Assumption of the Risk in Maryland

assumption of risk maryland

The idea of assumption of the risk is not only a legal term but it has also made its way into the popular culture. If you are dating a person who has twice been convicted of theft and he/she robs you after you break up, your friends might say that you "assumed the risk" by dating a thief. The idea is a simple one: you lose the right to complain about the harm done if you wrongfully or foolishly and unnecessarily exposed yourself to that risk.

Under Maryland law, this common sense notion is embedded in our tort laws. If you have assumed the risk for your injuries by knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risk inherent in a particular action or inaction that causes an accident, you cannot sue the other person for negligence. For example, if you get on your friend's motorcycle for a race and the motorcycle crashes at 120 miles per hour and you suffer personal injuries, you will be deemed to have assumed the risk of your injuries under Maryland law.

Defense lawyers in Maryland love to raise the assumption of the risk defense in personal injury cases. But, as a practical matter, the assumption of the risk defense is applicable to very few auto accident, malpractice, or product liability cases in Maryland. The assumption of the risk defense is most utilized by defense lawyers in slip and fall cases where, regrettably, the doctrine of assumption of risk has some real teeth in Maryland.

In Maryland, a defendant bears the affirmative burden when asserting the defense of assumption of the risk to prove the elements of the doctrine. In other words, the plaintff is not requied to prove she did not assume the risk; it is the defendant's job to provie it. The elements of prooff are: (1) the plaintiff had knowledge of the risk of potential harm; (2) the plaintiff appreciated that risk; and (3) the plaintiff voluntarily encountered the risk of danger. Assumption of the risk is not applicable in intentional tort cases.

Difference Between Contributory Negligence and Assumption of the Risk

The doctrine is often confused with contributory negligence. The fact that some states, like Ohio, have merged the doctrines together, makes it all the more complicated. But they are different theories. The difference between contributory negligence and assumption of the risk is that contributory negligence defeats recovery because it is a cause of the accident which happens, but assumption of the risk defeats recovery because it is a previous abandonment of the right to complain if an accident occurs. Said differently, assumption of risk involves the negation of defendant's duty whereas contributory negligence is a defense to a breach of such duty. Sometimes, assumption of the risk and contributory negligence overlap but, usually, one exists without the other. Still, the reasonableness of the plaintiff's conduct is the ultimate issue for both.

Links of Interest on Assumption of the RiskA Word from Our Sponsor

Not for nothing, let me point out that our lawyers enter into co-counsel relationships with lawyers dealing with the defense of assumption of the risk in serious personal injury cases.

Our firm frequently enters into co-counsel fee sharing relationship with other lawyers - consistent with the Maryland Rule 1.5(e). If you are a lawyer who has a case in Maryland, call 800-553-8082 or get our opinion on your case online.

Contact Us For a Free Consultation

If you are hurt in a serious accident or are the victim of medical malpractice, contact our team of lawyers to discuss your case.
Call us now for help at (800) 553-8082

You can also get a FREE no obligation on-line consultation.

Client Reviews

  • They quite literally worked as hard as if not harder than the doctors to save our lives.
  • Ron helped me find a clear path that ended with my foot healing and a settlement that was much more than I hope for.
  • Hopefully I won't need it again but if I do, I have definitely found my lawyer for life and I would definitely recommend this office to anyone!
  • The last case I referred to them settled for $1.2 million.
  • I am so grateful that I was lucky to pick Miller & Zois.
  • The entire team from the intake Samantha to the lawyer himself (Ron Miller) has been really approachable.
  • The case settled and I got a lot more money than I expected. Ron even fought to reduce how much I owed in medical bills so I could get an even larger settlement.
  • Miller and Zois is the best firm in the state of Maryland, and without their support, understanding, and just being there when I needed encouragement, I truly do not know how I would have succeeded without them.

Contact Us

Free Consultation (800) 553-8082 Call 24/7