Maryland Personal Injury, Accident, and Victim's Rights BlogHomeowners insurance, depending upon the exact language, normally excludes intentional acts by insured that cause injury. A policy that excludes coverage for “damage which is either expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured,” has been interpreted as excluding coverage for results that were subjectively intended by insured’s act. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Sparks, 63 Md. App. 738, 742 (1985). Moreover, the court has interpreted “intent” within the insurance policy as, “…desires to cause consequences…or believes that such consequences are substantially certain to result from his conduct.” Id. at 744 (emphasis added). However, the court has distinguished “intentional” from “wanton,” in noting that “wanton” conduct is described as consequences probably certain to result. Id. (emphasis added). Under such analysis, homeowners insurance would cover for an insured’s wanton conduct causing injury to a trespasser.
Over $850 Million in Verdicts and Settlements
Overview of Maryland Wrongful Death Law
As leading Maryland personal injury lawyers, we are often asked to explain Maryland law regarding wrongful death lawsuits.
The Duty of a Landowner to a Trespasser in Maryland
A trespasser is classified as one who enters another’s property intentionally and without consent or privilege. The only duty owed to a trespasser is to “abstain from wilful or wanton misconduct.” Doehring v. Wagner, 562 A.2d 762, 767 (1989); Carroll v. Spencer, 204 Md. 387, 394 (1954) (emphasis added). A “wanton” act is one performed with reckless indifference to potentially injurious consequences. Doehring, 562 A.2d at 767; Wells v. Poland, 120 Md. App. 699, 719 (1998). Moreover, “wanton” conduct is that which is “extremely dangerous and outrageous,” with reckless disregard of others rights. Wells, 120 Md. App. at 719. However, although the above cases define “wanton,” the standard applied by the court to trigger liability to trespassers is higher. The majority of cases use such language as “conduct calculated to or reasonably expected to lead to injury of the trespasser.” Doehring, 562 A.2d at 762; Wells, 120 Md. App. at 721 (emphasis added). For example in Doehring, defendant placing chain across driveway to prevent motorcycles from accessing was not willful or wanton conduct, even though defendant was aware of prior use of driveway by motorcycles. Id.
$55.18 Million Verdict Against Federal Government in Automobile Accident Case
A four year old girl and her mother were severely injured when an individual, employed by the federal government, ran a red light and broad-sided the SUV in which the toddler and her mother were traveling. After the collision, the victims’ vehicle struck a utility pole and rolled over. The young girl sustained multiple injuries, which required 25 surgeries. She was hospitalized for 250 days. Her past medical expenses totaled approximately $3.5 million. The toddler’s attorneys maintained that future life care costs for the young girl would approach $22 million. The mother sustained approximately $29,100 in past medical expenses and $212,500 in future medical expenses.
Medevac Helicopter Crash a Horrific Tragedy
All of Maryland is deeply saddened by the weekend crash of a Maryland medical evacuation helicopter over the weekend. Four people were killed in the late-night crash in Prince George’s County, Maryland. The Baltimore Sun reports the victims included the aircraft’s pilot, a crew member, a civilian medic and a patient.
Interpleader Actions in Maryland Personal Injury Claims
Occasionally in Maryland personal injury claims, a situation arises when one or more insurance companies agree to pay their entire policy to the claimant(s), but are unable to do so without exposing itself to potential liability. This situation often occurs when two or more persons are are injured and are competing for a limited amount of insurance. Rather than cut a deal with one of the victims, the insurance company will file an interpleader action.
Assumption of Risk Defense in Maryland Discussed
Next to contributory negligence, no defense is raised more in a Maryland personal injury case than assumption of risk. It is well-established in Maryland that in order to establish the assumption of risk defense, the defendant bears the burden of proving that the plaintiff: (i) had knowledge of the risk of the danger; (ii) appreciated that risk; and (iii) voluntarily confronted the risk of danger. The majority of the cases turn on the issue of voluntariness.
City Agrees to Pay Thousands to Victims of Police Brutality
The Baltimore City Board of Estimates approved two settlements in two cases against City Police Officers stemming from police brutality. In one case, the City approved at $320,000.00 Settlement for four victims and in the second, approved a $75,000.00 settlement on behalf on one victim.
Continue Reading ›
Pursuing a Recovery for Personal Injuries Caused by a Drunk Driver
Each year, more than forty percent of the total number of traffic fatalities are alcohol related. In this country, nearly 17,000 thousand people are killed on an annual basis in accidents caused by drunk drivers.
Sadly, notwithstanding these horrific statistics, Maryland law does not permit a cause of action against a bar owner, restaurant, homeowner or other individual or entity responsible for negligently serving alcohol to individuals who later get behind the wheel of a car and cause serious, and oftentimes catastrophic, injury to others. See Veytsman v. New York Palace, Inc., 170 Md.App. 104, 122 n.11 (2006). Such a claim is known as tavern liability or “dram shop” liability. In fact, Maryland is one of only three states that do not permit such lawsuits. Maryland law also does not allow an injured victim to recover punitive damages in automobile accident cases, even in instances where the driver that caused the injury has consumed excessive quantities of alcohol or other mind-altering drugs. See Komornik v. Sparks, 331 Md. 720 (1993).
Continue Reading ›
Pursuing a Product Liability Theory in the Catastrophic Automobile Accident Case
Many individual automobile insurance policies do not provide adequate coverage for catastrophically injured victims. As a result, a product liability case against the manufacturer of the automobile may need to be explored. Such cases can be extremely complicated and expensive to prosecute effectively. As such, it is imperative to consult a trial attorney with significant experience handling such cases.
Preserving Evidence in Trucking Accident Cases Occurring on Maryland’s Highways
Maryland is a major transportation corridor for trucking and other interstate travel with Interstate 95 running from North/South and Interstate 70 running East/West. As such, accidents involving tractor trailers and other large motor carriers oftentimes occur on Maryland’s frequently traveled roadways. In many of these cases, the tractor trailer is equipped with a “black box” containing critical information, such as average speeds of travel, top speeds, braking information for “hard stops” or other valuable information just prior to the point of impact. It may also contain information regarding the number of hours the truck was in operation; information that can be compared with the log books the driver and trucking company are required to keep. The black box can be a gold mine of information. The information contained in the black box can be critical to proving liability not just for the negligent truck driver, but for the company that employs him or her. This information can be used to show that a trucking company should have known there were problems with a particular driver.
Woman wins $1.5 Million from Man Who Gave Her HPV.
An Iowa jury recently awarded a woman $1.5 Million Dollars in a lawsuit she filed against the man who infected her with HPV, a sexually transmitted disease that causes genital warts. Karly Rossiter filed suit against Alan Evans claiming he told her he was free of sexually transmitted diseases in order to coerce her into having unprotected sex with him, when in fact he was carrying the human papilloma virus which causes genital warts.
Continue Reading ›
Tractor Trailer Plunges of Bay Bridge
The driver of a tractor trailer was tragically killed on Sunday morning when his 18-wheeler plunged into the Chesapeake Bay. According to an article in the Baltimore Sun, the accident occurred on the east bridge when a Camaro and the truck collided. The tractor trailer spun out of control, hit the jersey wall and plunged into the Chesapeake Bay. The driver of the tractor trailer was killed and two passengers in the Camaro were flown to University of Maryland, Shock Trauma.
Major Injury, but Minor Property Damage in Automobile Collision?
It’s a familiar, but fallacious argument. A favorite of defense counsel and insurance companies in automobile accident cases: “There was a minor impact, therefore there can only be minor injury, if any injury at all.” Defense lawyers often try to introduce into evidence distorted, grainy or out of focus photographs of minimal property damage without providing any expert testimony about the causal relationship between the amount of property damage and the victim’s injuries. The purpose of this tactic is to disprove by false implication what has been proven by medical evidence; to rebut the testimony of a licensed physician that has reached an opinion to a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the victim’s injuries were caused by the accident in question. There is no mention of the sudden and very high energy forces that are transmitted through the vehicle in the milliseconds after the impact. No mention of the fact that most modern cars are built to withstand a 10-15 mile per hour rear impact without suffering significant property damage, particularly if you’re dealing with an SUV or truck.
Expanding Potential Personal Injury Recoveries in Maryland With Negligent Entrustment Theory
Under Maryland law, an individual or company that entrusts a motor vehicle to another person with knowledge that such person has a propensity for negligent or reckless driving may be held liable for injuries subsequently caused by that person in a motor vehicle collision. For example, a parent that has given a vehicle to a child as a birthday gift (or even if the parent has simply permitted the use of a family vehicle) with knowledge that the child has reckless driving habits may be held liable for personal injuries caused by the child in a motor vehicle collision. The child’s youth, maturity and inexperience behind the wheel may be relevant factors to consider in the appropriate case. Typically, in order to recover under a theory of negligent entrustment it must be shown that the supplier of the vehicle knew or should have known that the driver would operate the vehicle in a manner that posed an unreasonable risk of harm to others.