Maryland Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

A major city has agreed to pay $1.2 million to settle a lawsuit filed by a woman who suffered third-degree burns when a "flash-bang" grenade thrown by a police officer on the city's SWAT team exploded near her during a raid. The victim suffered burns over 11 percent of her body and was permanently disfigured as a result of the incident, which happened during a search of the home she was visiting. The victim, now 31, accused police of needlessly using an "extreme level of force" when they lobbed the grenade into the house. Without admitting wrongdoing, the City Council voted unanimously in closed session Tuesday to approve the settlement. The victim's attorney, said there had been no reason to use the flash-bang grenade because police had previously searched the home without using the device and should have known that the occupants would have been sleeping. The two shotguns were found in the garage, and the victims were not armed, he said. Neither woman was arrested. "This was a real tragedy," the attorney said. "The conduct of the police was reprehensible." The lawsuit against police stemmed from his arrest on drug charges. Police who subsequently searched the home reported finding 216 live rounds and a magazine for an assault weapon. But prosecutors dismissed the case after determining that the Officer had falsely stated on a search warrant affidavit that the alleged narcotics seized during his arrest had been confirmed as actual drugs. It was one of a series of allegedly false statements by police seeking warrants. The policeman and three other officers were fired. One officer has since regained his job through arbitration.

Police should have known that the flash-bang grenade, which is typically used to disorient dangerous suspects, could severely burn or otherwise injure an innocent bystander, the attorney said in a suit filed last year in U.S. District Court. When detonated, such grenades emit a loud noise and blinding flash. He also said that police had conducted the raid to retaliate against a man who had connections to the home because he had filed a class-action lawsuit three days earlier accusing officers of falsifying search warrants. City officials denied any link between the suit and the raid, saying the SWAT team had been called in because police believed people in the home were gang members armed with guns. Two shotguns and cocaine and heroin were found during the search, police said. But the city acknowledged that a flash-bang grenade that a 10-year veteran, fired toward an unoccupied hallway hit a wall and bounced back into the living room where the victim had been sleeping, burning her on her chest and leg. She spent nearly a month being treated at the Hospital and incurred medical expenses of $400,000. A second woman was also hurt and has received a $45,000 settlement from the city. Police said they had fired the flash-bang grenade because the victim opened the front door as they approached and then shut it, forcing them to break it open.

If you or a member of your family or a friend has been subjected to any abuse or personal injury at the hands of authorities call my offices located in Rockville an/or Baltimore at 1-800-320-0080 for a free initial consultation.

Kenneth Matlock received a $6 million award for injuries he suffered when a large tree limb dropped onto his car in 2006. While traveling down Route 29 in New Jersey, a limb from an oak tree fell into his car. Matlock and his wife both suffered broken necks from the limb. Matlock then lost control of the car which ended up hitting a guard rail on the opposite side of the road. Due to his injuries, which include permanent disability, Matlock was no longer able to work as a truck driver. Matlock sued the township, the county and the state Department of Transportation which maintains the road as well as the adjoining property owners. It was determined that the tree was in the state's right of way and the suit against all other defendants was dismissed. The land where the tree was, had been underwater days before the accident when the Delaware River flooded for the third time in 21 months. The tree that fell had been weakened by the flooding and rot. The limb was hollow inside. There had been previous reports in the area of falling tree limbs and the DOT had the opportunity to inspect the other trees that posed a potential hazard to motorists. If you or a loved one has been involved in a serious accident through no fault of your own contact me at my Rockville or Baltimore offices at 1-800-320-0080 for a free initial consultation.

A major pharmaceutical company has entered into settlement agreements worth more than $21 million from charges that the firm overcharged Medicaid programs of Michigan and Massachusetts. The settlement by the nation's largest provider of pharmaceutical care for the elderly stems from a whistleblower lawsuit filed in federal court in 2003 by a former financial analyst. The pharmaceutical company was accused of not following "usual and customary" pricing regulations when charging Medicaid for prescription drugs supplied to residents of skilled-nursing facilities in the two states. In one instance, the whistleblower complaint alleged that in 2001 the pharmaceutical company was paid by private insurers an average of $27.75 per prescription, while its payments for Medicaid patients averaged $47.15 per prescription, according to a Washington-based whistleblower law firm that represented the former financial analyst. Under the settlement announced Tuesday, the pharmaceutical company will pay $9.45 million to Massachusetts and $11.6 million to Michigan. The settlement also requires the company to comply with pricing regulations, which include billing the lowest price the company charges a private third-party customer for the same drug. The pharmaceutical company denied any wrongdoing and cooperated during the investigation, according to a release from the Attorney General's office.
In a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the company said that the settlement agreement with Michigan and Massachusetts includes a provision to dismiss claims against the company included in another whistleblower lawsuit that is pending in Illinois related to the same charges. In recent years, legal troubles have cost the pharmaceutical company millions. Among other settlements, they paid $98 million last November to settle a whistleblower lawsuit that charged the company accepted kickbacks from a drug giant corporation.They admitted no guilt in the case. As part of that settlement, five whistleblower lawsuits were dismissed. If you suspect any fraud by a company or an insurance company call me at my offices located in Rockville or Baltimore at 1-800-320-0080 for a free consultation.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Florida (ACLU) and the Florida Justice Institute (FJI) today announced the filing of a federal class action lawsuit against the Santa Rosa County Sheriff. According to the ACLU and the FJI, the lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of the Sheriff's new postcard-only policy for jail inmate mail, which was established on July 26 of this year. This new policy severely restricts the free speech rights of inmates and their friends and family to communicate with each other. The ACLU and FJI are asking the court to order Santa Rosa County Sheriff to cease the unconstitutional practice of restricting jail inmates' ability to communicate with family and friends by limiting their mail to short, publicly viewable messages on postcards. "Writing and sharing thoughts and artwork with loved ones is one of the most important things to help keep inmates connected to their loved ones and express their reflections while incarcerated," said ACLU staff attorney. "Under the postcard-only policy Martin Luther King Jr. could not have sent the letter he sent from the Birmingham Jail on April 16, 1963, to his fellow clergymen. This postcard-only policy punishes inmates as well as their friends and family who reside outside the jail and have not been accused of any crime." The sheriff does not see where this policy has violated the rights of any inmates at the jail he oversees. "Our inmates enjoy all privileges and rights as dictated by law, both state and federal. It is my understanding that the ACLU's issue has been presented before the Federal courts several times and each time the courts have ruled in favor of this practice," He said. "We will not, nor have we ever, interfered with an inmate's right to communicate per statutory requirement. "This practice was initiated based on two factors: the cost to the taxpayers and the security of the facility." The lawsuit questions and challenges the policy to their right of communication. Inmates may also communicate with family via collect calls or during visitation, which is one two-hour period per week. The ACLU and FJI question the fairness due to the expense of collect calls and if a loved one is working during visitation their opportunity would be missed. Both parties to the suit against all also challenge the lack of privacy as they feel telephone and in-person conversations are easily overheard by fellow inmates, guards and other visitors, leaving closed letter correspondence as the only confidential way to communicate with family and other loved ones. "Simply because a family member is in jail doesn't mean he ceases to be part of the family," said the Executive Director, Florida Justice Institute. "Yet, this postcard-only policy forces them to write everything in abbreviated form, which can be read by anyone, or write nothing at all. Inmates and their families and friends need to be able to discuss issues of health and finances and exchange words of encouragement in a complete and private way. Postcards simply do not allow that. "Inmates in these situations will be effectively silenced by the Sheriff's new policy, or risk airing personal or confidential information to others and potentially put themselves in harm's way." The attorney also took to task the allegation this post card only policy is saving the jail money. "Allegations that this will save the jail a lot of money miss the mark. If the government believes that it must detain a person, then it must do so responsibly the attorney said. "While it costs over $50 a day to house each inmate, switching to two meals a day or turning off the A/C are simply not options. Depriving inmates and their friends and families of their ability to effectively communicate and continue relationships is not an option either. The cost argument is a red herring to draw attention away from the real matter, which is censoring speech. "A better way to save money would be to require arrestees who present no danger to the public and are not likely to flee to show up for a hearing rather than house them in the jail at the taxpayers' expense." The class action lawsuit represents a fluid population of approximately 500 people who are inmates at any one time in the Santa Rosa County jail.

If you or any relative has been subjected to State misconduct or you have been denied a claim or your civil rights call me at my offices located in Rockville or Baltimore at 1-800-320--0080 for a free consultation.