Construction Accident Complaint - Maryland

CONSTRUCTION ACCIDENT COMPLAINT

Table of Contents

1. Caption
2. Parties
3. Jurisdiction and Venue
4. Factual Allegations
5. Count I — Negligence
6. Count II — Premises Liability
7. Count III — Safety-Rule Violations / Evidence of Negligence
8. Count IV — Product Liability
9. Damages
10. Jury Demand
11. State-Specific Notes

Caption

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR [________________________________] COUNTY, MARYLAND

CASE NO. [____]

Parties

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] is an individual residing at [ADDRESS], [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Maryland [ZIP CODE], who was employed as a [JOB TITLE/TRADE].

2. Defendant [GENERAL CONTRACTOR NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE] with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS], the general contractor.

3. Defendant [SUBCONTRACTOR NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE] with its principal place of business at [ADDRESS].

4. Defendant [PROPERTY OWNER NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE/INDIVIDUAL] at [ADDRESS], the owner of the premises.

5. Defendant [EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER NAME] is a [ENTITY TYPE] at [ADDRESS], the manufacturer of [EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION].

Jurisdiction and Venue

6. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 1-501.

7. Venue is proper in [COUNTY] County pursuant to Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 6-201 because the cause of action arose in this county.

Factual Allegations

8. The construction project at [PROJECT ADDRESS], [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Maryland, was managed by Defendant General Contractor.

9. Plaintiff was employed by [EMPLOYER NAME] and was performing [JOB DUTIES] on [DATE OF ACCIDENT].

10. On [DATE OF ACCIDENT], at approximately [TIME], Plaintiff was [DESCRIPTION OF WORK ACTIVITY] when [DESCRIPTION OF ACCIDENT].

11. Plaintiff sustained severe injuries including [DESCRIPTION OF INJURIES].

12. Plaintiff was not contributorily negligent in any manner. Plaintiff exercised reasonable care for his/her own safety at all relevant times.

13. Workers' compensation is the exclusive remedy against Plaintiff's employer. This action is against third parties whose negligence caused Plaintiff's injuries.

Count I — Negligence

14. Plaintiff re-alleges all preceding paragraphs.

15. Defendants owed Plaintiff a duty of reasonable care.

16. Defendants breached their duty by:

☐ Failing to provide adequate fall protection
☐ Failing to maintain scaffolding and platforms
☐ Failing to barricade hazardous areas
☐ Failing to provide PPE and safety equipment
☐ Failing to implement and enforce safety plans
☐ Failing to train workers on safety protocols
☐ Failing to conduct safety inspections
☐ Failing to warn of known hazards
☐ Failing to coordinate subcontractor activities
☐ [OTHER SPECIFIC NEGLIGENCE]

17. Plaintiff was free from contributory negligence.

18. Defendants' negligence was the proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

Count II — Premises Liability

19. Plaintiff re-alleges all preceding paragraphs.

20. Defendant Property Owner owed Plaintiff the duty of care owed to an invitee — to keep the premises in a reasonably safe condition and to warn of known or discoverable dangers.

21. The premises contained a dangerous condition, namely [DESCRIPTION], which Defendant Property Owner knew or should have known about.

22. Defendant Property Owner failed to remedy or warn of the dangerous condition.

23. Plaintiff was free from contributory negligence.

24. The premises condition was the proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

Count III — Safety-Rule Violations / Evidence of Negligence

25. Plaintiff re-alleges all preceding paragraphs.

26. Federal OSHA standards (29 CFR Part 1926) and Maryland Occupational Safety and Health Act (Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 5-101 et seq.) apply to this worksite.

27. Defendants violated:

☐ 29 CFR 1926.451 et seq. — Scaffolding
☐ 29 CFR 1926.501 et seq. — Fall protection
☐ 29 CFR 1926.1400 et seq. — Cranes and Derricks in Construction (Subpart CC)
☐ 29 CFR 1926.651 et seq. — Excavation
☐ COMAR 09.12.32 — Maryland construction safety standards
☐ [OTHER VIOLATIONS]

28. To the extent an identified provision applies, was designed to protect a class that includes Plaintiff from the type of injury alleged, and its violation proximately caused that injury, the violation is evidence of negligence under Maryland's Statute or Ordinance Rule, not negligence per se.

29. Plaintiff was free from contributory negligence.

Count IV — Product Liability

30. Plaintiff re-alleges all preceding paragraphs.

31. Defendant Manufacturer designed, manufactured, and/or distributed [EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION].

32. The product was defective due to:

☐ Defective design
☐ Manufacturing defect
☐ Inadequate warnings

33. Maryland recognizes strict liability for defective products under common law (Phipps v. General Motors Corp., 278 Md. 337 (1976)).

34. The defective product was the proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries.

Damages

35. Plaintiff has suffered:

a. Past and future medical expenses;
b. Past and future lost wages and loss of earning capacity;
c. Physical pain and suffering;
d. Mental anguish and emotional distress;
e. Permanent disability and disfigurement;
f. Loss of enjoyment of life;
g. Loss of consortium (if applicable);
h. All other damages proven at trial.

Jury Demand

Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on all triable issues pursuant to Md. Const., Declaration of Rights, Art. 23.

Prayer for Relief

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants for compensatory damages, pre-judgment interest, costs, and such other relief as is just.

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]
[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq.
[BAR NUMBER]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[CITY], Maryland [ZIP CODE]
[PHONE] | [EMAIL]

Attorney for Plaintiff

Date: [__/__/____]

State-Specific Notes — Maryland

CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE (CRITICAL):

• Maryland follows pure contributory negligence — ANY fault by plaintiff (even 1%) is a COMPLETE BAR to recovery
• One of only four states (with AL, NC, VA) plus D.C. using this rule
• Exceptions: last clear chance doctrine, defendant's willful/wanton conduct
• Construction accident complaints must affirmatively allege plaintiff's due care

Workers' Compensation Exclusivity (Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 9-509):

• Exclusive remedy against employer; third-party claims permitted
• Workers' comp insurer has subrogation/lien rights

Statute of Limitations:

• Personal injury: THREE YEARS (Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101)
• Wrongful death: THREE YEARS (Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-904)

Damage Caps:

• Noneconomic damages capped (adjusted annually; approximately $935,000 for 2026)
• No cap on economic damages
• Punitive damages generally not capped but require proof of actual malice

OSHA State Plan:

• Maryland has MOSH (Maryland Occupational Safety and Health) — an approved state plan
• COMAR 09.12 contains Maryland-specific construction safety regulations

Court System:

• Circuit Court is the trial court of general jurisdiction

Sources and References:

• Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101
• Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-108 — Noneconomic Damages Cap
• Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 9-509