Recent Development: Hamilton v. Kirson: The Court of Appeals of Maryland Held That Circumstantial Evidence Offered to Satisfy the Causation Element of a Prima Facie Claim of Negligence in Lead Paint Cases Must Demonstrate a Reasonable Probability, Not Mere Possibility, That the Subject Property Was the Cause of the Lead Exposure

Authors

Matthew Stegman

Abstract

The Court of Appeals of Maryland held, in two consolidated cases, that circumstantial evidence presented to prove injuries from lead paint exposure was insufficient to survive a motion for summary judgment on the issue of causation.

Recommended Citation

Stegman, Matthew (2014) "Recent Development: Hamilton v. Kirson: The Court of Appeals of Maryland Held That Circumstantial Evidence Offered to Satisfy the Causation Element of a Prima Facie Claim of Negligence in Lead Paint Cases Must Demonstrate a Reasonable Probability, Not Mere Possibility, That the Subject Property Was the Cause of the Lead Exposure," University of Baltimore Law Forum: Vol. 45: No. 1, Article 8.
Available at: https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/lf/vol45/iss1/8