Sample Uninsured Motorist Complaint in District Court

This is a sample district court complaint in an uninsured motorist car accident case  against GEICO for bodily injuries and property damage.

• Sample Circuit Court Uninsured Motorist Complaint

THE DISTRICT COURT FOR PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY, MARYLAND

NATASHA BEVENS
– Plaintiff

v

DOMINIC PALACE
and
MARIO WILCHAZ
and
GEICO INSURANCE COMPANY
– Defendant

CASE NO. 0702-0000000-2005

Plaintiff, Natasha Bevens, (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) by and through her attorneys Laura G. Zois and Miller & Zois, LLC brings this personal injury lawsuit against the Defendants Dominic Palace, Mario Wilchaz and GEICO (hereinafter referred to as Defendants) and in support thereof states as follows:

FACTS

1. On or about, December 18, 2020, Plaintiff, Natasha Bevens, was lawfully operating and traveling in an automobile on Riggs Road in the State of Maryland.
2. At the same time and place, Defendant, Mario Wilchaz (hereinafter referred to as Defendant Driver One) was operating an automobile taking a left-hand turn from Merrimac Drive onto Riggs Road in the State of Maryland.
3. At the same time and place, Defendant, Dominic Palace, (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Driver Two”) was operating a motor vehicle on Riggs Road in the State of Maryland.
4. Defendant Driver One and Defendant Driver Two failed to control their vehicles and struck the vehicle occupied by Plaintiff.
5. At all times herein mentioned, Plaintiff’s vehicle was operated in a reasonable and prudent manner, with due caution and regard for the motor vehicle laws of the State of Maryland.
6. At the time of the car accident, Plaintiff had a valid policy of insurance with the Defendant GEICO at the time of the car accident and GEICO has failed to make payments under the policy.
7. That the Drivers of the at-fault vehicle does not have adequate insurance to cover the damages sustained by the Plaintiff in the car accident.

COUNT I – NEGLIGENCE OF DEFENDANT WILCHAZ

Plaintiff incorporates herein all preceding paragraphs.

8. Defendant Driver One had a duty to act reasonable and use due care while driving.  Defendant Driver One had a duty to pay attention to traffic, to maintain a proper lookout, to obey traffic control devices, to obey the laws and rules of the State of Maryland, to maintain proper speed for the conditions, to reduce speed to avoid an auto accident, to maintain a proper distance between vehicles and to control their vehicle to avoid a car crash.
9. Defendant Driver One breached that duty of due care by failing to pay proper attention to the roadway and the traffic, failing to maintain a proper lookout, failing to obey the traffic control device, failing to obey the laws and rules of the State of Maryland, failing to maintain proper speed for the conditions, failing to reduce speed to avoid an accident, failing to maintain a proper distance between vehicles, and failing to control their vehicle to avoid a collision.
10. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant Driver One in causing the car accident, Plaintiff suffered physical injuries and mental anguish. Plaintiff has past medical expenses, past lost wages, and past pain and suffering. Plaintiff may have future medical expenses and future lost wages. Plaintiff’s injuries from the accident with Defendant Driver are permanent. Finally, the Plaintiff, has suffered property damage, loss of use, loss of personal property and has incurred rental car expenses and towing expenses.
11. All the above damages were directly and proximately caused by the aforementioned negligence of the Defendant Driver One, and were incurred without contributory negligence or assumption of the risk on the part of Plaintiff, or an opportunity for the Plaintiff, to avoid the accident.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Driver One in the amount of $30,000.00 plus costs, pre-judgment interest, and post-judgment interest as this Court deems appropriate.

COUNT II – NEGLIGENCE OF DEFENDANT PALACE

Plaintiff incorporates herein all preceding paragraphs.

12. Defendant Driver Two had a duty to act reasonable and use due care while driving.  Defendant Driver had a duty to pay attention to traffic, to maintain a proper lookout, to obey traffic control devices, to obey the laws and rules of the State of Maryland, to maintain proper speed for the conditions, to reduce speed to avoid a car accident, to maintain a proper distance between vehicles and to control their vehicle to avoid a collision.
13. Defendant Driver Two breached that duty of due care by failing pay proper attention to the roadway and the traffic, failing to maintain a proper lookout, failing to obey the traffic control device, failing to obey the laws and rules of the State of Maryland, failing to maintain proper speed for the conditions, failing to reduce speed to avoid an accident, failing to maintain a proper distance between vehicles, and failing to control their vehicle in order to avoid a collision.
14. As a direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendant Driver Two, Plaintiff suffered physical injuries and mental anguish. Plaintiff has past medical expenses, past lost wages, and past pain and suffering.  Plaintiff may have future medical expenses and future lost wages. Plaintiff injuries from the accident with Defendant Driver are permanent. Finally Plaintiff, has suffered property damage, loss of use, loss of personal property and has incurred rental car expenses and towing expenses.
15. All the above damages were directly and proximately caused by the aforementioned negligence of Defendant Driver Two, and were incurred without contributory negligence or assumption of
    the risk on the part of Plaintiff, or an opportunity for Plaintiff, to avoid the motor vehicle accident.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant Driver Two in the amount of $30,000.00 plus costs, pre-judgment interest, and post-judgment interest as this Court deems appropriate.

COUNT III – BREACH OF CONTRACT

Plaintiff incorporates by reference herein all the above paragraphs.

16. At the time of the car accident, the vehicles being operated by both driver Defendants were uninsured, or in the alternative, that any insurance in force on the vehicle did not and does not, provide adequate coverage for the claims and damages asserted by Plaintiff.
17. At the time of the car accident, Plaintiff had in force a policy of automobile insurance issued by Defendant GEICO. This policy of insurance contained a provision for uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage that provided, among other things, insurance coverage for losses and damages sustained in accidents that were caused by the negligent operation of a vehicle by third persons, when that vehicle is uninsured or underinsured at the time of the accident, and the third person is not otherwise entitled to coverage.
18. The Plaintiff has complied with the terms of the contract with Defendant GEICO and is entitled to be paid by Defendant all damages sustained by Plaintiff resulting from the negligence of  Defendants.
19. Defendant GEICO, has breached its contract with Plaintiff by failing to make any payments to the Plaintiff’s under the uninsured motorist provision of Plaintiff’s policy.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, demands judgment be entered against Defendant, GEICO for compensatory damages in the amount of $30,000.00, plus costs, pre-judgment interest, and post-judgment interest.