Maryland Injury Law Center

May 14, 2007

Wrongful Death Auto and Truck Accident Verdicts and Settlements in Maryland, Virginia and Washington DC: How Much Are the Recoveries?

According to Metro Verdicts Monthly, the median motor vehicle accident wrongful death case in Maryland is worth $505,000.

This is interesting information. What does this data tell us? Not much. Why? The motor vehicle accident data has little probative value because it does not include the amount of the insurance policy at issue. We have settled fatal accident claims for $20,000 where that is all the insurance, and the defendant had no meaningful assets.

Uninsured motorist cases also bring down the median and average values because plaintiffs’ attorneys are overly reasonable in requesting damages because the plaintiff is often limited in the damages they can recover.

May 7, 2007

$1 Million Brachial Plexus Settlement – Is This a Lot of Money?

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Virginia Lawyers Weekly reports today on a $1,000,000 settlement in a medical malpractice Erb’s palsy case. The interesting thing about this case is that the injuries occurred during a cesarean section. The father of the child claimed he witnessed the obstetrician applying excessive force to the fetal head after the baby’s shoulder did not clear. Plaintiff’s expert testified the doctor failed to make the incision large enough to extract the baby’s head and then inappropriately applied traction to the baby’s still entrapped head. Fortunately, the doctor promptly diagnosed the child with a brachial plexus injury confined to the child’s neck (at C5/C6). After surgery, the child has a good prognosis for a functional arm and hand.

Shoulder dystocia cases are not rare but this is the first case I have seen or read about where the OB/GYN’s malpractice was failing to make a large enough C-section incision. There are many claims that involve failing to provide a c-section.

These injuries occur with babies that are much larger than typical or, as is frequently the case when the mother has diagnosed or undiagnosed gestational diabetes (or is just a diabetic). The big thing with this problem is seeing the problem before it manifests itself.

May 3, 2007

Protecting the Injury Victim During Deposition

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Goal number one when your client is giving a deposition is to do no harm.

The greatest harm your client can do in almost any personal injury case in his/her deposition is to get caught in a lie. Clients are most prone to “lie” about prior car accidents because they genuinely do not remember them. But a smart insurance company lawyer may turn an innocent failure to recall into a litmus test on the client’s credibility. As much as we as personal injury lawyers like to make the cases about ourselves – particularly when we get a great verdict, we all do it – the importance of our credibility/likability is a distant second to the importance to that of our client.

How can you solve the problem? Obviously, a good attorney spends time before the deposition discussing the issue with the client, explaining in very direct terms that prior medical history or claims history will be uncovered by any competent defense attorney or adjuster with access to a computer and/or the medical records. But, again, in some circumstances, the client may not remember whether they were injured on the job or made a claim for a car accident in which it involved them.

March 21, 2007

Slip and Fall Cases on Snow and Ice: Will You Win?

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

I stumbled on a Metro Verdicts Monthly from last year that examined the success plaintiffs have at trial in slip and fall cases on snow and ice. In Maryland, defendants prevailed 62% of the time.

The difficulty in these cases often lies not with whether the defendant was negligent, but whether the plaintiff assumed the risk because he/she appreciated the danger of walking on the snow/ice. Under Maryland law, this is the assumption of the risk, unless the plaintiff lacked the free will to avoid the danger. This is presumably the case when going to work, entering or leaving your home, and tending to other necessities of life. That no reasonable alternative path was available does not reduce the free will standard.

Morgan State v. Walker

March 19, 2007

Maryland Drivers Who Get Speeding Tickets Continue to Speed According to University of Maryland Study

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Ever wonder why your insurance rates go up when you get a speeding ticket? A study of 3.7 million licensed Maryland drivers shows that ticketing does not reduce drivers’ likelihood of getting another ticket for speeding.

Researchers at the University of Maryland School of Medicine looked at Maryland’s licensed drivers and found that getting a speeding ticket almost doubles the risk of receiving a subsequent speeding citation.

The study also turned up interesting data comparing those who go to court for speeding tickets and those that do not. As every Maryland driver knows, if you get a speeding ticket and you were not doing a complete Dale Earnhardt impression, you can either go to court (where you will invariably be found guilty so your best bet is to plead guilty) or you can pay the fine by mail. The University of Maryland study found that the likelihood of receiving another speeding ticket was 12 percent among drivers who had opted to pay fines and received points on their driving records compared to eight percent among those who received probation before judgment (PBJ). This makes sense. The driver who cared enough to go to court is probably more likely to slow down.

March 16, 2007

Videotaping a Defense Medical Exam: Should Personal Injury Lawyers Explore This Option?

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

When I received an advertisement for a book on Deposing Difficult Doctors by Florida personal injury lawyer, Kim Hart, the title caught my attention. The advertisement included excerpts from the book. What caught my interest is videotaping “independent” medical exams (IMEs). The book makes two arguments in favor of videotaping IMEs:

1. “If you make it a practice to videotape all compulsory medical examinations, you soon will have videotapes of most of the doctors used by the insurance companies in your area. Give your client a copy of a previous videotaped compulsory medical examination and the transcript from the examination of the doctor who is scheduled to examine her. This will take all the mystery and surprise out of the situation and help calm your client’s fear of the unknown.”

2. “A defense-oriented CME [I assume this stands for compulsory medical exam] doctor often plays Mr. Nice Guy at the examination. He will make sympathetic statements to your client such as, “I can see you have suffered a lot” or “I can tell that this injury has had a serious effect on your life.” If a physician is two-faced and projects Mr. Nice Guy at the compulsory medical examination but Attila the Hun at trial, showing the jury a tape of the examination can communicate to them instantly what a scheme he is.”

March 7, 2007

Most Outrageous Lawsuits: The Attack on Personal Injury Lawyers Continues Unabated

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

America Online (AOL) is running an article titled “Most Outrageous Lawsuits.” It appears in the money and finance section of AOL and was also prominently displayed on the AOL home page. As a frequent user of AOL (I really love their product) for the last 11 years, I keep seeing this article over and over.

The “crazy lawsuits” AOL describes come directly from groups like Citizens Against Lawsuit Abuse (CALA) and the American Tort Reform Association (ATRA), groups who see personal injury lawyers as the great Satan whose sole mission is to destroy corporate America while lining our pockets with millions of dollars.

These groups rely on a false premise: that the American public cannot be trusted and American juries give out ridiculous awards that unsubstantiated by the evidence or even common sense. The groups that vilify personal injury lawyers are entitled to their opinion and they are not wrong that frivolous lawsuits sometimes get filed. What it does not entitle them to is their own facts. But they often make up their own facts, manufacturing insane lawsuits and verdicts that never happened.

February 23, 2007

Don’t Object Just Because You Can: Dr. Robert O. Gordon’s Deposition

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

My partner, Laura Zois, conducted a videotape trial cross-examination of frequent flyer defense medical expert, Dr. Robert O. Gordon, a doctor who makes a lot of money working for insurance companies and, frequently, for State Farm. During his examination, he spewed out many inappropriate and factually incorrect statements. Here is an example:

Q. And why not, Doctor? Would you explain the reasons for your opinion?

A. Well, first of all, there was nothing in the emergency room report, or in the report of the doctors that he was sent to by his attorney, that indicated that —

February 16, 2007

Lawyers Using Handwriting Analysis in Jury Selection

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The National Law Journal reports that a few personal injury lawyers are relying on handwriting experts to help the lawyers in selecting juries. Handwriting analysis uses various clues, including the amount of pressure used, the size and angles of the letters, and spaces between words to paint a picture of a potential juror.

Attorneys have no opportunity to see the handwriting of prospective jurors. But personal injury lawyers in other jurisdictions review juror questionnaires that would provide a handwriting analysis. I remember reading somewhere that handwriting that is flamboyant and flowery would be preferable than tight and concise. (I’m not sure what someone would make of mine because it is illegible!) But if I practiced in a jurisdiction where I saw the jurors’ handwriting, I would want to see a study on point before spending a lot of resources analyzing their handwriting.

February 6, 2007

$8 Million Verdict in Prince George’s County

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Yesterday my partner, Laura G. Zois, tried a wrongful death auto accident case in Prince George’s County against Allstate. The jury awarded our client $8 million. Allstate made no offer to resolve the case.

We cannot collect the entire amount not only because of Maryland’s cap on pain and suffering damages but also because there is no first-party bad faith on uninsured motorist claims in Maryland. I understand that the Maryland General Assembly introduced a bill to bring the first party bad faith to Maryland.

I try very hard to keep the “insurance companies are pure evil” sentiment out of the Maryland Personal Injury Lawyer Blog because I think simplistic generalizations defeat real discussion of the issues. I teach Insurance Law at the University of Baltimore Law School and try even harder there to remain balanced in my approach to the class.