On February 19, Associate Policy Director Sarah Sample testified before the Judiciary Committee in opposition to HB 594 – Civil Actions – Motor Vehicle Accidents Involving Vulnerable Individuals – Comparative Negligence.
This bill would create a new comparative fault standard in Maryland and upend the state’s well-established and carefully balanced contributory negligence standard, without any corresponding adjustments to other components of Maryland’s longstanding balanced approach to tort claims.
The current standard of contributory negligence makes certain that when county employees have been negligent, and found to be at fault for the types of claims described in the bill, there is no question as to a plaintiff’s ability to recover damages. Additionally, the “last clear chance” exception functions in a way that plaintiffs still do have some existing potential to recover damages even if there is some fault in their own actions. Maryland’s doctrine of joint and several liability also represents an important part of the State’s balanced approach to such lawsuits. Taken together, Maryland has a thoughtful approach that is sensitive to residents from two angles. It allows for reasonable recovery of damages and a sensitivity to the taxpayer burden of excessive or prolonged government litigation.
The proposed shift to comparative negligence, especially in the absence of any changes to the other portions of Maryland’s current balanced system, would likely cause the number of claims to increase, give life to previously meritless or frivolous claims, and cause these cases to take longer and become more difficult to resolve.
More on MACo’s Advocacy:
