If you only remember one point about being sued after a car accident in Maryland, remember this: Maryland remains a contributory-negligence jurisdiction: any fault by the injured person can bar recovery entirely, subject to the last-clear-chance doctrine. You may sue a negligent driver, but your own negligence is a complete defense in most cases. Procedure, examples, and the opinions below hang off Contributory negligence at common law; Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-108 (last clear chance). The personal-injury deadline is 3 years — Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101. Maryland requires liability insurance and personal-injury protection (PIP), but PIP does not eliminate tort claims against at-fault drivers for bodily injury.
Insurance: at-fault, PIP, and no-fault thresholds
Maryland requires liability insurance and personal-injury protection (PIP), but PIP does not eliminate tort claims against at-fault drivers for bodily injury.
First-party benefits (PIP / MedPay) do not always eliminate a tort suit. Where Maryland uses a no-fault threshold, confirm whether your injuries meet the statutory trigger before assuming a lawsuit is barred or available.
Walking through Maryland facts
Use this walkthrough to see which Maryland authority does the work at each step.
Two drivers collide in Maryland. Each claims the other was negligent, and one was partly at fault.
- Identify the fault system: In Maryland, any negligence attributed to you can wipe out recovery entirely (subject to narrow doctrines such as last clear chance). That makes “whose fault is it?” outcome-determinative..
- Apply what fault does to the claim: Maryland remains a contributory-negligence jurisdiction: any fault by the injured person can bar recovery entirely, subject to the last-clear-chance doctrine. You may sue a negligent driver, but your own negligence is a complete defense in most cases.
- Calendar the lawsuit deadline: 3 years — Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.
- Separate insurance coverage from whether a tort claim exists: Maryland requires liability insurance and personal-injury protection (PIP), but PIP does not eliminate tort claims against at-fault drivers for bodily injury.
In Maryland the accident lawsuit turns on Contributory negligence at common law; Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-108 (last clear chance) and the contributory rule, not on a national no-fault script.
Deadline to sue (statute of limitations)
3 years — Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101
Missing the deadline usually ends the claim permanently. Tolling (minority, discovery rules, bankruptcy stays) can apply in narrow situations — do not assume extra time without counsel.
What to do after a crash in Maryland
- Get medical care and document injuries.
- Preserve photos, dash-cam, witness names, and the police report.
- Notify your insurer promptly; avoid recorded statements to the other driver’s insurer without advice.
- Calendar the SOL: 3 years — Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.
- Use LawDiver’s LawDiver rail (scoped to Maryland) to research comparative/contributory negligence opinions before negotiating.
Case law: fault and auto accidents in Maryland
ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE v. Edmund D. HEFFERNAN, II, Et Al.
ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE v. Edmund D. HEFFERNAN, II, Et Al., 399 Md. 598 (2007)
…e Heffernans] assert that Delaware’s tort law including the comparative negligence doctrine should be applied to determine whether, and to what extent, they are entitled to recover from the uninsured motorist. [Erie] contends that Maryland law, including the doctrines of contributory negligence and assumption of risk, should be applied. DISCUSSION What is ultimately at issue in…
ERIE INSURANCE EXCHANGE v. Edmund D. HEFFERNAN, II, Et Al. is worth reading on Maryland car-accident / fault because the court put the point in its own words: "Heffernans] assert that Delaware’s tort law including the comparative negligence doctrine should be applied to determine whether, and to what extent, they are entitled to recover from the uninsured motorist." Use that passage as the starting point, then read the facts that precede it.
MICHAEL E. HARRISON Et Al. v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION Et Al.
MICHAEL E. HARRISON Et Al. v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION Et Al., 295 Md. 442 (1983)
…uld be judicially abrogated in Maryland and the doctrine of comparative negligence adopted in its place as the rule governing trial of negligence actions in this State. I On April 26, 1978, Michael Harrison, fourteen years old and an eighth-grade student at Gaithersburg Junior High School in Montgomery County, attended a required physical education class. Since the weather was…
On car-accident / fault, MICHAEL E. HARRISON Et Al. v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION Et Al. speaks to the Maryland dispute in this passage: "Maryland and the doctrine of comparative negligence adopted in its place as the rule governing trial of negligence actions in this State." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Michael FRANKLIN v. Glenn A. MORRISON Et Al.
Michael FRANKLIN v. Glenn A. MORRISON Et Al., 350 Md. 144 (1998)
…n where there is non-equal negligence, and a tort system of comparative fault. Maryland law does not recognize comparative negligence. See Harrison v. Montgomery County Bd. of Educ., 295 Md. 442, 456 A.2d 894 (1983). We have great difficulty understanding how a jury would make the necessary determination of great disparity in fault without assigning percentages of fault to the…
Practitioners open Michael FRANKLIN v. Glenn A. MORRISON Et Al. when Maryland car-accident / fault turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Maryland law does not recognize comparative negligence. See Harrison v. Montgomery County Bd. of Educ., 295 Md. 442, 456 A.2d 894 (1983)." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Max’s of Camden Yards v. A.C. Beverage
Max’s of Camden Yards v. A.C. Beverage, 172 Md. App. 139 (2006)
…not on a relative fault basis. Maryland does not recognize comparative negligence. See Franklin, 350 Md. at 168, 711 A.2d 177. We note that “[i]t is well established under Maryland law that one who is guilty of active negligence cannot obtain tort indemnification,” regardless of whether the alleged tortfeasor from whom indemnity is being sought was actively negligent. Franklin…
Practitioners open Max’s of Camden Yards v. A.C. Beverage when Maryland car-accident / fault turns on the distinction in this sentence: "Maryland does not recognize comparative negligence. See Franklin, 350 Md. at 168, 711 A.2d 177." Do not lift it out of the facts the court was deciding.
Sonia CARTER, Et Al. v. the WALLACE & GALE ASBESTOS SETTLEMENT TRUST — Raker, J., concurring in part and dissenting
…in its analysis that apportionment concerns causation, not comparative negligence principles. I disagree with the majority’s holding that in all cases, death is an indivisible injury as a matter of law and hence, not suitable for apportionment. Death may be indivisible as to result, but it is not per se incapable of apportionment. Many courts around the country have permitted…
On car-accident / fault, Sonia CARTER, Et Al. v. the WALLACE & GALE ASBESTOS SETTLEMENT TRUST — Raker, J., concurring in part and dissenting speaks to the Maryland dispute in this passage: "I disagree with the majority’s holding that in all cases, death is an indivisible injury as a matter of law and hence, not suitable for apportionment. Death may be indivisible as to result, but it is not per se incapable of apportionment." The surrounding opinion shows how the court applied that language to the record.
Key takeaways
- Fault system: contributory negligence (any plaintiff fault can bar recovery).
- Controlling authority: Contributory negligence at common law; Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-108 (last clear chance).
- In Maryland, any negligence attributed to you can wipe out recovery entirely (subject to narrow doctrines such as last clear chance). That makes “whose fault is it?” outcome-determinative.
- Personal-injury filing deadline: 3 years — Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101.
- Insurance: Maryland requires liability insurance and personal-injury protection (PIP), but PIP does not eliminate tort claims against at-fault drivers for bodily injury.
Can you be sued after a car accident in Maryland?
Yes. A driver, passenger, pedestrian, or property owner injured in a crash can file a negligence (or related) claim against an allegedly at-fault driver — and against owners or employers in some agency/vicarious-liability settings. Being “mostly not at fault” does not stop a lawsuit from being filed; it shapes whether the plaintiff can win and how much they recover.
You can also be sued even when you believe the other driver is primarily responsible. Fault is usually a contested jury (or settlement) issue under Contributory negligence at common law; Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-108 (last clear chance).
Comparative fault and negligence in Maryland
Maryland remains a contributory-negligence jurisdiction: any fault by the injured person can bar recovery entirely, subject to the last-clear-chance doctrine. You may sue a negligent driver, but your own negligence is a complete defense in most cases.
In Maryland, any negligence attributed to you can wipe out recovery entirely (subject to narrow doctrines such as last clear chance). That makes “whose fault is it?” outcome-determinative.
Practical consequences:
- Settlement leverage tracks predicted fault shares.
- Insurers often reserve rights or deny coverage based on comparative-fault findings.
- Multiple defendants (other drivers, employers, vehicle owners) can split fault among themselves under Maryland allocation rules.
Frequently asked questions
Can I get sued if the accident was not my fault?
Anyone can file a suit. Winning — and collecting — depends on proving negligence and overcoming Maryland’s contributory rules under Contributory negligence at common law; Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-108 (last clear chance).
What if I was partly at fault?
In Maryland, any negligence attributed to you can wipe out recovery entirely (subject to narrow doctrines such as last clear chance). That makes “whose fault is it?” outcome-determinative.
How long do I have to sue after a car accident in Maryland?
3 years — Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101
Does insurance prevent a lawsuit?
Maryland requires liability insurance and personal-injury protection (PIP), but PIP does not eliminate tort claims against at-fault drivers for bodily injury. Coverage disputes are separate from whether a tort claim exists.