Legal Opinion

DRD Pool Service, Inc. v. Freed

Court of Appeals of Maryland

Decided September 24, 2010No. 104, Sept. Term, 2009PublishedCited by 43 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGreene, J.

In this case, we are asked to determine two issues. First, we are asked to decide whether a jury may consider a claim for conscious pain and suffering when there is a reasonable inference of consciousness prior to the decedent’s death, but the length of that consciousness and evidence of pain and suffering during the drowning process are based on expert testimony rather than on eyewitness testimony. The petitioner, DRD Pool Service, Inc. (“DRD”), argues that a claim for conscious pain and suffering cannot be based solely on an expert’s opinion in the absence of any case-specific independent…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Payne v. TennesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Vasquez v. HillerySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Gregory v. AshcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Oaks v. ConnorsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
  5. Murphy v. EdmondsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. Exxon Mobil Corp. v. AlbrightCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2013
  2. Thompson v. UBS Financial Services, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2015
  3. Rochkind v. StevensonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2020
  4. Lawrence v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2021
  5. Finch v. LVNV Funding LLCCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 2013

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API