There are unfortunately many instances where a minor child is injured as a result of the careless choices someone else had made. In these circumstances special attention must be given to the future consequences of the injury, if any. In Maryland personal injury cases the law requires certain provisions be observed when settling a minor's claim. These provisions are to insure that the minor child receive the benefit of the settlement. The law governing settlement of a minor's claims is outlined below. The provision apply only in situations where the proceeds the minor is to receive exceeds $5,000.00. And require funds to be held in trust for the benefit of the child until age of majority. Particualr language must be written on the check in distribution to the minor as outlined below.
§ 13-403. Payment to trustee
(a) Unless a court appoints a guardian of the property of a minor under subsection (c) of this section, if a minor or any other person in whose name a claim in tort is made or judgment in tort obtained on behalf of a minor recovers a net sum of $5,000 or more, the person responsible for the payment of the money shall make payment by check made to the order of
"................................., trustee under Title 13 of the Estates and
(name of trustee)
Trusts Article, Annotated Code of Maryland, for .............................,
(name of minor)
minor".
(b) No other act is necessary to constitute the person named a trustee.
(c)(1) In accordance with the procedures for the appointment of a guardian under Subtitle 2 of this title, the court may appoint a guardian of the property of a minor on whose behalf a recovery in tort is sought or has been obtained if the court determines that the appointment would be in the minor's best interest.
(2) The petition for guardianship may be made by an interested person or a trustee under this subtitle.
(d) If a court appoints a guardian of the property of a minor under subsection (c) of this section and the minor or any other person in whose name a claim in tort is made or judgment in tort obtained on behalf of the minor recovers a net sum of $5,000 or more, the person responsible for the payment of the money shall make payment by check made to the order of ".........., (name of guardian), guardian under Title 13, Subtitle 2 of the Estates and Trusts Article, Annotated Code of Maryland, for .......... (name of minor), minor".
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Statute of Limitations Against Your Underinsured Motorist Coverage
This issue covers those circumstances when you know the defendant insurance coverage will not be adequate to cover the extent of the injury you have sustained. This can happen when the defendant has no insurance or the insurance they have is not enough to compensate your damages. So the issue sometimes arises as to when do you have to file suit against your own insurance company or more accurately the insurance company covering the vehicle you were in at the time of the accident. Some people argue the time frame starts when you are injured. However in Maryland personal injury cases the suit against the UM carrier is a claim in breach of contract. As such according to Lane v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., 321 Md. 165, 582 A.2d 501 (1990), the court determined the Statute of Limitations will not begin to run on a suit by the insured against the insurer for the breach of the contractual duty to indemnify until that breach literally occurs.
In the Lane case husband and wife were involved in an automobile accident that was the apparent fault of an uninsured motorist. They notified their insurance company of the accident shortly after it happened. On December 14, 1982, they brought suit against the uninsured motorist. The insurance company, however, made no effort to intervene. On April 17, 1986, over three years later, the Lanes sued their insurance company for uninsured motorist benefits. The insurance company filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that the action was barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations. The Court of Appeals held the Statute of Limitations cannot begin running until there is an actual breach of the contract.
In the Lane case husband and wife were involved in an automobile accident that was the apparent fault of an uninsured motorist. They notified their insurance company of the accident shortly after it happened. On December 14, 1982, they brought suit against the uninsured motorist. The insurance company, however, made no effort to intervene. On April 17, 1986, over three years later, the Lanes sued their insurance company for uninsured motorist benefits. The insurance company filed a motion for summary judgment, asserting that the action was barred by the three-year Statute of Limitations. The Court of Appeals held the Statute of Limitations cannot begin running until there is an actual breach of the contract.
Monday, November 3, 2008
Maryland Medical Malpractice the Twenty Percent Rule
Maryland medical malpractice law places a limitation on who can testify in the cases to certify and/or testify to the standard of care to those medical providers who devote no more then 20% of their professional time to testifying in personal injury cases. Specifically, MD Code, Courts and Judicial Proceedings, § 3-2A-04 b(4)
A health care provider who attests in a certificate of a qualified expert or who testifies in relation to a proceeding before an arbitration panel or a court concerning compliance with or departure from standards of care may not devote annually more than 20 percent of the expert's professional activities to activities that directly involve testimony in personal injury claims.
The issue was addressed in in Witte v. Azarian where the court addressed what kind of activities “directly involve testimony in personal injury claims,” within the meaning of CJ section 3-2A-04(b)(4), so as to constitute the numerator in the 20 Percent Rule. The court reasoned that the operative statutory phrase at issue (“activities that directly involve testimony in personal injury claims”), was ambiguous, as its meaning could not be ascertained from its plain language, and that, in light of the legislative history of the Act as amended, including the amendments establishing the certificate of qualified expert requirement, that language had to be read narrowly, so as to avoid “creat[ing] an unreasonable impediment to the pursuit, or defense, of a common law right of action” for medical negligence. The Court determined a standard to determine the issue as follows:
A more reasonable approach, we think, is to regard the statute as including only (1) the time the doctor spends in, or traveling to or from, court or deposition for the purpose of testifying, waiting to testify, or observing events in preparation for testifying, (2) the time spent assisting an attorney or other member of a litigation team in developing or responding to interrogatories and other forms of discovery, (3) the time spent in reviewing notes and other materials, preparing reports, and conferring with attorneys, insurance adjusters, other members of a litigation team, the patient, or others after being informed that the doctor will likely be called upon to sign an affidavit or otherwise testify, and (4) the time spent on any similar activity that has a clear and direct relationship to testimony to be given by the doctor or the doctor's preparation to give testimony.
A health care provider who attests in a certificate of a qualified expert or who testifies in relation to a proceeding before an arbitration panel or a court concerning compliance with or departure from standards of care may not devote annually more than 20 percent of the expert's professional activities to activities that directly involve testimony in personal injury claims.
The issue was addressed in in Witte v. Azarian where the court addressed what kind of activities “directly involve testimony in personal injury claims,” within the meaning of CJ section 3-2A-04(b)(4), so as to constitute the numerator in the 20 Percent Rule. The court reasoned that the operative statutory phrase at issue (“activities that directly involve testimony in personal injury claims”), was ambiguous, as its meaning could not be ascertained from its plain language, and that, in light of the legislative history of the Act as amended, including the amendments establishing the certificate of qualified expert requirement, that language had to be read narrowly, so as to avoid “creat[ing] an unreasonable impediment to the pursuit, or defense, of a common law right of action” for medical negligence. The Court determined a standard to determine the issue as follows:
A more reasonable approach, we think, is to regard the statute as including only (1) the time the doctor spends in, or traveling to or from, court or deposition for the purpose of testifying, waiting to testify, or observing events in preparation for testifying, (2) the time spent assisting an attorney or other member of a litigation team in developing or responding to interrogatories and other forms of discovery, (3) the time spent in reviewing notes and other materials, preparing reports, and conferring with attorneys, insurance adjusters, other members of a litigation team, the patient, or others after being informed that the doctor will likely be called upon to sign an affidavit or otherwise testify, and (4) the time spent on any similar activity that has a clear and direct relationship to testimony to be given by the doctor or the doctor's preparation to give testimony.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Litigation Themes
I have been reading and studying the use of themes in litigation. I thought some of what I have learned might be helpful to you. As I research on this issue I actually found a lot of material but very little concisely condensed material.
First themes are essential to success in litigation. I found a great deal of really useful information by ordering and listened to audio recording of trials in the area. I typically select the larger verdict trials. If you are interested in doing this also it is easy. You can order the audio and video (video in Baltimore City circuit court, with the consent of parties or counsel) for about $25-$45 per day of trial testimony. Interestingly I discovered every successful plaintiff's case is really just the advancement of themes. The successful attorneys have captured the simplest understanding of the human drama of their case and reduced it to a easily identifiable set of concise words. Those successful themes inherently carry the proposition that the defendant has made a careless choice and is now trying to side step responsibility for the harms by dodging responsibility or passing the buck. Like revenge these themes are best served cold and dispassionately. One author proposed developing a theme by first asking yourself what do you want from this case and then outlining the facts that support why you should have it. Others propose a similar formula which ask why should I win this case? All agree formation of the theme early in the case even before discovery is essential. Understanding the theme will be modified to changing facts as discovery progresses. Once trial is viewed as theme advancement evidential issues become some what secondary requirements. Obviously necessary but still secondary to theme advancement.
First themes are essential to success in litigation. I found a great deal of really useful information by ordering and listened to audio recording of trials in the area. I typically select the larger verdict trials. If you are interested in doing this also it is easy. You can order the audio and video (video in Baltimore City circuit court, with the consent of parties or counsel) for about $25-$45 per day of trial testimony. Interestingly I discovered every successful plaintiff's case is really just the advancement of themes. The successful attorneys have captured the simplest understanding of the human drama of their case and reduced it to a easily identifiable set of concise words. Those successful themes inherently carry the proposition that the defendant has made a careless choice and is now trying to side step responsibility for the harms by dodging responsibility or passing the buck. Like revenge these themes are best served cold and dispassionately. One author proposed developing a theme by first asking yourself what do you want from this case and then outlining the facts that support why you should have it. Others propose a similar formula which ask why should I win this case? All agree formation of the theme early in the case even before discovery is essential. Understanding the theme will be modified to changing facts as discovery progresses. Once trial is viewed as theme advancement evidential issues become some what secondary requirements. Obviously necessary but still secondary to theme advancement.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Wrongful Death In Maryland Personal Injury
Wrongful Death In Maryland Personal Injury
The wrongful death statute in Maryland can be found in the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article starting with section 3-901 through 3-904. Additionally Maryland Rule 15 -1001 must also be reviewed prior to initiating suit. The wrongful death statute defines the persons who are entitled to bring an action for wrongful death as a result of the loss of someone who has died. Specifically the claim may be brought by primary beneficiaries. Those persons are defined as a spouse, a parent, and the children of the deceased person. If there is no primary beneficiary then suit may be brought by secondary beneficiaries, who are defined as any person related to the deceased person by blood or marriage who was wholly dependent upon the deceased. A person is considered wholly dependent under the wrongful death statute when he or she existed financially entirely on the income of the deceased and has no other consequential source or means of being financially self-supporting other than income of the deceased. Even in circumstances where spouses are separated and near divorce the surviving spouse is still entitled to bring an action and obtain recovery. An illegitimate child may also qualify the primary beneficiary under the statute. Additional a viable unborn child at the time of the decedent's death may qualify as a primary beneficiary under the statute. However, a stepchild, stepparent or personal representative however is not permitted to be a claimant under the statute.
It is important to remember that primary beneficiaries who are not pursuing suit must still be named in the pleadings
The wrongful death statute in Maryland can be found in the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article starting with section 3-901 through 3-904. Additionally Maryland Rule 15 -1001 must also be reviewed prior to initiating suit. The wrongful death statute defines the persons who are entitled to bring an action for wrongful death as a result of the loss of someone who has died. Specifically the claim may be brought by primary beneficiaries. Those persons are defined as a spouse, a parent, and the children of the deceased person. If there is no primary beneficiary then suit may be brought by secondary beneficiaries, who are defined as any person related to the deceased person by blood or marriage who was wholly dependent upon the deceased. A person is considered wholly dependent under the wrongful death statute when he or she existed financially entirely on the income of the deceased and has no other consequential source or means of being financially self-supporting other than income of the deceased. Even in circumstances where spouses are separated and near divorce the surviving spouse is still entitled to bring an action and obtain recovery. An illegitimate child may also qualify the primary beneficiary under the statute. Additional a viable unborn child at the time of the decedent's death may qualify as a primary beneficiary under the statute. However, a stepchild, stepparent or personal representative however is not permitted to be a claimant under the statute.
It is important to remember that primary beneficiaries who are not pursuing suit must still be named in the pleadings
Friday, September 26, 2008
Erbs Palsy
This is an injury that can be caused at birth and often times is the result of medical negligence. There are specific protocols doctors and mid wives are trained to follow when they encounter a birth emergency such as the baby becoming stuck due to the shoulders not passing through the birth canal. The various protocols include:
McRoberts Maneuver: Where the mother is repositioned and flexing knees to abdomen
Surapubic Pressure: Where push pressure is asserted over the mother's abdomen.
Wood's or Cork Screw Maneuver: Rotating the child's upper shoulder downward and the downward shoulder up ward.
C- Section: Which is extracting the baby through surgery.
There are four major types of injuries which occur to the nerves in the brachial plexus network which can result in some form of palsy:
1. an avulsion meaning the nerve is torn from the spine.
2. a rupture meaning the nerve is torn but not where it attaches to the spine.
3. a neuroma meaning the nerve has tried to heal but scar tissue has grown around the injury placing pressure on the injured nerve praxis. While the nerve has been damaged, it has not been torn and improvement should be seen within 3 months.
4. Neuropraxia is the mildest form of nerve injury. Neuropraxia, the most common form of Erb's Palsy is localized to the specific place where the injury occurs. It is a physiologic block of nerve conduction within an axon without any anatomical interruption. Many infants born with brachial plexus palsy have neuropraxia and sometimes recover within 4-6 weeks.
If you are not sure if negligence was involved in your baby's injury call my office. We will investigate the cause for you and provide those answers at no cost to you. 1-888-760-7339.
McRoberts Maneuver: Where the mother is repositioned and flexing knees to abdomen
Surapubic Pressure: Where push pressure is asserted over the mother's abdomen.
Wood's or Cork Screw Maneuver: Rotating the child's upper shoulder downward and the downward shoulder up ward.
C- Section: Which is extracting the baby through surgery.
There are four major types of injuries which occur to the nerves in the brachial plexus network which can result in some form of palsy:
1. an avulsion meaning the nerve is torn from the spine.
2. a rupture meaning the nerve is torn but not where it attaches to the spine.
3. a neuroma meaning the nerve has tried to heal but scar tissue has grown around the injury placing pressure on the injured nerve praxis. While the nerve has been damaged, it has not been torn and improvement should be seen within 3 months.
4. Neuropraxia is the mildest form of nerve injury. Neuropraxia, the most common form of Erb's Palsy is localized to the specific place where the injury occurs. It is a physiologic block of nerve conduction within an axon without any anatomical interruption. Many infants born with brachial plexus palsy have neuropraxia and sometimes recover within 4-6 weeks.
If you are not sure if negligence was involved in your baby's injury call my office. We will investigate the cause for you and provide those answers at no cost to you. 1-888-760-7339.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Medical Malpractice in Maryland. Those Cases Matter Too.
If you have been injured as a result of a doctor or hospital's careless treatment and you have been to the lawyers and each one tells you the damages do not justify filing suit call me before you give up the fight. A common opinion for many malpractice lawyers is that the case has to be worth seven figures to justify filing suit. I happen to disagree. I see many medical negligence issues each year where the damages are less then optimal but the case still has value beyond expenses. I am more then happy to give your case an initial evaluation or that final review after everyone has said no. Too frequently a blind eye is turned on those who deserve. This is done in favor of what many consider more prudent business decision making. Let my office be your last stop. Please feel free to call to discuss your medical malpractice case. 1-888-760-7339
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)