Auto Injury Law and Legislation

Baltimore Auto Injury News: Are Maryland’s Liability Rules Too Far Behind the Times?

December 15, 2012 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

It’s been asked numerous times for years now, that is, should our states laws concerning liability in the case of accidents involving personal injury and property damage be update, scrapped or overhauled? As Maryland auto and trucking accident attorneys, I and my legal staff are well aware of the rules, regulations and statutes that affect various aspects of personal injury law. One area of Maryland’s liability rules involves the term “contributory fault,” which in many instances in the past has thwarted victims from obtaining their due compensation following an injury accident.

Whether one is hurt in Baltimore, Gaithersburg, Washington, D.C., or Rockville, being laid up in a hospital bed can be a traumatic event. Losing one’s life is far worse, of course, but being injured to the extent that one requires tens of thousands of dollars’ worth of medical treatment and possible rehabilitation and physical therapy can inflict a financial hardship that most families these days would find hard to pay for.

Being seriously hurt in a motorcycle wreck, by a dangerous product, through a drugstore’s or pharmacist’s negligence, even a medical error at a nursing home, can all result in some painful and long-term physical consequences. It may seem insurmountable at times, especially right after a bad injury accident, yet it’s very important to remember that we all have rights under the law and because of this anyone who is injured or seriously hurt through the negligence of another individual should contact a qualified personal injury lawyer.

Baltimore Auto Injury Update: Poor Legal Decisions Can Limit One’s Ability to Recover Medical Costs, Damages

May 2, 2012 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Choosing the right lawyer following a serious injury-related traffic collision is an important step toward bringing a successful personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit against a negligent party. As Maryland auto, bike and trucking accident attorneys, we have the training and legal skills to represent victims of car, truck and motorcycle accident here in Maryland.

Whether one is injured in Baltimore, Bowie, Annapolis or the District, there is nothing enjoyable about being hurt, laid up in the hospital and then having to foot the bill for another person’s thoughtless or negligent act. More than one family has been hurt physically, emotionally and financially by a reckless or inattentive driver. With medical treatment costs going through the roof, it only makes sense to choose the right attorney when planning one’s strategy to recover medical, rehabilitation and other costs following a roadway accident.

As Maryland personal injury lawyers, we have seen enough post-accident carnage to know how shaken a victim of a car or truck collision must feel in the aftermath of a serious highway wreck. The same goes for cyclists and pedestrians who are hurt as a result of being struck by a car or commercial delivery truck. In cases where a victim is incapacitated or even killed, the family may need to bring a suit on their behalf to compensate for possible long-term care costs brought on by a careless driver.

Maryland Injury Law Update: Defective Vehicle Suit? Having Expert Witnesses Can Make or Break a Case

October 10, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

For those who think that winning a defective vehicle suit following an injury-related traffic accident or fatal roadway crash involving a car, truck or motorcycle, you may want to reconsider. As much as it is heartening to believe you have an open and shut case of product liability, the fact is these kinds of law suits are typically heard by juries that may or may not understand the technical details involved.

Furthermore, as Baltimore auto accident lawyers and Maryland personal injury attorneys, we know that bringing in a professional or expert witness for the plaintiff’s side is more than a good idea; it’s often necessary if the court is to allow a case to continue. In the interest of justice, having all the necessary tools at one’s disposal can make the difference between winning a case on its merits, or losing due to partial measures.

A recently-decided appellate case (D. Show and M. Federici v. Ford Motor Company) demonstrates what can happen if the plaintiff either chooses not to hire an expert witness or believes his or her case can stand on the general facts alone. In this particular instance, the plaintiffs’ 1993 Ford Explorer was involved in a traffic collision, during which the SUV rolled over, injuring the occupants, David Show and Maria Federici.

According to court records, the plaintiffs’ vehicle was moving through a roadway intersection at about 30mph when it was hit by another car in the vicinity of its left-rear wheel. As a result of the impact, the Explorer rolled over. In such cases, it’s not uncommon for the driver and passengers inside the vehicle to receive injuries ranging from cuts and bruises to broken bones and closed-head trauma. Under some circumstances, fatalities can result from a car crash such as this.

In bringing their suit against Ford, Show and Federici contended that the Explorer was defective because its design rendered it unstable. However, the basis for this claim was apparently insufficient and the suit was removed under the diversity jurisdiction and the parties consented to a final decision by a magistrate judge.

Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, they failed to designate an expert to testify regarding the vehicle’s design as it applied to stability and operational control of the vehicle. Because of this, the magistrate judge ruled that the lawsuit could not go forward without the necessary expert testimony, granting summary judgment to Ford Motor Company.

Maryland Personal Injury Update: Following Painful Traffic Accidents, Insurance Companies can Increase the Discomfort

June 28, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

It’s a fair bet that more than one motorist in Annapolis, Gaithersburg, Washington, D.C., or Rockville has been dismayed to find that his or her health insurance company has demanded to be repaid for the costs that their insured toted up as a result of an automobile, motorcycle or trucking accident injury accident.

Most people who haven’t been involved in a car crash or filed a traffic-related personal injury claim would find it more than surprising that an injured party could be asked to essentially reimburse their insurance company for various medical costs incurred following an personal injury.

Certainly a party that was not at fault and has been hurt, possibly seriously, should not have to pay back costs to an insurer for a legitimate claim. As the argument goes, healthcare insurers don’t ask to be paid back for costs associated with medical treatment or other necessary physical rehabilitation, so why now?

When people hear that their health insurance company wants a refund after paying months or years of timely healthcare premiums, we as Maryland personal injury lawyers understand how this could raise more than a few eyebrows. The simple counter to this seemingly unscrupulous request from one’s own insurer is that eventually the client himself will be reimbursed for all of his or her medical costs through the auto insurance company that represents the other negligent party.

Baltimore Car and Truck Accident Update: Maryland’s Automobile Insurance Minimums for Bodily Injury Raised Again

February 13, 2011 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

As of the New Year, the minimum liability coverage required by Maryland law for bodily injury in case of a traffic collision has been increased for every Maryland vehicle owners. The rise in bodily injury liability coverage coincides with the ever-increasing cost of medical treatment. As Baltimore auto accident attorneys, we can understand how the price of medical care has continued to rise year after year.

According to news reports, 2011 sees the minimum levels of liability protection, which automobile insurance policies sold in Maryland must have for bodily injury, rise by 50 percent. New policies written in 2011, as well as current policies renewed going forward, must now provide for at least a minimum of $30,000 for bodily injury liability for one person injured as a result of a car crash; and a minimum of $60,000 for two or more individuals injured in a traffic collision. This minimum bodily injury liability requirement will be known as “30/60 coverage.” The previous minimums were $20,000 and $40,000, respectively.

While the newly raised minimum coverage requirements might be expected to hit every Maryland policy holder in the form of increased insurance premiums, according to reports not all motorists will be see an increase in monthly payments. According to news articles, only those drivers with so-called “barebones” police coverage should expect to feel an increase in premiums.

Maryland Court of Appeals Upholds Cap on Damages for Pain and Suffering

September 27, 2010 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

On Friday, September 24, 2010, the highest court in Maryland issued an opinion regarding the state’s statutory cap on noneconomic damages. In DRD Pool Service, Inc. v. Freed, et al., the Maryland Court of Appeals held that the state of Maryland may constitutionally cap the damages an injured person may receive even when a jury returns a verdict in excess of the statutory limit. As we discussed in an earlier post, the attorneys at Lebowitz & Mzhen Personal Injury Lawyers believe that this cap disproportionately hurts individuals who are the most severely injured.

In 1986, the Maryland General Assembly passed legislation (currently codified at Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 11-108) that limits the amount of noneconomic damages an injured person can receive. By imposing this limitation, Maryland law makers intended to reduce the medical malpractice insurance premiums paid by physicians.

We believe that the cap had unfortunate consequences to people who suffer extreme losses, pain, suffering, or disfigurement. As of October 1, 2010, the statutory cap is set at $725,000 for an injured victim, or the estate of a decedent whose death was caused by the negligence of another person or corporation. While this may seem like a substantial sum of money, it leaves seriously injured people without just compensation for the harms inflicted by the negligent acts of others. Consider whether this amount would be sufficient to compensate for the loss suffered by the parents involved in DRD Pool Service, Inc. v. Freed.

On June 26, 2006, five year old Connor Freed went to the Crofton Country Club swimming pool in Anne Arundel County with a family friend and their two children. At some time during their visit, Connor had his life jacket removed so that he could go to the restroom. Unfortunately, Connor returned to the pool without putting the life jacket back on, and the little boy was subsequently found floating face down in the water. Conner’s parents brought suit against the operators of the pool, DRD Pool Service, alleging that DRD was negligent in failing to properly train its life guards. After hearing evidence during trial, a jury found that DRD was negligent, that the negligence was a proximate cause of Connor’s death, and awarded the Freeds $4,006,442 in damages for the wrongful death of their son. Pursuant to Maryland law, the trial judge reduced the verdict to $1,002,500.

On appeal, the parents asked the appellate courts to find that the 25 year old cap is in violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Maryland Declaration of Rights. Relying upon the principle of stare decisis (meaning “to stand by decisions”), the Court of Appeals refused to find that prior decisions upholding the legislation were wrong and upheld the limit on damages.

In his dissent, Judge Joseph Murphy adopted an earlier dissenting opinion issued by Judge Howard Chasanow. In that opinion, Judge Chasanow noted the following:

“There is a sad, even tragic, aspect of the class of tort victims who will be most significantly affected by the cap. It is obvious that those whose noneconomic damages will be greatest and who will lose the most by the cap will be those who must endure their injuries for the longest period of time. Infants with paralyzed or severed arms or legs, young children, hideously and permanently scarred or disfigured, youngsters with injuries that will cause them permanent excruciating and unremitting pain and who can be expected to suffer from these injuries over the full seventy-plus years of their probable lifetimes will be the ones with the highest noneconomic damages and, therefore, the ones most affected by the cap.”

Murphy v. Edmonds, 325 Md. 342, 378, 601 A.2d 102, 119 (J. Chasanow, dissenting).

While no amount of money can ever fully compensate a parent for the loss of a child, we believe that the jury who listens to evidence, hears the physical and emotional impact such a loss inflicts is in the best position to render a fair judgment–not the legislature.

Baltimore Car Accident News: Drug-impaired Drivers Injure Many, But Prosecution for DUI Difficult

August 25, 2010 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

It’s no secret that many traffic accidents are caused by impaired drivers. A subset of this group includes individuals who cause injury and death because they are intoxicated by alcohol, prescription medicine and illegal drugs (also referred to as controlled dangerous substances or CDS). People who are not fully in control of their faculties due to taking drugs or consuming alcohol can be the source of serious traffic collisions involving passenger cars, motorcycles and commercial trucks.

As a Maryland automobile accident attorney, I know the seriousness of injuries sustained by occupants of motor vehicles caught up in these kinds of impaired driving crashes or DUI-related accidents. What may be disconcerting to many people out there is that prosecuting these DUI offenders is not as simple as it may seem.

This is a shame, because thousands of people are killed or injured every year by the thoughtlessness of these individuals. From simple cuts and bruises to broken bones and permanent disability — even death — there is too much suffering imposed on so many by so few who lack a social conscience. Yet recourse against these irresponsible few is difficult according to experts.

A recent article points out the there is a delicate balance between individuals who have a legitimate need for prescription medication and the public good. More and more it is becoming common for drivers to be charged with driving under the influence of drugs following a car or commercial truck accident. According to law enforcement authorities, although drunk driving deaths have reportedly been dropping, there has been an increase in accidents caused by drivers impaired due to prescription painkillers, anti-anxiety medications, sleep aids and other powerful drugs.

The situation has become increasingly worrisome for police officials nationwide because, unlike the effects of beer, wine and hard liquor, there is no agreement on what level of drugs in the blood driving impairment occurs.

Of course, the behavioral effects of legally prescribed drugs varies from one person to the next. Some drugs, such as anti-anxiety medications, can reduce driver’s level of alertness and reduce reaction time. Stimulants, on the other hand, can promote risk-taking and impair a person’s ability to judge distance. Then there is the issue of mixing prescription medication, taking these legal drugs with alcohol or even illicit drugs. All of which can make worsen a driver’s level of impairment, causing a sharp increase in the chances that a driver will cause a traffic accident.

Maryland Injury News: Distracted Driving Blamed for Increasing Number of Fatal Teenage Automobile Accidents

July 17, 2010 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

As parents will no doubt attest, teenagers can be easily distracted by a wide range of external stimuli. While this may be amusing to some, and a frustration to their parents and teachers, it is serious business once these kids start to driver motor vehicles. Driver’s education can only go so far to warn these future drivers to be aware of potential and deadly distractions on the road. But apparently much more needs to be done, as recently released government data suggests.

As a Maryland and D.C. auto accident attorney, I understand the myriad of ways that a driver can become distracted on the road, the result of which is many times a traffic accident. New and inexperienced drivers can be especially susceptible to having their concentration diverted. In some cases, and more often than any parent of a teenage driver would like to think about, fatalities can result. In short, distracted driving may be killing more American teenagers than ever before.

According to U.S. Government data, more than 4,000 teenagers lose their lives in traffic accidents that are caused predominantly by “distracted driving.” This includes distractions from having too many noisy occupants in the vehicle to talking on a cellphone while operating a passenger car. However, a new bill recently introduced by Congress may help in reducing this terrible trend.

Baltimore Automobile Accident Update: Suing for Wrongful Death Following a Fatal Maryland Car Crash

May 26, 2010 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

Any time a person dies it can be a sad and emotional time for the immediate family and relatives of the deceased person. Under the best of circumstances, such as death by natural causes, spouses, children and other dependants can face an uncertain future. But when loss of life is caused by possible negligence on the part of another individual, such as in a car, motorcycle or trucking-related accident, the tragedy is amplified many times over.

As Maryland personal injury attorneys, my firm understands the difficult times that a family faces after the loss of a loved one. If a family member dies because of another individual’s negligent or wrongful behavior, it may be appropriate to file a wrongful death claim.

Such claims allow members of a family to receive compensation for their loss — including loss of comfort, love, companionship, and financial support. It must be kept in mind that death does not negate a family’s right to be compensated for its loss. Furthermore, it does not preclude recovery for any suffering or pain that the deceased experienced as a result of wrongful or negligent actions on another person’s part.

Wrongful death following an automobile accident is described as any death which is due in whole or in part to the negligence or deliberate misconduct of another person. The term “car accident” can be a poor choice of words in cases of wrongful death, especially since many auto and trucking wrecks are caused by another person who often is determined to have been operating their vehicle in an inappropriate manner that either caused or worsened the actual vehicle crash.

If a car accident claims the life of a loved one as a result of another driver’s error or negligence, this may be cause for a wrongful death lawsuit. Actions on the part of another driver that may point to wrongful death can include one or more of the following:

— Drunk driving
— Speeding
— Following too close
— Performed illegal driving maneuver
— Defective road conditions

— Defective vehicle safety equipment

In some instances the cause may seem minor, however when another driver is speeding, for example, not only is that person breaking the law, he or she is increasing the danger their vehicle poses to others on the road.

Baltimore Auto Injury News: Will Banning Hand-held Cell Phones Reduce Fatal Maryland Traffic Accidents?

May 7, 2010 | Lebowitz & Mzhen

It’s already been discussed here that a recent study conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) found that cellphone bans do not appear to lower the incidence of traffic accidents. Even so, Maryland legislators are still moving toward a proposed law that will ban hand-held use of cellphones and mobile devices when operating a motor vehicle.

Anything that can reduce automobile and trucking-related highway crashes would be a good thing, since thousands of people are killed in traffic wrecks every year around the U.S. As a Baltimore car accident attorney, I’m on the side of the victims and I know that every driver should be doing his or her part to cut down on the carnage on our public roads.

I’ve seen what can happen to the occupants of a passenger car when it’s hit by another vehicle. Cuts and bruises are the least of the injuries a person can sustain in a crash. Traumatic brain injury is common, as is damage to the neck and spine, any of which can put a person in a wheelchair sometimes for the rest of their life. The question here is would a ban on hand-held cellphones be too much of burden, even if it saved the life of just one person?

Consider your answer carefully because the life you save may be your own, or that of a loved one. An editorial in the Baltimore Sun speaks to this very issue as Maryland faces a ban on hand-held cellphone use.

Of course, nearly every motorist at one time or another has seen all manner of vehicle being driven hazardously. This includes instances of failure to yield where appropriate, drifting into oncoming traffic or suddenly making a turn without an appropriate use of turn signals. I’ll wager that, at least in the past 10 years, these kinds of activities may well have been caused by a so-called distracted driver with a cellphone to his or her ear.

The new Maryland law would restrict driver cellphone use to only hands-free devices. Although it isn’t quite clear that such technology (usually a headset or vehicle-mounted microphone/speaker arrangement) improves matters much, but it may be the new law of the land as Maryland joins the growing number of jurisdictions that ban drivers from using hand-helds.