Maryland Accident Attorney Blog

All Drivers Should Maintain Strong Uninsured/Underinsured Coverage on Motor Vehicle Insurance Policies

Published on: April 1, 2024 | by Jason Wasserman

What is uninsured motorist coverage?

Although automobile liability insurance is mandatory for Maryland drivers, I cannot urge drivers enough to carry significant uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. Uninsured motorist (UM) coverage protects drivers when they are in a collision caused by a driver that has failed to obtain automobile insurance or when the offending driver cannot be identified (i.e. a hit and run or phantom vehicle scenario). While Maryland law mandates that all motor vehicles must carry liability insurance, data provided by the Insurance Information Institute estimates that over 15% of all Maryland drivers are unlawfully uninsured motorists. Moreover, neighboring states, such as Virginia and Delaware, do not have any laws mandating that drivers carry liability insurance, so victims of collisions caused by those drivers who enter Maryland may be left without recourse or a means to obtain compensation. When this occurs, you and the occupants in your vehicle may look to your own motor vehicle insurance policy to compensate you for your damages up to your policy’s UM coverage limits.

Underinsured motorist coverage (UIM) protects drivers and occupants of the vehicle who are involved in a collision caused by a driver who did not have sufficient coverage to compensate them for their damages. Maryland law requires a minimum of $30,000 per person, $60,000 per occurrence, for liability and UM/UIM limits. In this scenario, the insurance company will never pay more than $30,000 for any one individual or more than $60,000 for the entirety of all persons affected by a collision. At first glance, one might think those sums are sufficient, however, with the dramatic rise in medical costs, those sums barely make a dent in the medical costs in cases where there are serious injuries or where multiple people are injured. Keep this in mind, a brief trip on a Medivac Helicopter to Shock Trauma costs approximately $90,0000. A spinal fusion procedure for a back injury can easily run you upwards of $60,000.

Do I need uninsured motorist coverage?

UIM coverage can protect you from losing all your assets and going bankrupt from medical expenses or not being able to work when someone who has insufficient insurance coverage injures you in a collision. UIM coverage provides you, the occupants of your vehicle, and your resident family relatives with additional coverage up to the difference between the limits of UIM coverage and the at-fault driver’s bodily injury coverage. In other words, if the vehicle that caused the collision had $30,000 in insurance coverage and you carried a policy with $100,000 in UIM coverage, you could be entitled to additional compensation of up to $70,000 from your UIM policy once you receive the full limits of the bodily injury coverage from the offending vehicle. Keep in mind that you must first receive the full limits of bodily injury coverage from the offending vehicle before your UIM claim can become ripe.[1]

How much uninsured motorist coverage do I need?

With insurance costs always rising, many are lax to purchase sufficient coverage to protect themselves and their families. While purchasing the minimal amounts of motor vehicle insurance to become a legal driver in Maryland can be costly, especially if you have a negative driving record, it typically does not cost vehicle owners that much more to become sufficiently insured and to increase your protections. I recommend that all vehicle owners purchase a minimum of $250,000 (per person)/$500,000 (per occurrence) in coverage limits for both your Bodily Injury and UM/UIM portions of your policy.[2] If you have a family, if your family depends upon you for its support, own a business, have substantial assets, or need greater peace of mind, I always recommend obtaining at least $1 million in Bodily Injury and UM/UIM coverage. This additional level of protection will follow you and your family even if they are involved in a collision that does not involve a family vehicle.

While increasing your policy limits will likely increase your insurance premiums, this is definitely not an area of your budget where you want to skimp. Far too often I hear my clients proudly declare, “I have full coverage.” Full coverage by no means, however, equates to good, sufficient coverage. All “full coverage” means is that you carry liability and comprehensive coverage on your vehicle, and sometimes Personal Injury Protection (PIP) as well. Every day I meet with clients who thought they had sufficient coverage because they purchased “full coverage” wherein reality, all they have is a policy with coverage up to Maryland’s minimal limits of $30,000/$60,000.

Remember, it is extremely important to call and retain a personal injury attorney as soon as you can after any collision or injury you or a loved one sustains. You should reach out prior to speaking with anyone from any insurance company. As always, I remain available to consult with you in any injury situation or if you have questions about whether you may be entitled to benefits under any policy of insurance. Please contact me, Jason Wasserman, at (410) 385-9110.

Maryland Lengthens the Statute of Limitations for Victims of Childhood Sexual Abuse

Published on: April 21, 2017 | by Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White

Thanks to Delegate C.T. Wilson’s persistent effort, the Maryland General Assembly passed and Governor Larry Hogan signed into law House Bill 642 on April 4, 2017. The new law provision extends the statute of limitations for victims of sexual abuse to sue offenders and the individuals, organizations and/or government entities who allowed the abuse to occur.

Maryland’s previous statute of limitations provided that child sex abuse victims only had to age 25 to sue (seven years from the date the victim reached the age of majority). The new law extends the statute of limitations to age 38. Although the law is a huge step forward, there are a couple of important things to note.

The Law Requires Gross Negligence to Sue Responsible Third Parties

Amtrak Train Crash in Philadelphia

Published on: May 14, 2015 | by Steven D. Silverman

Another fatal train accident has taken place on the east coast. This one occurred yesterday in Philadelphia and the preliminary investigating seems to indicate that the cause of the accident was conductor error. According to the unnamed sources, the so called “black boxes” which were recovered from the crash scene indicate that the train was travelling at speeds in excess of 100 miles per hour. The accident occurred as the train attempted to negotiate a curve in the tracks where trains are not to exceed 50 miles per hour. So far, eight people are confirmed dead and hundreds more have been injured. There is a criminal investigation underway. https://www.silvermanthompson.com/contact-us.html
Continue Reading ›

Roland Park Bicycle Death Case Requires An Experienced Attorney

Published on: December 29, 2014 | by Andrew G. Slutkin

Sadly, another bicycle rider has been killed by a driver, this time in Roland Park.

I have handled two high-profile bicycle death cases in Maryland in the last few years, and both of them were tragic. The first involved a bicyclist who was run over by a commercial vehicle in Baltimore City. That case also involved a hit and run, though the driver in that case never came back to the scene.

The second involved a Johns Hopkins student who was run over by an elderly woman.

STSW Assists Victims in Shocking “Mikvah” Video Voyeurism Case

Published on: November 6, 2014 | by Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White

On October 14, 20014, prominent D.C. Rabbi and religious scholar Barry Freundel was arrested by the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) and charged with various offenses relating to voyeurism. According to charging documents, Rabbi Freundel installed recording devices in the changing/shower area connected to a Jewish ritual bath known as a “mikvah.”

Rabbi Freundel was affiliated with Kesher Israel in Washington, D.C., he was a Jewish studies professor at Georgetown Law and he served on the faculty at Towson University in Maryland. Preliminary information suggests Rabbi Freundel encouraged his female students to participate in the mikvah and thousands of women who used the mikvah face the very real prospect that Rabbi Freundel captured and/or distributed the women’s images without their knowledge or consent. Media accounts indicate that several of the institutions with which Rabbi Freundel was affiliated are currently investigating other potential misconduct and MPD’s investigation in that regard is ongoing.

Silverman|Thompson|Slutkin|White|LLC (STSW) is in the process of investigating the potential criminal and civil liability flowing from Rabbi Freundel’s conduct on behalf of several potential victims. If you believe you may be a victim of Rabbi Freundel, you have important rights in the criminal process that STSW’s victims’ rights attorneys can help you protect. In addition, you have the right to seek a financial recovery against an array of individuals and entities that may be held liable for Rabbi Freundel’s acts. Many of these rights are time-sensitive and it is imperative that you immediately seek competent legal representation.

STSW Exploring Claims on Behalf of Business and Residents Affected by West Virginia Oil Spill

Published on: January 11, 2014 | by Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White

More than 100,000 households and businesses have been left without potable water because of a large-scale chemical spill discovered Thursday on the Elk River near Charlestown, West Virginia. The spill occurred just north of one of the largest water treatment plants in America and as many as 480,000 residents may be affected.
Continue Reading ›

Tragedy Suggests Urgent Need for Better Police Training for Dealing with Mental Illness and Disability

Published on: January 8, 2014 | by Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White

A tragic national trend continued Sunday in the latest incident of police killing an unarmed individual suffering from mental illness or disability. After allegedly stating “I don’t have time for this,” a police officer shot unarmed North Carolina resident Keith Vidal, 18, in the chest, fatally wounding the 5’3″, 90-pound teen. Vidal, who suffered from schizophrenia, had been experiencing a psychotic episode and his family was unable to calm him down.

During the episode, Vidal’s stepfather, Mark Wilsey, called 911 for help and reported that Vidal had refused to take his medication and was attempting to fight his mother. Wilsey requested that police take Vidal somewhere he could receive help. According to the family, three officers from three different police departments then arrived on the scene.

The first two officers spoke with Vidal and apparently had some success in calming him down, when the third officer, from the Southport Police Department, arrived 14 minutes later. As stated in a police report obtained by a local news station, one of the officers informed the 911 dispatcher multiple times that that everything at the scene was okay. According to Wilsey, however, when the third officer arrived, he suggested that a Taser be used on Vidal, at which point Vidal attempted to run from the officers.

D.C. Dram Shop Liability Expands

Published on: November 5, 2013 | by William Sinclair

Last month, a D.C. jury found that the District Lounge & Grille, a bar (now closed) formerly located in the Adams Morgan section of the District, was liable to the Estate of Julia Bachleitner under the D.C. Dram Shop Statute. The parties had previously agreed that, if the bar was found liable, the damages would be $1 million.
Continue Reading ›

Navy Yard Shooting Gives Rise to Potential Civil Claims

Published on: November 4, 2013 | by Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White

STSW is currently investigating potential criminal and civil claims arising out of the massacre of 13 Navy Yard employees on behalf of several of the victims’ families.

Aaron Alexis was employed by The Experts, a subcontractor of Hewlett-Packard Enterprise Services (HP), and was granted access to secure Navy Yard facilities in that capacity. Based on the widespread media reports of Alexis’ increasingly bizarre behavior, The Experts was potentially on notice of a dangerous mental illness. Alexis was living in a hotel with fellow employees who apparently witnessed his declining mental state, as did members of the hotel staff. Alexis was also involved in several encounters with police which either were or could have been discovered by The Experts. The Experts may be liable for, among other things, wrongful death, negligent hiring, negligent supervision and negligent retention. Depending on the precise relationship between The Experts and HP, HP faces potential liability.

Others may also be held accountable for the deaths and injuries suffered by the victims and their families. The federal government may have been negligent in permitting Alexis to bring a disassembled weapon onto its premises and the contractor who performed his employment background check could also be held accountable for failing to discover signs of obvious mental illness.

Understanding the Process of Evaluating and Negotiating Automobile Injury Claims

Published on: April 30, 2013 | by Steven D. Silverman

In an effort to help our clients understand the process of negotiating a personal injury claim, I have compiled the following information that I feel is important you understand once the medical bills, lost wage statements and any other “special” damages have been obtained and the negotiating process has begun.

There are basically two types of damages to be considered when evaluating your claim, special damages and general damages:

a. Special damages are those damages for which you can show a dollar amount that you incurred as a result of having to pay money or losing money as a result of the collision and your injuries. Examples of special damages are medical bills and lost wages.

b. General damages are the damages for which you do not have a bill or for which you cannot show any “tangible” loss. Examples of general damages are pain and suffering.
Continue Reading ›