Sample Products Liability Complaint in Maryland Wrongful Death Case
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR BALTIMORE CITY, MARYLAND
SANDY JENKINS - Plaintiff
CONECTIV ENERGY- Defendant
Plaintiff, Sandy Jenkins, by and through their undersigned attorneys, Ronald V. Miller, Jr., and Miller & Zois, LLC, bring suit against Defendant Conectiv Energy and states as follows:
- Plaintiff is a resident of Mt. Carmel, Pennsylvania.
- Defendant Conectiv Energy carries on regular and substantial business in Baltimore City, Maryland.
- On July 3, 2004 at 11:05 p.m., at 13601 Philadelphia SB Avenue in Ocean City, Maryland, Plaintiff suffered serious and permanent injuries as the result of an explosion that occurred on Defendant’s electrical pole (Conectiv pole 62496/95862 located on the bay side of 135th Street).
- The explosion caused a cylinder measuring two inches long and 3/8 inches wide to become imbedded in Plaintiff’s right forearm.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 through 4 of this Complaint.
- Defendant participated in sale and maintenance of a product.
- Defendant maintained, installed and assembled the product which contained a defective condition because the design was defective and unsafe.
- This design defect made the product unreasonably dangerous.
- The system as assembled by Conectiv remained unchanged and was in the same condition at the time of the injury hereafter alleged.
- As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s installation and maintenance of the defectively designed product, Plaintiff sustained permanent injury.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 through 9 of this Complaint.
- Defendant built and/maintained an electrical system that had a defective design or was defectively maintained. Accordingly, defendant owed a duty to Plaintiff that the system was designed and maintained in such a way that made the system safe for its intended purpose.
- Defendant knew or should have known when building and maintaining this electrical system that it was designed defectively or maintained, creating a unreasonable risk of injury for to Plaintiff.
- Plaintiff was negligent in failing to properly design, manufacture, install, maintain, and communicate the defect in the system to Plaintiff, creating a clear and immediate risk of serious injury. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff sustained serious injury.
Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations contained in Paragraph 1 through 12 of this Complaint.
- Defendant’s conduct in maintaining an electrical system in a public area constituted an abnormally dangerous activity which exposed Plaintiff to an unreasonable risk of harm.
- At all relevant times, Defendant had control over the abnormally dangerous activity of maintaining the electrical system.
- As set forth above, Plaintiff sustained injury as a direct and proximate cause of this unreasonably dangerous activity. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant in the amount of FIVE MILLION DOLLARS ($5,000,000.00), plus interest, costs and any other relief this court deems appropriate.
Miller & Zois, LLC
Ronald V. Miller, Jr.
Laura G. Zois
1 South St, #2450
Baltimore, MD 21202
Counsel for Plaintiffs
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff pursuant to Maryland Rule 2-325, prays a trial by jury on all issues.Sample Complaints
- Sample Product Liability Complaint (another complaint, this one for wrongful death)
- Other Sample Complaints (more sample tort complaints)
- Sample Interrogatories (example of interrogatories in product liability case)
- Other Sample Discovery (requests for admission
- Sample Interrogatories (example of interrogatories in premises liability case)
- Sample Premises Liability Complaint (example of premises liablity lawsuit)
- Premises Liability Lawsuits (an overview)