Maryland Accident Lawyer Blog

The family of a promising young man, who was killed while riding his bike by an elderly driver, is opposing a bill that would allow drivers to hold a license for eight years, instead of the current five year renewal requirement.

Sad story here. The driver, an 83 year old woman, was attempting to make a right turn, and turned into the path of the bike rider. The mother of the deceased is lobbying to keep legislators from increasing the span that drivers can go before renewing their licenses, and has said that eight years is too long for people over 40 to hold a driver's license without some kind of regular testing. She has stated that the law is going in the wrong direction, and that it is not going to make our roads safer.

Eight years may be a bit excessive of a time frame when you are considering an 83 year old, but a 40 year old? Speaking for myself, and I'm over 40, I can't see that a decrease in the current five year requirement is the answer either.

Of note, the driver involved in this accident was able to keep her license, and kept driving for several months after the accident.

When you settle a large case with a minor in Maryland, the parties typically file what is called a "friendly suit" advising the court of the settlement - and asking the court to bless the agreement.

Maryland law does not require this. This does not, naturally, stop defense lawyers from demanding that you file a friendly suit. They do it this way because, arguably, the law required it before 2004 and because they think - probably incorrectly - that a judge's blessing gives them more protection in the event that the minor seeks to disavow the settlement.

To file a friendly suit, you file your lawsuit along with a joint motion for settlement and a draft order for the court to sign. You can see examples of these by clicking on the preceding links.

As I've written before, we spend a lot of energy trying to track down defendants. Not in most cases, but when we can't find someone with relative ease it can be a big hassle. In 2012, people are moving more quickly and leave fewer tracks when they move. One effective weapon we have used over the years is Accurint which provides access to over 34 billion current public records that you can utilize to find your man or woman.

Apparently, whoever started Accurint sold out to Lexis and this same person (obviously, I'm using hearsay here) has now started a new company. Some plaintiffs' lawyers are saying that it has just a ton of information (and, apparently, is free for law enforcement officers).

We have not tried it out yet because we are chickens that are set in our way. So, changing from a product that you trust is hard. But you can find TLO - which is what is called - here. If you are using it, leave a comment and tell me what you think.

The Louisiana Supreme Court this week overturned a jury's verdict in a sidewalk slip and fall case. The court found that, as a matter of law, the defect on the sidewalk did not present an unreasonable risk of harm.

For slip and fall cases, plaintiffs' lawyers want the story to begin in a good way. This one does: "Plaintiff was walking home from church when...." As she was walking, Plaintiff slipped and fell on a section of sidewalk and sustained a comminuted fracture of the radius of her right arm.

The sidewalk ran into a driveway. Two sections had become, or were installed, depressed in relation to the rest of the sidewalk . So they sat a few inches lower than the remaining sidewalk. The elevation change was approximately one-and-one-quarter to one-and-one-half inch in addition to the elevation change created by the depression.

In a bench trial, the municipality was found by the judge to be 100 percent at fault for the accident. Plaintiff was awarded $346,214.39 in damages: She had $56,616.17 in past and future medical expenses, and about $57,000 in past and future - mostly future - lost wages.

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals of Louisiana affirmed the portion of the trial court's ruling that provided that the elevated differential created an unreasonable risk of harm, but it amended the judgment to attribute 10 percent fault to plaintiff. I find this pretty bizarre. As the court points out, the allocation of fault is not an exact science but, instead, is the search for an acceptable range that a reasonable finder of fact could have found.

Continue reading "10% Contributory Negligence as a Matter of Law?" »

When it comes to bringing in revenue and making headlines, law firms do a hell of job. The biggest ones bring in millions, even billions of dollars. They argue before the Supreme Court. They help shape global economies.

When it comes to designing websites, though, these firms are clueless. These are the folks who often charge upwards of $1000 per hour for their services, and yet their websites look like the work of some cut-rate freelance designers.

Inc. is right. Law firm blogs have awful designs. Wait? What was that? Really? Oh, yes, our law firm's website also has an awful design. I would say it is a 1950's design if they were making websites in 1950. But I do think we provide as much real information to lawyers and injury victims as any website in Maryland or even in the country.

Accident lawyers can't help but to homogonize insurance companies. But the reality is that they are all very different with different models and agendas.

On our Maryland car accident claim overview on our website, we provide on the bottom right hand side a summary of our lawyers' thoughts on dealing with 18 - count them, 18! - insurance companies who handle claims in Maryland.

The Western District Missouri Court of Appeals last week affirmed a $ 950,000 jury verdict in a motorcycle accident case, concluding that the condition of the road during construction was the primary cause of the man's injuries.

The jury award surprises me. Plaintiff was driving his motorcycle through an "inactive" construction zone. While passing a truck at 70 miles per hour, he lost control of his motorcycle as the result of uneven payment, a nearly two inch difference in the grades. (Arguably that 70 mph did not help, either.)

Plaintiff's lawsuit alleged the motorcycle accident would not have occurred if there had been proper warning of the uneven surfaces. The jury largely agreed, finding the defendants 95% at fault for the accident and the motorcyclist only 5% at fault (which would lead to a defense verdict under Maryland law).

http://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=51217

Continue reading "Motorcycle Accident Verdict Affirmed" »

Tuesday, the National Transportation Safety Board called for a nationwide ban on the use of cell phones and text messaging devices while driving although the recommendation is not, as it probably should be, for hands-free phones (or passengers). Maryland already had passed a similar law.

This recommendation underscores that the federal government is growing increasingly concerned by statistics that show cell phones are killing people in massive numbers. What would have been more impressive is asking for a ban on cell phones for drivers. Period. But regardless of the death toll, that is not in the political cards, at least not now.

In Dunbar v. State Farm, a federal judge in Oklahoma granted summary judgment to State Farm in what was really a silly bad faith case.

This case involved a pedestrian accident where somebody backed out of their driveway and hit someone. USAA tendered, albeit slowly, its $100,000 limits for the at-fault driver. State Farm did what it does, it slowly increased the offers over time. But in this case, medical records were provided, for whatever reason, over time, making State Farm's increase in offers seem quite reasonable. Eventually, State Farm tended its entire policy of $200,000. Because it was an uninsured motorist case, that should have resolved the claim. But Plaintiff's accident lawyer proceeded with the claim under the theory that State Farm should have made the offer sooner, but was dragging their feet.

I don't get it. Neither did the appellate court.

The opinion also underscores Oklahoma law (and Maryland law) that regardless of the severity of injury, an underinsured claim does not kick in until the underlying policy tenders its limits. So if you have a death case and the at fault driver has a $30,000 policy, the underinsured motorist coverage obligations do not kick in until the underlying policy has been offered.

David Stratton, a defense lawyer with Jordan Coyne & Savits, provides a link on his blog to an interactive map that shows the location of road accident fatalities between 2001 and 2009. If you allow yourself to move past the dry statistics and really think about what you are seeing - even for an instant - it is terribly depressing. It makes me wonder: exactly how much would it cost - in time and money - to cut this figure in half? Lower the speed limits? Require car makers to build safer cars? More restrictions on truck drivers? I'm not saying we should do this. But I sure would like someone to do an estimate so we can figure out what the tab would be.

In Carr v. Cinnamon, a California appellate court applied the same rule we have here in Maryland: the finder of fact can award whatever they want for noneconomic damages, including zero even when it seems preposterous that a person could suffer medical bills and have no pain and suffering.

Plaintiff's premises liability lawsuit alleged that her leg fell through the floor of a patio on defendant's property. The jury found the defendant partially responsible and awarded a whopping $6,207.08 with no damages for pain and suffering. Improbably, Plaintiff's attorney appealed, arguing that the damages award was inadequate as a matter of law and the trial court should have awarded damages (additur) or awarded a new trial.

The appellate court disagreed, finding juries can essentially do whatever they want. One thing is for sure: this jury was not a big fan of this plaintiff.

You can find the opinion here.

We've all been through it before...trying to locate either the defendant or the "friend of a friend" who was with our client at the time of the accident. When this person appears to be absolutely nowhere, it is worth checking out whether this defendant or witness is a guest of the state of Maryland.

Thankfully, people in jail are relatively easy to find. All but 8 state departments of corrections - including Maryland - makes available to the general public, information and photographs of inmates who are incarcerated. While originally created in the interest of public safety, it has become a tool in which witnesses have been located. There is no charge for these inmate locators, and new states are being added as they become available. You can chose the state you want to search and it will take you directly to their inmate locator. Some states will show pictures, release date, crimes, etc. while others will only list their age with no photo.

You have located your incarcerated witness, now what? If your defendant is in jail, you have an easy means of obtaining service of your Complaint. If you are trying to find a witness to the accident you can arrange a meeting and can videotape the inmate's trial testimony by videotape. This can usually be set up by contacting their caseworker, though every detention center is different. In most cases, you will need the warden's permission, as this process will bring in a lot of outsiders (all counsel, court reporter, videographer, etc.).

Clearly, there are some hoops to jump through to dealing with a defendant or witness that is jail in Maryland. While it may cause an accident lawyer a few headaches, finding and gathering testimony from inmates has and can be done.