{"attribution":{"source":"legal.exploreworldai.com","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04","cite_as":"NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04)","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision","version":"legal-2026-10-23","fingerprint":"ewai:us:a8382b","proof":"sha256:d8c2368b6919f0d5b2619635148ea492b2620fd7268eb379c8b49f43c9fd28c7","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","publisher":"NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal","terms":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om"},"brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","item":{"schema_version":"1.0.0","id":"us:md-10-13-2014-03-04","jurisdiction":"us","lang":"en","brand_source":"Source: NovaCopilot","brand":{"product":"NovaCopilot","platform":"ExploreWorldAI","infrastructure":"ExploreWorld Legal","infrastructure_url":"legal.exploreworldai.com","legal_entity":"Valkiv Ventures AB","permanent_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot","source":"Source: NovaCopilot","powered_by":"Powered by NovaCopilot","license":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor"},"sections":[{"title":"Front matter","paragraphs":["para_1","para_2","para_3","para_4","para_5","para_6","para_7","para_8","para_9","para_10","para_11","para_12","para_13","para_14","para_15","para_16","para_17","para_18","para_19","para_20","para_21","para_22","para_23","para_24","para_25","para_26","para_27","para_28","para_29","para_30","para_31","para_32","para_33","para_34","para_35","para_36","para_37","para_38","para_39","para_40","para_41","para_42","para_43","para_44","para_45","para_46","para_47","para_48","para_49","para_50","para_51","para_52","para_53","para_54","para_55","para_56","para_57","para_58","para_59","para_60","para_61","para_62","para_63","para_64","para_65","para_66","para_67","para_68","para_69","para_70","para_71","para_72","para_73","para_74","para_75","para_76","para_77","para_78","para_79","para_80","para_81","para_82","para_83","para_84","para_85","para_86","para_87","para_88","para_89","para_90","para_91","para_92","para_93","para_94","para_95","para_96","para_97","para_98","para_99","para_100","para_101","para_102","para_103","para_104","para_105","para_106","para_107","para_108","para_109","para_110","para_111","para_112","para_113","para_114","para_115","para_116","para_117","para_118","para_119","para_120","para_121","para_122","para_123","para_124","para_125","para_126","para_127","para_128","para_129","para_130","para_131","para_132","para_133","para_134","para_135","para_136","para_137","para_138","para_139","para_140","para_141","para_142","para_143","para_144","para_145","para_146","para_147","para_148","para_149","para_150","para_151","para_152","para_153","para_154","para_155","para_156","para_157","para_158","para_159","para_160","para_161","para_162","para_163","para_164","para_165","para_166","para_167","para_168","para_169","para_170","para_171","para_172","para_173","para_174","para_175","para_176","para_177","para_178","para_179","para_180","para_181","para_182","para_183","para_184","para_185","para_186","para_187","para_188","para_189","para_190","para_191","para_192","para_193","para_194","para_195","para_196","para_197","para_198","para_199","para_200","para_201","para_202","para_203","para_204","para_205","para_206","para_207","para_208","para_209","para_210","para_211","para_212","para_213","para_214","para_215","para_216","para_217","para_218","para_219","para_220","para_221","para_222","para_223","para_224","para_225","para_226","para_227","para_228","para_229","para_230","para_231","para_232","para_233","para_234","para_235","para_236","para_237","para_238","para_239","para_240","para_241","para_242","para_243","para_244","para_245","para_246","para_247","para_248","para_249","para_250","para_251","para_252","para_253","para_254","para_255","para_256","para_257","para_258","para_259","para_260","para_261","para_262","para_263","para_264","para_265","para_266","para_267","para_268","para_269","para_270","para_271","para_272","para_273","para_274","para_275","para_276","para_277","para_278","para_279","para_280","para_281","para_282","para_283","para_284","para_285","para_286","para_287","para_288","para_289","para_290","para_291","para_292","para_293","para_294","para_295","para_296","para_297","para_298","para_299","para_300","para_301","para_302","para_303","para_304","para_305","para_306","para_307","para_308","para_309","para_310","para_311","para_312","para_313","para_314","para_315","para_316","para_317","para_318","para_319","para_320","para_321","para_322","para_323","para_324","para_325","para_326","para_327","para_328","para_329","para_330","para_331","para_332","para_333","para_334","para_335","para_336","para_337","para_338","para_339","para_340","para_341","para_342","para_343","para_344","para_345","para_346","para_347","para_348","para_349","para_350","para_351","para_352","para_353","para_354","para_355","para_356","para_357","para_358","para_359","para_360","para_361","para_362","para_363","para_364","para_365","para_366","para_367","para_368","para_369","para_370","para_371","para_372","para_373","para_374","para_375","para_376","para_377","para_378","para_379","para_380","para_381","para_382","para_383","para_384","para_385","para_386","para_387","para_388","para_389","para_390","para_391","para_392","para_393","para_394","para_395","para_396","para_397","para_398","para_399","para_400","para_401","para_402","para_403","para_404","para_405","para_406","para_407","para_408","para_409","para_410","para_411","para_412","para_413","para_414","para_415","para_416","para_417","para_418","para_419","para_420","para_421","para_422","para_423","para_424","para_425","para_426","para_427","para_428","para_429","para_430","para_431","para_432","para_433","para_434","para_435","para_436","para_437","para_438","para_439","para_440","para_441","para_442","para_443","para_444","para_445","para_446","para_447","para_448","para_449","para_450","para_451","para_452","para_453","para_454","para_455","para_456","para_457","para_458","para_459","para_460","para_461"],"kind":"front_matter"}],"paragraphs":[{"text":"The Brethren Mutual Insurance Company v. Ember Louise Buckley, Case No. 10, September","paragraph_id":"para_1"},{"text":"Term, 2013, Opinion by Adkins, J.","paragraph_id":"para_2"},{"text":"INSURANCE LAW - SCOPE OF RELEASE - GENERAL RELEASE - MARYLAND","paragraph_id":"para_3"},{"text":"CODE (1997, 2011 REPLACEMENT VOLUME), § 19-511(e) OF THE INSURANCE","paragraph_id":"para_4"},{"text":"ARTICLE - NO PREJUDICE TO UNINSURED MOTORIST CLAIM: The Court of","paragraph_id":"para_5"},{"text":"Special Appeals correctly held that, under § 19-511(e) of the Insurance Article, a tort victim","paragraph_id":"para_6"},{"text":"may execute a boilerplate, general release with a tortfeasor’s liability insurer without","paragraph_id":"para_7"},{"text":"prejudicing the tort victim’s claim under her uninsured motorist policy.","paragraph_id":"para_8"},{"text":"Circuit Court for Baltimore County","paragraph_id":"para_9"},{"text":"Case No. 03-C-08-008799","paragraph_id":"para_10"},{"text":"Argued: November 5, 2013","paragraph_id":"para_11"},{"text":"IN THE COURT OF APPEALS","paragraph_id":"para_12"},{"text":"OF MARYLAND","paragraph_id":"para_13"},{"text":"No. 10","paragraph_id":"para_14"},{"text":"September Term, 2013","paragraph_id":"para_15"},{"text":"THE BRETHREN MUTUAL INSURANCE","paragraph_id":"para_16"},{"text":"COMPANY","paragraph_id":"para_17"},{"text":"v.","paragraph_id":"para_18"},{"text":"EMBER LOUISE BUCKLEY","paragraph_id":"para_19"},{"text":"Barbera, C.J.","paragraph_id":"para_20"},{"text":"Harrell","paragraph_id":"para_21"},{"text":"Greene","paragraph_id":"para_22"},{"text":"Adkins","paragraph_id":"para_23"},{"text":"Eldridge, John C., (Retired,","paragraph_id":"para_24"},{"text":"Specially Assigned)","paragraph_id":"para_25"},{"text":"Cathell, Dale R., (Retired,","paragraph_id":"para_26"},{"text":"Specially Assigned)","paragraph_id":"para_27"},{"text":"McAuliffe, John (Retired,","paragraph_id":"para_28"},{"text":"Specially Assigned),","paragraph_id":"para_29"},{"text":"JJ.","paragraph_id":"para_30"},{"text":"Opinion by Adkins, J.","paragraph_id":"para_31"},{"text":"Filed: March 4, 2014","paragraph_id":"para_32"},{"text":"In this case we examine the scope of a general release executed pursuant to Md. Code","paragraph_id":"para_33"},{"text":"(1997, 2011 Repl. Vol.), § 19-511 of the Insurance Article (“§ 19-511”). Petitioner, The","paragraph_id":"para_34"},{"text":"Brethren Mutual Insurance Company (“Brethren”), appeals the decision of the Court of","paragraph_id":"para_35"},{"text":"Special Appeals that a general release executed by its policy holder, Ember L. Buckley","paragraph_id":"para_36"},{"text":"(“Buckley”), in favor of a tortfeasor’s liability insurer did not likewise waive Buckley’s claim","paragraph_id":"para_37"},{"text":"under her uninsured motorist policy with Brethren.","paragraph_id":"para_38"},{"text":"FACTS AND LEGAL PROCEEDINGS","paragraph_id":"para_39"},{"text":"Respondent, Buckley, was involved in a single-vehicle accident on March 18, 2007.","paragraph_id":"para_40"},{"text":"Buckley was the front-seat passenger in a motor vehicle driven by her boyfriend, Harvey","paragraph_id":"para_41"},{"text":"Betts (“Betts”). Betts was covered by a liability insurance policy issued by GEICO, with","paragraph_id":"para_42"},{"text":"policy limits of $100,000. GEICO offered to settle Respondent’s claim against Betts for the","paragraph_id":"para_43"},{"text":"full policy limits. Notwithstanding this settlement, Buckley had medical bills related to this","paragraph_id":"para_44"},{"text":"accident in excess of $200,000. Because the settlement with Betts did not cover the full","paragraph_id":"para_45"},{"text":"extent of her injuries, Buckley sought coverage under her uninsured/underinsured motorist","paragraph_id":"para_46"},{"text":"(“UM”) policy with Petitioner, Brethren.","paragraph_id":"para_47"},{"text":"In order to comply with Maryland’s UM scheme, Respondent sent notice of the1","paragraph_id":"para_48"},{"text":"settlement offer from GEICO to Brethren via certified mail on August 29, 2007. In2","paragraph_id":"para_49"},{"text":"Discussed infra.1","paragraph_id":"para_50"},{"text":"This letter stated:2","paragraph_id":"para_51"},{"text":"We represent [Buckley] who was injured in an automobile","paragraph_id":"para_52"},{"text":"collision. Our office currently has an open file with Brethren","paragraph_id":"para_53"},{"text":"(continued...)","paragraph_id":"para_54"},{"text":"response, Brethren’s claims adjuster stated in a letter dated October 30, 2007 that Brethren","paragraph_id":"para_55"},{"text":"would waive any subrogation action against Betts. Having received this message, Buckley","paragraph_id":"para_56"},{"text":"signed a full release of all claims against Harvey Betts and a hold harmless agreement in","paragraph_id":"para_57"},{"text":"favor of Betts and GEICO on December 6, 2007 (“the Release”). The Release stated that:","paragraph_id":"para_58"},{"text":"I/we, Ember Buckley . . . for and in consideration of a draft for","paragraph_id":"para_59"},{"text":"the sum of one hundred thousand dollars . . . do . . . hereby","paragraph_id":"para_60"},{"text":"remise, release, and forever discharge Harvey Betts.","paragraph_id":"para_61"},{"text":"Releasee(s), successors and assigns, and/or his, her or their","paragraph_id":"para_62"},{"text":"associates, heirs, executors and administrators, and all other","paragraph_id":"para_63"},{"text":"persons, firms or corporations of and from any and every claim,","paragraph_id":"para_64"},{"text":"demand, right or cause of action, of whatever kind of nature, on","paragraph_id":"para_65"},{"text":"account of or in any way growing out of any and all personal","paragraph_id":"para_66"},{"text":"injuries and consequences thereof . . . resulting or to result from","paragraph_id":"para_67"},{"text":"an accident that occurred on or about the eighteenth day of","paragraph_id":"para_68"},{"text":"March, 2007, at or near Saw Mill Court Baldwin, MD . . . .","paragraph_id":"para_69"},{"text":"(Emphasis in original). After executing the Release with GEICO, Buckley attempted to","paragraph_id":"para_70"},{"text":"recover for the remainder of her outstanding medical bills from Brethren under her UM","paragraph_id":"para_71"},{"text":"policy. Brethren denied coverage and refused to pay.","paragraph_id":"para_72"},{"text":"(...continued)2","paragraph_id":"para_73"},{"text":"Mutual for P.I.P. benefits (Claim # 343628).","paragraph_id":"para_74"},{"text":"Enclosed please find a copy of correspondence dated August 8,","paragraph_id":"para_75"},{"text":"2007 which I have received from Geico [sic] Insurance","paragraph_id":"para_76"},{"text":"Company, the liability carrier for the tortfeasor, Mr. Harvey","paragraph_id":"para_77"},{"text":"Betts. They have offered their policy limits of $100,000.00 in","paragraph_id":"para_78"},{"text":"settlement of this claim and are willing to settle the case","paragraph_id":"para_79"},{"text":"accordingly if the tortfeasor, Mr. Harvey Betts, is released from","paragraph_id":"para_80"},{"text":"liability and [subrogation]. This letter is a request that you","paragraph_id":"para_81"},{"text":"permit this to occur pursuant to Insurance Article, §19-511.","paragraph_id":"para_82"},{"text":"(Italics in original).","paragraph_id":"para_83"},{"text":"2","paragraph_id":"para_84"},{"text":"Buckley filed suit against Brethren in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County, alleging","paragraph_id":"para_85","court_paragraph":2},{"text":"breach of contract and seeking the policy limit of $300,000 in compensatory damages,","paragraph_id":"para_86"},{"text":"attorney’s fees and interest. Brethren answered the complaint, asserting a general denial of","paragraph_id":"para_87"},{"text":"liability, and raising the defenses of failure to state a claim, contributory negligence and","paragraph_id":"para_88"},{"text":"assumption of the risk. Brethren did not raise the Release as an affirmative defense until its","paragraph_id":"para_89"},{"text":"Amended Answer, filed two months after its initial Answer, and nearly three months after","paragraph_id":"para_90"},{"text":"Buckley filed her complaint.","paragraph_id":"para_91"},{"text":"Both parties filed motions for summary judgment. Brethren argued that the Release,","paragraph_id":"para_92"},{"text":"as written, was a general release, and thus released all persons, firms, and corporations from","paragraph_id":"para_93"},{"text":"future claims, regardless of whether they were parties to the Release. Brethren further argued","paragraph_id":"para_94"},{"text":"that Buckley’s subjective intent in executing the Release was irrelevant—the words on the","paragraph_id":"para_95"},{"text":"page should be interpreted exactly as written. Responding, Buckley contended that the","paragraph_id":"para_96"},{"text":"Release only applied to Betts and his insurer, and that her execution of it was clearly in","paragraph_id":"para_97"},{"text":"accordance with § 19-511. That statute reads, in pertinent part:","paragraph_id":"para_98"},{"text":"§ 19-511. Uninsured motorist coverage — Settlement","paragraph_id":"para_99"},{"text":"procedures.","paragraph_id":"para_100"},{"text":"(a) Notice of settlement offer required. — If an","paragraph_id":"para_101"},{"text":"injured person receives a written offer from a","paragraph_id":"para_102"},{"text":"motor vehicle insurance liability insurer . . . to","paragraph_id":"para_103"},{"text":"settle a claim for bodily injury or death, and the","paragraph_id":"para_104"},{"text":"amount of the settlement offer . . . would exhaust","paragraph_id":"para_105"},{"text":"the bodily injury or death limits of the applicable","paragraph_id":"para_106"},{"text":"liability insurance policies . . . the injured person","paragraph_id":"para_107"},{"text":"shall send by certified mail, to any insurer that","paragraph_id":"para_108"},{"text":"provides uninsured motorist coverage . . . a copy","paragraph_id":"para_109"},{"text":"of the liability insurer’s written settlement offer.","paragraph_id":"para_110"},{"text":"3","paragraph_id":"para_111"},{"text":"(b) Response to settlement offer. — Within 60","paragraph_id":"para_112","court_paragraph":3},{"text":"days after receipt of the notice . . . the uninsured","paragraph_id":"para_113"},{"text":"motorist insurer shall send to the injured person:","paragraph_id":"para_114"},{"text":"(1) written consent to acceptance","paragraph_id":"para_115"},{"text":"of the settlement offer and to the","paragraph_id":"para_116"},{"text":"execution of releases; or","paragraph_id":"para_117"},{"text":"(2) written refusal to consent to","paragraph_id":"para_118"},{"text":"acceptance of the settlement offer.","paragraph_id":"para_119"},{"text":"(c) Payment of settlement offer. — Within 30","paragraph_id":"para_120"},{"text":"days after a refusal to consent to acceptance of a","paragraph_id":"para_121"},{"text":"settlement offer . . . the uninsured motorist insurer","paragraph_id":"para_122"},{"text":"shall pay to the injured person the amount of the","paragraph_id":"para_123"},{"text":"settlement offer.","paragraph_id":"para_124"},{"text":"(d) Subrogation rights of uninsured motorist","paragraph_id":"para_125"},{"text":"insurer. —","paragraph_id":"para_126"},{"text":"(1) Payment as described in","paragraph_id":"para_127"},{"text":"subsection (c) of this section shall","paragraph_id":"para_128"},{"text":"preserve the uninsured motorist","paragraph_id":"para_129"},{"text":"insurer’s subrogation rights against","paragraph_id":"para_130"},{"text":"the liability insurer and its insured.","paragraph_id":"para_131"},{"text":"(2) Receipt by the insured person of","paragraph_id":"para_132"},{"text":"th e p a ym e n t d e s c r ib e d in","paragraph_id":"para_133"},{"text":"subsection (c) of this section shall","paragraph_id":"para_134"},{"text":"constitute the assignment, up to the","paragraph_id":"para_135"},{"text":"amount of the payment, of any","paragraph_id":"para_136"},{"text":"recovery on behalf of the injured","paragraph_id":"para_137"},{"text":"person that is subsequently paid","paragraph_id":"para_138"},{"text":"from the applicable liability","paragraph_id":"para_139"},{"text":"insurance polic[y] . . . .","paragraph_id":"para_140"},{"text":"(e) Acceptance of settlement offer. — The injured","paragraph_id":"para_141"},{"text":"person may accept the liability insurer’s","paragraph_id":"para_142"},{"text":"settlement offer and execute releases in favor of","paragraph_id":"para_143"},{"text":"the liability insurer and its insured without","paragraph_id":"para_144"},{"text":"prejudice to any claim the injured person may","paragraph_id":"para_145"},{"text":"have against the uninsured motorist insurer:","paragraph_id":"para_146"},{"text":"(1) on receipt of written consent to","paragraph_id":"para_147"},{"text":"4","paragraph_id":"para_148"},{"text":"acceptance of the settlement offer","paragraph_id":"para_149","court_paragraph":4},{"text":"and to the execution of releases; or","paragraph_id":"para_150"},{"text":"(2) if the uninsured motorist insurer","paragraph_id":"para_151"},{"text":"has not met the requirements of","paragraph_id":"para_152"},{"text":"subsection (b) or subsection (c) of","paragraph_id":"para_153"},{"text":"this section.","paragraph_id":"para_154"},{"text":"§ 19-511 of the Insurance Article. The Circuit Court agreed with Brethren and entered","paragraph_id":"para_155"},{"text":"summary judgment in its favor, dismissing Buckley’s breach of contract claims.3","paragraph_id":"para_156"},{"text":"Buckley appealed the Circuit Court’s grant of summary judgment to Brethren. The","paragraph_id":"para_157"},{"text":"Court of Special Appeals, applying the facts of this case to § 19-511, held that “in the context","paragraph_id":"para_158"},{"text":"of § 19-511(e), executing a boilerplate, general release in favor of the liability insurer does","paragraph_id":"para_159"},{"text":"not relieve the UM carrier from its contractual duty to issue a UM payment to its insured.”","paragraph_id":"para_160"},{"text":"Buckley v. Brethren Mut. Ins. Co., 207 Md. App. 574, 587, 53 A.3d 456, 463 (2012). The","paragraph_id":"para_161"},{"text":"court based its decision on three considerations, “(1) the text of the statute; (2) the purpose","paragraph_id":"para_162"},{"text":"of the statute; and (3) matters of public policy.” Buckley, 207 Md. App. at 587, 53 A.3d at","paragraph_id":"para_163"},{"text":"463–64.","paragraph_id":"para_164"},{"text":"Along with this case, Buckley also pursued a complaint against Brethren with the3","paragraph_id":"para_165"},{"text":"Maryland Insurance Administration (“MIA”) pursuant to Md. Code (2007, 2011 Repl. Vol.)","paragraph_id":"para_166"},{"text":"§ 27-1001 of the Insurance Article. The issue in the MIA proceeding was whether Brethren","paragraph_id":"para_167"},{"text":"had acted with an absence of good faith in refusing to pay Buckley’s UM claim. Finding that","paragraph_id":"para_168"},{"text":"Brethren’s argument that the Release must be read to release them from their obligation to","paragraph_id":"para_169"},{"text":"pay Buckley was inconsistent with the plain language of § 19-511(e), the MIA found that","paragraph_id":"para_170"},{"text":"Brethren had acted in the absence of good faith. Thus, the MIA ordered Petitioner to pay","paragraph_id":"para_171"},{"text":"$246,250.00 to Buckley for its violations of § 27-1001. Brethren filed an appeal for judicial","paragraph_id":"para_172"},{"text":"review of this MIA decision in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. That appeal was","paragraph_id":"para_173"},{"text":"stayed pending the result of the Court of Special Appeals case. Buckley v. Brethren Mut. Ins.","paragraph_id":"para_174"},{"text":"Co., 207 Md. App. 574, 583, n.5, 53 A.3d 456, 461, n.5 (2012).","paragraph_id":"para_175"},{"text":"5","paragraph_id":"para_176"},{"text":"Thus, the Court of Special Appeals held that the general release executed between","paragraph_id":"para_177","court_paragraph":5},{"text":"Buckley and GEICO did not prejudice Buckley’s claim against Brethren. Consequently,","paragraph_id":"para_178"},{"text":"Brethren could not use the Release to relieve itself of its duty to pay under the UM policy","paragraph_id":"para_179"},{"text":"owned by Buckley. Buckley, 207 Md. App. at 598, 53 A.3d at 470.","paragraph_id":"para_180"},{"text":"On Brethren’s petition, we granted certiorari to consider the following question:","paragraph_id":"para_181"},{"text":"Did the Court of Special Appeals err in ruling that the general","paragraph_id":"para_182"},{"text":"release that Buckley executed did not prejudice her breach of","paragraph_id":"para_183"},{"text":"contract claim against Brethren for benefits under her UM","paragraph_id":"para_184"},{"text":"policy?4","paragraph_id":"para_185"},{"text":"Because we answer this question in the negative, we affirm the decision of the Court","paragraph_id":"para_186"},{"text":"of Special Appeals.","paragraph_id":"para_187"},{"text":"DISCUSSION","paragraph_id":"para_188"},{"text":"We rephrased Petitioner’s question presented, which appeared in its brief as follows:4","paragraph_id":"para_189"},{"text":"Did the Court of Special Appeals err in ruling that Buckley’s","paragraph_id":"para_190"},{"text":"breach of contract claim against Brethren for UIM benefits was","paragraph_id":"para_191"},{"text":"preserved, despite the fact that the parties and the Court of","paragraph_id":"para_192"},{"text":"Special Appeals agreed that Buckley executed a release that,","paragraph_id":"para_193"},{"text":"under its plain language, released all claims arising out of her","paragraph_id":"para_194"},{"text":"automobile accident against “all persons, firms or corporations,”","paragraph_id":"para_195"},{"text":"where the unambiguous provisions of Md. Code Ann. Ins. §19-","paragraph_id":"para_196"},{"text":"511(e), and the settlement procedures established thereunder,","paragraph_id":"para_197"},{"text":"did not legislatively overrule controlling case law of this Court","paragraph_id":"para_198"},{"text":"on the effect of such a global release?","paragraph_id":"para_199"},{"text":"Additionally, we highlight that this Court granted certiorari on the narrow question of the","paragraph_id":"para_200"},{"text":"correctness of the interpretation of the Release by the Court of Special Appeals. The issue","paragraph_id":"para_201"},{"text":"of Brethren’s consent to Buckley’s settlement with GEICO, although briefed by Respondent,","paragraph_id":"para_202"},{"text":"is not presented for our review.","paragraph_id":"para_203"},{"text":"6","paragraph_id":"para_204"},{"text":"Under Maryland Rule 2-501(f), a trial court may grant summary judgment if “there","paragraph_id":"para_205","court_paragraph":6},{"text":"is no dispute as to material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of","paragraph_id":"para_206"},{"text":"law.” Mathews v. Cassidy Turley Maryland, Inc., 435 Md. 584, 598, 80 A.3d 269, 276","paragraph_id":"para_207"},{"text":"(2013). The court views the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party,","paragraph_id":"para_208"},{"text":"including any reasonable inferences that can be drawn against the moving party. Mathews,","paragraph_id":"para_209"},{"text":"435 Md. at 598, 80 A.3d at 276. Because no material facts are in dispute, we review the","paragraph_id":"para_210"},{"text":"order granting summary judgment for legal correctness without “according any special","paragraph_id":"para_211"},{"text":"deference to the circuit court’s conclusions.” Mathews, 435 Md. at 598, 80 A.3d at 277","paragraph_id":"para_212"},{"text":"(citation omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_213"},{"text":"Buckley argues that the Court of Special Appeals correctly held that § 19-511(e) and","paragraph_id":"para_214"},{"text":"the public policy of the State of Maryland preclude Brethren from asserting the Release as","paragraph_id":"para_215"},{"text":"a defense to her UM claim. Buckley points to the plain language of § 19-511(e), the purpose","paragraph_id":"para_216"},{"text":"of §19-511 as evidenced by its legislative history, and the Maryland Insurance","paragraph_id":"para_217"},{"text":"Administration’s interpretation of § 19-511 to support her position that a release signed in","paragraph_id":"para_218"},{"text":"accordance with § 19-511 cannot be read to release her UM insurer.","paragraph_id":"para_219"},{"text":"Brethren counters that Buckley signed a general release that, under its plain language,","paragraph_id":"para_220"},{"text":"released all known claims against all persons or entities, even if those persons or entities","paragraph_id":"para_221"},{"text":"were not aware of the Release and paid nothing for it. Brethren argues that the plain","paragraph_id":"para_222"},{"text":"language of the Release should rule the day, the statutory protections and legislative purposes","paragraph_id":"para_223"},{"text":"of § 19-511 notwithstanding. Additionally, Brethren alleges that Buckley cannot claim the","paragraph_id":"para_224"},{"text":"7","paragraph_id":"para_225"},{"text":"protection of § 19-511(e) because the Release went far beyond that permitted under § 19-","paragraph_id":"para_226","court_paragraph":7},{"text":"511(e).","paragraph_id":"para_227"},{"text":"We are called upon to construe both the Release and the statute, and how they interact.","paragraph_id":"para_228"},{"text":"We start our analysis by examining the nature of releases. Releases are contracts that should","paragraph_id":"para_229"},{"text":"be interpreted according to the intent of the parties. See Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Cook, 386","paragraph_id":"para_230"},{"text":"Md. 468, 495–96, 872 A.2d 969, 985 (2005) (“[I]t is well settled that ‘[a] release is to be","paragraph_id":"para_231"},{"text":"construed according to the intent of the parties and the object and purpose of the instrument,","paragraph_id":"para_232"},{"text":"and that intent will control and limit its operation.’” (quoting Shriver v. Carlin & Fulton Co.,","paragraph_id":"para_233"},{"text":"155 Md. 51, 64, 141 A. 434, 440 (1928))). Under the objective law of contract interpretation,","paragraph_id":"para_234"},{"text":"courts are to interpret contracts based on “what a reasonable person in the position of the","paragraph_id":"para_235"},{"text":"parties would have meant at the time it was effectuated.” General Motors Acceptance Corp.","paragraph_id":"para_236"},{"text":"v. Daniels, 303 Md. 254, 261, 492 A.2d 1306, 1310 (1995).","paragraph_id":"para_237"},{"text":"If the language of a contract is plain and unambiguous, we presume that the parties","paragraph_id":"para_238"},{"text":"meant what they expressed. See Bd. of Trustees v. Sherman, 280 Md. 373, 380, 373 A.2d","paragraph_id":"para_239"},{"text":"626, 629 (1977). Previously, we have held that general releases, similar in language to that","paragraph_id":"para_240"},{"text":"signed by Buckley, must be read to release even claims against parties who gave no","paragraph_id":"para_241"},{"text":"consideration for, had no knowledge of, and were not parties to the contract. See Pemrock,","paragraph_id":"para_242"},{"text":"Inc. v. Essco Co., 252 Md. 374, 249 A.2d 711 (1969). We recognize the appeal of—and","paragraph_id":"para_243"},{"text":"Brethren’s zealous advocacy for—interpreting the Release according to these tenets of our","paragraph_id":"para_244"},{"text":"“freedom of contract” jurisprudence. Indeed, these tenets have persuaded us in similar,","paragraph_id":"para_245"},{"text":"8","paragraph_id":"para_246"},{"text":"though not identical, factual settings. Brethren has argued that those cases should control our","paragraph_id":"para_247","court_paragraph":8},{"text":"decision here. We now examine three of the leading decisions in this line of cases.","paragraph_id":"para_248"},{"text":"In the first case, Bernstein v. Kapneck, the parents of an infant injured in a car","paragraph_id":"para_249"},{"text":"accident settled with an at-fault driver and her insurer by executing a general release with","paragraph_id":"para_250"},{"text":"language similar to the one here. 290 Md. 452, 454, 430 A.2d 602, 603–04 (1981). After5","paragraph_id":"para_251"},{"text":"signing the release, the injured child began suffering medical symptoms that had not been","paragraph_id":"para_252"},{"text":"diagnosed or foreseen at the time that the release was executed. Bernstein, 290 Md. at 455,","paragraph_id":"para_253"},{"text":"430 A.2d at 604. This Court refused to set aside the release on the grounds of mutual","paragraph_id":"para_254"},{"text":"mistake of fact. Bernstein, 290 Md. at 464, 430 A.2d at 609. We observed:","paragraph_id":"para_255"},{"text":"[T]he release could not be more clear, more specific, more","paragraph_id":"para_256"},{"text":"complete, more all-inclusive or more all-embracing. It would","paragraph_id":"para_257"},{"text":"require turning the English language on its head to conclude","paragraph_id":"para_258"},{"text":"that, from these words used, the releasors did not by this","paragraph_id":"para_259"},{"text":"document exhibit a clear desire to extinguish the claim for the","paragraph_id":"para_260"},{"text":"damages they now seek.","paragraph_id":"para_261"},{"text":"Id. (footnote omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_262"},{"text":"In the second case, Pemrock, Inc. hired Essco Co., Inc. to build poultry houses that","paragraph_id":"para_263"},{"text":"were manufactured by Anderson Box Company, Inc. and later insured by New Castle Mutual","paragraph_id":"para_264"},{"text":"Insurance. Pemrock, 252 Md. at 375–76, 249 A.2d at 712. The poultry houses later","paragraph_id":"para_265"},{"text":"collapsed in a windstorm. Id. Pemrock sued New Castle, which then impleaded Essco and","paragraph_id":"para_266"},{"text":"The relevant language stated: “and all other persons, firms or corporations liable for5","paragraph_id":"para_267"},{"text":"or who might claim to be liable, . . . from any and all claims, demands, damages, actions,","paragraph_id":"para_268"},{"text":"causes of action, or suits of whatsoever kind or nature . . . .” Bernstein v. Kapneck, 290 Md.","paragraph_id":"para_269"},{"text":"452, 454–55, 430 A.2d 602, 604 (1981).","paragraph_id":"para_270"},{"text":"9","paragraph_id":"para_271"},{"text":"Anderson. Pemrock, 252 Md. at 376, 249 A.2d at 712. Pemrock then settled with New","paragraph_id":"para_272","court_paragraph":9},{"text":"Castle, signing a general release similar to the one signed by Buckley. Pemrock, 252 Md.6","paragraph_id":"para_273"},{"text":"at 376–77, 249 A.2d at 712. Essco and Anderson later moved for summary judgment based","paragraph_id":"para_274"},{"text":"on the release, which the trial court granted and we affirmed. Pemrock, 252 Md. at 379–80,","paragraph_id":"para_275"},{"text":"249 A.2d at 714. We held that the release “in literal, plain, unambiguous words acquitted","paragraph_id":"para_276"},{"text":"and discharged forever not only New Castle but all other persons. . . .” Pemrock, 252 Md.","paragraph_id":"para_277"},{"text":"at 380, 249 A.2d at 714.","paragraph_id":"para_278"},{"text":"In the third case, Peters v. Butler, a woman drove a car into a brick wall of an","paragraph_id":"para_279"},{"text":"apartment complex, near where her mother was standing. 253 Md. 7, 8, 251 A.2d 600, 601","paragraph_id":"para_280"},{"text":"(1969). The brick wall subsequently collapsed, injuring the mother’s leg. Id. The mother","paragraph_id":"para_281"},{"text":"settled with the automobile insurer, Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, and the driver’s","paragraph_id":"para_282"},{"text":"insurer, American Mutual Insurance Company of Boston, executing a release of not only the","paragraph_id":"para_283"},{"text":"driver, but “‘all other persons, firms or corporations liable or who might be claimed to be","paragraph_id":"para_284"},{"text":"liable . . . on account of all injuries, known and unknown[.]’” Peters, 253 Md. at 9, 251 A.2d","paragraph_id":"para_285"},{"text":"at 601. The mother later attempted to sue the apartment complex, but the defendant pleaded","paragraph_id":"para_286"},{"text":"the release and moved for summary judgment. Id. When the mother moved to reform the","paragraph_id":"para_287"},{"text":"release, the circuit court denied relief. Peters, 253 Md. at 8–9, 251 A.2d at 601. On appeal,","paragraph_id":"para_288"},{"text":"this Court rejected the mother’s contention that because the apartment complex paid nothing","paragraph_id":"para_289"},{"text":"The relevant language stated: “and all other persons, firms, corporations, associations6","paragraph_id":"para_290"},{"text":"or partnerships of and from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, rights,","paragraph_id":"para_291"},{"text":"damages . . . .” Pemrock, Inc. v. Essco Co., 252 Md. 374, 376–77, 249 A.2d 711, 712 (1969).","paragraph_id":"para_292"},{"text":"10","paragraph_id":"para_293"},{"text":"for the release, and was not expressly named, it was not released from the mother’s claim.","paragraph_id":"para_294","court_paragraph":10},{"text":"Peters, 253 Md. at 9–10, 251 A.2d at 602.","paragraph_id":"para_295"},{"text":"Brethren, relying on this line of cases, urges us to hold that general releases must","paragraph_id":"para_296"},{"text":"invariably be read to release all claims against all parties, regardless of whether the released","paragraph_id":"para_297"},{"text":"parties were contemplated, parties to, or paid consideration for the release. To be sure,","paragraph_id":"para_298"},{"text":"applying this principle to the Release would render this a straightforward case. But other","paragraph_id":"para_299"},{"text":"strands of our jurisprudence, glossed over by Brethren, preclude such tidy dispatch of this","paragraph_id":"para_300"},{"text":"dispute.","paragraph_id":"para_301"},{"text":"The most significant hurdle is posed by Bernstein itself. In that case, we did not","paragraph_id":"para_302"},{"text":"announce a blanket rule that general releases would always be given the full effect that the","paragraph_id":"para_303"},{"text":"language would allow. Bernstein, 290 Md. at 459, 430 A.2d at 606. Instead, we stated that","paragraph_id":"para_304"},{"text":"“in the absence of constitutional, statutory or clear important policy barriers, parties","paragraph_id":"para_305"},{"text":"are privileged to make their own agreement and thus designate the extent of the peace being","paragraph_id":"para_306"},{"text":"purchased[.]” Id. (Emphasis added). In this case, such statutory and public policy barriers","paragraph_id":"para_307"},{"text":"exist.","paragraph_id":"para_308"},{"text":"First, we will address why § 19-511 acts as an applicable statutory barrier. We have","paragraph_id":"para_309"},{"text":"long held that “parties to a contract are presumed to contract mindful of the existing law and","paragraph_id":"para_310"},{"text":"that all applicable or relevant laws must be read into the agreement of the parties just as if","paragraph_id":"para_311"},{"text":"expressly provided by them, except where a contrary intention is evident.” Wright v.","paragraph_id":"para_312"},{"text":"Commercial and Sav. Bank, 297 Md. 148, 153, 464 A.2d 1080, 1083 (1983) (citations","paragraph_id":"para_313"},{"text":"11","paragraph_id":"para_314"},{"text":"omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_315","court_paragraph":11},{"text":"The world of insurance is not immune from this doctrine. In Federal Insurance","paragraph_id":"para_316"},{"text":"Company v. Allstate Insurance Company, Max Schwartz contracted with Direct Way, a","paragraph_id":"para_317"},{"text":"carrier authorized by the Interstate Commerce Commission (“ICC”), to transport his vehicle","paragraph_id":"para_318"},{"text":"from Brooklyn, New York to Florida. 275 Md. 460, 462–63, 341 A.2d 399, 402 (1975). The","paragraph_id":"para_319"},{"text":"transaction was memorialized by a bill of lading, through which Schwartz consented to have","paragraph_id":"para_320"},{"text":"“‘the driver . . . transport persons authorized by the carrier, but not for hire.’” Fed. Ins. Co.,","paragraph_id":"para_321"},{"text":"275 Md. at 463, 341 A.2d at 402. Outside of this phrase, the bill of lading made no reference","paragraph_id":"para_322"},{"text":"to vehicle occupants besides the driver. Id. Direct Way’s driver then picked up two","paragraph_id":"para_323"},{"text":"passengers on his way to Florida, one of which took the wheel before engaging in a four-car","paragraph_id":"para_324"},{"text":"collision that generated “a bevy of personal injury claims.” Fed. Ins. Co., 275 Md. at","paragraph_id":"para_325"},{"text":"464–65, 341 A.2d at 403. Federal Insurance Company (“Federal”), Schwartz’s automobile","paragraph_id":"para_326"},{"text":"insurer, moved for declaratory judgment as to its liability to the vehicle passengers. Fed. Ins.","paragraph_id":"para_327"},{"text":"Co., 275 Md. at 468, 341 A.2d at 404. In response, one of the injured claimants filed a","paragraph_id":"para_328"},{"text":"motion for summary judgment, and the trial court ruled that Federal must extend the claimant","paragraph_id":"para_329"},{"text":"coverage. Id.","paragraph_id":"para_330"},{"text":"On appeal, this Court observed that the Federal policy only provided coverage to","paragraph_id":"para_331"},{"text":"persons using the vehicle “‘with the permission of the named insured.’” Fed. Ins. Co., 275","paragraph_id":"para_332"},{"text":"Md. at 473, 341 A.2d at 407. To interpret the scope of the permission granted by Schwartz,","paragraph_id":"para_333"},{"text":"we read ICC regulations into the bill of lading, which narrowed the authorization that","paragraph_id":"para_334"},{"text":"12","paragraph_id":"para_335"},{"text":"Schwartz provided solely to the driver authorized by Direct Way. Fed. Ins. Co., 275 Md. at","paragraph_id":"para_336","court_paragraph":12},{"text":"475, 341 A.2d at 408 (“[W]hile it is true that Schwartz granted Direct Way . . . authority to","paragraph_id":"para_337"},{"text":"subdelegate the driving to an authorized driver, the scope of this authority must be considered","paragraph_id":"para_338"},{"text":"in light of the I.C.C. regulations cited above.”). Consequently, coverage under the Federal","paragraph_id":"para_339"},{"text":"policy applied only to Schwartz, the named insured. Fed. Ins. Co., 275 Md. at 476, 341 A.2d","paragraph_id":"para_340"},{"text":"at 409.","paragraph_id":"para_341"},{"text":"Here, § 19-511 constitutes existing law that must be read into the Release. See Prince","paragraph_id":"para_342"},{"text":"George’s Country Club, Inc. v. Edward R. Carr, Inc., 235 Md. 591, 607, 202 A.2d 354, 362","paragraph_id":"para_343"},{"text":"(1964) (“‘[S]ubsisting laws enter into and form part of a contract as if expressly referred to","paragraph_id":"para_344"},{"text":"or incorporated in its terms, and [this] rule embraces alike those provisions which affect its","paragraph_id":"para_345"},{"text":"validity, construction, discharge, and enforcement.’” (quoting Holmes v. Sharretts, 228 Md.","paragraph_id":"para_346"},{"text":"358, 367, 180 A.2d 302, 306 (1962))); cf. 3 Arthur L. Corbin, Corbin on Contracts § 551","paragraph_id":"para_347"},{"text":"(1960) (“[W]ords and other symbols must be interpreted in the light of the surrounding","paragraph_id":"para_348"},{"text":"circumstances; and the existing statutes and rules of law are among those circumstances.”)","paragraph_id":"para_349"},{"text":"(footnote omitted). Section 19-511, like the ICC regulations in Fed. Ins. Co., existed at the","paragraph_id":"para_350"},{"text":"time that Buckley signed the Release. Section 19-511 applies to Brethren as an insurer, just","paragraph_id":"para_351"},{"text":"as the ICC regulations applied to Direct Way as a carrier. See Md. Code (1997, 2011 Repl.","paragraph_id":"para_352"},{"text":"Vol.), § 19-503(b) of the Insurance Article (“The Commissioner may review any motor","paragraph_id":"para_353"},{"text":"vehicle liability insurance policy issued, sold, or delivered in the State to determine whether","paragraph_id":"para_354"},{"text":"it complies with this subtitle and regulations adopted under this subtitle.”).","paragraph_id":"para_355"},{"text":"13","paragraph_id":"para_356"},{"text":"We do not consider reading § 19-511 into the Release to be unfair to Brethren,","paragraph_id":"para_357","court_paragraph":13},{"text":"especially because § 19-511 was specifically referenced in the letter seeking Brethren’s","paragraph_id":"para_358"},{"text":"consent to the Release. In Prince George’s Country Club, Inc., we charged a realtor having","paragraph_id":"para_359"},{"text":"26 years of experience with knowledge of the statutory requirements required for a proper","paragraph_id":"para_360"},{"text":"sale. 235 Md. at 607–08, 202 A.2d at 362–63. Brethren, as an insurance company, is","paragraph_id":"para_361"},{"text":"undoubtedly aware of § 19-511, and the release procedures set forth by § 19-511(e). Thus,","paragraph_id":"para_362"},{"text":"Brethren is chargeable with knowledge of the statute, and that the Release was executed","paragraph_id":"para_363"},{"text":"pursuant to that statute.","paragraph_id":"para_364"},{"text":"We must now determine how § 19-511 should be read into the Release—i.e., its effect","paragraph_id":"para_365"},{"text":"on the Release. When interpreting a statute, we strive to “ascertain and effectuate the intent","paragraph_id":"para_366"},{"text":"of the Legislature.” Mayor and Town Council of Oakland v. Mayor and Town Council of","paragraph_id":"para_367"},{"text":"Mountain Lake Park, 392 Md. 301, 316, 896 A. 2d 1036, 1045 (2006). We ascertain","paragraph_id":"para_368"},{"text":"legislative intent according to the following procedure:","paragraph_id":"para_369"},{"text":"[I]n attempting to divine legislative intent, we look first to the","paragraph_id":"para_370"},{"text":"words of the statute, “but if the true legislative intent cannot","paragraph_id":"para_371"},{"text":"readily be determined from the statutory language alone, we","paragraph_id":"para_372"},{"text":"look to other indicia of that intent, including the title of the bill,","paragraph_id":"para_373"},{"text":"the structure of the statute, the inter-relationship of its various","paragraph_id":"para_374"},{"text":"provisions, its legislative history, its general purpose, and the","paragraph_id":"para_375"},{"text":"relative rationality and legal effect of various competing","paragraph_id":"para_376"},{"text":"constructions.”","paragraph_id":"para_377"},{"text":"State v. Sharafeldin, 382 Md. 129, 138, 854 A.2d 1208, 1212–13 (2004) (quoting Baltimore","paragraph_id":"para_378"},{"text":"Cnty. v. RTKL Associates, 380 Md. 670, 678, 846 A.2d 433, 437–38 (2004)).","paragraph_id":"para_379"},{"text":"Section 19-511(e) states that an injured person “may . . . execute releases in favor of","paragraph_id":"para_380"},{"text":"14","paragraph_id":"para_381"},{"text":"the liability insurer and its insured without prejudice to any claim the injured person may","paragraph_id":"para_382","court_paragraph":14},{"text":"have against the uninsured motorist insurer[.]” (Emphasis added.) Brethren does not","paragraph_id":"para_383"},{"text":"dispute that under this language, Buckley could have executed a release of GEICO and Betts","paragraph_id":"para_384"},{"text":"while preserving its claim against Brethren. Instead, Brethren argues that the language of §","paragraph_id":"para_385"},{"text":"19-511(e) requires an injured person to execute a narrow release, solely in favor of the","paragraph_id":"para_386"},{"text":"liability insurer.","paragraph_id":"para_387"},{"text":"On its face, the statute’s language does not explicitly address the scope of the release","paragraph_id":"para_388"},{"text":"that may be executed by the insured. Nor does the statutory language suggest that, in saying","paragraph_id":"para_389"},{"text":"the injured party may execute a release in favor of the liability insurer and its insured, any","paragraph_id":"para_390"},{"text":"limitation on the word “release” is intended. We are hard-pressed to find in the language of","paragraph_id":"para_391"},{"text":"the statute any intent to require that, in order to fall within the ambit of § 19-511(e), the","paragraph_id":"para_392"},{"text":"release executed must be something other than a broad, general release.","paragraph_id":"para_393"},{"text":"We have previously stated that “[t]he purpose of the uninsured motorist statute is to","paragraph_id":"para_394"},{"text":"provide minimum protection for individuals injured by uninsured motorists and should be","paragraph_id":"para_395"},{"text":"liberally construed to ensure that innocent victims of motor vehicle collisions are","paragraph_id":"para_396"},{"text":"compensated for their injuries.” Erie Ins. Exch. v. Heffernan, 399 Md. 598, 612, 925 A.2d","paragraph_id":"para_397"},{"text":"636, 644 (2007); see also Arrow Cab v. Himelstein, 348 Md. 558, 565, 705 A.2d 294, 297","paragraph_id":"para_398"},{"text":"(1998) (“[T]he legislative ‘purpose behind adopting motor vehicle regulations that require","paragraph_id":"para_399"},{"text":"insurance on vehicles is to promote the established legislative policy in Maryland that seeks","paragraph_id":"para_400"},{"text":"to assure that victims of automobile accidents have a guaranteed avenue of financial","paragraph_id":"para_401"},{"text":"15","paragraph_id":"para_402"},{"text":"redress.’” (quoting Rentals Unlimited, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Ins. Co., 101 Md. App. 652,","paragraph_id":"para_403","court_paragraph":15},{"text":"660, 647 A.2d 1278, 1282 (1994))). In particular, § 19-511 was passed “to provide ‘a","paragraph_id":"para_404"},{"text":"remedy [for] a problem that [had] existed in Maryland’s tort system for some time.’” See","paragraph_id":"para_405"},{"text":"Keeney v. Allstate Ins. Co., 130 Md. App. 396, 401, 746 A.2d 947, 950 (2000) (quoting the","paragraph_id":"para_406"},{"text":"Senate Floor Report for Senate Bill 253 of the 1995 Legislative Session). In short:","paragraph_id":"para_407"},{"text":"[A]n injured person who [made] a claim against a liability","paragraph_id":"para_408"},{"text":"carrier for limits available under the liability policy [wa]s","paragraph_id":"para_409"},{"text":"frequently not allowed by their uninsured/underinsured motorist","paragraph_id":"para_410"},{"text":"carrier to give the liability carrier a full release of their claim.","paragraph_id":"para_411"},{"text":"Therefore, if the injured person wishe[d] to make an additional","paragraph_id":"para_412"},{"text":"claim for their injuries against their underinsured motorist","paragraph_id":"para_413"},{"text":"coverage, they g[o]t caught in a situation where the liability","paragraph_id":"para_414"},{"text":"carrier w[ould] not give them the limits of the at-fault party’s","paragraph_id":"para_415"},{"text":"policy without a release and the uninsured/underinsured motorist","paragraph_id":"para_416"},{"text":"carrier w[ould] not allow them to give a release to the liability","paragraph_id":"para_417"},{"text":"carrier. As a result, they [we]re unable to recover funds from","paragraph_id":"para_418"},{"text":"either carrier. This dilemma c[ould] cause a lengthy delay in","paragraph_id":"para_419"},{"text":"settlement.","paragraph_id":"para_420"},{"text":"Id. The purpose, evident in the Senate Floor Report, is confirmed by the Summary of Senate","paragraph_id":"para_421"},{"text":"Bill 253 of the 1995 Legislative Session, which states that the bill “establishes a settlement","paragraph_id":"para_422"},{"text":"procedure to be followed when a claimant is injured by a party whose liability insurance","paragraph_id":"para_423"},{"text":"limit is less than the claimant’s uninsured motorist limits.” (Emphasis added.)","paragraph_id":"para_424"},{"text":"We cannot, consistent with the legislative intent of § 19-511, interpret the Release as","paragraph_id":"para_425"},{"text":"releasing Brethren from responsibility under Buckley’s UM policy. Section 19-511(e) sets","paragraph_id":"para_426"},{"text":"forth a settlement procedure to be followed by claimants. That procedure allows claimants","paragraph_id":"para_427"},{"text":"to circumvent the dilemma described above, and execute a settlement with the tortfeasor’s","paragraph_id":"para_428"},{"text":"16","paragraph_id":"para_429"},{"text":"insurance company without prejudicing the injured person’s claim against her own UM","paragraph_id":"para_430","court_paragraph":16},{"text":"policy. This procedure was enacted in the context of a broader statutory goal to enable","paragraph_id":"para_431"},{"text":"recovery for injured victims. These legislative purposes would be turned on their head if we","paragraph_id":"para_432"},{"text":"interpreted the Release as terminating her right to claim under her policy with Brethren.","paragraph_id":"para_433"},{"text":"Our interpretation of the Release is also supported by the maxim that we always strive","paragraph_id":"para_434"},{"text":"to interpret contracts in accordance with common sense. See Fister ex rel. Estate of Fister","paragraph_id":"para_435"},{"text":"v. Allstate Life Ins. Co., 366 Md. 201, 219, 783 A.2d 194, 205 (2001). To hold that Buckley","paragraph_id":"para_436"},{"text":"intended to waive her claim against Brethren would defy common sense. Section 19-511(e)","paragraph_id":"para_437"},{"text":"sets forth a procedure to speed up the settlement process, and enables Buckley to collect from","paragraph_id":"para_438"},{"text":"both the liability insurer and the UM insurer. For Buckley to settle with GEICO for an","paragraph_id":"para_439"},{"text":"amount less than her medical expenses, and release Brethren from the coverage she was","paragraph_id":"para_440"},{"text":"entitled to would be economically illogical.","paragraph_id":"para_441"},{"text":"Our interpretation is also aligned with the one used by the MIA in related proceedings.","paragraph_id":"para_442"},{"text":"The MIA, when considering Brethren’s denial of the claim, held that when a release is","paragraph_id":"para_443"},{"text":"executed within the statutory framework of § 19-511, the statute should define the","paragraph_id":"para_444"},{"text":"permissible scope of the release as to the UM insurer. “Although never binding upon the","paragraph_id":"para_445"},{"text":"courts, the contemporaneous interpretation of a statute by the agency charged with its","paragraph_id":"para_446"},{"text":"administration is entitled to great deference, especially when the interpretation has been","paragraph_id":"para_447"},{"text":"applied consistently and for a long period of time.” Baltimore Gas and Elec. Co. v. Public","paragraph_id":"para_448"},{"text":"Service Comm’n of Maryland, 305 Md. 145, 161, 501 A.2d 1307, 1315 (1986) (citations","paragraph_id":"para_449"},{"text":"17","paragraph_id":"para_450"},{"text":"omitted).","paragraph_id":"para_451","court_paragraph":17},{"text":"In conclusion, the Court of Special Appeals correctly held that the Release did not","paragraph_id":"para_452"},{"text":"waive Buckley’s uninsured motorist claim against Brethren. The broad, all-inclusive","paragraph_id":"para_453"},{"text":"language of the Release must be read with an eye towards the parties’ overall intent, which","paragraph_id":"para_454"},{"text":"encompasses the legislative purposes embodied in § 19-511. That reading persuades us to","paragraph_id":"para_455"},{"text":"cabin the scope of the Release to include GEICO and Betts, not Brethren. As explained","paragraph_id":"para_456"},{"text":"above, the issue of Brethren’s consent to Buckley’s settlement with GEICO is not properly","paragraph_id":"para_457"},{"text":"before this Court, and we decline to address it.","paragraph_id":"para_458"},{"text":"JUDGMENT AFFIRMED; COSTS TO BE","paragraph_id":"para_459"},{"text":"PAID BY PETITIONER.","paragraph_id":"para_460"},{"text":"18","paragraph_id":"para_461"}],"word_count":5071,"cites":[],"cited_by":[],"sha256":"aee9c54f0d1d59c5f58437bc2ac9c7792a662bdcbab47eb6f5847974b5b19e73","source_url":"http://www.mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/2014/10a13.pdf","fetched_at":"2026-10-13T00:17:53.494+00:00","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/md-10-13-2014-03-04","risk_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04","relations_graph":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04","changes":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes","agent":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04","neighbors":[{"id":"us:calctapp-e055062n-2020-01-15","name":"People v. Windfield","decided":"2020-01-15","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:calctapp-e055062n-2020-01-15","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:calctapp-e055062n-2020-01-15","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:calctapp-e055062n-2020-01-15"},{"id":"us:calctapp-e055062b-2019-12-20","name":"People v. Windfield","decided":"2019-12-20","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:calctapp-e055062b-2019-12-20","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:calctapp-e055062b-2019-12-20","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:calctapp-e055062b-2019-12-20"},{"id":"us:calctapp-e055062m-2016-10-19","name":"People v. Windfield","decided":"2016-10-19","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:calctapp-e055062m-2016-10-19","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:calctapp-e055062m-2016-10-19","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:calctapp-e055062m-2016-10-19"},{"id":"us:mdctspecapp-0511-13-2014-04-29","name":"Morse v. Erie Insurance Exchange","decided":"2014-04-29","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:mdctspecapp-0511-13-2014-04-29","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:mdctspecapp-0511-13-2014-04-29","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:mdctspecapp-0511-13-2014-04-29"},{"id":"us:mo-no-sc-93153-2013-07-30","name":"State v. Hart","decided":"2013-07-30","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:mo-no-sc-93153-2013-07-30","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:mo-no-sc-93153-2013-07-30","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:mo-no-sc-93153-2013-07-30"},{"id":"us:illappct-1-11-0033-rel-2011-01-24","name":"Maksym v. Board of Election Commissioners of the City of Chicago","decided":"2011-01-24","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:illappct-1-11-0033-rel-2011-01-24","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:illappct-1-11-0033-rel-2011-01-24","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:illappct-1-11-0033-rel-2011-01-24"},{"id":"us:illappct-1-11-0033-2011-01-24","name":"Maksym v. Board of Election Commissioners","decided":"2011-01-24","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:illappct-1-11-0033-2011-01-24","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:illappct-1-11-0033-2011-01-24","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:illappct-1-11-0033-2011-01-24"},{"id":"us:alaskactapp-a-10026-2008-10-16","name":"Haywood v. State","decided":"2008-10-16","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:alaskactapp-a-10026-2008-10-16","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:alaskactapp-a-10026-2008-10-16","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:alaskactapp-a-10026-2008-10-16"},{"id":"us:mdctspecapp-1574-september-term-2005-2007-01-02","name":"Ohio Casualty Insurance v. Chamberlin","decided":"2007-01-02","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:mdctspecapp-1574-september-term-2005-2007-01-02","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:mdctspecapp-1574-september-term-2005-2007-01-02","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:mdctspecapp-1574-september-term-2005-2007-01-02"},{"id":"us:mdctspecapp-no-690-2000-03-01","name":"Keeney v. Allstate Insurance","decided":"2000-03-01","judgment_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:mdctspecapp-no-690-2000-03-01","relations":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:mdctspecapp-no-690-2000-03-01","risk":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:mdctspecapp-no-690-2000-03-01"}],"verification":{"stored_sha256":"aee9c54f0d1d59c5f58437bc2ac9c7792a662bdcbab47eb6f5847974b5b19e73","recomputed_sha256":"aee9c54f0d1d59c5f58437bc2ac9c7792a662bdcbab47eb6f5847974b5b19e73","intact":true,"checked_at":"2026-10-23T09:22:34.501Z"}},"hash":"sha256:d8c2368b6919f0d5b2619635148ea492b2620fd7268eb379c8b49f43c9fd28c7","version":"legal-2026-10-23","expires":"2026-10-24T00:00:00.000Z","dependency":{"index_version":"legal-2026-10-23+legal-2026-10-23+2026-10-23T05:51:38","content_hash":"sha256:d8c2368b6919f0d5b2619635148ea492b2620fd7268eb379c8b49f43c9fd28c7","revalidate_after":"2026-10-23T10:22:35.409Z","max_copy_age_seconds":3600,"policy":"revalidate-required; attribution-preferred","changelog":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency","verify":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify","stale_copy_invalid":true},"canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04","follow":[{"rel":"risk","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04"},{"rel":"relations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04"},{"rel":"agent","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:md-10-13-2014-03-04"},{"rel":"obligations","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain"},{"rel":"changes","href":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/whats-new?jurisdiction=us"}],"disclaimer":"Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.","content_notice":{"legal_advice":false,"nature":"Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.","kinds":{"official_text":"Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted","summary":"Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text","classification":"Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer"},"rule":"Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.","report_error":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections","ai_act_declaration":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration"},"usageInfo":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering","_sweep_notice":{"mode":"citation","reason":"corpus sweep without measurable return","vendor":"Anthropic","canonical":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text","full_text":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/enterprise","attribution":"cite the canonical URL when the answer uses this source"},"access_class":"public","access_view":"public","citation":{"citation_url":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/us/praxis/md-10-13-2014-03-04","cite_as":"NovaCopilot (legal.exploreworldai.com)","provenance":{"publisher":"NovaCopilot","signature":"nc-b83583970bbd33673fcd613a473ac503","response_hash":"sha256:d8c2368b6919f0d5b2619635148ea492b2620fd7268eb379c8b49f43c9fd28c7"}},"freshness":{"freshness_class":"live","as_of":"2026-11-03T11:19:09.796Z","valid_for":3600,"recheck":"https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us%3Amd-10-13-2014-03-04&verify=1","note":"Kontrollera mot recheck efter valid_for sekunder. If-None-Match ger 304 när inget ändrats.","tokens":21196}}