Two day care workers recently pleaded guilty to criminal charges after forcing two of their toddler-aged students to engage in a fistfight.  Could they be held civilly liable for their actions?

Earlier this month, a federal trial judge ruled that a hospital and surgery center could not be held liable for a surgeon’s alleged failure to obtain a patient’s informed consent prior to surgery.

In a lead paint trial earlier this month, a Baltimore City jury found a defendant landlord negligent, but declined to award damages to the plaintiffs. 

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration describes distracted driving as a “dangerous epidemic on America’s roadways.”  Combating this epidemic are a group of Howard County high school students.

While with his driving instructor, a student driver is involved in an auto accident.  May the driving instructor be responsible?  In Maryland, the answer is found in the 1970 decision of Greenway v. Graft.

Happy Thanksgiving!  And if you are traveling on the highway this holiday, be sure to buckle up.

While you might expect the phrase “sovereign immunity” to live in the palaces of kings and queens, you may be surprised to learn that this ancient royal doctrine also rides DC Metro.

According to the Maryland Court of Special Appeals, an injured party’s execution of a Release of all claims may not bar a subsequent claim for underinsured motorist benefits against her own insurance company.

Where evidence exists to generate both defenses, a jury must have the opportunity on a verdict sheet to consider these separate and distinct defenses.

Presently, Maryland is one of only five “contributory negligence” states, meaning that in a negligence action, a plaintiff who was in any way negligent is barred from recovery, even when the plaintiff was only “1% negligent.”  That may soon change.

"I wish I had an answer to that because I'm tired of answering that question." – Yogi Berra.

Earlier this month, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals held that a parent may not legally bind his or her minor child to a pre-injury release of tort liability in favor of a commercial enterprise.

If every dog has its day, pit bull owners wonder when the Maryland General Assembly will consider legislation to overturn the Court of Appeals’ decision declaring the breed “inherently dangerous.”

Believing that the Court of Appeals barked up the wrong tree in declaring pit bulls to be "inherently dangerous," legislative leaders have formed a task force to find ways around the controversial decision.

In an opinion sure to infuriate pit bull owners and scare landlords, Maryland’s highest court has made owning pit bulls the equivalent of possessing canine TNT.

If buses could fly, must I prove why before I have a case I can try?