Maryland Personal Injury Lawyer, Underinsured Settlement Procedures

In the event you intend on settling your case with the defendant insurer (liability carrier) and your case value exceeds the defendant's policy limits you can seek additional money on your client's behalf from the client's underinsured motorist coverage. However, there is a procedure that must be followed. Please review § 19-511. Uninsured motorist coverage--settlement procedures

(a) If an injured person receives a written offer from a motor vehicle insurance liability insurer or that insurer's authorized agent to settle a claim for bodily injury or death, and the amount of the settlement offer, in combination with any other settlements arising out of the same occurrence, would exhaust the bodily injury or death limits of the applicable liability insurance policies, bonds, and securities, the injured person shall send by certified mail, to any insurer that provides uninsured motorist coverage for the bodily injury or death, a copy of the liability insurer's written settlement offer.

(b) Within 60 days after receipt of the notice required under subsection (a) of this section, the uninsured motorist insurer shall send to the injured person:

(1) written consent to acceptance of the settlement offer and to the execution of releases; or

(2) written refusal to consent to acceptance of the settlement offer.

(c) Within 30 days after a refusal to consent to acceptance of a settlement offer under subsection (b)(2) of this section, the uninsured motorist insurer shall pay to the injured person the amount of the settlement offer.

(d)(1) Payment as described in subsection (c) of this section shall preserve the uninsured motorist insurer's subrogation rights against the liability insurer and its insured.

(2) Receipt by the injured person of the payment described in subsection (c) of this section shall constitute the assignment, up to the amount of the payment, of any recovery on behalf of the injured person that is subsequently paid from the applicable liability insurance policies, bonds, and securities.

(e) The injured person may accept the liability insurer's settlement offer and execute releases in favor of the liability insurer and its insured without prejudice to any claim the injured person may have against the uninsured motorist insurer:

(1) on receipt of written consent to acceptance of the settlement offer and to the execution of releases; or

(2) if the uninsured motorist insurer has not met the requirements of subsection (b) or subsection (c) of this section.

Accident In Baltimore, The Lane Change

Every personal injury lawyer in Maryland will tell you there are several types of cases you generally want to stay away from unless the damages justify the risk. The reason these are difficult cases is because the liability is sometimes difficult to prove. And as we all know, if you are frequent readers, the plaintiff has the burden to prove liability and damages. And so the red light/green light cases can end up being your word against mine. In which case the plaintiff looses since it is a tie. Likewise the lane change cases are a problem for much the same reason. Each driver will claim the other wrongly entered his lane. Often times in these cases you get little to no assistance in your proof from the property damage. Which I have found often is the evidence that does not lie and has its own story to tell. I have such a case pending in Baltimore City. I decided to take a chance on this one for several reasons. One I like the plaintiff and I believe her. The damages are not compelling. I believe the case will stay in district court, which in Baltimore is not always a blessing. However, I am impressed with the location of the vehicles post accident. My client’s vehicle once hit was forced into oncoming traffic and up over the medium. Also the plaintiff's property damage was passenger side more to front. In such an instance plaintiff’s visibility of the other vehicle was greater then defendant’s visibility. People do not purposefully run into other peoples cars. It is more probable the defendant did not see the plaintiff judging from the position of the vehicles immediately prior to impact.

Maryland Personal Injury The Damage Cap

Maryland has long ago placed a cap on the amount of non economic damages a person can receive in compensation for injury. Since its inception the cap has been the center of great debate initiated primarily by the plaintiff aggrieved by the harsh reduction of his/her judgment. Some argue the cap thwarts justice. Once the jury has spoken and entered a judgment shouldn't that judgment be honored? Others argue the cap is needed to contain cost to the general public. Ultimately the cap removes discretion from the fact finder and leaves litigants with an inflexible mathematical boundary. A viable alternative that better serves justice is a post judgment review of the excess award. Not every case should be sustained. I am sure not every case should be reduced. The Maryland Damage cap states in pertinent part:

in any action for damages for personal injury or wrongful death in which the cause of action arises on or after October 1, 1994, an award for noneconomic damages may not exceed $500,000.

(ii) The limitation on noneconomic damages provided under subparagraph (i) of this paragraph shall increase by $15,000 on October 1 of each year beginning on October 1, 1995. The increased amount shall apply to causes of action arising between October 1 of that year and September 30 of the following year, inclusive.

(3)(i) The limitation established under paragraph (2) of this subsection shall apply in a personal injury action to each direct victim of tortious conduct and all persons who claim injury by or through that victim.

(ii) In a wrongful death action in which there are two or more claimants or beneficiaries, an award for noneconomic damages may not exceed 150% of the limitation established under paragraph (2) of this subsection, regardless of the number of claimants or beneficiaries who share in the award.

Vicarious Personal Injury Liability in a Maryland

Maryland law says the general rule is "every automobile driver must exercise toward every other driver that duty of care which a person of ordinary prudence would exercise under similar circumstances". Baltimore Transit Co., v Prinz 215 Md 398 (1958). Makes sense if we intend to keep a sound order to society. Then everyone should act reasonably. If you act in a careless manner and you hurt someone then you are liable for the damages you have caused. So are there situations where someone else’s careless behavior makes you liable? Well in Maryland personal injury law the answer is yes. Negligent entrustment and respondeat superior cases provide examples. Negligent entrustment occurs when the owner knows or should know that the person he is entrusting his vehicle to is likely to use the vehicle in a manner involving risk of harm to others. For example lending your car to a person you know is intoxicated. Then the owner may be held liable Macky v Dorsey 104 Md. App. 250 (1995). Other wise the mere ownership of a vehicle does not impute liability Toscano v Spriggs 343 Md 320 (1996). And as far as respondeat superior is concerned this is when an employer is held liable for the careless acts of their employees provided the act was committed by their employee while acting in the scope of their employment. Oaks v Connors 339 Md 24 (1995).

Elements of a Complaint in Maryland Personal Injury Cases

A properly pleaded claim of negligence includes four elements: (1) that the defendant was under a duty to protect the plaintiff from injury, (2) that the defendant breached that duty, (3) that the plaintiff suffered actual injury or loss, and (4) that the loss or injury proximately resulted from the defendant's breach of the duty. Todd v. Mass Transit Admin., 373 Md. 149, 816 A.2d 930 (2003).
As such every complaint in an personal injury case in Maryland for negligence must state, all facts which are essential to the cause of action with a reasonable degree of certainty. It is necessary to inform the defendant of the acts or omissions on which his or her liability is based. In order to state a cause of action in negligence, the complaint should state:

1. a right on the part of the plaintiff,
2. a duty on the part of the defendant with respect to that right,
3. a breach of that duty by the defendant,
4. the plaintiff has suffered an injury as a result of the breach of duty
5. the amount of damages the plaintiff is seeking to recover.

Energy Crisis and Personal Injury In Maryland

The effects of the energy crisis are realized everywhere even in subtle manners. For example, in my practice I am finding more and more occasions where I am hired by multiple clients all from the same host vehicle which was involved in a car accident. The reason is car pooling as a result of efforts to save on gas cost. What issues does this raise for the Maryland personal injury lawyer? Aside from the benefits which are obvious. This generally means we are taking policy limits. But this situation gives rise to several very serious complications. For example, conflict of interest issues involving liability and settlements. Additionally, you can encounter insurance coverage issues and UM/UIM issues.

In the event of a liability conflicts you simply can not represent the driver. And if you have met the driver as an initial interview you may find yourself in a situation where you can not represent anyone in the case, absent a written consent.

As far as settlements, assuming liability is a non issue, in which case representing the driver is also fine, again as an attorney you will encounter a problem. For example let say you have five clients in your host vehicle. There is a 20/40 policy. How do you decide who gets what from the settlement with out adversely affecting the interest of any one single client over the interest of another. This is a serious situation as far as conflict of interest is concerned. The solution I have found is Consent to Representation executed by each client. The Consent tells each client of the exact conflict at issue as well as their right to seek independent counsel. As long as you as an attorney are confident your representation of any one client is not adverse to the interest of another client and this confidence is reasonable and each client is informed of the issues and consents, then you are able to represent each. Please feel free to call me to discuss if you as a Maryland personal injury lawyer are encountering the same problem.