Legal Question in Personal Injury in Maryland

Re: I was hit by a drunk driver and am going to court for it...

I agree with all of Mr. Press's comments. In particular the portion about non-dischargeability in bankruptcy -- that should be emphasized directly to the court. Most judges in the position of considering an admitted drunken driver who has caused an accident are not going to want that defendant to be able to discharge the judgment in a bankruptcy. And of course, even though it would not be PROPER for a jury to consider the fact of drunken driving in deliberating as to damages (as Mr. Press points out), the reality is that the jury WOULD consider that fact if they know about. As a plaintiff, you definately want the jury to hear about that fact.

Finally, like Mr. Press I agree that if you don't have an attorney, you should get one right away.

Re: I was hit by a drunk driver and am going to court for it...

Your lawyer should be able to discuss this with you in detail (if you don't have one, get one now). An admission of negligence AND proximate causation of the accident may be enough to render irrelevant anything except damages, and the defendant's drunkenness would not be relevant to damages. I would insist, though, at least that the defendant stipulate that s/he was drunk so that there is an admission and finding that would prevent the discharge of any uninsured portion of the judgment in bankruptcy. Otherwise, if they don't admit that, I would argue that you are entitled to have the court make that finding, thus entitling you to introduce the evidence of drunkenness. But if they do make the admission, the reality is that you are only entitled to actual damages for the injuries caused, which are the same whether or not the other driver was drunk, so the court would properly exclude any evidence other than that going to your damages (unless you can convince the court that you can meet Maryland's extremely difficult standard for punitive damages). Putting on that evidence, if it were rendered legally irrelevant, would go only to prejudice the jury against the defendant, which the court should not allow.