Mattison v. Gelber, 30 A.3d 1017

Appellant sued for medical malpractice against Estate of Dr. Rosas and Dr. Gelber; verdicts favorable to appellant against the Estate ($811,162.73) and in favor of Gelber; April 9, 2010 judgments signed but costs not specified; appellant sought new trial primarily against Gelber for discovery responses and later moved for final judgment arguing no final judgment due to unresolved costs; court denied motions for new trial and entered a summary order denying entry of final judgment; appellant appealed solely from denial of final judgment; issue concerns whether costs must be adjudicated for finality and whether the first motion remained outstanding; court remands for clerical correction to include costs per Rule 2-603(b).
The trial court authored two judgments reflecting jury verdicts; both forms lacked any cost allocation or “with costs” language.
Rule 2-603 requires the clerk to assess and notify costs, and the court may allocate costs by order; historically costs were intended to be included in judgments absent contrary orders.
The Court of Special Appeals held the April 2010 judgments were final for appeal despite missing explicit cost language and remanded to correct the docket to reflect costs against the Rosas Estate.
The decision emphasizes ministerial clerical duties to add costs to judgments and clarifies that default non-inclusion can be corrected post-judgment to reflect proper cost allocation.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the first motion for new trial remained outstanding.	Mattison argued the first motion persisted.	Gelber argued the denial of the second motion encompassed the first.	Yes; denial of the second encompassed the first.
Whether failure to rule on costs rendered the judgments incomplete or non-final.	Costs sought against Rosas Estate were unresolved.	No finality issue since the court denied relief and costs follow 2-603.	Costs must be adjudicated; remand to assess costs.
Whether clerk must automatically assess costs and include them in the judgment absent a contrary order.	Clerk should include costs as part of the judgment.	Judge could allocate or award costs by separate order.	Clerk must assess and include costs; remand for docket correction.
Whether the April 9, 2010 judgments were final and appealable despite missing cost language.	Judgments incomplete without cost language.	Judgments final upon denial of motions; costs not essential to finality.	Judgments were final and appealable; remanded for docket correction.

Martin G. Imbach, Inc. v. Deegan, 208 Md. 115 (Md. 1955) (distinguishes when an order does not constitute a judgment and costs must be entered)
Baltimore County v. Xerox Corp., 41 Md.App. 465 (Md. App. 1979) (discretion to award costs in law actions and clerks’ roles)