Attorneys

Amy Askew Amy Askew

Amy E. Askew

Principal

Biography

Amy Askew is a Maryland trial lawyer with particular experience representing the rail and health care industries. She also represents lawyers in professional responsibility matters. Amy has tried many jury and bench trials to verdict and successfully argued in the appellate courts of Maryland. She has significant experience defending companies in class-action litigation, particularly consumer class actions.

Amy represents railroads in injury and property claims brought by individuals or entities, as well as claims brought by railroad employees under the Federal Employers' Liability Act. She is active in DRI and the National Association of Railroad Trial Counsel.

In the health care industry, Amy has successfully defended liability actions against physicians and hospitals, including medical malpractice claims and claims against health care businesses that provide products and services.

In addition, Amy has extensive experience handling professional liability matters involving legal malpractice and attorney grievance allegations.


Recognition

Maryland State Bar Association, Litigator of the Year, 2017

The Best Lawyers in America, Railroad Law, since 2018; Professional Malpractice Law - Defendants, 2019

Benchmark Litigation, Future Star, 2013 - 2017; Local Litigation Star, since 2017

The Daily Record, Maryland’s Top 100 Women, 2017

Maryland Super Lawyers, 2009 - 2018

The Daily Record, Maryland’s Leading Women, 2010


Service

Baltimore Girls' School Leadership Coalition, Member, Board of Directors, 2007 - present

Baltimore Urban Debate League, Member, Board of Directors, 2010 - 2015; returned 2017 - present

Maryland Professionalism Center, Mentoring Program for New Admittees, 2015

 


Memberships

Maryland State Bar Association

Bar Association of Baltimore City

American Bar Association

Federal Bar Association

DRI

National Association of Railroad Trial Counsel

International Association of Defense Counsel


Events

Presenter, "Do’s and Don’ts for Litigators," Maryland Defense Counsel, Inc., 2013


Representative Matters

Successfully obtained a dismissal of a putative class action lawsuit alleging, among other counts, fraud, RICO violations, and negligent misrepresentation, on behalf of a medical professional. The case was covered in the Law360 article, “Miners Can't Sue Johns Hopkins Over Black Lung Benefits,” August 29, 2017.

Served as a member of the defense team that successfully represented one of six Baltimore police officers who were charged in connection with the death of Freddie Gray. The firm’s client faced the most serious charges among the six officers charged. Following extensive discovery, motions, and a two-week bench trial, the defense team secured acquittals on all seven counts of the indictment, including second-degree murder, three manslaughter counts, assault, reckless endangerment, and misconduct in office. In this highly publicized trial, the defense team relied on the depth of its criminal defense experience, exceptional facility with complex medical issues, and extensive trial practice. By obtaining key pre-trial evidentiary rulings combined with the team’s presentation at trial, the firm succeeded in acquiring a not-guilty verdict as to all charges. 

Successfully defended a national healthcare provider in a medical malpractice case. In the lawsuit, the plaintiff alleged that the healthcare provider failed to diagnose his evolving stroke, and that this failure caused him to develop a permanent brain injury. The health care provider moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff’s causation expert did not have an adequate factual basis for his opinion (as required under Maryland Rule 5-702). The trial court agreed and struck the causation testimony of plaintiff’s expert. The striking of this testimony was fatal to his claim, and the court subsequently entered summary judgment in favor of the healthcare provider and dismissed the case. The plaintiff appealed, and the Court of Special Appeals issued an opinion affirming the circuit court’s decision. The Court of Special Appeals held that summary judgment was appropriate because, without expert testimony on causation, a reasonable jury could not have found in favor of the plaintiff.

Recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of a national railroad company in the Circuit Court for Allegany County, Maryland. The plaintiff filed suit against the railroad under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act, 45 U.S.C. §§ 51 et seq., seeking $25,000,000 in damages. The circuit court granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that it was undisputed that the defendant provided the plaintiff with a reasonably safe place to work, that the plaintiff failed to establish negligence, and that there was no evidence to support the plaintiff’s theory of causation.

News

Events

Reputation

professional_detail.inc