Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyers have likely brought claims under 20-601 of the Transportation Code. If one is hit by an uninsured, disappearing or unidentified driver of a motor vehicle, and sustains injury, a claim may be made against MAIF. There are many pitfalls. Notice must timely given. There are many classes of individuals who cannot bring claims [e.g. one operating a car that itself has no uninsured motorist coverage]. But, if the qualifications are satisfied, then a claim for personal injury or property damage may be made against the fund. Due to the intricacies of these claims, you should always consult a knowledgeable Baltimore personal injury lawyer early on regarding your rights under this section.
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
The general concepts involved in Maryland's Boulevard rule are explored in other chapters. Seasoned Baltimore personal injury lawyers of likely dealt with the question of whether a "favored" driver be denied recovery? If sufficient evidence is put forth that the favored driver was in fact negligent, and the proximate cause of the accident, then the question of whether or not recover is barred on contributory negligence principles is for the jury. Speeding by the favored driver is rarely enough to relive that driver of their statutory preference. Dean v. Redmiles, 280 Md. 137 . Experienced Baltimore personal injurylawyers know that the favored driver's driving drunk on the wrong side of the road without headlights is enough to lift the statutory preference, and a person injured by that conduct may recover, even if technically the "unfavored" driver.
Friday, June 24, 2011
HOW MUCH IS MY BALTIMORE PERSONAL INJURY CASE WORTH? I was hit in the rear. Isn't the other driver at fault?
Most seasoned Baltimore personal injury lawyers will tell you the answer, generally, is yes. All drivers must use reasonable care for the safety of others. If one of those drivers follows too closely, or fails to pay attention, and strikes the driver in front, then, yes, they are at fault. But that's not automatic. Many experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyers have argued that the driver of the car in front has responsibilities too. They must signal an intent to slow, stop, or turn. If they fail to adhere to these, it may well be that they caused or contributed to the accident. And of course, there is the "emergency doctrine", discussed in another chapter, sometimes seized upon by judges to deny a claim.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
One may think that if someone was involved in criminal activity, or, at least in conduct that violated a statue or ordinance, and that conduct played a part in injuring another person, the violator would be responsible for the injury. An experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyer will tell that person that showing a violation of a statue is only half of the battle. Certainly, proof of the violation can be presented, and may be considered as some evidence of negligence. Seasoned Baltimore personalinjury lawyers, representing the defense, have successfully argued that unless the conduct that constituted the violation was also a negligent act that directly caused the injury, there is no responsibility. The law calls this concept "proximate causation".
Of course everyone has the obligation to look and listed for a train before crossing a track. Experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyers know that both the operator of the train, and anyone crossing the rails, have the duty to us reasonable care to avoid an accident. But what about an injury that occurs on the railroad's property, or on their right-of-way, but does not involve a train. Unless the individual has permission to be on the property, they are considered trespassers, or what knowledgeable Baltimore personal injury lawyers know are called "bare licensees". The railroad owes no duty of reasonable care to these individuals. The railroad would only be liable for injuries that it, or it's employees intentionally or wantonly caused.
Monday, June 13, 2011
An employee who sustains an accidental injury arising out of his or her employment is entitled to worker's compensation benefits. Experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyers advise their clients that "arising out of" employment means that the injury results from some incident of employment. That is to say, if the injury occurs during works hours, at a place where the employee is expected at that time, and results from an activity reasonably related to the work, then it arises out of that work. In that instance, the knowledgeable Baltimore personal injury lawyer will seek worker's compensation benefits for the injured client. If there is evidence that the injury is related to something other that work activities e.g. a drug interaction or heart attack, then an aggressive Baltimore personal injury lawyer will need to examine the cause of the injury for evidence of the negligence or culpability of a third party if their client is to recover.
Friday, June 10, 2011
HOW MUCH IS MY BALTIMORE PERSONAL INJURY CASE WORTH? I got hurt at work. Do I have a personal injury case, too?
An employee who sustains an accidental injury arising out of his or her employment is entitled to worker's compensation benefits. These are typically wage loss payments and medical expenses. The nature of worker's compensation injures are explored and discussed elsewhere on this site. The thorough Baltimore personal injury lawyer will always explore a possible "third-party" component to any workers compensation claim. In a straight worker's compensation claim, it does not matte if the employer was at fault for the accident. Benefits are payable if the injury occurred in the course of employment. But what if the injury was caused by a negligently designed machine of piece of equipment? What if the worker's compensation injury was a car accident with an "at-fault" driver that did not work for the employer. Experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyers frequently make two-cases-out-of-one, collecting wage loss and medical benefits for their clients under the worker's compensation scheme, and separate damages for pain and suffering via a personal injury action.
Thursday, June 9, 2011
Baltimore personal injurylaw provides that a local government is responsible for injuries to pedestrians caused by an unsafe condition resulting from negligent design or construction on public streets and sidewalks. Knowledgeable Baltimore personal injury lawyers also know that that local government has a duty to warn about dangerous conditions on public streets and sidewalks that are created by third persons. The local government is charged with knowledge of what should have been discovered by reasonable inspection. Many experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyers also know that the local government also has an obligation to remedy dangerous conditions on private property that could cause harm to pedestrians on public streets and sidewalks.
Monday, June 6, 2011
In other chapters, what some Baltimore personal injury lawyers might call "garden variety" negligence is discussed. Car accidents, slips, falls and the like- where the injuries might be mild to serious, but not life threatening. What if someone's conduct leads to the death of another? Baltimore personalinjury law provides that where a "wrongful act" [an act, including criminal conduct, neglect, or improper operation of a vessel] causes the death of another, an action against that person may be maintained, and must generally be filed within 3 years. The action is to be for the benefit of a spouse, child or parent, although not necessarily brought my them. Knowledgeable Baltimorepersonal injury lawyers know that if there is not a spouse, child or parent, then the action shall be for the benefit of a blood or marital relative who was dependent on the decedent for support. A spouse, child or parent may recover as their damages: monetary loss, mental anguish, emotional pain, loss of society, companionship, comfort, protection, care, attention, advice, counsel ,training, and guidance as applicable.
Friday, June 3, 2011
Evidence that a person was traveling faster than the posted speed limit – while perhaps difficult to prove- can be considered evidence that the speeder was negligent in the operation of the vehicle. Knowledgeable Baltimore personal injurylawyers have argued that, even if the person is within the posted limit, they still may be driving to fast for prevailing conditions, and therefore negligent. Experienced Baltimore personal injury lawyers may have handled racing [cars engaged in a "contest of speed"] cases. Haddock v. State, 192 A.2d 105. Whether or not cars were racing is a question of fact that must be proven to a jury. If there is a race, and there is an accident, it is considered negligence as a matter of law, and all participants are liable for any injuries caused, irrespective of which care actually caused the injury. Walker v. Hall, 369 A.2d 105. Note speeding and racing are separate offenses, but racing and reckless driving are not. Your Baltimore personal injury lawyer may know that is also, separately, illegal to serve as a "flagman" for a race.
Thursday, June 2, 2011
Knowledgeable Baltimore personal injury lawyers know that the drivers of emergency vehicles have a duty to operate those vehicles safely, even when responding to emergency calls, in the pursuit of suspects, or responding to a fire alarm. These emergency responders are liable for acts of ordinary negligence, but their actions, or inactions, are to be judged in light of their emergency responsibilities. However, so long as audio and visual alarms are used, the law does provide certain privileges to the operators of those vehicles. ExperiencedBaltimore personal injury lawyers know these emergency operators may park or stand in areas that other vehicles may not; pass through a red light if safe to do so; speed safely; and disregard directional signals. Nevertheless, they are always charged with the responsibility of using reasonable care and diligence as required by the circumstances of the emergency.