Pedestrian Accident Complaint - Maryland

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (PEDESTRIAN COLLISION) — MARYLAND

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Caption
2. Parties, Jurisdiction, and Venue
3. General Factual Allegations
4. Count I — Negligence (Against Defendant Driver)
5. Count II — Statute or Ordinance Rule (Crosswalk / Right-of-Way / Due Care) (Against Defendant Driver)
6. Count III — Vicarious Liability / Negligent Entrustment (Against Defendant Owner)
7. Damages
8. Prayer for Relief
9. Demand for Trial by Jury
10. Signature and Service Blocks
11. Maryland Practice Notes
12. Sources and References

1. CAPTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR [COUNTY NAME] COUNTY, MARYLAND

[or: IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY]

Case No. [________________________________]

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES (PEDESTRIAN COLLISION)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

Plaintiff, by and through undersigned counsel, sues the Defendants and states as follows:

2. PARTIES, JURISDICTION, AND VENUE

1. Plaintiff [PLAINTIFF NAME] ("Plaintiff") is an adult individual residing in [COUNTY] County, Maryland, who at all material times was lawfully traveling on foot as a pedestrian on the public roadways of this State.

2. Defendant [DRIVER NAME] ("Defendant Driver") is an adult individual residing in [COUNTY / STATE] and may be served with process at [SERVICE ADDRESS].

3. Defendant [OWNER NAME] ("Defendant Owner") is [an adult individual residing in / a business entity organized under the laws of] [COUNTY / STATE] and was, at all relevant times, the titled owner of the motor vehicle operated by Defendant Driver; service may be made [on the individual at [ADDRESS] / on its resident agent, [AGENT NAME], at [AGENT ADDRESS]].

4. This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction pursuant to Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 1-501, and the amount in controversy exceeds $30,000, exclusive of interest and costs, vesting jurisdiction in the Circuit Court.

5. Venue is proper in this Court under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 6-201 and § 6-202 because the Collision occurred in, and/or a Defendant resides or carries on a regular business in, [COUNTY] County, Maryland.

3. GENERAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6. On or about [__/__/____] at approximately [TIME], Plaintiff was lawfully crossing [ROADWAY] [within a marked crosswalk / within an unmarked crosswalk at the intersection] at or near its intersection with [CROSS-STREET] in [MUNICIPALITY], [COUNTY] County, Maryland (the "Collision").

7. At all material times, Plaintiff exercised due care and reasonable vigilance for Plaintiff's own safety, [was crossing with a favorable "WALK" pedestrian signal / was crossing within the crosswalk and on the half of the roadway on which Defendant Driver was traveling], and had the right-of-way over Defendant Driver's vehicle.

8. At the same time and place, Defendant Driver was operating a [YEAR / MAKE / MODEL] motor vehicle owned by Defendant Owner, traveling [DIRECTION] on [ROADWAY].

9. Defendant Driver negligently [DESCRIBE CONDUCT — e.g., failed to stop for Plaintiff in the crosswalk; turned [left / right] across Plaintiff's path without yielding; failed to keep a proper lookout; was traveling at an excessive or imprudent speed; was distracted by a mobile device; ran the red light / disregarded the pedestrian signal; passed a vehicle that had stopped to permit Plaintiff to cross], causing Defendant Driver's vehicle to strike Plaintiff.

10. The Collision was caused solely by Defendant Driver's failure to stop for, yield to, and avoid striking Plaintiff. No negligence of Plaintiff caused or contributed to the Collision in any degree.

11. As a pedestrian, Plaintiff was wholly unprotected by any vehicle structure, restraint system, or crumple zone, and the force of being struck by Defendant Driver's vehicle caused Plaintiff to suffer catastrophic injuries far more severe than those typically sustained by a vehicle occupant.

12. The [Maryland State Police / [Local] Police Department / Sheriff's Office] investigated the Collision and [cited Defendant Driver for violation of Md. Code, Transp. § [SECTION] / determined Defendant Driver to be at fault].

13. As a direct and proximate result of the Collision, Plaintiff sustained serious and permanent bodily injuries, including [DESCRIBE INJURIES — e.g., multiple fractures, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, internal organ damage, degloving and disfiguring lacerations], requiring emergency transport to [HOSPITAL] and extensive subsequent medical care.

4. COUNT I — NEGLIGENCE (Against Defendant Driver)

14. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 13 as though fully set forth herein.

15. Defendant Driver owed Plaintiff a duty to exercise reasonable care in the operation of a motor vehicle, including the duty to keep a proper lookout for pedestrians, to stop for and yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian lawfully crossing in a crosswalk, to maintain a reasonable and prudent speed, to exercise due care to avoid colliding with a pedestrian, and to operate the vehicle in accordance with Maryland law.

16. Defendant Driver breached that duty by, among other things:

• Failing to come to a stop for Plaintiff, who was crossing the roadway in a crosswalk;
• Failing to keep a proper and careful lookout for pedestrians;
• Operating the vehicle at a speed greater than was reasonable and prudent under the conditions;
• Failing to exercise due care to avoid colliding with Plaintiff;
• Driving while distracted or inattentive;
• Failing to slow, stop, or take reasonable evasive action to avoid striking Plaintiff; and
• Otherwise failing to exercise the degree of care that an ordinarily prudent driver would have exercised under the same or similar circumstances.

17. Defendant Driver's negligence was the sole, direct, and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages, and no negligence of Plaintiff contributed thereto.

18. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has sustained the damages described in Section 7 below.

5. COUNT II — STATUTE OR ORDINANCE RULE (CROSSWALK / RIGHT-OF-WAY / DUE CARE) (Against Defendant Driver)

19. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 18 as though fully set forth herein.

20. The Maryland Transportation Article imposes specific statutory duties on drivers for the protection of pedestrians lawfully using the public highways, including, as applicable to the manner of the Collision:

• Md. Code, Transp. § 21-502 — where no traffic-control signal is in operation and no pedestrian tunnel or overhead crossing is provided, the driver of a vehicle shall come to a stop when a pedestrian crossing the roadway in a crosswalk is on the half of the roadway on which the vehicle is traveling or is approaching from an adjacent lane on the other half of the roadway; a driver may not pass a vehicle stopped to let a pedestrian cross; and a violation that contributes to an accident is a separately punishable offense;
• Md. Code, Transp. § 21-504 — notwithstanding the foregoing, every driver shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian, shall give warning by sounding the horn when necessary, and shall exercise proper precaution upon observing a child or any obviously confused or incapacitated person; and/or
• Md. Code, Transp. § 21-801 / § 21-801.1 — a driver shall not operate a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent, or exceeding the posted limit.

21. These statutes were enacted for the protection of a class of persons that includes Plaintiff — pedestrians lawfully using the public highways — against the type of harm Plaintiff suffered.

22. Defendant Driver violated [CITE THE SPECIFIC SECTION(S) APPLICABLE], and was cited for [TRAFFIC CITATION, IF ANY]. Such violation constitutes evidence of negligence under Maryland's Statute or Ordinance Rule, not negligence per se, and was a direct and proximate cause of the Collision and of Plaintiff's injuries and damages.

6. COUNT III — VICARIOUS LIABILITY / NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT (Against Defendant Owner)

23. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates Paragraphs 1 through 22 as though fully set forth herein.

24. Defendant Owner entrusted the subject vehicle to Defendant Driver when Defendant Owner knew or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have known that Defendant Driver was an incompetent, inexperienced, unfit, or reckless operator likely to create an unreasonable risk of harm to others.

25. In the alternative, at the time of the Collision Defendant Driver was operating the vehicle within the course and scope of an agency or employment relationship with Defendant Owner, rendering Defendant Owner vicariously liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.

26. Defendant Owner's negligent entrustment and/or vicarious liability was a direct and proximate cause of Plaintiff's injuries and damages, for which Defendant Owner is liable.

7. DAMAGES

27. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' negligence, Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, the following damages:

• Economic damages: past and future medical, hospital, surgical, rehabilitative, pharmaceutical, and related expenses; future medical and life-care costs; past lost wages; and future lost earnings and diminished earning capacity.
• Non-economic damages: past and future physical pain and suffering; mental anguish; permanent physical impairment; disfigurement and scarring; and loss of enjoyment of life.

28. Punitive damages. To the extent the evidence establishes that Defendant Driver acted with "actual malice," Plaintiff seeks punitive damages consistent with Maryland law, which requires actual malice proven by clear and convincing evidence. See Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420 (1992).

8. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully demands judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally to the extent permitted by law, as follows:

• A. For compensatory economic and non-economic damages in an amount in excess of $75,000, to be determined by the jury;
• B. For punitive damages as permitted by Maryland law;
• C. For pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as allowed by law;
• D. For the costs of this action; and
• E. For such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

9. DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable as a matter of right pursuant to Md. Rule 2-325 and Article 23 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights.

10. SIGNATURE AND SERVICE BLOCKS

Dated: [__/__/____]

Respectfully submitted,

[LAW FIRM NAME]

By: [________________________________]

[ATTORNEY NAME], CPF No. [________]

Counsel for Plaintiff

[STREET ADDRESS]

[CITY, STATE ZIP]

Telephone: [NUMBER]

Email: [EMAIL]

11. MARYLAND PRACTICE NOTES

• Contributory negligence (dispositive). Because Maryland bars recovery for ANY plaintiff fault, the single most important issue in a Maryland pedestrian case is establishing that the pedestrian was free from fault and lawfully crossing with the right-of-way. Affirmatively plead Plaintiff's due care (¶¶ 7, 10, 17), anticipate the contributory-negligence defense (Md. Rule 2-323(g)), and prepare a last-clear-chance argument. Scrutinize any allegation that the pedestrian crossed mid-block, against a signal, or stepped suddenly off the curb (Transp. § 21-502(b), § 21-503).
• Statute of limitations. A civil action for personal injury must be filed within three years of accrual under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Confirm accrual (discovery rule) and any tolling for minority/incapacity.
• Crosswalk / right-of-way framework. Transp. § 21-502 requires the driver to STOP for a pedestrian crossing in a crosswalk on the driver's half (or approaching from the adjacent lane), and § 21-504 imposes an overriding duty of due care. § 21-503 places yield duties on a pedestrian crossing outside a crosswalk — the focal point of the contributory-negligence defense.
• Pleading standard. Maryland requires a complaint to contain a clear statement of the facts necessary to constitute a cause of action (Md. Rule 2-305); plead each element with supporting facts and conform the ad damnum to Rule 2-305.
• Punitive damages. Recoverable only on clear and convincing proof of actual malice (Owens-Illinois v. Zenobia); not available for ordinary negligence.
• Service of process. Service is governed by Md. Rule 2-121; serve an entity's resident agent or as authorized, and out-of-state defendants under the long-arm statute, Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 6-103.
• Jury demand. A jury demand must be filed within the time set by Md. Rule 2-325 (generally within 15 days after service of the last pleading directed to the issue) or it is waived; the demand in this Complaint preserves the right.

12. SOURCES AND REFERENCES

• Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101 (three-year limitations) — https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/
• Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 1-501 (Circuit Court jurisdiction); § 6-201, § 6-202 (venue)
• Md. Code, Transp. § 21-502 (driver to stop for pedestrian in crosswalk) — https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=gtr&section=21-502
• Md. Code, Transp. § 21-503 (pedestrian crossing other than in crosswalk; duty to yield) — https://codes.findlaw.com/md/transportation/md-code-trans-sect-21-503/
• Md. Code, Transp. § 21-504 (duties of drivers relating to pedestrians; due care to avoid colliding; sound horn) — https://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/transportation/title-21/subtitle-5/section-21-504/
• Md. Code, Transp. § 21-801, § 21-801.1 (speed)
• Md. Code, Ins. § 19-505 (PIP); § 19-509, § 19-511 (uninsured/underinsured motorist)
• Coleman v. Soccer Ass'n of Columbia, 432 Md. 679 (2013) (reaffirming contributory negligence)
• Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Zenobia, 325 Md. 420 (1992) (actual-malice standard for punitive damages)
• Maryland Rules, Title 2 (Civil Procedure — Circuit Court) — https://www.courts.state.md.us/

Disclaimer: This template is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. An attorney licensed in Maryland must review and customize this document before filing. Laws, citations, and court rules change frequently; verify all authorities before use.