Pro Se Plaintiff: McCormick v. HABC

Kopec Law Firm

This Maryland Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog regularly discusses medical malpractice cases from the Maryland appellate courts. Additionally, it features other personal injury court decisions in which the same legal issues arise. In a recent personal injury case, the Appellate Court had to review claims of error in the trial by a pro se plaintiff (plaintiff representing self). In doing so, the Court demonstrated that although the plaintiff did not follow briefing rules, the Court endeavored to glean the plaintiff’s assignments of error and review the transcript to address them.

The Appellate Court of Maryland issued an unreported opinion in McCormick v. Housing Authority of Baltimore City (January 30, 2024). The case involved a pro se plaintiff public housing resident, alleging that soil erosion had caused water problems in her unit that had caused her many health problems.

Public housing buildings in case by pro se plaintiff
Public Housing

In the Courts

After the plaintiff’s case, then the circuit court granted a motion for judgment. The trial judge primarily focused on the lack of expert testimony connecting the plaintiff’s medical conditions to the soil erosion. (Op. at 5).

The Appellate Court addressed the issues the plaintiff attempted to raise in her brief. The plaintiff complained that the trial court did not grant her motion for default based on the defendant’s failure to file a timely answer. The Court, however, cited the transcript showing that the plaintiff agreed to withdraw the motion and proceed with the trial. (Id. at 8). 

The Court also concluded that the pro se plaintiff had failed to establish the elements of negligence, and the trial court correctly granted the motion for judgment. (Id. at 10-12). Specifically, the plaintiff did not put on causation expert testimony to link her physical injuries to soil erosion.

The plaintiff also failed to establish a breach of contract. Significantly, the plaintiff failed even to introduce a copy of her lease. (Id. at 13). The Appellate Court concluded that the circuit court correctly granted the defendant’s motion for judgment. (Id. at 14). Further, the procedural errors that the plaintiff raised were not meritorious. (Id. at 16-17).

Commentary: Pro Se Plaintiff

The Appellate Court noted that the plaintiff had filed an informal brief that did not conform to the rules, including the designation of issues for the appeal. (Id. at 7). However, the Court analyzed the plaintiff’s submission. It restated the questions in a way the Court believed reflected the plaintiff’s concerns. 

The court has flexibility in dealing with pro se plaintiffs. Maryland courts have repeatedly said they give no special treatment to a pro se party. Pickett v. Noba, 114 Md. App. 552 554-555 (1997). This principle allows the court to ensure a pro se party’s failure to follow the rules does not waste the court’s time or prejudice the administration of justice. In McCormick, the Court could have struck the brief for failing to comply with the rules and dismissed the appeal. MD Rule 8-503.

Flexibility

However, the court also can choose to be flexible, as it did here. The Appellate Court did not dismiss the appeal. Instead, the Court attempted to glean the issues the plaintiff was trying to raise. Then, the Court examined the transcript and papers from the proceeding below to assess those issues. The lawyers usually do this by gathering support from the record in presenting their arguments. The McCormick Court gave the plaintiff a full review. No one could say she didn’t receive a full hearing of her issues. As a result, there is more of a sense of justice than if the Court had dismissed the appeal because she did not have the legal assistance to state her claims correctly.

The portions of the transcript cited suggest that the trial court was also deferential to the pro se plaintiff. The trial court repeatedly offered the plaintiff the option of postponement if she was not completely ready to proceed with the trial. (Id. at 16).

Evidently, the trial court probably could have disposed of this case on a pre-trial motion for summary judgment based on the same facts that it entered judgment at trial. However, it is not clear why that didn’t happen. In any event, the courts gave this plaintiff a full hearing of the issues she tried to raise.

Mark Kopec is a top-rated Maryland medical malpractice lawyer. You can contact us at 800-604-0704 for a free consultation. Thank you for reading the Maryland Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog.

What Our Clients Say About Us

At the Kopec Law Firm, we are grateful that satisfied clients express their appreciation!

Mark is a knowledgeable and empathetic lawyer who speaks directly and concisely to evaluate your problem. He doesn't use attorney jargon that confuses people, rather he talks clearly. Although he couldn't help me with my situation, the consultation I had was productive because he answered my questions and gave me some clarity.

Shahnaz in Ellicott City

Dear Mark, I just wanted to express my gratitude for your dedication to my case. As you know, it has been a long and upsetting process for me, which would have been a great deal longer had it not been for the hours you put in helping me with this emotional roller coaster. Thank you again.

Shannon T. in Anne Arundel County

Dear Mark, thank you so much for your help and kindness. You provided the guidance and assistance we needed to obtain some understanding in loss of our child. We will never forget the professional and personal service provided. If anyone is in need of legal representation, I will certainly send them your way. God bless.

Kim C. in Cecil County

I wanted to say thank you for spending time with me regarding my questions about legal issues. Mere words cannot really express my gratitude. You seem to truly care about people.

Client in Baltimore City

Dear Mr. Mark, I’m truly grateful to have had you work on my son’s case. You were up front at all times and were on key every step of the way. I will always recommend your firm. Thank you so much for helping my son. P.S. Every time my son sees you on TV, he says “Mom, that’s my lawyer, Mr. Mark.” 🙂 Thank you again. You did an excellent job on the...

K.N. in Baltimore City

Dear Mark, we want to thank you for all the hard work and time your firm put in our case. You took the time to listen to us and research our case. You were honest and up front regarding the case. You responded to questions and concerns quickly. We would highly recommend your firm and services to anyone who is in need of legal representation. We...

Rebecca T. in Prince George’s County

Super Awesome team and staff! Worked with them for a case they handled for my grandchild about 10yrs ago! Would definitely use them again! I recommend them to everyone I know. Could never thank them enough! Very thorough and knowledgeable! Always kept us in the loop throughout the entire process!!!!

Letha C. in Prince George’s County

Mark explained everything in detail and brought clarity to all of my concerns.

Doris in Edgwater

I am very happy and thankful for your help. You responded very quickly. I am very happy to recommend you.

Linda in Chevy Chase
  1. 1 Free Consultation
  2. 2 Talk to a Lawyer
  3. 3 No Fee Unless You Win
Fill out the contact form or call us at 800-604-0704 to schedule your consultation.

Send Us a Message