The Collateral Source Rule applies in Maryland

My Advanced Legal Writing students (at Thomas M. Cooley Law School) have repeatedly asked me to provide a sample brief that I would recommend. As a result of their constant questioning, I offer two opposing Amicus Curiae briefs.

Opposing parties filed Amicus Curaie briefs in a case regarding one heartbreaking and tragic CSX Rail Road injury case – sad, but interesting and very telling. Haischer v.CSX Transportation, Inc., 381 Md. 119 (2004).

The Maryland Trial Lawyers' Association (MTLA) filed a brief on behalf of the injured engineer.

The Association of American Railroads (AAR) filed a brief on behalf of CSX Railroad.

In addition, I recommend that my students take a quick peek at the recent Haischer opinion in which the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the injured engineer, Mr. Haischer.

In Haischer, the Maryland Court of Appeals of examined when the collateral source rule applies in Maryland.

Q: So what did the Court hold?
A: The collateral Source Rule applies in Maryland.

Haischer's ruling presents very good news for Huggins and Huggins Law (and also for our client.) But, the opinion signals very bad news for the other side. Thus, Maryland’s Highest Court provided the "hook" on which we hang our client's argument.

Good news; our client's Quality of Life has certainly been altered.

Stay tuned, folks . . .

Once again, we offer you public THANKS, Chi, for all your dedicated research on the Collateral Source Rule in Maryland
.
By the way, congrats, Chi, on your recent success and swearing in to the New York and New Jersey bar exams. Stay focused.