Blackburn Ltd. Partnership v. Paul
438 Md. 100
| Md. | 2014Background
- This Maryland tort case involves Blackburn and affiliates (Country Place Apartments) vs. Alicia Daley Paul.
- Near-drowning of Christopher Paul (age 3) at the Country Place pool in 2010 caused severe brain injury.
- Plaintiff sued for negligence and negligence per se, alleging statutory/COMAR and Montgomery County regulatory breaches.
- Circuit Court granted summary judgment to petitioners, denying any duty beyond willful misconduct due to trespasser status.
- Court of Special Appeals reversed, holding statutory/regulatory duties could create a duty to trespassers.
- Maryland Supreme Court granted certiorari to address the interaction between common-law duties to trespassers and statutory duties under COMAR.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether common-law duty to trespassers remains sole standard | Paul argues statutes create duty despite trespasser status | Petitioners argue no statutory duty overrides trespasser rule | Yes; statute can create duty notwithstanding trespasser status |
| Does Statute or Ordinance Rule apply to COMAR in this context | Paul claims COMAR targets a protected class (children) and supports duty | Petitioners contend grandfathering excludes preexisting pools; no targeted class | Partially; Statute or Ordinance Rule applies when statutes/regs protect a specific class |
| Did COMAR 10.17.01.21 barrier requirements apply to grandfathered pools | Paul argues barriers must still comply; grandfathering limited | Petitioners rely on exemptions for previously approved pools | Yes; barrier requirements can impose duty even for grandfathered pools under exception |
| Does COMAR 10.17.01.03D(1) negate grandfathering where health/safety at risk | Paul: exceptions do not override safety protections | Petitioners: exemptions survive unless condition jeopardizes health/safety | No; exemptions do not bar application of safety-centered exceptions when risk exists |
Key Cases Cited
- Brooks v. Lewin Realty III, Inc., 378 Md. 70 (Md. 2003) (statute-or-ordinance rule for civil negligence evidence)
- Allen v. Dackman, 413 Md. 132 (Md. 2010) (statutory-duty rule; housing codes override trespasser status)
- Osterman v. Peters, 260 Md. 313 (Md. 1971) (public-oriented ordinance; trespasser status limits recovery)
- Longeley v. State, 161 Md. 563 (Md. 1932) (two-part test for statutory duty against public-facing regulations)
- Warr v. JMGM Group, LLC, 433 Md. 170 (Md. 2013) (statutory-duty rule; clarifies when statute creates duty vs. public health statute)
- Remsburg v. Montgomery, 376 Md. 568 (Md. 2003) (statute-or-ordinance rule scope and application)