wheeler, Parcel, Mauro, Hultin & Spaanstra, PC, Denver, Colo., amicus curiae, for Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc., the Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass'n of the U.S., The Chamber of Commerce of the U.S., Nat. Ass'n of Mfrs. of the U.S. of America, Business Roundtab and Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n.

Edward F. Houff, Carolyn J. Moses, Church & Houff, Baltimore, amicus curiae, for The Center for Claims Resolution.

James R. Eyler, John P. Sweeney, Gregory L. Lockwood, Miles & Stockbridge, Baltimore, for Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.

Submitted to MURPHY, C.J., and ELDRIDGE, RODOWSKY, McAULIFFE, CHASANOW, KARWACKI and ROBERT M. BELL, JJ.

ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

ELDRIDGE, Judge.

The defendant Anchor Packing Company has filed a Motion for Reconsideration, requesting that certain "attached documents be made part of the total record" in this case and that the Court reconsider in part its decision. See Owens-Illinois v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 601 A.2d 633 (1992). Specifically, Anchor asks this Court to review a portion of Part V of the opinion holding that Anchor was not entitled to indemnity or contribution from Raymark Industries, Inc., in the Zenobia case because Raymark had never been named as a defendant by the plaintiff Zenobia and had never been properly named as a third party defendant by Anchor. Anchor requests that we change our decision regarding its cross-claim in the Zenobia case.

Page 668

Anchor asserts that the plaintiff Zenobia in fact named Raymark in the original complaint but that the copy of the original complaint included in the record extract omitted one page, namely the page upon which Raymark was named as a defendant. The defendant Anchor has also attached as exhibits to its motion a stipulated cross-claim filed by all of the defendants against all other defendants and a cross-claim for indemnity filed by Anchor against all...

To continue reading

Request your trial
24 practice notes
  • Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, OWENS-ILLINOI
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1991
    ...that will support punitive damages. --------------- * The addendum to this opinion denying Motion for Reconsideration can be found at 325 Md. 665 and 602 A.2d 1 All other defendants named by both plaintiffs in the original complaints and subsequent amended complaints had either been granted......
  • Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, No. 280
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1997
    ...time period is not evidence of the practices of the Preston Street garage between 1948 and 1952. See Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 665, 670, 602 A.2d 1182 (1992) ("The mere 'conjecture' that half of Anchor's asbestos products may have come from Raymark over a thirty year period i......
  • Hoffman v. Stamper, No. 33
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • February 4, 2005
    ...an award of punitive damages. We pointed out that, in Owens-Illinois v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 601 A.2d 633 (1992), reconsideration denied, 325 Md. 665, 602 A.2d 1182 (1992), the Court modified the standard for an award of punitive damages and that, under the new standard, as applied in frau......
  • McCoy v. Biomet Orthopedics, LLC, Civil Action No. ELH-12-1436
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Maryland)
    • January 25, 2021
    ...failure to warn cases was explained in Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 432-38, 601 A.2d 633, 638-41, reh'g denied, 325 Md. 665, 602 A.2d 1182 (1992). . . . [W]e recognized in Zenobia that a majority of courts hold, expressly or implicitly, "that a manufacturer of a product, wh......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
24 cases
  • Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, OWENS-ILLINOI
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1991
    ...that will support punitive damages. --------------- * The addendum to this opinion denying Motion for Reconsideration can be found at 325 Md. 665 and 602 A.2d 1 All other defendants named by both plaintiffs in the original complaints and subsequent amended complaints had either been granted......
  • Ford Motor Co. v. Wood, No. 280
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1997
    ...time period is not evidence of the practices of the Preston Street garage between 1948 and 1952. See Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 665, 670, 602 A.2d 1182 (1992) ("The mere 'conjecture' that half of Anchor's asbestos products may have come from Raymark over a thirty year period i......
  • Hoffman v. Stamper, No. 33
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Maryland
    • February 4, 2005
    ...an award of punitive damages. We pointed out that, in Owens-Illinois v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 601 A.2d 633 (1992), reconsideration denied, 325 Md. 665, 602 A.2d 1182 (1992), the Court modified the standard for an award of punitive damages and that, under the new standard, as applied in frau......
  • McCoy v. Biomet Orthopedics, LLC, Civil Action No. ELH-12-1436
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court (Maryland)
    • January 25, 2021
    ...failure to warn cases was explained in Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420, 432-38, 601 A.2d 633, 638-41, reh'g denied, 325 Md. 665, 602 A.2d 1182 (1992). . . . [W]e recognized in Zenobia that a majority of courts hold, expressly or implicitly, "that a manufacturer of a product, wh......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT