Baltimore County, Maryland v. Michael Quinlan, 466 Md. 1

215 A.3d 282 (2019) · Court of Appeals of Maryland · August 26, 2019 · No. No. 50, September Term, 2018

Summary

The Maryland Court of Appeals held that degenerative medial and lateral meniscal tears suffered by a paramedic could qualify as a compensable occupational disease under Maryland’s Workers’ Compensation Act. The court concluded that the nature of the paramedic’s employment involved hazards placing the employee at greater risk of degenerative knee conditions and that sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that the condition arose from the employment. The court also upheld the denial of the employer’s motion for summary judgment.

Holdings

  1. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion by denying Baltimore County's motion for summary judgment because the record presented a material factual dispute and the court could properly allow a full hearing on the merits.
  2. Degenerative meniscal tears may qualify as an occupational disease under Maryland Labor and Employment Article § 9-502(d) when the nature of the employment exposes the employee to hazards of the disease to a greater degree than the general public and the employee's job functions expose the employee to those hazards.
  3. The evidence was sufficient for the jury to reasonably conclude that Quinlan's degenerative meniscal tears were due to the nature of his paramedic employment and incurred as a result of that employment.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion by denying Baltimore County's motion for summary judgment based on the characterization and evidentiary support of Quinlan's occupational-disease claim.
  2. Whether degenerative tears of the medial and lateral menisci could qualify as an occupational disease under Maryland Labor and Employment Article § 9-502(d).
  3. Whether the evidence permitted the jury to reasonably conclude that Quinlan's degenerative meniscal tears were due to the nature of his employment and incurred as a result of that employment.

Disposition

affirmed

Cases Cited (21)

  • Liggett & Meyers Tobacco Co. v. Goslin, 163 Md. 74, 80 (1932)(followed)
  • Housing Authority of Baltimore City v. Woodland, 438 Md. 415, 426 (2014)(followed)
  • Presbyterian University Hospital v. Wilson, 337 Md. 541, 549 (1995)(followed)
  • Metropolitan Mortgage Fund, Inc. v. Basiliko, 288 Md. 25, 28 (1980)(followed)
  • Barnes v. Greater Baltimore Medical Center, Inc., 210 Md. App. 457, 487 (2013)(followed)
  • Kent Village Associates Joint Venture v. Smith, 104 Md. App. 507, 516-17 (1995)(followed)
  • Scott v. State, 454 Md. 146, 188 (2017)(followed)
  • Shah v. Howard County, 337 Md. 248, 254 (1995)(followed)
  • Uninsured Employers' Fund v. Danner, 388 Md. 649, 659 (2005)(followed)
  • Victory Sparkler & Specialty Co. v. Francks, 147 Md. 368, 378-79 (1925)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 21.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…