Articles Posted in Maryland Accident Law

Maryland law requires drivers to maintain a safe distance when overtaking or passing a cyclist. The specific distance is not explicitly defined in Maryland’s traffic laws, but it generally states that a motor vehicle should leave a “safe and reasonable distance” when passing a cyclist.

Safe and Reasonable Distance

The concept of a “safe and reasonable distance” in traffic laws, such as Maryland’s requirement for passing cyclists, is intentionally somewhat flexible to accommodate a variety of real-world situations. What constitutes a “safe and reasonable distance” can depend on several factors:

Many people researching information on their accident claims in Maryland ask what COMAR is. COMAR is the Code of Maryland Regulations. COMAR regulations are Maryland state agency regulations. You can find all the COMAR regulations here.

What is COMAR?

What is COMAR and who writes these crazy regulations?   COMAR stands for Code of Maryland Regulations.  These regulations come from the executive branch of the Maryland government.  So they are the governor’s regulations as promulgated by administrative agencies.  How do they get the power to make what is essentially state law?  Like Congress, the Maryland Legislature delegates some rule-making authority to the executive branch (the governor).

How much can a tow truck driver charge? If there is no agreement on fee, the tow truck driver/company cannot charge beyond what is fair, reasonable, and customary in the tow truck industry. How much that is will vary upon the jurisdiction, distance, the difficulty of the tow, and a lot of other factors. But, certainly, tow truck companies cannot set any price they like, and lawfully require payment.

Tow Truck Fees After a Car Accident

Tow truck fees after a car accident can vary depending on several factors, including location, the tow company’s policies, the distance the vehicle needs to be towed, and the type of services required. Here are some key points to understand about tow truck fees after an accident:

Left-hand turn accidents can make for difficult and complicated auto accident lawsuits. An accident involving a left-turn can cause devastating injuries and determining fault is not always as easy as it might seem.

At first glance, determining fault in left-turn accidents may seem simple because the driver making the left turn has an obligation to yield to oncoming traffic.  That simple assumption is correct in the lion’s share of cases.  When you call our law firm and telling us another driver to a left turn in front of you, our lawyers are pretty confident, without hearing anything else, that you have a case.  Similarly, if you are the driver who took a left turn, it might be pretty hard to argue you are not at fault.

But… you have to hear the entire story.  Because the assumption that the driver who made the left turn is at-fault sometimes fails.  This is particularly true, as I explain below, in Maryland and Washington, D.C.

Maryland accident lawyers complain very little about not having punitive damages for accident lawsuits in Maryland. Why? I think it is just because we are so used to it in 2020, no one really imagines a punitive damages world for car crash cases.

While all roads lead to Rome, let’s talk about punitive damages generally and Maryland car accident cases and employment law cases.

Car collisions can be terrifying, stressful events and cause both personal injury and property damage.  There are 16,000,000 car accidents (no typo there) a year in this country.  There are more than 4.5 million automobile accidents that resulted in property damage and 1.7 million crashes that resulted in personal injuries.

It is amazing how much we are doing to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and yet we don’t take the simplest steps to we could to prevent car accident deaths (although that may be an unfair comparison).

The sheer number of collisions, the varying results, and complex outcomes all contribute to many misconceptions about car accidents. What’s important to remember is that if you suffered an injury as the result of a car collision, you should contact a personal injury attorney.  It can be us at Miller & Zois or another attorney.  But if you have been hurt, you should be talking to someone to make sure you understand your rights and options. (You know, we will make this the last misconception.)

The last clear chance doctrine is a frequently litigated and extremely confusing exception to Maryland’s contributory negligence law.  Even the names are confusing.  The doctrine has also been called the doctrine of discovered peril,  supervening negligence, subsequent negligence, and the aptly named humanitarian doctrine.  The most common incorrect assumption is that it is a defense to the case. In fact, the opposite is true.

So the way this works, at least in Maryland, is that the jury can find contributory negligence but still award damages if it found that the defendant blew a last clear chance to avoid the accident.

Continue reading

In Gables Construction, Inc. v. Red Coats, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals earlier this month addressed the issue of whether a party can be liable for contribution as a joint tortfeasor even if that party was able to avoid direct liability because of it passed along its responsibility in a contractual waiver of subrogation.

In other words, can you sneak out of responsibility as a joint tortfeasor if someone else has accepted your responsibility for the loss?   This is the first time a Maryland court has ever addressed this issue.

Facts of Gable Construction

All litigation attorneys in Maryland are probably very familiar with the Maryland Pattern Jury Instructions (“MPJI”). The MPJI published by the Maryland State Bar Association through the efforts of a special MSBA committee comprised of practitioners.

Both the Criminal and Civil MPJI are widely used by judges across the state to give written instructions to juries. The Court of Appeals has repeatedly clarified that the Pattern Jury Instructions have “no official status” and trial courts are not obligated to use or adopted them. Armacost v. Davis (Md.2019) However, the reality is that the MPJI are universally relied on by judges and attorneys alike when instructing juries.

The Maryland Pattern Jury Instructions are intended to provide short, understandable, and accurate statements of certain points of law in Maryland. The original version of the Pattern Jury Instructions was first published back in the 1980s. Since then the MPJI has been periodically revised and republished to reflect significant changes and developments in Maryland law. The most recent revision of the MPJI is the 5^th Edition which the MSBA published in the fall of 2017. Among the many changes and revisions in the 5^th Edition of the MPJI is a new definition of proximate causation at § 19:10.

It is not explicitly illegal, but it is recommended by all jurisdictions that you should clear snow off your car. The driver’s manuals in Maryland and Virginia both include snow removal.

Is there a Maryland law that says that you should not be able to have snow on your car so it does not come flying off and blind me?   Sort of.  Transportation Code §21-1104 states that a person may not drive a vehicle if obstructs the driver’s view of the front or sides of the vehicle. They may not drive a vehicle if it interferes with the control of the driver’s. However, the law would likely have a broad application in cases involving snow on top of cars. But no one will pull you over for having too much snow on your case.

About a decade ago, the D.C. city council approved legislation that required drivers to remove snow and ice from their vehicles. However, the law never became permanent.