When pursuing a personal injury claim in Maryland, causation is one of the most critical elements you must prove. It’s not enough to show that you’ve been injured. You must demonstrate that the defendant’s actions or omissions caused your injury.
Understanding causation is essential to building a strong personal injury case of any type, from a car accident case to a slip and fall claim.
Understanding Legal Causation in Maryland Personal Injury Cases
In personal injury law, legal causation refers to the connection between the defendant’s conduct and the plaintiff’s injury.
Maryland law requires plaintiffs to prove two types of causation:
- Cause in fact
- Proximate cause
Both elements must be established to hold a defendant legally responsible for your injuries. Let’s break down what these terms mean and how they apply in personal injury cases.
Cause in Fact
Cause in fact answers the question: “Did the defendant’s actions actually cause the injury?” In Maryland, this is often referred to as the “but-for” test. This means that but for the defendant’s actions, the injury would not have occurred.
Imagine you are walking through a grocery store, and an employee negligently fails to clean a spill. You slip, fall, and break your arm. Your injury would not have occurred in this case but for the employee’s failure to clean the spill. Therefore, the employee’s negligence is the cause in fact of your injury.
However, if you had fallen on a clean floor, then the cause could not be established.
Proximate Cause
While cause in fact is about direct cause, proximate cause focuses on legal responsibility. It asks whether the defendant’s actions are related closely enough to the injury to hold them liable. Maryland courts typically apply the foreseeability test. This test is used to determine the proximate cause.
An injury is considered the proximate cause of a defendant’s actions if it was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of those actions. For example, if a driver runs a red light and crashes into another vehicle, it is foreseeable that running a red light could cause an accident and injuries. Therefore, proximate cause would be established.
On the other hand, let’s say a truck driver negligently causes a minor accident. As a result, traffic slows down. Ten minutes later, a distracted driver rear-ends another car in traffic. In this situation, it may not be foreseeable that the original accident would lead to the next crash. Thus, the truck driver might not be held liable for the second accident. The proximate cause would be too remote.
Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad (1928)
To illustrate the complexities of legal causation, consider the famous case of Palsgraf v. Long Island Railroad. This case is still debated in law schools today.
In this case, a commuter was running to catch a train. Two railroad employees helped him board the moving train, which caused him to drop a package. Unbeknownst to everyone, the package contained fireworks. The fireworks exploded, causing a shockwave that injured Mrs. Palsgraf, a nearby onlooker.
Mrs. Palsgraf sued the railroad company. She claimed their employees’ negligence caused her injuries.
The court ruled against Mrs. Palsgraf. The court found that her injuries were not reasonably foreseeable. The employees may have been negligent in helping the commuter, but they could not have predicted that their actions would lead to a fireworks explosion. Thus, proximate cause was not established.
This case demonstrates that even if someone’s negligence sets off a chain of events, they may not be liable. In other words, plaintiffs are required to prove that the harm they suffered was foreseeable.
How Maryland Law Handles Causation in Personal Injury Cases
Courts in Maryland rely on common law principles and statutory rules when analyzing causation. Maryland follows the doctrines of:
- “But-For” Causation for cause in fact
- Foreseeability for proximate cause
Additionally, Maryland courts may apply the “substantial factor” test. This test is used in cases involving multiple parties who may have contributed to the injury. Under this test, if the defendant’s actions were a substantial factor in causing harm, they may be held liable. Liability may be established even if other factors also contribute.
Challenges in Proving Causation
Proving causation can be challenging. This is especially true in cases involving:
- Multiple Defendants: There may be more than one party who contributed to the accident.
- Pre-existing Conditions: If the victim had a prior injury or condition, the defense may argue that the current injury wasn’t caused by the accident.
- Chain Reaction Events: These are situations where the defendant’s negligence set off a series of events leading to the injury.
An attorney can work with medical experts, accident reconstruction specialists, and economists to establish a clear link between the defendant’s actions and your injuries.
Why Proving Causation Matters in Maryland Personal Injury Cases
Without solid evidence of causation, even the strongest claim can fail. Maryland law places the burden of proof on the plaintiff. This means you must present credible evidence showing that:
- The defendant’s actions (or failure to act) caused your injury.
- Your injury was a foreseeable consequence of the defendant’s conduct.
Failing to prove either element can result in your claim being dismissed or denied.
Contact Our Firm for a Free Case Evaluation Today
If you’ve been injured due to someone else’s negligence, don’t wait to seek legal help. The statute of limitations in Maryland limits the time you have to file a personal injury claim. Reach out to Alpert Schreyer Personal Injury Lawyers for a free consultation. You can contact us online or call (301) 932-9997. Let us help you prove causation, build your case, and fight for fair and appropriate compensation.