Business & Tech

Report: Court of Appeals Upholds Rule Favoring Small Businesses

Maryland remains one of four states with contributory negligence doctrine, the Gazette reported.

By Kirsten Petersen

Small businesses in Maryland secured a big victory this week when the Court of Appeals upheld the state’s contributory negligence doctrine, the Gazette reported.

Contributory negligence prevents an injured person from winning legal damages against another party if he is partially to blame for his injuries, regardless of how involved the second party might have been in the circumstances that led to the injuries.

Interested in local real estate?Subscribe to Patch's new newsletter to be the first to know about open houses, new listings and more.

For small businesses, this means that they may not be held accountable for large legal damages, which Jack Mozloom of the National Federation of Independent Business told the Gazette could “ruin a business overnight.”

The appeals court case was James Coleman v. Soccer Association of Columbia, which involved a volunteer coach, Coleman, who suffered severe facial fractures from the metal crossbar of a soccer goal, according to the newspaper. After kicking a ball into the goal, he jumped up and grabbed the crossbar, causing the unanchored goal to fall backwards and crush his face, the Gazette reported.

Interested in local real estate?Subscribe to Patch's new newsletter to be the first to know about open houses, new listings and more.

The court determined that the soccer association’s negligence contributed to the injury but also Coleman’s own negligence, the newspaper reported. The contributory negligence doctrine does not require the soccer association to pay damages.

Maryland is one of four states that stand by this rule. The rest of the country follows a comparative fault or comparative negligence doctrine, which splits the fault by percentage, the newspaper reported.

While business groups praised the decision, Maryland State Delegate Luiz Simmons told the Gazette that the doctrine “is for some a very harsh rule” because it bars “many otherwise worthy victims from being compensated in an injury.”

Read the full story at the Gazette.net.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here