Opinion ID: 1964676
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Parallel Litigation

Text: Appellants claim that the personal representative should not be able to maintain separate suits in the District of Columbia and in Maryland based on the same allegations. Although there undoubtedly will be some overlap between the two cases, they are not identical. The complaint in the District of Columbia is a survival action on behalf of the Estate, whereas the complaint in Maryland is a wrongful death action on behalf of the decedent's two grandsons who are domiciled in Maryland. The facts on which the two lawsuits are based are the same, and so the witnesses and evidence also are likely to be the same on the question of negligence. The damages claims are not the same, however, and the witnesses and evidence as to damages will be very different. Moreover, in her opposition to defendant's motion, appellee contended that she could not have brought the wrongful death action in the District because the District of Columbia statute of limitations had expired. [8] If appellants were primarily concerned with consolidating the two actions, they could waive any applicable statute of limitations bar as a defense and permit appellee to file the wrongful death action in the District. [9] Cf. Ussery, 647 A.2d at 782 (noting that separate actions in Maryland and the District would be seriously inconvenient when all the likely defendants were amenable to suit only in the Maryland courts).