Construction Accident Complaint - Maryland

Before filing: Complete and attach the Civil – Non-Domestic Case Information Report (CC-DCM-002), unless exempted under Md. Rule 2-111(a).

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. [Include only if a viable tort claim exists after checking statutory-employer status under Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. §§ 9-508 and 9-509:] 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 under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. [§ 6-202(8), because this negligence cause of action arose here] / [§ 6-201(a), because Defendant resides, carries on regular business, is employed, or habitually engages in a vocation here] / [§ 6-201(b), if its multiple-defendant conditions are met: STATE FACTS].

Factual Allegations

8. The construction project at [PROJECT ADDRESS], [CITY], [COUNTY] County, Maryland, was managed by [GENERAL CONTRACTOR NAME]. [Call that entity a Defendant only if it is named in the caption after the statutory-employer check.]

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. [Include only if supported by the facts:] Plaintiff exercised reasonable care for Plaintiff's own safety at all relevant times. Contributory negligence is a defense for Defendants to plead and prove.

13. Workers' compensation is generally the exclusive remedy against Plaintiff's employer under Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 9-509. Defendants named in this tort action are alleged to be liable third parties, subject to the statutory-employer analysis in the next paragraph.

13A. [If a general contractor is named:] The conditions for treating [GENERAL CONTRACTOR NAME] as Plaintiff's employer under Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 9-508(a) do not apply because [PLEAD FACTS CONCERNING THE CONTRACTOR'S UNDERTAKING, SUBCONTRACT, AND PLAINTIFF'S WORK]. [If § 9-508 does apply, remove the contractor from the ordinary negligence claims unless specific facts support an exception under § 9-509(c) or (d).]

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. [If supported by the facts:] Plaintiff exercised reasonable care for Plaintiff's own safety.

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. [If supported by the facts:] Plaintiff exercised reasonable care for Plaintiff's own safety.

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. [If supported by the facts:] Plaintiff exercised reasonable care for Plaintiff's own safety.

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. 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

Amount demanded under Md. Rule 2-305(b)(1) (choose one):

☐ $[AMOUNT], which does not exceed $75,000.

☐ Damages exceeding $75,000; no specific sum is demanded.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against Defendants for compensatory damages in the selected amount category above, pre-judgment interest, costs, and such other relief as is just.

Respectfully submitted,

[________________________________]
[ATTORNEY NAME], Esq.
[MARYLAND ATTORNEY 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
• Contributory negligence is an affirmative defense for the defendant to plead and prove; plead the worker's due-care facts only when supported by the record.

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

• Exclusive remedy against employer; third-party claims permitted
• A principal contractor may be the worker's statutory employer under § 9-508(a) and (b), making § 9-509 exclusivity relevant even if the contractor did not directly hire the worker. Check the statutory elements before naming the general contractor in tort.
• 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 in ordinary personal-injury actions are capped under CJP § 11-108(b)(2): $965,000 for causes arising October 1, 2025–September 30, 2026, and $980,000 for causes arising October 1, 2026–September 30, 2027. The $500,000 base increases by $15,000 each October 1 beginning in 1995; use the cap for the cause-of-action date and check whether a separate statutory regime applies.
• 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, Cts. & Jud. Proc. §§ 6-201 and 6-202 — Venue
• Md. Code, Lab. & Empl. § 9-509