Charlene Janson v. Reithoffer Shows, Inc., No. 21-2374 (4th Cir. 2023)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-2374 CHARLENE JANSON, Plaintiff − Appellee, v. REITHOFFER SHOWS, INC., Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Deborah Lynn Boardman, District Judge. (1:19−cv−00079−DLB) Submitted: October 5, 2022 Decided: June 1, 2023 Before WYNN, DIAZ, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. ON BRIEF: David A. Skomba, Miranda D. Russell, FRANKLIN & PROKOPIK, P.C., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Michael J. Winkelman, MCCARTHY, WINKELMAN, MESTER, OFFUTT, LLP, Lanham, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Reithoffer Shows, Inc. appeals the district court’s denial of its Rule 50 motions for judgment as a matter of law. The jury found that Reithoffer’s negligence proximately caused Charlene Janson’s injury. And although the jury also found Janson was contributorily negligent, it awarded her damages, finding that Reithoffer had the last clear chance to avoid her injury but failed to do so. Before the case was submitted to the jury, Reithoffer argued that there was insufficient evidence to submit the questions whether Reithoffer’s negligence proximately caused Janson’s injury and whether Reithoffer had the last clear chance to avoid the injury. After the district court entered judgment, Reithoffer renewed its motion on last-clear-chance grounds. The district court denied those motions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, for the reasons identified in the district court’s decision, see Janson v. Reithoffer Shows, Inc., No. DLB-19-79, 2021 WL 5280894 (D. Md. Nov. 12, 2021), we affirm. And we dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal conclusions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.