When representing a client who my have a potential claim for personal injury against the State of Maryland, Maryland personal Injury lawyers must place the state on proper notice within six months of the incident. Failure to do so could bar any recovery under Maryland law.

Although the doctrine of sovereign immunity generally precludes an action for damages against the State of Maryland, its agencies, or officials, the Maryland Tort Claims Act (MTCA) provides for waiver of that immunity in cases of “tortuous acts or omissions committed within the scope of the public duties of state personnel, and committed without malice or gross negligence.”

The MTCA requires that the injured individual “may not institute an action . . . unless: (1) the claimant submits a written claim to the Treasurer or a designee of the Treasurer within 1 year after the injury to the person . . . ; (2) the Treasurer or designee denies the claim finally; and (3) the action is filed within 3 years after the cause of action arises.” MD. CODE ANN., STATE GOV’T § 12-102
In addition, the notice requirement provides the State with early notice of a potential claim, which allows the Treasurer, upon receipt of timely notice, to . . . consider[] the fiscal consequences of the claim, and then decide[] which of several options to pursue. As a result of the early notice required under the MTCA, the Treasurer also has “the opportunity to investigate the claims while the facts are fresh and memories vivid, and, where appropriate, settle them at the earliest possible time.

Finally, Section 12-107 of the State Government Article of the Maryland Code, regarding the form of notice, provides:
(a) Form. – A claim under this subtitle shall:
1. contain a concise statement of facts that set forth the nature of the claim, including the date and place of the alleged tort;

2. demand specific damages;
3. state the name and address of each party;
4. state the name, address, and telephone number of counsel for the claimant, if any; and
5. be signed by the claimant, or the legal representative or counsel for the claimant.

Because the purpose of the statute is to enable the State to conduct an investigation into the underlying circumstances of the claim, and because courts are mandated to construe the MTCA broadly, plaintiffs are not required to submit a notice that exactly mirrors the form set forth in §12-107. This Court, likewise, should construe the MTCA notice requirements broadly in order to provide Plaintiffs a remedy, as envisioned by the General Assembly, and deny Defendant DJS’s Motion to Dismiss.
Continue Reading ›

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. The Baltimore Sun reports the victims included the aircraft’s pilot, a crew member, a civilian medic and a patient.

An Iowa jury recently awarded a woman $1.5 Million Dollars in a lawsuit she filed against the man who infected her with HPV, a sexually transmitted disease that causes genital warts. Karly Rossiter filed suit against Alan Evans claiming he told her he was free of sexually transmitted diseases in order to coerce her into having unprotected sex with him, when in fact he was carrying the human papilloma virus which causes genital warts.
Continue Reading ›

Personal injury settlements involving minors in Maryland are strictly governed by the legislature to protect the minor. Under Title 13, Section 402 of the Estates and Trusts Article, Annotated Code of Maryland “it is public policy of the state that any substantial sum of money paid to a minor because of a claim, action, or judgment in tort should be preserved for the benefit of the minor.”

In Maryland, it is possible to admit medical bills and records at trial without calling a doctor or other health care provider to testify. Section 10-104 of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article of the Maryland Code sets forth the requirements for introducing medical bills and records without the support of witness testimony at trial. This provision can save a client the added expense of having to pay a doctor to testify at trial or in a deposition. In some cases, the cost of such testimony can be considerable. In many personal injury lawsuits or automobile accident cases, particularly in Maryland’s District Courts, it may be more cost-effective to introduce medical bills pursuant to section 10-104. Doing so may actually increase a client’s net recovery because it reduces certain litigation expenses.

In personal injury cases, damage to personal property may be a component of an injured victim’s overall damages. How do you prove this component of your case? In Maryland, it is well-established that an owner of personal property may express an opinion as to the value of that property without qualification as an expert. See Maryland Casualty Co. v. Therm-O-Disc, Inc. 137 F.3d 780,786 (1998). The experienced personal injury trial lawyer should be well-armed with this authority whenever proving his or her client’s total economic damages in a personal injury case. The experienced trial lawyer will not let defense counsel convince the court that an expert is needed to opine as to the value of personal property. Maryland law contains no such requirement.