The Court giveth and the Court taketh away or really the other way around. Maryland highest Court issued another ruling in a case that has been closely watched by personal injury lawyers statewide. The previous ruling by the Court of Appeals was commented on here extensively and critically. http://www.maryland-law.com/library/marylands-highest-court-takes-on-damages-cap-in-drowning-case.cfm andhttp://www.maryland-law.com/blog/maryland-court-of-appeals-upholds-damages-cap-in-injury-cases.cfm

The latest development in this case is a more favorable ruling again emanating from the Court of Appeals wherein it was decided that damages for conscious pain and suffering could be proven by expert testimony rather than eyewitness testimony, where there was no eyewitness to a child's swimming pool drowning death at Crofton Country Club in Anne Arundel County.

The defense argument which had been sustained by the trial court was effectively "yes because our lifeguards were so negligent that they did not see a six year old drown in our pool no one can say when he went from conscious, healthy, living six-year-old to an unconscious soon to be deceased six-year-old." Thus, there can be no objective means for a jury to determine how long he suffered.

Wow, it is the old if a tree falls in the woods and nobody is there to hear it does it make a sound defense. Obviously, the tree makes a sound and living beings who drown suffer. Glad the Court got this aspect of the case right . Tragic that they can't appreciate the injustice that Maryland's non-economic damages cap works on the most severely injured.

 
Be the first to comment!
Post a Comment