Can you get a ticket for keeping on the tail lights Pontiac puts on in the factory? According to this blogger, a Maryland judge says yes.
The story sounds incredibly bizarre, including a report that the judge suggested the car be sold because this Pontiac does not comply with Maryland law.
There is no way to verify these types of Internet stories. Maybe it is more fun that way.
There are so many perils in dealing with claims against local governments. The law is against you from the start by cutting the statute of limitations and in the end by often limiting the amount of your recovery. Then there is the pain that comes from dealing with claims adjusters for the state who often seem to have no interest in what the trial value of a case may be.
This case highlights a final concern: getting approval from the local municipality, or whoever else, for settlement authority. It is like dealing with an insurance company times 1,000. Here, everyone agrees the case should settle... except the municipality.
The Baltimore Sun is covering personal injury wrongful death accident trials. Super. Here is how the article begins: "A $100 million civil trial opened Thursday with attorneys contending that Baltimore police officers purposely drove erratically while transporting a suspect, leading to the man's death."
The writer is telling the readers $100 million for a reason. It lets us know...absolutely nothing. It is beyond impossible for the plaintiff to actually receive this amount of money, given the cap we have in Maryland which may limit the verdict to less than 1% of the recovery (depending on the amount of economic damages and whether there was pain and suffering before death). Even with the best possible "the tragic victim's family and next door neighbors all sat on the jury" outcome.
Using $100 million just serves to confuse readers who think there really is the potential for jackpot justice of this magnitude in every case.
I'm going to post today the type of blog post I hate most: "There was an accident today on...." But this one is different because of the scope of the tragedy. CNN reports that ten people were killed in a single truck accident in Kentucky.
The truck apparently went across the median on Interstate 65 in Hart County and hit an 18 passenger van, reportedly a family of Menonites traveling to a wedding in Iowa.
Just an unbelievable tragedy that underscores in a meaningful way the risks we take when we get on the road with these big rig trucks. This case is a single tragedy but, statistically speaking, more than 11 people will die in other truck accidents today.
As a society, we have implicitly decided to allow these deaths by letting these big rig trucks operate on the road much the same way we do. Every other country in the world has also agreed to this tradeoff and, maybe, in the big economic picture, ease of delivery of goods actually saves lives. Who knows? But I do know that we should be tirelessly looking at ways to make our roads safer and to limit the number of truck accident deaths we have each year in this country. Because 5,300 people is just too many.
California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner released regulations permitting mileage verification for pay-as-you-drive - car insurance by the mile. Apparently, the goal of paying as you go would be to get people thinking about how many miles they are putting on their cars which will lead them to drive less.
I'm not sure who is writing these policies. Spokesmen for State Farm, Allstate and Progressive said they are considering, but have not decided, the issue of whether to offer this type of insurance coverage in California.
As an auto accident lawyer, I'm a little concerned about the coverage issues that would ensue. For example, in Texas, you can buy insurance in bundles of miles driven. In other words, your policy says, "You are covered for 3,000 miles of driving."
But this requires drivers to keep score. People keep score poorly. Then, their insurance lapses. The result is a lot of uninsured motorist on the road.
We already have to many uninsured drivers in Maryland. So unless there is a plan to make sure coverage is maintained, this well intentioned plan could cause more harm than good.
Accident lawyers are coming up with new and creative schemes. Unfortunately, sometimes this schemes involve ambulance chasing.
Maryland accident lawyers do not complain much about not having punitive damages for accident lawsuits in Maryland. Why? I think it is just because we are so used to it, no one really imagines a punitive damages world. Yesterday, the Maryland Malpractice Lawyer Blog underscored the power of punitive damages in reporting on a South Carolina medical malpractice claim.
Today, LawyersUSA reports on a drowning accident verdict in Montgomery, Alabama. The jury found $766,000 in compensatory damages for the drowning death of a 19-year-old football player against an Alabama hotel. But the jury also awarded $3 million in punitive damages. The jury clearly wanted to send the hotel a message for what it obviously considered extreme negligence. It is unfortunate that Maryland juries are not afforded the same opportunity to send a message in accident cases in Maryland.
I really find this interesting:
Progressive Insurance announced the availability of insurance protection for pets in automobiles. The announcement was colored as a promotional move to entice new customers. I just about busted a gut when I heard about it. The fact of the matter is that insurance actuary tables reveal that by percentage, autos with pets riding in them have fewer and less destructive collisions than automobiles without pets in them. George Soros doesn't give a rat's patootie about your pet. It's all about his own bottom line. In fact, if those same actuary tables showed beyond a doubt that natural blondes had fewer auto collisions than the rest of us, hair color would be a determining factor in calculating your insurance premium and natural blonds would get preferred rates. It's that simple.
What a cynical view of the insurance industry! Yet, so accurate.
You really have to wonder why there would be a correlation between driving with a pet and safety. What is the correlation between driving with children and driver safety and how does it compare to driving with pets? I would be really curious.
The Maryland Court of Appeals decided Lanay v. Daniel Realty, another lead paint case. I just summarized a lead paint CSA case yesterday, so you are not going to get a full summary of this case, at least not today. But the basic issue in the case is when can you read in the deposition or discovery answers of a party who is no longer a party? The short, take-home message for Maryland accident lawyers is don’t assume you can read in the discovery answers of a party in a multiple party case if you think there is any chance that one of the defendants might have settle out or be dismissed from the case.
Interestingly, this appeal was marred by the fact that there was a technical malfunction with the audio recording device during the trial in Baltimore City, which made the record sketchy.
You can find the case here.
The New York Times has an article how the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration chose not to make public hundreds of pages of research and warnings about the relationship between cell phones and car accidents. Why? Higher-ups at the NHTSA claim that the motivating force was concerns about angering Congress. I'm sure this may be what the NHTSA officials were told, but the reason for the information being withheld is that the agency was sticking to its mission of gathering safety data, not lobbying states. Doesn’t this sound more like the Bush administration to you than it does Congress?
Apparently, the data showed that hands-free headsets did not eliminate car accidents, because cell phone conversation was what causes the distraction, not just the holding of the cell phone. To date, no state has banned entirely the use of cell phones while driving.
I’ve never seen data estimating how many Maryland car accidents are caused by cell phone usage. But I think the Maryland legislature should take a look at this study and consider what our law should be in Maryland on cell phone usage while driving a car. Cell phone use is still on the rise and Maryland accident lawyers already have enough business.
Maryland needs to decide if we are playing Russian Roulette every time we drive down a two lane highway at 50 miles an hour, either talking on a cell phone, or with someone coming at us from the opposite direction talking on a cell phone.
The Washington Metro subway system is gearing up for a spade of lawsuits following an accident last month that killed nine and injured 80, the Washington Post reports. Potential liability for the crash remains unclear but experts estimate that damages could reach into the hundreds of millions. Federal investigators are still trying to determine the exact cause of the Metro accident.
WBAL has a very informational yet unintentionally funny piece on its website about the relationship between car insurance rates and your credit history.
BALTIMORE -- The WBAL TV 11 News I-Team has discovered that your credit can play a huge role in what you pay for auto insurance and there's little you can do about it.It's been long known that where you live, your marital status and age can impact what you pay for auto insurance, I-Team reporter Deborah Weiner said. But an insurance agent from a well-known company who asked to remain anonymous risked her job to share her outrage with 11 News about credit scores impacting insurance rates.
The agent said she wants consumers to know that even during the recession, most automobile insurers use credit information to rate driver policies, meaning personal problems such as bankruptcies and late payments may result in higher premiums for drivers.
"If you follow the rules and you're a safe driver and you don't have any accidents, there should be no reason -- any other reason -- that your premium should be higher," the agent said.
The full article is available here. It is a well-written and informative article. It is amazing how very people in Maryland understand that their credit score can matter as much as the all important "points on your license" in determining auto insurance rates. The reason: people who are casual with their credit are like to take higher risks in their cars which makes them more likely to get into a car accident - and a more serious car accident - than those with good credit. This is not a theory. It is a statistical fact.
Continue reading "Credit Scores and Car Insurance in Maryland" »
Are you a local municipality looking to make a few extra bucks in this economy? Anne Arundel County has the answer: Starting next month, Anne Arundel County will reportedly start charging $500 for emergency ambulance rides. Anne Arundel County officials note that county residents will not be personally responsible for any of the fee. Instead, the county will try to get the injured or sick person's insurance to foot the bill. The county will not seek collection from uninsured people using these emergency services in Anne Arundel County.
Continue reading "Anne Arundel County Charging for Ambulance Rides If You Have Insurance" »
Overlawyered links to an interesting post on the Law and Magic Blog on a motion in limine to prevent the defense lawyer from attempting "to perform magic tricks and/or magic acts in the presentation of his clients' case to the jury." In response, the defendant's lawyer argues:
That the undersigned counsel opted to travel the globe to learn a special set of performance skills rather than wasting his brain cells drinking his summers away at the Jersey Shore should not be held against him," and "respondent counsel understands his role in the legal process, is respectful of same and would never dishonor the Court with cheap parlor tricks-(especially when Las Vegas quality illusions are so readily known and available to him.)
Attention all Plaintiffs' lawyers encountering this lawyer: who cares? Do you really think defense lawyer's ability to perform magic tricks is going to impact your verdict? I can think of a thousand easy mark responses to counter that the defendant's lawyer is using magic tricks. I'll go as far as to say I think plaintiffs' lawyers should want the defense lawyer to perform magic tricks.
This Maryland Daily Record last month reported on a twice tragic fatal Frederick, Maryland accident case. A woman was killed by a fire truck that was responding to an emergency.
Compounding the tragedy, a U.S. District Court judge ruled that the Plaintiff’s maximum recovery in the case is $20,000 because the Federal Tort Claims Act allows the Plaintiff to piggyback onto a Maryland law that gives fire departments and their agents immunity “from civil liability for any act or omission in the course of performing their duties” except to the extent provided by the maximum coverage limits in Maryland of $20,000.
No reasonable person can argue that judging the negligence of a fire department must be viewed though the obvious lens: they are rushing to put out a fire. But negligence is negligence. What if the jury believed that a woman was killed because the driver was doing something that no reasonable person would do, even in response to an emergency? What if he was looking away from the road because he was in an argument with his girlfriend on his cell phone? Shouldn’t that woman’s family be entitled to an award beyond $20,000 for her death? The law is too inflexible and it provides too little trust in juries.
The Maryland Gazette reports that given the lack of evidence of gross negligence – for which mere speeding does not meet - the State's Attorney for Prince George's County said he will not prosecute the Prince George's County police officer involved in a fatal car accident collision with a Bowie man in December 2007.
The victim’s family has a wrongful death lawsuit pending for this accident. Regardless of where you stand on the question of whether there should be criminal prosecution in these cases (you can read my thoughts on this here), any Maryland accident lawyer will tell you that this question is of little consequence to the family’s wrongful death lawsuit because there is little difference to the accident case whether the conviction is for vehicular manslaughter or for the ticket that this P.G. County police officer did receive in this case (assuming the ticket is involves something beyond speeding).
The Baltimore Examiner reports that Maryland Court of Appeals Chief Judge Robert M. Bell will suggest that judges give up five days of leave as a way of helping address Maryland's budget crisis. Bell has scheduled a hearing on tomorrow to propose taking away five of the 27 days of leave state judges will receive in 2009.
The full Maryland Court of Appeals is expected to vote on this issue. Judge Bell's flip flop on this issue - he originally opposed the plan - underscores the increasing apprecation for the severe budgetary constaints facing Governor Martin O’Malley.
Twenty-seven days is a stunning about of leave for those of us in the private sector. There are not too many Maryland accident lawyers taking more than 5 weeks of vacation. But you have to remember that judges are being paid a lot less than they would be in the private sector so allowing them perks like this is probably more than a fair trade off for Maryland taxpayers.
The New York Times reports on a new World Health Organization and UNICEF report that found that childhood accidents account for approximately 830,000 deaths annually around the world. Just an incredible statistic. Injury accidents are to blame for 40% of childhood deaths in developing countries. Car crashes were the leading cause of death for children under 5. A lens to how needless these deaths are: 5,000 children die from drinking the kerosene their parents use for cooking, a problem easily remedied with childproof caps.
Obviously, the United States is not immune, either. A CDC study released in conjunction with this report determined that accidents kill more than 12,000 children in the United States each year.
The problem internationally is obviously harder for us to solve. Domestically, the CDC suggests three things: (1) graduated driver’s license laws, forbidding teenagers to drive at night or with teenage passengers (which may be a bit of a mixed bag), (2) to enforce seat-belt laws on teenagers, and (3) laws requiring children younger than 8 years-old to ride in booster seats.
Sometimes, statistics are so overwhelming we chose to ignore them.
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.
A Washington County woman died at University of Maryland Shock Trauma Center in Baltimore from injuries in an accident on Friday she sustained in a two-vehicle accident in Cascade. Apparently, the woman left a bar in Cascade and drove off after a pickup truck driven by a man she had a argument with in the bar. I am assuming they were or had been in a relationship, I don't know.
Anger and cars do not mix and alcohol and cars also do not mix. When you throw them all in together, the likelihood of a tragic outcome rises exponentially.
You can read an article on this tragedy from a Hagerstown local newspaper here. Note I'm assuming there was alcohol involved to some degree because they were at a bar but that is an assumption.
