|Docket No.||Opinion Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|No. 9||ECR||Sep 10 2012
|Jul 9 2013||5-2||Eldridge||ST 2012|
Issue - Tort Law - Should this Court ameliorate or repudiate the doctrine of contributory negligence and replace it with a comparative negligence regime?
Holding: In a 5-2 decision, the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that the General Assembly’s repeated failure to pass legislation abrogating the defense of contributory negligence is very strong evidence that the legislative policy in Maryland is to retain the principle of contributory negligence. As a result, the Court declined to repudiate the doctrine of contributory negligence and replace it with comparative negligence.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders|
|Apr 20 2012||Writ of Ceriorari granted.|
|Jun 22 2012||Electronic Case Record|
|Jul 11 2012||Brief amici curaie of Local Government Insurance Trust, et al. filed.|
|Brief amici curaie of American Tort Reform Association, et al. filed.|
|Brief amici curaie of Maryland Chamber of Commerce, et al. filed.|
|Jul 9 2013||Decision.|