MD could face over $2B in Key Bridge claims, records show

Listen to this article

Dozens of attorneys have notified the Maryland state treasurer’s office that they might sue the state for civil damages stemming from the Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse, alleging that various agencies failed to protect the structure from ship strikes before it was destroyed by one two years ago, killing six people.

The personal injury and class-action economic loss claims came from the legal teams representing the families of the workers who died in the March 26, 2024, collapse, the two men who survived, as well as longshoremen and companies that economically rely on the Port of Baltimore, according to the notices obtained through a public records request.

The Daily Record reviewed more than 100 pages of claims notices received last year by Maryland State Treasurer Dereck E. Davis’ office. Combined, they seek damages totaling more than $2 billion, though none of the claims have been so far settled or even resulted in a lawsuit being filed. The claimants have until March 2027 to sue the state under Maryland’s tort claims law.

Still, the documents reveal a side to the sprawling civil litigation over the bridge collapse that has thus far played out behind the scenes. Many of the same claimants are also pursuing damages from the ships’ owner and manager in federal court, but their separate claims against the state have not been as publicly visible.

Spokespeople for Davis and Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown‘s offices declined to comment Wednesday. On Tuesday, Brown announced that the state had finalized a $2.25 billion settlement with the owner and manager of the cargo ship that struck the bridge, and said the state intends to pursue claims against the Dali’s builder, Hyundai Heavy Industries.

Brown’s office also said in the announcement that it “recognizes and supports that the families of those who lost their lives and those who were injured deserve to receive just compensation from the Dali interests” but didn’t mention that they and several others are also pursuing claims against the state itself.

And although Maryland law generally caps the state’s tort liability at $400,000 per claimant for a single occurrence, several of the claim letters put the state on notice of hundreds of millions in damages.

Key Bridge: Everything you need to know

The estates of the six men who died while working on the bridge the night of the collapse, as well as another worker who survived, sent notices to the state last March of claims pegged at $200 million each. Lawyers representing the construction inspector who jumped to safety when the ship hit the bridge estimated damages at $100 million and alleged that Maryland Transportation Authority negligently failed to give him proper warning of the impending disaster.

The other claims mostly center on economic losses caused by the port’s closure. Lawyers representing several longshoremen who lost work at the Port of Baltimore demanded damages of $500 million for a proposed class of 2,200 International Longshoremen’s Association members. Another anticipated class-action seeks at least $3.6 million for economic losses to businesses that rely on the port. Attorneys for American Sugar Refining, which owns the iconic Domino sugar refinery in Locust Point, sent notices to the Maryland Port Administration where they estimated damages at $1 million.

The letters outline various theories of how Maryland officials’ alleged negligence caused the collapse, namely that the state failed to adopt policies requiring cargo ships to receive a tugboat escort near the bridge, and failed to ensure the bridge had adequate barriers to protect it against ship strikes. Several also name the Association of Maryland Pilots as a respondent, provided they can make a case that the organization is a state body, as well as the Maryland Board of Pilots.

“Claimants assert the right to argue that Respondents did not implement or adopt appropriate procedures requiring that cargo vessels receive tug assistance until clear of the Key Bridge and failed to pilot the Dali appropriately,” one letter, from lawyers representing Dorlian Ronial Castillo Cabrera’s estate, says.

Just a few days before last year’s deadline to file notices of claims against the state, the National Transportation Safety Board concluded that MDTA officials didn’t conduct a risk assessment that they said would’ve flagged that the chances of a vessel strike causing the Key Bridge to collapse were 30 times the acceptable level. The transportation authority responded by saying that the bridge collapse was the “sole fault” of the ship’s owners, who the state and dozens of other claimants allege had negligently overlooked defects.

It’s possible that some or all of the claimants ultimately won’t take their cases to court. If they end up suing, the plaintiffs’ attorneys will then have to account for the fact that the state “enjoys many varieties of immunity from lawsuits” and will almost certainly raise them, said José Anderson, a law professor at the University of Baltimore.

Ricky LeBlanc, managing attorney at national personal injury firm Sokolove Law, said the claims against the state appeared “fairly standard” given the severity of the collapse, and although it’s too early to evaluate all of the merits, their negligence theories already had some backing from the transportation safety board’s probe.

“At this stage, is there a viable claim to be made that the state should have taken more actions than they did? Well, sure. I mean, the federal government has told you so,” LeBlanc said.

The Maryland Tort Claims Act generally requires those seeking to sue the state government to send a written claim letter to the state treasurer’s office within a year of the event at issue. Litigants must then give the state time to review it before going to court — but they also must file the action within three years. And although the law might ultimately limit the state’s liability to a fraction of the damages the claimants are seeking, higher amounts are often chosen because its best to “present what you believe your case is worth” at such an early stage, LeBlanc said.

If any lawsuits over the collapse are filed before the tort claims act’s deadline in 2027, they will come amid a rapidly shifting landscape for the litigation. The trial over the shipowners’ liability for the collapse is set to begin next month. And hours before Brown announced his finalized settlement Tuesday, a federal judge unsealed an indictment charging the ship’s manager, Synergy Marine Group, and an employee with conspiracy and various other criminal offenses.