From the Listserve Edited by Louise A. Lock
Louise A. Lock (Louise A. Lock, P.A.) received her J.D. from the University of Baltimore School of Law and an L.L.M. in Health Law from the Widener University School of Law. She serves on the MTLA’s Board of Governors and␣ is a member of the President’s Club as a Founder.␣ Ms. Lock is also Editor-in-Chief of the Trial Reporter. Her practice concentrates in the areas of medical malpractice, drug products liability and personal injury.
Subject: Use of Criminal / Traffic Conviction in Civil Trial
From: “Roger S. Weinberg”
rogerweinberg@msn.com: Defendant in District Court criminal trial is convicted of negligent riving. De- fendant files Cross-claim against Plaintiff in civil trial for injuries. Is there a case that says the prior conviction (reasonable doubt standard) can be used in the civil trial to bar his claim under contributory negligence principles? What if Defendant appeals his criminal conviction and gets a PBJ on appeal to the Circuit Court?
From: “Charles E. Matz”
matz@comcast.net: 1. If the defendant pleads guilty in traffic court, the guilty plea is admissible in a subsequent civil case. See Miller v. Hall, 161 Md. 111 (1931). It is admissible as an admission.
2. If the defendant simply paid the traffic ticket by mailing a check, that action (and the fact that a traffic citation was issued by the officer) is not admissible in a subsequent civil case. Briggeman v. Albert, 322 Md. 133 (1991). The action of mailing the check is equivalent to plea of “no contest,” which is also not admissible in a subsequent civil action. Paying a traffic ticket does not nec- essarily mean that the driver admits guilt; it may have been more costly for the driver to fight the ticket than to pay it. 3. If the defendant is tried in traffic court and is found guilty, the conviction is not admissible in a subsequent civil action. See
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kuhl, 296 Md. 446, 450 (1983); Brooks v. Daley, 185, 196 (1966). See also Eagan v. Calhoun, 347 Md. 72 (1997) (collecting cases). It is true that the standard of proof in traffic court is higher than that in a civil case. However, much less is at stake in traffic court. A defendant may not (and in most cases, would not) hire an attor- ney to fight a traffic ticket for, say, $75.00. Thus, it would not be fair to use the con- viction against the defendant in a subsequent civil case in which he is being sued for say, $100,000. Also, there is no right to a jury trial in most traffic court cases. Traffic court procedures are also much more streamlined than Circuit Court procedures, and even DistrictCourt civil procedures (i.e., no discovery). The prior conviction does not bar the
defendant’s claim. Indeed, the conviction (regardless of what happened in the ap- peal) is not even admissible in the civil trial. If you so much as breathe one word about the conviction at the trial, the judge would most likely declare a mistrial. Iwould add that there is a belief that the jurors in the civil trial should make their own judgment about the case, and that decision making process should not be affected by some other person’s opinion about the case.
Subject: re: Bankruptcy Stay/Filing Complaint
From: “Scott Robertson”
scottrobertson@lawspa.net:
Listmates,I have a case I need to file - the statute of limitations runs in about a month. My client just received a notice that the tortfeasor has filed bankruptcy and the notice of stay. With the statute approaching I feel that I need to file the complaint, but do a need to file a motion to lift the automatic stay to the extent of insurance coverage first? Do I file and let the defense raise the issue?Any thoughts would be appreciated.
From: “Sean Gritz”
SGritz5@aol.com: I’d file the complaint and a motion to lift the stay to the extent that there is in- surance available at the same time. Let them raise any complaints with it, but you are covering yourself for limitations pur- poses.
From: “LJFeldman”
ljfeldman@earthlink.net: Scott, If you file the Complaint, you will be in violation of the automatic stay. You probably do not have sufficient time to have the stay lifted prior to the statute running. I believe that the statute of limi- tations stops upon the filing of the bankruptcy, thus limitations will not toll. I can’t remember if that is by statute or case law in MD. You may want to research that issue a little, and if the statute stops running, you will have plenty of time to file the lift stay and then the complaint.
From: “James P. Koch”
jkoch1@ix.netcom.com: For claims against a bankrupt defen- dant, the statute of limitations is automatically extended until thirty days after bankruptcy court’s notice of the ter- mination or expiration of the bankruptcy stay when the case is concluded , 11 U.S.C. §108. If you want to file a com- plaint now anyway, you need to file a motion for relief from stay before filing the complaint. State court judgments and orders entered in violation of the stay are generally void, and you can be hit with monetary sanctions for violating the stay.
24 Trial Reporter Summer 2003
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56