Maryland
How Fisher v. State of Wisconsin applies in Maryland: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Torts.
Maryland law recognizes the principles established in Fisher v. State of Wisconsin regarding the duty of care owed by governmental entities in tort actions. This aligns with Maryland’s approach to sovereign immunity and the exceptions that allow claims against the state for negligent acts.
In Maryland, governmental entities may be liable for negligence where a special duty exists or under certain exceptions to the doctrine of sovereign immunity.
The court held that a municipality could be liable for negligent design if it breached a special duty owed to individuals.
The court recognized that the state could be held liable for negligent acts during the performance of a governmental function, provided the action arises from a special relationship.
The court reaffirmed the principle that states exercising their discretion in planning are generally immune, but operational negligence may expose them to liability.
Maryland's approach aligns with federal standards regarding negligence claims against government entities but emphasizes specific duties and exceptions to sovereign immunity, which differ from the more general federal applications under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). Unlike federal law, Maryland courts apply a nuanced approach regarding the special duty required to hold the state liable.
Understanding the nuances of sovereign immunity and exceptions in Maryland tort law, as exemplified in Fisher, is critical for the Maryland bar exam, particularly in questions involving governmental liability.