<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Maryland Accident Attorney Blog</title>
      <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/</link>
      <description>Published by Silverman|Thompson|Slutkin|White</description>
      <language>en</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2008</copyright>
      <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:57:09 -0500</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/?v=3.33</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs> 

            <item>
         <title>Valuing Personal Injury Cases in Maryland</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Experienced personal injury attorneys know there is no question asked more often and as difficult to answer than; What is my case worth? The answer to this question is based upon many factors which an experienced personal injury lawyer can best answer. </p>

<p>Our system of civil justice is terrible at valuing the loss, but rather consistently values the lawsuit. For instance, there are many cases involving horrific tragedies such as the death of a child, the loss of which can never be compensated for. Nonetheless, our judicial system attempts to assign a value to such an incomprehensible losses. Hence, the value of most lawsuits never truly compensate for the irreplaceable loss of life or limb. So how do we lawyers come up with a value for injury cases? Understanding this is an imperfect science, lets get cracking. </p>

<p>Most experienced personal injury lawyers will consider the below factors, as well as personal experience, to provide clients with a range of what a case may be worth. The factors that determine value of a personal injury case include:</p>

<p>1)	<strong>Strength of liability </strong><br />
2)	<strong>Venue</strong><br />
3)	<strong>Severity of Injury</strong><br />
4)	<strong>Medical Bills: past and future</strong><br />
5)	<strong>Economic Loss: Wages and Loss of services</strong><br />
6)	<strong>Aggravating Factors</strong><br />
7)	<strong>Skill of Attorneys</strong></p>

<p><strong>Strength of liability:</strong> The settlement value of a case will often be greatly affected by the strength of the liability. For instance, if two auto accident plaintiffs have the same injury (broken back) the pretrial settlement offers may vary greatly based upon the strength of the liability argument. </p>

<p>If liability is clear (rear end collision), than the pretrial offer will be higher to take into account that there will be a verdict, and it is just a question of how much. On the other hand, if liability is disputed and the defendant has a chance of winning on liability, the pretrial settlement offer will be considerably less to reflect the real possibility that the defendant may walk away paying nothing.<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/11/valuing_personal_injury_cases.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/11/valuing_personal_injury_cases.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 14:57:09 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Standard Maryland Jury Instructions for Injured Pedestrian</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>LIST OF INSTRUCTIONS<br />
		(Maryland Civil Pattern Jury Instructions-Unless Otherwise Indicated)</p>

<p>1.	Introduction 1:1<br />
2.	Questions of Law During Trial 1:2<br />
3.	Witness Testimony Consideration 1:3<br />
4.	Expert Opinion Testimony 1:4 <br />
5.	Impartiality in Consideration 1:5<br />
6.	Inferences from Statements of Court 1:6<br />
7.	Burden of Proof-Preponderance of Evidence Standard 1:7<br />
8.	Case Submission on Issues 1:12<br />
9.	Conclusion-Unanimous Verdict 1:13<br />
10.	Introductory Statement on Damages 10:1<br />
11.	Compensatory Damages for Bodily Injury 10:2<br />
12.	Susceptibility to Injury 10:3<br />
13.	Damages – Collateral Source Rule 10:8<br />
14.	Mortality Table – Life Expectancy of Laura Moore 10:26<br />
15.	Standard of Care 18:1<br />
16.	Definition – Negligence 19:1<br />
17.	Definition – Causation 19:10<br />
18.	Contributory Negligence – Generally 19:11<br />
19.	Last Clear Chance 19:14<br />
20.	Definition of Pedestrian 23:1<br />
21.	Duty to Pedestrians – Generally 23:2</p>

<p> <br />
MPJI-Cv 1:1 INTRODUCTION</p>

<p>a.	Instructions at Beginning of Trial</p>

<p>(i) Explanation of Trial Procedure</p>

<p>Members of the jury, in this case the plaintiff, (name), has sued the defendant, (name), claiming damages for (brief description of claim).<br />
The trial will proceed in the following way. You will first hear opening statements by the lawyers. Each party has the right to make an opening statement for the purpose of outlining for you what the party expects to prove. The plaintiff's lawyer will make the first opening statement and then the defendant's lawyer may choose whether to make an opening statement.<br />
The plaintiff will then present evidence. After the plaintiff's case has been presented through witnesses and exhibits, the defendant will then have an opportunity to present evidence. Each witness is first examined by the party who calls the witness to testify and then the opposing party is permitted to cross-examine the witness.<br />
During the trial the lawyers may make objections to the introduction of evidence, or make motions concerning the law. Arguments in connection with objections or motions are usually made out of the hearing of the jury, either here at the bench or after the jury has been excused from the courtroom. This is because questions of law and admissibility of evidence do not involve the jury; they are decided by the judge. It is the duty of a lawyer to make objections and motions which the lawyer believes are proper. You should not be influenced by the fact that a lawyer has made objections or by the number of objections which have been made. You should draw no conclusions from my rulings, either as to the merits of the case or as to my views regarding any witness or the case itself.<br />
After the conclusion of all of the evidence, I will instruct you as to the law which is applicable to this case. You must follow and apply the law as I will explain it to you. After these instructions, the lawyers will make their closing arguments. In their arguments, the lawyers will point out to you what they contend the evidence has shown and the conclusions they would like you to draw from the evidence. The plaintiff's lawyer will make the first closing argument, then the defendant's lawyer will make a closing argument. After the defendant's argument, the plaintiff will have an opportunity to make an argument in rebuttal to the defendant's argument. What the lawyers say in their opening statements, in their closing arguments, and in making objections or motions during the trial, is not evidence. The reason the plaintiff goes first in each instance is because the plaintiff has the burden of proof.<br />
After closing arguments, you will retire to the jury room and begin your deliberations. It will then be your function and responsibility to decide the facts. You must base your findings only upon the testimony, the exhibits received and the stipulation(s) of the parties and any conclusions which may fairly be drawn from that evidence.</p>

<p>(ii) General Principles</p>

<p>The following general principles are intended to assist you in judging the evidence and to guide you in the performance of your duties as jurors during the course of the trial: [MPJI-Cv 1:3, 1:4, 1:5, 1:6, 1:7 and 1:8, to the extent they are applicable, are to be used here.]</p>

<p>(iii) Admonitions as to Juror Conduct</p>

<p>This case will probably take (insert number) days to conclude. During that period, there will be recesses and adjournments of court when you will be excused. From this point forward, until the case is over and you have rendered your verdict, you may not discuss the case with anyone who is not on the jury. You may not discuss the case even with each other during the trial. You must wait until after you have heard (1) all of the evidence, (2) my instructions as to the law, and (3) closing arguments. In fairness to all the parties to this case, you should keep an open mind throughout the trial. You should reach your final conclusions only during your deliberations after having heard all of the evidence, my instructions as to the law and the lawyers' closing arguments. Until the trial is over, you must avoid all contact of any kind with any of the participants in the trial, except for common courtesy such as the exchange of greetings. That includes the parties, the lawyers, the witnesses and any persons whom you see in close contact with these individuals. Do not visit the scene of any incident mentioned in the testimony or seek advice from friends or acquaintances as to any issues in this case or otherwise conduct investigation outside the courtroom. The reason for this is that you must decide the case only on the evidence which you have heard and seen in the courtroom and on nothing else.</p>

<p>b. Instructions at End of Trial</p>

<p>Members of the jury, the time has come for the Court to give you its instructions with respect to the law which is applicable in this case. You must apply the law as I explain it to you. Any comments I may make about the facts are only to help you and you are not required to agree with them. It is your function and responsibility to decide the facts. You must base your findings only upon the testimony, the exhibits received and the stipulation[s] of the parties, including any conclusions which may be fairly drawn from that evidence. Opening statements and arguments of the lawyers are not evidence in this case. If your memory of any of the testimony is different from any statement that I might make during the course of these instructions or that counsel might make in argument, you must rely on your own memory.</p>

<p>c. Witness and Party</p>

<p>Any person who testifies, including a party, is a witness.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/11/standard_maryland_jury_instruc.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/11/standard_maryland_jury_instruc.html</guid>
         <category>Automobile Accident</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:46:15 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Pursuing an Airbag Case</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Our firm has recently had considerable success against automobile manufacturers for defective airbags. We are familiar with the technical issues involving airbags that deploy with excessive force, untimely deployment, and airbags that do not deploy at all.</p>

<p>We represent client's with airbag cases throughout the United States. Our expert network is highly skilled and effective. We offer free consultations and ask that you at least obtain a police report and vehicle photographs as soon as possible. In addition, we are interested in knowing:</p>

<p>1.  Year, make and model of the vehicle<br />
2.  Whether any air bags deployed (driver, passenger, rollover air bags, side air bags, etc.)? <br />
3.  What were the injuries?<br />
4.  Date and description of accident, including what part of the vehicle was involved (front, side, rear) and what was hit (another car, pole, tree, etc.)<br />
5.  Do they have photographs of the vehicle damage?<br />
6.  Is the vehicle available?  Where is it stored?<br />
7.  Description of any prior accidents with that vehicle<br />
8.  Was the person wearing their seat belt?<br />
9.  Were alcohol or drugs involved?</p>

<p>It is critical that you do not sell the car or allow the insurance company to salvage the vehicle. The vehicle will need to be preserved for inspection. For more information, please <a href="http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1289801.html">contact our team of lawyer </a>to discuss.<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/pursuing_an_airbag_case.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/pursuing_an_airbag_case.html</guid>
         <category>Products Liability</category>
         <pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:33:47 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Nissan Issues Massive Recall Over Airbag Problems</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Nissan recently decided to recall 204,361 vehicles from its 2007 and 2008 model years in the United States due to the possibility that a passenger side airbag could fail to deploy properly in an accident.  The recall covers 2007 and 2008 Nissan Altima, Altima Coupe, 350Z, Murano and Rogue; and Infiniti G35 Sedan, G37 Coupe and EX35 built from March 12, 2007 to May 27, 2008.  Please <a href=" http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE49E7P820081015">click here</a> for the full article.</p>

<p>The defect was in the passenger side "Occupant Classification System," which figures out whether the front passenger is present, and if so, whether it's a child or small adult.  Apparently, the problem is with Nissan’s “Occupant Classification System,” which didn’t work properly since it was out of spec.  As a consequence, the passenger airbag may not deploy in a serious crash. </p>

<p>For more information regarding Nissan’s recall, or to speak with a trial attorney with experience litigating similar product liability claims against automobile manufacturers, please <a href="http://www.mdattorney.com">contact us</a> for a free consultation.<br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/nissan_issues_massive_recall_over_airbag_problems.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/nissan_issues_massive_recall_over_airbag_problems.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:21:44 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Does Maryland Homeowners Insurance Cover Willful or Wanton Acts?</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>Homeowners 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. <br />
	 <br />
A federal case, using Maryland law, discussed a policy excluding coverage for acts by the insured that “reasonably expected or intended to cause a loss.” The court stated the exclusion language applied to insured’s conduct of kicking in bathroom stall door that resulted in the door hitting the plaintiff and causing injuries. Blue Ridge Ins. Co. v. Puig, 64 F. Supp.2d 514 (1999). The court in Blue Ridge Ins. Co., distinguished the case with Allstate Ins. Co., on the fact that the insurance policy in Blue Ridge Ins. Co., excluded acts “reasonably expected…to cause a loss” as opposed to the language contained in the policy in Allstate Ins. Co. (excluding coverage for damage which is either expected or intended from the standpoint of the insured.)</p>

<p>Often times, their is a fine line between negligence and perceived intentional acts. This can mean the difference between insurance coverage of no insurance coverage. At Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin and White, our experienced Maryland personal injury lawyers have successfully walked this fine line on many occasions. For further information, please <a href="http://www.mdattorney.com">contact us</a>. <br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/does_maryland_homeowners_insur.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/does_maryland_homeowners_insur.html</guid>
         <category>Premises Liability</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:18:40 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Overview of Maryland Wrongful Death Law</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>As leading Maryland personal injury lawyers, we are often asked to explain Maryland law regarding wrongful death lawsuits.</p>

<p>Generally, a wrongful death claim is brought by a surviving spouse, child or parent. A Survival claim is brought by the personal representative of an estate.</p>

<p><br />
 To recover for a Wrongful Death cause of action, plaintiff must prove: 1) death; 2) negligence of the defendant; and 3) defendant’s negligence proximately caused death of decedent. Weimer v. Hetrick, 309 Md. 536, 547 (1987). In addition to the elements set out by case law, the Wrongful Death statute provides that the plaintiff must be within a category of defined beneficiaries under the statute and the claim must be brought within the applicable time period, 3 years after death of decedent. Md. Cts & Jud. Proc. Art. § 3-904. <br />
	<br />
To recover for a Survival cause of action, plaintiff must prove: 1) defendant’s negligence was direct and proximate cause of decedent’s injuries; 2) decedent lived after the injury; and 3) between time of injury and time of death, decedent experienced conscious pain. Tri-state Poultry Coop. v. Carey, 190 Md. 116, 125 (1948). </p>

<p>For further information, please contact the Maryland personal injury lawyers at <a href="http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1300844.html">Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin and White</a>. <br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/overview_of_maryland_wrongful.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/overview_of_maryland_wrongful.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:11:40 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>The Duty of a Landowner to a Trespasser in Maryland</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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. </p>

<p>Our firm recently represented the estate and parents of a minor who was shot and killed while trespassing onto the land of a police officer. Despite the difficult burdens placed upon the trespasser, we were able to prevail. Often, these types of cases will turn on disputed facts. Therefore, the attorney's investigation and preparation is critical to a successful verdict or settlement. </p>

<p>For further information, please contact the Maryland personal injury lawyers at <a href="http://www.mdattorney.com">Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White</a>.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/the_duty_of_a_landowner_to_a_trespasser_in_maryland.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/the_duty_of_a_landowner_to_a_trespasser_in_maryland.html</guid>
         <category>Premises Liability</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2008 14:00:28 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>$55.18 Million Verdict Against Federal Government in Automobile Accident Case</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>

<p>The toddler’s mother sued the federal government, which employed the negligent driver that caused the accident.  The mother claimed that the federal government was vicariously liable because the negligent driver was acting within the course and scope of his employment at the time of the accident and had failed to stop for a red light.  The government ultimately conceded that it was liable, but argued that the damages were significantly less than claimed.  A California court disagreed.  After a bench trial, the court entered judgment in favor of the toddler and her mother for $55.18 million.</p>

<p>If you or a loved one have been injured as a result of the negligence of another driver, contact an <a href=" http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1301050.html">experienced Maryland plaintiff's personal injury lawyer </a> for a free consultation about how best to pursue your claim.      <br />
</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/5518_million_verdict_against_f.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/10/5518_million_verdict_against_f.html</guid>
         <category>Automobile Accident</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 21:48:11 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Medevac Helicopter Crash a Horrific Tragedy</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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. <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/bal-te.medevac29sep29,0,677275.story">The Baltimore Sun reports</a> the victims included the aircraft's pilot, a crew member, a civilian medic and a patient.  </p>

<p>The men and women who heroically serve on Maryland's medevac teams are instrumental in saving thousands of Marylanders each year by responding swiftly and professionally to accident and vehicle crash sites. The cause of this accident remains unknown and is still under investigation. All 11 remaining Maryland medical evacuation helicopters will remain grounded until the cause of the crash is determined.  These medevac helicopters are similar in make and model to the one that crashed over the weekend. </p>

<p>Five people survived this crash and were taken to Maryland Shock Trauma Center in Baltimore. Maryland medevac helicopters fly around 5,000 missions each year. There has not been a major accident or fatality in the past two decades. All Marylanders respect and appreciate the selfless work of the brave men and women of the Maryland medevac team and grieve with them and the families of those who lost their lives. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/medevac_helicopter_crash_a_horrific_tragedy.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/medevac_helicopter_crash_a_horrific_tragedy.html</guid>
         <category>Personal Injury</category>
         <pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 10:53:39 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Interpleader Actions in Maryland Personal Injury Claims</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>

<p>Generally, An action for interpleader may be brought against two are more adverse claimants, when those claimants claim to be entitled to certain property, said property is within the possession of the Plaintiff, and the claims are such that the Plaintiff may be exposed to double or multiple liability, meaning that the Plaintiff could be subject to pay out more money then is actually in their possession. </p>

<p>An Interpleader Action in Maryland can be filed in state of federal court.</p>

<p>There are two different ways to file an Interpleader Action in Federal Court. The first is using Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the second is using §1335 of the USCS. For our purposes, we should use §1335 to file a Federal Interpleader Action. The reason for this is because Rule 22 requires complete diversity between the Stake-Holder (our firm) and the Claimants (all of the investors). Because the majority of the investors are from Maryland, we would not have complete diversity between Stake-holder and Investors, therefore, making it difficult to interplead under Rule 22. Section 1335, however, only requires that there be diversity between two or more adverse claimants. In this case, because at least one of the claimants is from Alabama, we satisfy the diversity requirement under §1335, therefore permitting the action to be filed in Federal Court.  </p>

<p>Interpleader actions in Maryland State court are governed by Md. Rule 2-221. This rule states that after Defendants have had the opportunity to answer the complaint, there are seven possible orders that may be entered.</p>

<p>The only apparent difference between filing the action in State court and filing in Federal Court is that the State Rule specifically lays out in detail the possible prayers for relief, the seven aforementioned orders, as compared to the Federal Rules which leaves this open to determination of the moving party. </p>

<p>For further information on this subject, please contact <a href="http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1300900.html">Steve Silverman</a> for a complimentary consultation. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/interpleader_actions_in_maryla_1.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/interpleader_actions_in_maryla_1.html</guid>
         <category>Insurance Carriers</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:28:40 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Assumption of Risk Defense in Maryland Discussed</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>

<p>In order for a plaintiff to have voluntarily exposed himself to the risk of a known danger, “there must be some manifestation of consent to relieve the defendant of the obligation of reasonable conduct.”  ADM Partnership v. Martin, 348 Md. 84, 92, 702 A.2d 730, 734 (1997).</p>

<p>As the Maryland Court of Appeals has explained:<br />
[I]n order for a plaintiff to assume voluntarily a risk of danger, there must exist “the willingness of the plaintiff to take an informed chance,” . . . ; there can be no restriction on the plaintiff’s freedom of choice either by the existing circumstances or by coercion emanating from the defendant.  This is so because even where the plaintiff does not protest, the risk is not assumed where the conduct of the defendant has left him no reasonable alternative.  Where the defendant puts him to a choice of evils, there is a species of duress, which destroys the idea of freedom of election.  </p>

<p>the Restatement (Second) of Torts.  Section 496E of the Restatement provides:<br />
(1) A plaintiff does not assume a risk of harm unless he voluntarily accepts the risk.<br />
(2) The plaintiff’s acceptance of a risk is not voluntary if the defendant’s tortious conduct has left him no reasonable alternative course of conduct in order to<br />
(a)  avert harm to himself or herself, or <br />
(b) exercise or protect a right or privilege of which the defendant has no right to deprive him. </p>

<p>In Maryland, “if a person was compelled to act and had no freedom of choice regarding whether to act,” he will not be said to have acted voluntarily, as a matter of law.  See Crews v. Hollenbach, 358 Md. 627, 648, 751 A.2d 481 (2000).  </p>

<p>For further information on the assumption of risk defense in Maryland personal injury cases, please contact <a href="http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1300900.html">Steve Silverman</a> for a complimentary consultation. </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/assumption_of_risk_defense_in.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/assumption_of_risk_defense_in.html</guid>
         <category>Defenses</category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:55:24 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>City Agrees to Pay Thousands to Victims of Police Brutality</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>The Baltimore City Board of Estimates approved two settlements in two cases against City Police Officers stemming from police brutality.  <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_city/bal-md.ci.settlements19sep19,0,2770178.story">http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/baltimore_city/bal-md.ci.settlements19sep19,0,2770178.story</a>.  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.  </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/city_agrees_to_pay_thousands_t.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/city_agrees_to_pay_thousands_t.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 11:28:09 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Pursuing a Recovery for Personal Injuries Caused by a Drunk Driver</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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.  </p>

<p>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).</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/pursuing_a_recovery_for_person.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/pursuing_a_recovery_for_person.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2008 22:03:31 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Pursuing a Product Liability Theory in the Catastrophic Automobile Accident Case</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>

<p>In addition to a simple “negligence” theory, Maryland law recognizes the “crashworthiness doctrine” and doctrine of “strict liability.”  A claim may also be pursued under Maryland’s Consumer Protection Act in appropriate circumstances.  Pursuing such avenues may be the only way to obtain full compensation for the catastrophically injured client.  Therefore, at the beginning of a case, counsel should take affirmative steps to determine whether a product liability theory of recovery should be considered.  At a minimum, counsel should take steps to secure the vehicles involved in an accident and send a “spoliation” letter to any parties involved in the accident to preserve evidence for later inspection.</p>

<p>My law firm and I recently obtained a substantial settlement from an automobile manufacturer in a product liability case on behalf of a woman who was blinded in an automobile accident case by the vehicle’s airbag.  For more information regarding your catastrophic automobile injury case, please <a href=" http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1301050.html">contact us</a> for a complimentary consultation.</p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/pursuing_a_product_liability_t.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/pursuing_a_product_liability_t.html</guid>
         <category></category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:50:20 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
            <item>
         <title>Preserving Evidence in Trucking Accident Cases Occurring on Maryland&apos;s Highways</title>
         <description><![CDATA[<p>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.</p>

<p>If you’ve been involved in an automobile accident involving a tractor trailer or other trucking company, it is important to retain counsel early and act quickly.  Counsel should send a “spoliation” letter requesting that the trucking company take affirmative steps to preserve evidence, including the data contained in the black box.  A substantial amount of the data can be lost if the tractor trailer is put back into service after an accident.  Counsel should notice the inspection of the tractor trailer unit.  Counsel should also retain expert assistance to download the black box information.  You don’t want the defendant-trucking company to beat you to the punch because they can easily erase critical information in the process.  In addition to a black box, some trucking companies also use satellite tracking on their vehicles.  This too can be a critical resource to explore when prosecuting a trucking accident case.</p>

<p>If you’ve been injured by the negligence of a truck driver, contact an <a href=" http://www.mdattorney.com/lawyer-attorney-1301050.html">experienced Maryland plaintiff's personal injury lawyer </a> for a free consultation about how best to pursue your claim.    </p>]]></description>
         <link>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/preserving_evidence_in_truckin.html</link>
         <guid>http://www.marylandaccidentattorneyblog.com/2008/09/preserving_evidence_in_truckin.html</guid>
         <category>Automobile Accident</category>
         <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:02:45 -0500</pubDate>
      </item>
      
   </channel>
</rss>
