Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Wolfe v. Bailey

United States District Court, D. Maryland

October 1, 2017

BARBARA WOLFE, Plaintiff,
v.
RICARDO BAILEY II, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION.

          Paula Xinis United States District Judge.

         Plaintiff Barbara Wolfe brought this negligence action against former Defendant Ricardo Bailey and co-Defendants Saundra Lord and Jacqueline Reed for injuries sustained during a car crash involving all four parties. ECF No. 2. Previously, after a full round of briefing, this Court granted a motion for summary judgment in favor of Defendant Bailey and dismissed all claims against him. ECF Nos. 44, 45. Now pending before the Court is a motion for summary judgment by Defendant Lord. ECF No. 41. The motion is opposed by Defendant Reed, ECF No. 43, but not opposed by Wolfe provided that at trial no party may claim that Lord caused or contributed to the accident, ECF No. 46.

         Bailey and Lord were the drivers of the two middle cars involved in the four-car collision that is the basis for this case. After reviewing the parties' submissions in connection with Lord's motion, the Court has determined that the evidence in the record and the legal issues relevant to Lord's motion for summary judgment are, for all intents and purposes, the same as those the Court discussed in its Memorandum Opinion granting Bailey's earlier motion. See ECF No. 44. Attempting to suggest otherwise, Defendant Reed points to Lord's deposition testimony that she “slammed” on her breaks in response to the stopped car ahead of her and that she did not know why the car ahead of her had stopped:

Q. . . . Now, it's my understanding that, at some point in time, you see traffic ahead of you come to a stop; is that correct?
A. I didn't see anybody stop. I just saw taillights, bright red taillights and that's basically what I saw.
Q. Okay. Bright red taillights of just the vehicle ahead of you or of all the cars ahead of you?
A. No, just the vehicle ahead of me.
Q. Were you able to see beyond that vehicle?
A. No. . . . I shouldn't say I couldn't see. I might have been able to, but I didn't, I wasn't looking.
Q. Okay. You were focused on the car ahead?
A. Yes, with red taillights.
. . .
Q. And you saw [the speed of the car ahead of you] reduce?
A. You know, I don't know. As I say, what I saw were the taillights. I don't know anything about what that car in front of me was doing, or I mean, I just - it was just there. The brake lights were ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.