Articles Posted in Personal Injury

Negligence law in Maine is designed to compensate the victims of another’s negligence for damages related to physical harm that is caused by such negligence. In addition to physical harm, victims can generally recover damages for psychological and economic damages that are causally related to this physical harm. Negligent acts that cause psychological or emotional harm without physical injury may also form actionable claims, however, Maine law is more limited in this respect. The Supreme Judicial Court of Maine recently ruled that a woman’s negligence claim alleging PTSD as a result of the defendant’s actions had been rightfully rejected by a lower court.

The plaintiff in the recently decided case worked as a heavy equipment operator for a paper company. The plaintiff’s company hired a heavy equipment repair company (the defendant) to fix a crane while the plaintiff was working. While working on the crane, employees of the defendant instructed the plaintiff to assist them in repairing the crane by operating the controls while a repairperson rode on the body of the crane. The plaintiff reluctantly agreed to assist the defendant’s employees. While the plaintiff was assisting in the repairs, one of the men repairing the crane unexpectedly stood up and was crushed between an overhead truss bean and the crane, causing him to fall 30 feet to the floor. The man dies as a result of his injuries.

The plaintiff suffered emotional distress and PTSD as a result of her experience surrounding the fatal accident. She filed a negligence lawsuit against the defendant, alleging that they negligently ordered her to participate in the repair, resulting in the death, and this caused the plaintiff’s psychological injuries. The plaintiff also made a claim that the defendant negligently inflicted emotional distress. In response to the plaintiff’s general negligence claim, the defendant answered that Maine law requires a plaintiff to allege physical harm as a result of negligence. In response to the negligent infliction of emotional distress claim, the defendant argued that the plaintiff did not have a sufficient relationship with the deceased for her claim to succeed. The trial court accepted the defendant’s arguments and resolved the case in favor of the defendant.

If you’re in an accident in Maine, whether a car accident or a slip-and-fall, you may be wondering if you’ll be saddled with the expenses required to treat your injuries, restore your property, and compensate your time away from work. Maybe you contributed in some small way to your accident, such as speeding slightly or not carefully inspecting the walkway, and you’re worried you may not be able to recover any costs at all.

To recover damages in a personal injury case, you must establish the negligence of the person you are trying to recover from. This means this person owed you a duty of care and breached that duty in a way that caused your injury, which basically establishes fault. Different states use different negligence systems that can create a confusing legal environment for personal injury litigants. Some states say that victims cannot recover any damages at all if they were at fault even in a small way in an accident. Others allow for recovery, but damages will be reduced by the percentage a jury finds you to be at fault. Others allow recovery if you are found either equally at fault or less than equally at fault. In Maine, if you are 49% or less at fault, you are allowed to recover damages in a personal injury case. This is called a modified comparative negligence system.

Modified Comparative Negligence in Maine

As stated above, Maine’s negligence rule means that you will recover as long as a jury determines you were less than 49% at fault in the accident—meaning you cannot recover if you are “equally at fault.” If you are less than 49% at fault but more than 0% at fault, your recoveries will be reduced to the extent the jury finds is “just and equitable” considering your actions and share of responsibility.

Continue reading

Individuals who suffer injuries because of another person or entities’ negligence may be able to recover for their damages from the negligent party. Under Maine’s personal injury laws, victims who wish to recover damages must be sure to adhere to the state’s strict procedural and evidentiary rules. Injury victims should consult and retain an experienced Maine injury victim to ensure that their rights and remedies are appropriately addressed.

Maine’s “statute of limitations” provides Maine injury victims with a strict amount of time that they have to file a personal injury lawsuit against the culpable party. In Maine, personal injury plaintiffs must file their lawsuits within six years of when the incident giving rise to the claim occurred. Relative to other states, Maine provides victims with a longer time frame to file their lawsuit; however, plaintiffs still risk dismissal if they fail to abide by the time period. Additionally, there are stricter and shorter deadlines when the claim is against a governmental entity such as a city or county. In those cases, plaintiffs must meet additional notice requirements, and they only have two years to file their claims.

Another critical concept that injury victims must understand is Maine’s comparative fault rule. Maine follows the modified comparative fault rule to resolve cases where the plaintiff is partially responsible for causing their own injuries and damages. Under the law, an injury victim’s damages will be reduced relative to their percentage of fault, as long as they are less than 50% responsible. If the injury victim is more than 50% responsible, courts will bar their claim, and they cannot collect any damages from the other party. The law requires Maine courts to apply the rule whenever the two parties share fault; however, the rule is also relevant during insurance settlement negotiations.

Earlier this month, a state appellate court issued an opinion in a Maine personal injury case discussing the state’s equine statute. Specifically, the court had to determine if the equine statute precluded the plaintiff’s case against the parents of a ten-year-old girl who struck the plaintiff while riding a horse. As the court notes, this case was the first time the Maine Supreme Court heard a case requiring the court to determine the breadth of immunity provided by the equine-immunity statute.

According to the court’s opinion, the plaintiff was observing children race horses at an arena. While there was a designated area for spectators, the plaintiff observed from an area that was closer to the exit. The plaintiff watched as a ten-year-old girl rode around the track several times. However, on the girl’s fourth circuit around the raceway, the girl’s horse collided with the plaintiff. The plaintiff fell, seriously injuring her wrist, and later filed a personal injury lawsuit against the girl’s parents (the defendants).

In response to the plaintiff’s complaint, the defendants claimed Title 7 Chapter 743 Section 4103-A of the Maine Revised Statutes provides the defendant’s immunity from the plaintiff’s lawsuit. Specifically, that statute provides that any “person engaged in an equine activity is not liable for any property damage or damages arising from the personal injury or death of a participant or spectator resulting from the inherent risks of equine activities.”