This morning I blogged about University of Maryland Medical Systems v. Waldt in one of the longest posts in Maryland Injury Lawyer Blog history. Apparently, in light of my blog post and the criticisms contained in the post, the Maryland Court of Appeals withdrew the opinion. (Okay, maybe it did not happen quite that way. But allow me to pretend.)
What does this mean? I have no idea. The Maryland high court substantively changed its opinion a few years back in Erie v. Heffernan on the question of the impact of insurance companies waiving subrogation in uninsured motorist claims. But the court reaffirmed the deleted portions of the opinion in Heffernan in Maurer v. Pennsylvania National. I’m still perplexed by the thinking on all of that to this day. I’m sure there was a logical reason. But the Maryland Court of Appeals does not share its thinking on these things.
Anyway, the Vegas odds are that this means nothing of great substance. I doubt one of the four judges in the majority is going to flip and join the dissent to make a majority. The changes could just be trivial. But anything is possible and we will have to wait and see.