Maryland Accident Lawyer Blog

The Auto Negligence Section of the Maryland Assocation for Justice is putting on a seminar for Maryland accident lawyers on January 7, 2009. The speaker will be Miller & Zois' Rod Gaston on the topic of defense medical examinations.

The dinner meeting is at:

That’s Amore Restaurant
10400 Little Patuxent Pkwy.
Columbia, Maryland 21044

Rod has spend a ton of time dealing with the numerous issues concerning Defense Medical Examinations. He will discuss what to do when defense counsel proposes or unilaterally schedules an examination of your client or files a motion for a physical examination. You will receive sample correspondence and motions designed to address the terms and conditions of the physical examination. He will show you how to limit the scope of the medical examination, how to obtain discovery from the doctor including the doctor's financial records for impeachment purposes. Course attendees will receive an overview of Maryland Rule 2-423 and all relevant case law dealing with requests for physical examinations including the citations to the rules and list of cases. Sample correspondence, subpoenas, motions, responses to defense motions, other pleadings and court orders relating to these examinations along with selected financial records from defense "hired-guns" will be provided. Learn which judges in the various venues are our friends in this arena - and which are not. Also learn what to do when the defendant's "hired-gun" takes an immediate appeal from the order requiring disclosure of his/her financial records. This program will not be recorded nor videotaped and only those attending will receive the written hand-out materials.

Continue reading "Maryland Accident Lawyer Seminar" »

Posted by Laura G. Zois | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Maryland Accident Law

Bookmark:

A U.S. District Court in Akron, Ohio upheld the a traffic camera law in Cinncinnati, ruling that the law's ability to impose a $100 fine was a civil penalty permitted under the U.S. Constitution.
The Plaintiff, a lawyer and former city councilman, is not done. He intends to challenge the case in the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.

In Maryland, red light and radar cameras and growing Anne Arundel County, Baltimore County, Howard County, Baltimore City, Montgomery County, and Bel Air (Hartford County).

Personally, as a Maryland accident lawyer who has seen up close the harm that can come from speeding and running red lights, I hope the Plaintiff's appeal fails. I think red light cameras, unmanned radar and all of these other "Big Brother" devices save lives. Is there some privacy intrusion? Yes, I guess. But it is relatively insignificant and, to me at least, well worth it if it saves a single life.

For more on this story, click here.

Posted by Laura G. Zois | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Maryland Accident Law , News Stories

Bookmark:

Our Maryland accident lawyers have created a help center with sample lawsuits as a guide for Maryland accident attorneys and victims. You can find these sample lawsuits by clicking on the "sample lawsuits" link.

Posted by Laura G. Zois | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Maryland Accident Law

Bookmark:

I wrote a Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog post about property damage claims and a property damage dispute my Dad had a year or so ago. I received a comment explaining to me that the defendant's insurance company was asserting the last clear chance doctrine.

Thanks for the comment which comes with a "that's what I would expect from a PI lawyer" smear. And it sounds, right. Last clear chance sounds like something you would expect to come out of the mouth of an insurance company accident lawyer, right?

But no. In Maryland, the "last clear chance" is not a defense asserted by
the defendant. Instead, it is asserted by Maryland accident lawyers on behalf of accident victims. It is asserted by plaintiffs. Las clear chance is a defense to a defendant's claim that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent. In Maryland, contributory negligence is generally a bar to recovery.

But the last clear chance doctrine allows a contributorily negligent accident victim to recover a financial award if: (i) the defendant is negligent; (ii) the plaintiff is contributorily negligent; and
(iii) the plaintiff makes a showing of something new or sequential, which affords the defendant a fresh opportunity (of which he fails to avail herself or himself) to avert the consequences of his own original negligence.

This doctrine of last clear chance has been the generally unchanged law in Maryland over the last 140 years.

Posted by Laura G. Zois | Permalink | Email This Post

Posted In: Maryland Accident Law

Bookmark: