Martindale-Hubbell AV Preeminent
Super Lawyers
Super Lawyers Rising Stars
Maryland State Bar Association
Top 100 Trial Lawyers
DC Bar
Maryland Association for Justice
American Bar Association
Prince George's County Bar Association

| by

Under Maryland law, children cannot recover damages in tort from their parents. In other words, the doctrine of parent-child immunity generally bars minor children from pursuing negligence claims against their parents, with few exceptions. Recently, a Maryland was tasked with determining whether such immunity survives the death of a child, in a case in which an infant tragically drowned at his father’s home. If you lost a child due to the negligence of another party, you should speak to a Maryland personal injury lawyer to determine whether you may be able to recover damages in a wrongful death claim.

The Child’s Death

It is reported that the plaintiff and the defendant were co-parents of a twenty-one-month-old son. Pursuant to a consent order between the parties, the mother had full and permanent physical custody of the child. In July 2016, the child was at the defendant’s home for visitation during a time when the defendant was hosting a party.

Allegedly, during the course of events, the child tragically fell into a pool in the defendant’s backyard and drowned. The mother filed a lawsuit against the defendant, alleging his negligence led to the fatal accident. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that they were barred by the doctrine of parent-child immunity. The court ultimately granted the defendant’s motion and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

| by

Under Maryland law, employers can be deemed vicariously liable for the negligent acts of their employees. For example, if a patient suffers harm due to incompetent treatment in a hospital setting, both the doctor that rendered the care and the hospital may be held accountable. When a doctor is an employee of the hospital, establishing vicarious liability is relatively straightforward. If the doctor is an independent contractor, though, proving a hospital’s liability can be more challenging, as discussed in a recent ruling issued by a Maryland court. If you were injured by a reckless health care provider, it is wise to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your options for seeking compensation.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was transported to the trauma center of the defendant hospital after he suffered critical injuries in a car accident. He sustained further harm when the defendant trauma surgeon negligently performed surgical procedures on the plaintiff’s legs and neglected to provide proper follow-up care. The plaintiff subsequently had to undergo bilateral amputations of his legs above the knee.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit asserting medical negligence claims against the defendant trauma surgeon and vicarious liability claims against the defendant hospital. The case proceeded to trial, and the jury found in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant hospital moved for JNOV. The court granted the defendant’s motion, after which the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

| by

Many Marylanders struggle with mental health issues. While treatment is effective in many cases, some people tragically cannot overcome their illnesses and lose their lives to suicide. Questions often arise as to what liability, if any, can be imposed on parties that were aware of a person’s suicidal ideation and inadvertently aided them in taking steps to end their lives. This was illustrated in a recent Maryland case in which the court analyzed whether a store could be deemed negligent for selling an employee a firearm despite knowledge of his suicidal ideation. If you lost a loved one due to another party’s negligence, it is prudent to meet with a Maryland personal injury lawyer to examine your potential claims.

Factual Background

It is reported that the decedent had a history of depression and battled suicidal ideation since he was a child. He was diagnosed with major depressive disorder in June 2019. He worked at a supercenter that sold firearms, and at least three of his coworkers were aware of his mental health history. In October 2019, he began experiencing a mental health crisis and entered the hospital for three days. He sent text messages to his coworkers, informing them he was suffering from crippling depression and had attempted suicide.

Allegedly, the decedent’s coworkers discussed adding him to a blacklist that would bar him from purchasing firearms, and his supervisor stated that he would but failed to do so. The decedent returned to work, purchased a firearm, and died by suicide in the parking lot. His parents filed a lawsuit against the supercenter, arguing that its negligence led to the decedent’s death. The defendant moved for judgment on the pleadings. Continue Reading ›

| by

Generally, people seeking damages in personal injury lawsuits will allege that they suffered bodily harm. While plaintiffs can usually recover compensation for physical injuries they suffered as a result of someone else’s negligence, they cannot recover damages for emotional injuries caused by learning about or witnessing property damage. There are exceptions to the general rule, though, like the personal safety exception, as discussed in a recent Maryland case. If you suffered emotional harm due to another party’s carelessness, it is advisable to contact a Maryland personal injury lawyer to discuss whether you might be owed damages.

The History of the Case

It is reported that the defendant crashed his truck into the plaintiffs’ house in September 2019. The accident occurred early in the morning. While the plaintiffs were home at the time of the incident, they did not sustain any physical harm. They suffered emotional injuries, however, and subsequently sought compensation from the defendant in a personal injury lawsuit. After the completion of discovery, the defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiffs could not recover damages for emotional injuries brought about by witnessing damage to their property. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion, and the plaintiffs appealed.

The Personal Safety Exception

On appeal, the trial court ruling was reversed. In Maryland, a plaintiff ordinarily cannot recover compensation for emotional injuries caused by witnessing carelessly inflicted injury to their property. There are exceptions, however, including the personal safety exception. The court explained that the personal safety exception allows for recovery when the defendant’s carelessness caused property damage that subsequently causes emotional harm that is brought about by the plaintiff’s reasonable fear for their own safety or for the safety of their family members. Continue Reading ›

| by

Under Maryland law, property owners generally have an obligation to maintain their premises in a safe condition to prevent visitors from suffering harm. Simply because an accident occurs at a property does not mean that the owner neglected its duties, though. Instead, a property owner will usually only be held liable for harm if it was caused by a dangerous condition on their premises that the owner knew or should have known of, as discussed in a recent Maryland case. If you were hurt in a trip and fall accident on someone else’s property, you might be able to recover compensation, and you should speak to a Maryland premises liability lawyer about your potential claims.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered injuries when she stepped off of a curb and fell into a six inch depression in a shopping center parking lot owned and managed by the defendant. She filed a premises liability lawsuit against the defendant, alleging that it negligently failed to inspect and maintain the subject lot. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that it did not owe a duty to the plaintiff or have a duty to inspect the lot for conditions of which it had no prior knowledge. The court agreed and granted the defendant’s motion. The plaintiff appealed.

Establishing a Property Owner’s Liability

The trial court’s ruling was affirmed on appeal. In Maryland, a property owner may be liable for physical harm invitees suffer due to a dangerous condition on their land, but only if they know or reasonably should know that the condition presents a reasonable risk of harm to visitors, that said visitors are unlikely to discover the condition, and the owner fails to protect them from the potential danger. Continue Reading ›

| by

The owner of the ship that is responsible for the Key Bridge collapse has filed a petition to seek a cap on damages at 43 million dollars.  The complaint asks the court to consolidate all claims and limit or deny liability under the limitation of liability act of 1851. Plaintiffs with a claim against the ship or responsible party will try to break the limit on liability.  According to the petition filed in court on Monday, the value of the Dali was 90 million when it left the Port of Baltimore. repair of the ship is expected to cost at least 28 million.  Salvage of the ship is likely going to cost at least 19.5 million.  It is unclear if the estimates of value will be accepted or disputed by the interested parties.  There is still a search for additional bodies that are missing.

| by

We should all be able appreciate the sheer physics of riding on a nearly one thousand foot long cargo container ship.  This ship is roughly the size of the Empire State Building.  Trying to navigate the waters and bridges with this type of vessel is no easy task no matter the skill of the operator.

Much continues develop every day with the surviving structures of the bridge, the port of the vessel, and the hazmat containers.  There are reports of several containers that have either entered the water or have been breached.  The hazards in the area including the cold temperatures, debris, potential hazardous materials in the water all make navigating the waters challenging.  There is also a reported sheen on the water at the scene.  Containers have shifted and could be in danger falling.  State and Federal agencies have been and are still on the scene with divers and drones.  We are finding now that the minutes leading up the collision, alarms were sounded as the ship was out of control.  Power was out and the major systems of the vessel were out of order.

According to the Baltimore City Fire Department, salvage continues to occur as waste is removed.   The vessel data recorder is the recording device on the marine vessel that measures activity.  These devices are not as good as black boxes but do provide data.  Evidence from the engine room data would certainly help to diagnose the issues leading to any crash.  Currently, the technology does not exist to show immediately if the failure was mechanical or electrical.

Continue Reading ›

| by

Traffic will be seriously impacted after the collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge on March 26, 2024, along Interstate 695 in Baltimore, Maryland. Following the early morning accident which was caused by a vessel that crashed into the bridge, drivers were immediately directed to take alternate routes through the city. The Maryland Transportation Authority said all lanes were closed on I-695. Most drivers can take Interstate 95, the Fort McHenry Tunnel, or Interstate 895, the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel, as alternate routes of travel. However, the Maryland Transportation Authority reminds drivers that vehicles carrying hazardous materials, including more than 10 pounds of propane, are not allowed in the tunnels. Additionally, vehicles more than 13-feet and 6-inches high or 8-feet wide may not use the 1-895 Baltimore Harbor Tunnel. Vehicles more than 14-feet and 6-inches high or 11-feet wide may not use the I-95 Fort McHenry Tunnel. Those vehicles should use the western portion of I-695 instead. An estimated 35,000 people used the bridge on a daily basis.

All vessel traffic into and out of the Port of Baltimore is suspended until further notice. The Port of Baltimore handled more than $80 billion in imports and exports in 2023, according to census data.

Bridge collapse accidents are rare. A search of the internet will reveal many ship collisions causing major injuries and damages.

Continue Reading ›

| by

Parties in civil lawsuits will usually ask jurors to weigh the evidence presented and determine issues such as liability and damages. Generally, the courts regulate what evidence the parties can submit to the jury. If a court rules improvidently with regard to what evidence is relevant or appropriate, it may harm a party’s case. Merely because a party does not concur with a judge’s reasoning with regard to evidence does not mean that a verdict should be overturned, though, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland ruling issued in a car accident case. If you were injured in a collision, it is in your best interest to talk to a Maryland auto accident lawyer to discuss what evidence you must produce to recover damages.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered injuries in a collision that occurred when the defendant struck the rear of her car. She filed a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, asserting a negligence claim. The defendant admitted liability, and the case proceeded to trial on the issue of damages. The defendant was not present during the trial; twice during the trial, his attorney stated that he was absent because he had cancer and his health did not allow him to be there. The plaintiff’s attorney objected to the statement that the defendant had terminal cancer, and the court sustained the objection.

Allegedly, the plaintiff’s counsel did not seek a curative instruction or ask for any other relief. The jury ultimately found in favor of the plaintiff but did not award her damages for future medical expenses or lost wages. The plaintiff appealed, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion with regard to how it handled the statements about the defendant’s cancer. Continue Reading ›

| by

Many Maryland residents rely on public transportation and expect that they will be able to access such conveyances without suffering harm. Unfortunately, however, it is not uncommon for passengers on public transportation to encounter dangerous conditions that ultimately cause them to suffer injuries. Whether a transit authority will be held liable for harm sustained in an accident on one of its vehicles depends, in part, on whether it had notice of the allegedly harmful condition, as explained in a recent Maryland opinion. If you were hurt while riding public transportation, it is advisable to speak to a Maryland personal injury lawyer to evaluate your possible causes of action.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered injuries while riding a bus owned and operated by the defendant transit authority. Specifically, she tripped over the frame of the wheelchair ramp while entering the bus and stumbled. She subsequently filed a personal injury lawsuit against the defendant, seeking compensation for her harm. Following discovery, the defendant moved for summary judgment arguing, among other things, that the plaintiff failed to establish the defendant had notice of the allegedly dangerous condition as required to recover damages under Maryland law.

Notice of Dangerous Conditions

In Maryland, in order to recover damages for negligence, a plaintiff must demonstrate a duty, a breach of the duty, proximate cause, and damages. Further, a property owner’s liability to a person injured on their property depends on the individual’s status; for example, property owners have a duty to protect invitees from injuries caused by unreasonable risks that the invitees are unlikely to uncover. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information
6301 Ivy Ln #600
Greenbelt, MD 20770
Phone: (301) 441-2022Fax: (301) 474-6054

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2024, Foran & Foran P.A.
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design