Summary Judgment Victory in Baltimore Utility-Related Personal Injury Case
The Challenge: Alleged Injury Linked to Nearby Utility Work
O’Hagan Meyer Maryland partner Ken Smith represented defendants in a personal injury action arising from a utility project in Baltimore City. The plaintiff alleged that an unusual incident causing injury was connected to nearby excavation activity performed as part of the project.
The claim relied on an asserted chain of events linking the defendants’ work to the accident, despite the absence of clear evidence explaining how the incident occurred.
The Solution: Causation-Focused Summary Judgment Strategy
Ken Smith moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiff could not meet the essential element of causation without expert testimony. The motion emphasized that the alleged sequence of events was “unexplained, and possibly inexplicable,” and that no reliable evidence connected the defendants’ excavation work to the accident.
The court agreed that expert testimony was required to establish causation and found that the plaintiff failed to provide evidence sufficient to meet that burden.
The Outcome: Case Dismissed in Full
The court granted summary judgment for all defendants, concluding that the plaintiff could not explain how the event occurred or link it to the defendants’ conduct.
The ruling resulted in a decisive defense victory in a complex personal injury case involving alleged utility‑related activity.
