I tried to keep abreast of verdicts and settlements in personal injury cases in Maryland by reading the Maryland Daily Record, keeping up on 
the Maryland Association for Justice listserv, and getting the reports from Jury Verdict Research, Metro Verdicts, and just what I hear on the street from other lawyers.
The result of one case tells you nothing. But if you keep following jury verdicts and settlements, you see patterns emerge. Here are ten things I have learned from this process:
Maryland personal injury lawyers are not permitted to say that they specialize in personal injury law. This may soon change.
The Maryland Court of Appeals is considering amendments to Rule 7.4 of the Lawyers’ Rules of Professional Conduct that would permit a Maryland personal injury attorney — or any lawyer for that matter — who has been certified as a specialist in a particular area of law to hold themselves out to the public as a specialist.
What would the attorney’s qualifications be for specialization? I think this may be the challenge that led the court to defer ruling on this issue, which they did last week.
[2018 Update: I DO specialize in personal injury law! We are now allowed to make this claim.]
There are an unbelievable number of variables involved in arriving at a settlement value for a personal injury case. Compensation offers vary
wildly because there are so many different factors with different weights attached to them.
But assuming there is no issue about the amount of money available* to pay on the claim, the single most reliable way to predict settlement value is the type of injury. There are two key factors to consider when looking at the type of injury.
I’m don’t use this blog much for safety tips. Not because they are unimportant, but because you can get that information elsewhere. However, with
Labor Day weekend coming upon us, I have to drive to the Eastern Shore so I’d like to be safe. And I get to feel unbelievably superior when I write these things. So let’s talk about using car mirrors properly because it seems like few people know how to use them and fewer understand their limitations. Please read this in a condescending, know-it-all tone.
Mirrors are one of the most vital parts of an automobile. Too many drivers on Maryland roads today, view mirrors as important as getting a NFL Red Zone is to the “Kinky Boots” musical cast playing at the Hippodrome later this month. They are jerking their heads around, like a madman before every aggressive, unsafe lane change they make.
Big rig trucks are dangerous. They cause serious injuries and they kill people. Our law firm is currently handling 5 wrongful death truck 
accident cases. It is beyond awful.
I think we have established this fact on this blog. What we have not talked about specifically is the risk to truck drivers. Driving a truck was the single most hazardous occupation in the United States last year, taking 852 lives. Logging that many hours on the road with vehicles that are tough to control… I’m surprised the number is not higher.
Compounding this tragedy is the lack of uninsured motorist benefits for truck drivers. Commercial trucks have liability insurance requirements. Most trucks must be insured at a minimum of $750,000. (It is a crime that this cap has not been raised in the last zillion years but that is a whole different issue.)
Facebook discovery is all the rage amongst defense lawyers in personal injury cases. The reason is twofold. First, it gets defense lawyers 
access to information that might lead to admissible evidence that could diminish a plaintiff’s claim. Rarely will it relate to liability but there is an actual possibility that out-of-context (or in context) it would lead a jury to believe their pain is less than stated.
The second reason, and I think an equally driving force, is that defense lawyers have a new tool to harass the plaintiff(s). Why? Because there is at least a subpopulation of defense lawyers who want to punish plaintiffs and their lawyers for bringing any personal injury claim. This is the type of discovery that can be done with no real effort. All you have to do is ask. That is the real beauty of this discovery from the defense lawyer’s perspective. You just cut and paste from the guy down the hall or something you find online (I’m helping them here) and then just shout “reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence” if the plaintiff’s attorney objects.
Bill Cosby has been in the news a bit. As you know, dozens of women have alleged that Bill Cosby drugged and sexually assaulted them. The claims date back to the 1960s, with the alleged
victims ranging from random women that Cosby encountered to other celebrities. A recent lawsuit even alleged that Cosby assaulted underage women. Obviously, some very serious allegations.
A few lawsuits have been filed already, but most of them allege defamation or some other cause of action – separate from sexual assault. Why? Because most of these claims allege conduct after the statute of limitations expired. Of course, someone will try to end-run the statute of limitations. But as Americans are now seeing, statutes of limitation are cruelly unforgiving, even when anyone’s sense of justice and fair play are pitted against it.
But what would a lawsuit against Bill Cosby even look like? Specifically, what would a lawsuit against Bill Cosby look like, if filed in the state of Maryland? Sexual assault and rape are not their own torts – but they are crimes. These torts may be brought forward and filed in a civil lawsuit for these crimes.
I hate the New England Patriots. I started rooting against them the minute they started getting good in 2001. While I hate Tom Brady as a byproduct, I have to admit that — notwithstanding 
maybe Bridget Moynahan — he is pretty much the epitome of what we want our great athletes to be.
Adding to my hatred of the Patriots, I’ve sued — and settled — a malpractice case against the Pats in which they took a score of ridiculous positions, including the position that the claim should be arbitrated by the CBA, a claim they first made years after the case was filed. Their arrogance over the course of the case was pretty much what you would expect. The idea of settlement was completely ridiculous until the point where it wasn’t. But I long admired their winning and, it goes without saying, the breadth and scope of their evil.
Over the years, one theme I have revisited on my blogs is the distorted perception people have in regards to our civil justice system’s administration of personal injury cases. In my mind, there are two main distorters – maybe a word I made up – that mislead people: large jury verdicts and how the civil justice system treats famous people. Prime example: Tom Brady’s Deflategate lawsuit which I really think underscores some of these distortions.
The Maryland Court of Special Appeals recently decided Johnson v. Franklin, a lead paint case with an unique discovery issue.
I’m glad you kept reading, you law scholar you! Anyway, these are the facts. A lead paint case is filed in Baltimore City Circuit Court pertaining to a property where the Plaintiff used to live. The property had long since been rehabbed and sold. Therefore, Plaintiff could not just walk in the door to do the lead-paint testing that he claimed he needed for his lawsuit. As a result, Plaintiff sends a letter to the current owner, asking if he can stop by for some “non-invasive environmental testing” of the property. The owner does not respond, which prompts the plaintiff to file a complaint to perpetuate the evidence. Specifically, he seeks an “equitable bill of discovery,” which would grant him a right of access to the property. The current owner does not respond to the motion but appears at a hearing pro se. The court denies the motion because the current owner’s privacy interests outweigh the Plaintiff’s need to conduct testing.
This makes little sense to me. How burdensome is it to have your property tested? I can’t figure out why the property owner would fight it either. Plaintiff agrees and appeals to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, alleging that the trial court abused its discretion by denying the complaint/request/petition.
Social media is great. It’s an excellent way to maintain contact with old friends. It’s an excellent place to get news before any TV station gets it. You can even follow Miller & Zois on Facebook. We are pretty cute, right?
But it is a scary new world. How many times have you heard about someone gets fired or disciplined because of an ill-advised post or comment? How many politicians have resigned because they thought it was a good idea to send a “private” message to an intern? How many people have been arrested from a tip found on social media?
Facebook and other forms of social media can also spell trouble for lawyers, too. In New Jersey, two attorneys were recently sanctioned for sending a Facebook friend request to another party.
