|
|
|
|
IN SURVIVAL ACTIONS, DECEDENT’S ESTATE MAY RECOVER FOR PRE-IMPACT EMOTIONAL DISTRESS AND MENTAL ANGUISH AS ARE CAPABLE OF OBJECTIVE DETERMINATION
The Maryland Court of Appeals in Benyon considered the issue whether "pre-impact" fright or any other form of mental and emotional disturbance or distress, suffered by an accident victim who dies instantly upon impact, is a legally compensable element of damages in a survival action. It held that, in survival actions, where a decedent experiences great fear and apprehension of imminent death before the fatal physical impact, the decedent’s estate may recover for such emotional distress and mental anguish as are capable of objective determination. In this case, the decedent was killed in a motor vehicle accident on I-495, the Capital Beltway. Montgomery Cablevision had coordinated with Maryland State Police in early morning hours to have all traffic stopped, so that it could repair a broken cable. Traffic backed up about a mile each way. The decedent rear-ended a tractor trailer which was at a complete stop in a middle lane, at the rear of a traffic backup filling all lanes. Although he was only traveling at 55 m.p.h., the decedent was unable to stop or slow his speed sufficiently and was killed on impact. The decedent’s survivors and estate brought wrongful death and survivorship actions, against the owner of the tractor-trailer, and against Montgomery Cablevision. The theory with regard to the tractor trailer was that the rear of the tractor trailer was not properly illuminated, and thus, was not sufficiently visible. The theory with regard to Montgomery Cablevision was that it violated specific conditions of its work permit by failing to post advance warning signs to oncoming traffic. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs. Among other things, it awarded the decedent’s estate $1,000,000 for "pre-impact fright." The latter award was reduced to $350,000 under Md. Code §11-108(b). On appeal, the Court of Special Appeals reversed the judgment for pre-impact fright. The Court of Appeals granted the plaintiffs petition for writ of certiorari, and reversed the Court of Special Appeals. In reaching its decision, the Court of Appeals made a comprehensive nationwide survey of federal and state law on this subject. The Court stated that damages for emotional distress or mental anguish are recoverable in Maryland, provided that it is proximately caused by the wrongful act of the defendant and it results in a physical injury, or is capable of objective determination. This standard does not require the traditional common law sequence of events for recovery of emotional damages, which was wrongful act, physical impact, physical injury and then emotional injury. Here, the decedent’s fright was accompanied by both physical injuries and independent objective manifestation. The decedent received fatal injuries, and his fright could be reasonably inferred from 71 ½ feet of skid marks at the scene. Damages for pre-impact fright are reasonable when the decedent experiences it during the "legitimate window of mental anxiety." Here the window opened when the decedent became conscious that he was in imminent danger and it closed with his death. "To be sure, however, ‘pre-impact fright’ damages should compensate a decedent’s fright, not the resultant death." [Editor’s Note: The results of this case are debatable as questions of fact, but as the Court recognized, resolution of the factual issues are properly left to the jury. For example, that the decedent here was in control of his vehicle and had the opportunity to brake in an attempt to avoid or mitigate the crash, distinguishes this case from aircraft crash cases. Here the decedent probably had some hope. That he slammed on his brakes does not necessarily mean he knew he would die, or even be seriously injured. Secondly, as anyone who has ever been in a traffic jam at night on the Capital Beltway knows, there is a sea of brake lights ahead as one approaches the halted traffic. The decedent’s view of the road ahead likely was limited by the terrain at the scene. Presumably the jury found that Montgomery Cablevision knew or should have known where such "blind spots" are on the highway, and should have posted warning signs sufficiently in advance. Whether or not such advance signs actually have a slowing effect on traffic on the Capital Beltway, in the absence of any visible traffic congestion, is doubtful. But the jury obviously decided otherwise.] |
|
Send E-mail to info(at)jocs-law.com with questions
or comments about this web site.
General contact information.
|
