Personal Injury Law

Maryland?s Cap on Damages in Lead Paint Cases

The Maryland Court of Appeals has two big cases in 2009 ? one a lead paint case, the other a medical malpractice claim - in which plaintiffs seek a path around Maryland?s non-economic damages cap after big jury verdicts. Plaintiffs lost Round 1 today.

In Green v. NBS, Plaintiffs? lead paint lawyers argued that the statutory cap on non-economic damages in Maryland does not apply to personal injury claims authorized by the Consumer Protection Act. Specifically, and creatively, Plaintiffs claimed that a lawsuit brought under the CPA is not a ?personal injury action? and the Maryland legislature did not want a cap on deceptive practiced covered by the CPA.

The Maryland high court, however, found that Plaintiffs? CPA claim is a personal injury action, and that CJ § 11-108 is applicable to a proceeding in which a consumer asserts a claim for money damages to compensate for injuries sustained as a result of a Consumer Protection Act violation. The court?s reasoning is, essentially, that if it looks like a personal injury claim and talks like a personal injury claim, then it is a personal injury claim.

Plaintiffs? lawyers made two other arguments. The first was DOA: the cap violates the Maryland constitution. Again, Plaintiffs? lawyers tried to put a CPA spin on the old argument, arguing that a cap on a CPA claim violates the prohibition against the enactment of ?special laws? in the Maryland Constitution. But the argument went nowhere with the court.

Full post as published by Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog on July 21, 2009 (boomark / email).