Maryland Car Accident Attorney Blog

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.

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

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.

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

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.

Apparently, for the average auto accident policy holder the cost of these higher coverage minimum tends to be relatively low, this according to in order to National Association of Insurance Commissioners. As a comparison, the state of Texas raised its minimums from 25/50 to 30/60 -- a smaller percentage increase than Maryland motorists will see -- however, that state’s insurance commissioners say policy holders will likely only see a two to three percent increase in their premiums.

Maryland Auto Insurance Minimums Increase, OnlinePRNews.com, January 12, 2011

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, LLC 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.

Continue reading "Maryland Court of Appeals Upholds Cap on Damages for Pain and Suffering" »

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.

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

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.

According to estimates, of the more than 30,000 highway traffic deaths that happened in 2008 across the U.S., nearly 12 percent involved 15- to 20-year-old drivers. Records show that most of the deaths were a result of distracted driving. According to Allstate Insurance, the main cause of distracted-driving wrecks is cellphone use.

According to the insurance company’s statistics, texting while driving makes an accident 23 times more likely to happen. Just reaching for a cellphone as it is ringing means you are nine times more likely to have an accident versus normal driving. These two acts, according to the article, is similar to having four beers and driving.

The U.S. Department of Transportation says distracted driving is a critical problem, and has called it an epidemic in America because nearly every American -- including a lot of teenagers of driving age -- owns a cellphone and believes that he or she can safely “talk and drive.” Many experts believe it simply cannot be done at all.

Distracted Driving Killing More American Teens, VOANews.com, June 24, 2010

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.

Continue reading "Baltimore Automobile Accident Update: Suing for Wrongful Death Following a Fatal Maryland Car Crash" »

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.

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

As a Maryland auto accident attorney, I know how costs can add up for the average family. When a car, truck or motorcycle accident causes a wage earner to be hospitalized for injuries suffered during a crash, medical costs and lost earnings can put many families into a terrible bind. Because carrying auto insurance on your vehicle is required by law, premiums are another cost that simply cannot be avoided.

Recently, news out of Annapolis shows that the state legislature is working on a bill that would likely increase insurance premiums for nearly every one of the 61,000 Maryland Automobile Insurance Fund customers. At the time of the news article, the bill passed through the House despite the protestations of the Republican side.

The bill would require policyholders to carry a minimum security of $30,000 for individuals and $60,000 for multiple drivers. Currently those minimums are $20,000 and $40,000 respectively and have not changed since 1972 when MAIF was established following legislation that made auto insurance mandatory.

According to new reports, House GOP leaders argue that the higher premiums would cause some MAIF policyholders to drop their coverage altogether and bump up other insurance carriers' rates. The argument is that this will hurt people at the bottom end of the socioeconomic ladder; effectively a burdensome tax increase.

As law, average premiums in Baltimore city would increase by 9.3 percent, or $174, to $2,035. In inner Prince George's County, rates would go up by 8.2 percent, or $89, to $1,178, according to MAIF estimates. Opponents argue that the increases would put automobile insurance out of reach for some policyholders.

On the other hand, the bill’s supporters say that increasing the minimum security is long overdue. According to a spokesman for the Maryland Association for Justice Inc., "It's to make sure someone who gets injured by a negligent driver is compensated so they can pay their medical bills and receive their lost wages."

The argument for the bill includes the rational that current minimums were set in 1972 when the average household income was $11,800 and gasoline cost 50 cents a gallon. According to the article, the $20,000 minimum security would be equal to $101,600 in today's dollars, which means that the value of that coverage has gone down significantly.

Minimum auto insurance limits could rise, Gazette.net, March 26, 2010

Having seen a number of car, commercial truck and SUV collisions over the past few months, it’s important to remind anyone who has been involved in a recent traffic accident that bodily injuries sustained as a result of a crash should never be compared to the damage that your vehicle may have received.

Why do I say this? The reason is simple, many insurance companies will attempt to paint a victims level of injury with the same brush as that of the vehicle involved in the accident. There is rarely a correlation between the two. And even if there was, you should always consult with a qualified Maryland injury attorney before signing any documents related to the accident.

Having represented hundreds of car-crash victims, I and my staff know that it is very easy for the occupant of a passenger vehicle to become seriously hurt in a traffic accident even though the repairs to the vehicle itself are relatively minor.

When it comes to traffic accidents, human beings aren’t nearly as robust as an iron and steel automobile. Still, defense attorneys and insurance companies tend to make the familiar, yet always deceptive argument that equates vehicle damage to bodily injury. Do not accept this reasoning under any circumstances.

Whether you live in Glen Burnie, the District, Annapolis, or Baltimore, car accidents can and do happen anywhere, any time -- some with horrendous results. Insurance companies will typically attempt to downplay the severity of an accident in an effort to get a reduced settlement for the victim and his family. Very often, they will introduce evidence such as out-of-focus snapshots of the vehicle’s damage, sometimes not even showing the worst aspects of the crash.

With these kinds of techniques, you likely won’t see the lawyers for the insurance company bringing any experts to testify about the direct and causal relationships between the amount of property damage and the extent of the victim’s personal injuries. It’s well known in the medical field that brain trauma as well as neck injuries can result from accidents that result in only slight or moderate damage to the vehicle itself.

My suggestion is not to become one of the hundreds of car crash victims who settle for less than what they deserve simply on the say so of an insurance company representative. Your future and the future happiness of your family is worth the time and effort to consult a professional legal expert. Don’t shortchange yourself unnecessarily.

Negligent drivers, whether they operate passenger vehicles or commercial delivery trucks or tractor-trailer rigs, should be help accountable for their actions behind the wheel. In Maryland, the penalties for reckless driving involving fatalities can appear to be hardly sufficient considering the results that are evident. Not a week goes by that it seems we hear at least one news story of a traffic fatality on one of this state’s busy roadways.

As a Baltimore automobile accident lawyer, I and my colleagues fight a seemingly never ending battle for car crash victims and their families. It makes not difference whether a person is hurt as a result of a semi truck hitting their car or another passenger vehicle slamming into their sedan, minivan or SUV. The pain and suffering sustained during the accident and afterward can be substantial.

Not long ago we reported on a bill introduced into the Maryland state legislature that would increase the penalties for drivers found guilty of reckless and negligent driving in instance where the driver’s action led to the death or serious injury of another individual. It’s heartening to know now that the bill has already received support in the form of a successful vote in the Senate and will soon be moving on to the House.

According to news reports, the bill introduced by Sen. Bryan Simonaire and known as the Joseph Norfolk Act was initially inspired by the June 2007 traffic death of Cpl. Scott Wheeler of Millersville. The 31-year-old Wheeler, Howard County police officer, was struck by a passing car while on patrol duty. The office was reportedly hit a Nissan Sentra on Route 32 after he attempted to pull the driver over for speeding. He died several days later. At the time of that crash, investigators said the 24-year-old woman driving the Nissan didn't see Wheeler in the road. She eventually paid $310 in fines.

If passed by the House, this new law would set the maximum fine for both negligent driving and reckless driving at $1,000 – double the current fine. The bill also calls for a loss of license for up to 180 days if the defendant is convicted. At the time of the news article, there was as yet no date set for a vote in the House.

Reckless driving bill passes state Senate, HometownAnnapolis.com, March 17, 2010

In my Baltimore injury law office we often hear of accidents involving service vehicles. Taxi cabs, hire cars, limousines and shuttle busses can all be involved in traffic collisions. As passenger, you can be seriously injured in even the simplest automobile accidents. It doesn’t take much to cause an unbelted occupant of a motor vehicle to sustain broken bones, cuts and bruises and even debilitating injuries.

Every Maryland resident who rides as a passenger in a cab, bus or other type of fare-paying transportation should be aware of the potential problems associated with uninsured carriers. And even if you don’t travel in these potentially costly conveyances, you may have an elderly relative or friend who often uses one to get to and from the supermarket or other metropolitan location.

This is especially important because, as we all know, automobile accidents can happen anywhere, any time. People on a fixed budget will find uninsured cabs and hire cars particularly difficult to turn when they offer such low fares. But you must ask yourself the question, “Is it worth the possibly devastating medical or work-loss costs should you become a victim of that driver’s error or negligence?”

It is important to keep in mind that if you or a loved one becomes injured in a vehicle that is not properly insured, you may have a very difficult time recovering medical and other costs. Legitimate cab and hire car companies are more expensive for many reasons, but one good reason is that they carry the proper insurance. As a Maryland auto accident lawyer, I am well aware of the risks involved in riding with an uninsured or under-insured driver.

And while it may not seem so at the time, hailing a budget-priced cab or hire car could be financially irresponsible if that vehicle is involved in an accident with you riding inside.

Even supermarket managers and owners of grocery stores do not realize the liability that they could incur by allowing uninsured "courtesy drivers" to solicit their customers’ business. These so-called “hackers” operate illegally in part because they do not care to pay for commercial auto insurance, which the law requires.

Based on reports, the Maryland Auto Insurance Fund, which provides coverage for many sedans and taxis, currently has a base rate of about $4,000 per year for such vehicles operating in Baltimore. Hackers may very well have personal auto insurance, but that doesn’t always cover them if they injure a paying customer, especially if they are operating their vehicle without the knowledge of their insurance company.

The point here is you should always think twice when choosing paid transportation. At the time, it may seem penny wise to hail that cheap “hacker” cab rather than a legitimate, yet more expensive insured taxi. But that low fare may not be such a great deal if you are hurt or severely injured in a crash.

To some observers, it could be said that Maryland’s automobile manslaughter laws are not nearly as harsh as they should be for individuals convicted of killing another person as a result of a traffic wreck. While car and truck accidents happen all of the time, a percentage of these collisions are fatal. As a Baltimore auto accident lawyer, I and my colleagues have helped dozens of families deal with the tragic loss of a loved one due to another person’s negligence.

Wrongful death suits can be quite commonplace in instances of gross negligence on a driver’s part. Certain factors can make a vehicular manslaughter charge necessary, such as drinking and driving, excessive speed and aggressive driving, even distracted driving is getting the attention of some states as a cause of fatal passenger car and trucking-related collisions. Pedestrians killed by a motorist’s poor judgment are another group that is represented in the gruesome fatal traffic accident statistics.

A recent editorial brought home some of the heart-breaking details that illustrate typical facts surrounding these sad stories of loss and grief. One example of the seeming injustice of Maryland’s traffic laws was an incident where a driver only had to pay two traffic tickets after an accident that killed a gentleman and was allegedly caused by excessive speed, racing and off-road driving.

In another case, a Baltimore County couple lost their 15-year-old son when he died in front of their home having been hit by a van traveling at more than 60mph in a 30mph speed zone. In that instance, it was learned that the license of the 21-year-old driver had previously bee suspended three times for speeding in another state -- arguably more harsh than the punishment he received for the fatal accident he caused in Maryland.

High-speeds and poor judgment can result not only in broken bones and traumatic brain injuries; it can also lead to death or permanent disability. There is no easy way for a family to recover from the loss of a child, parent or bread-winner. Many times the loss hits families and affects the family members for years to come -- sometimes for their entire lives.

Some Maryland officials agree that there exists a major loophole in state law that separates instances of what some would call “ordinary negligence” and that of gross negligence. Some believe that the standard for proving gross negligence is impossibly high to meet here in Maryland, which would explain how many apparently grossly negligent drivers can essential snuff out a person’s life yet only be charged with a simple moving violation as a consequence of their actions.

Hopefully legislators will succeed in tightening up that gap for the sake of every family who has or will lose a loved one to a bad driver. Only time will tell if things change for Maryland residents.

The Ninth Ward: There's no excuse for Maryland's lax vehicular manslaughter laws, HometownAnnapolis.com, February 24, 2010

Drunk driving kills thousands of people every year across the U.S. and Maryland is no exception to this sad statistic. Whether you live in Annapolis, Baltimore, the District or Columbia, MD, every week it is possible to read another in the steady stream of news article covering fatal traffic accidents caused by motorists impaired by alcohol, prescription narcotics and illicit drugs. Most every Maryland injury attorney has represented his or her fair share of victims and their families following a tragic car or truck wreck.

A bill making its way through the Maryland legislature may help to reduce the number of injuries, such as broken bones, head trauma and spinal cord damage, caused by repeat drunk driving offenders. According to reports, two bills are part of the state’s Drunk Driving Elimination Act, which was created in an attempt to reduce the incidence of DUI across Maryland.

One of the bills would require every convicted drunk driving offender to have an ignition interlock installed in his or her vehicle, and to remain in use for a state-mandated period of time -- possibly three months. This potential law, which would affect even first-time DUI offenders, is similar to laws on the books in other states that require the use of ignition interlock devices for people responsible for automobile and trucking-related collisions.

Even though DUI car accidents can result in death and serious, debilitating injuries some groups are against certain portions of the legislation. Not surprisingly, this bill is being opposed by the Alcohol Beverage Institute, which would prefer to have the bill be worded so that only repeat offenders or those individuals facing additional violations are required to have the interlock device attached to their vehicles.

Also going through the state legislature is another bill that would eliminate the right of a motorist to refuse a breath test when pulled over for suspicion of DUI -- or if that individual is a habitual offender. Framers of the bill are facing opposition from personal rights advocates who have a history of defending motorists’ right to lawfully refuse a breath test. Proponents of the second bill say that some defendants in drunken driving cases use their breath test refusal as part of a defense tactic, which can result in a civil penalty such as a license suspension as opposed to being subjected to a criminal trial for drunk driving.

Voicing a painful message: Don't drink and drive, HometownGlenburnie.com, February 27, 2010

A recent Court of Appeals ruling has determined that Maryland health insurance carriers do not necessarily have to cover the medical costs incurred by victims of car and truck accidents. As part of a class-action suit concluded on October 20, Maryland’s top court’s decision is based on a state law that requires automobile insurance companies to carry PIP (or personal injury protection) coverage for driver’s.

As a Maryland auto accident attorney, I understand the typically expensive medical costs associated with car and truck accidents. This is why I and my colleagues always recommend to anyone involved in an injury accident to contact a qualified accident lawyer to review his or her situation. This latest court ruling makes it more difficult for victims of traffic collisions to recover their medical costs following a hospital stay.

The Court of Appeals’ 6-1 decision is a setback for a class of injured motorists who claimed that MAMSI Life & Health Insurance Co. had an obligation to make good on policies requiring it to pay medical expenses, including those resulting from automobile accidents. Had MAMSI paid for beneficiaries’ medical costs, they could have used the insurance money under personal injury protection, or PIP, to cover other expenses, such as lost wages.

The class-action lawsuit began on Sept. 24, 2004, when lead plaintiff Kuei-I Wu sued MAMSI in Baltimore County Circuit Court for breach of contract and related claims, due to injuries incurred following a car accident three years earlier when she was a University of Maryland student.

On April 5, 2007, the circuit court certified as a class all owners of MAMSI health plans since Sept. 23, 2001, who had a car accident and whose PIP coverage was partially or fully exhausted before their treating physicians sought reimbursement from MAMSI, which subsequently had the case moved to U.S. District Court in Baltimore.

Wu claims she sought medical treatment under her MAMSI health policy, which contained a provision that called for coverage regardless of any other insurance she had, including PIP. Wu alleges the insurance company, in violation of the contract provision, required her treating physicians to seek reimbursement through the PIP first before turning to MAMSI.

But since the statutory issue has now been resolved in the company’s favor, the case will go back to the U.S. District Court in Baltimore for the narrower claim that MAMSI breached a provision in the policy contract requiring it to provide health coverage to injured motorists, regardless of the statute. The plaintiffs allege that, contrary to the policy contract, MAMSI’s separate contract with physicians required them to exhaust their driver’s auto insurance coverage before billing the company.

Continue reading "Maryland Auto Accident News: Health Insurance Not Obliged to Cover Crash Victims’ Medical Costs" »