“Criminal” v. “Civil Liability” for “Wrongful Conduct”
Published .
The general concept
A person’s conduct can sometimes lead to both a criminal prosecution and a civil lawsuit. The two proceedings serve different purposes and apply different legal elements and proof standards. A criminal case is brought by the government to enforce criminal law; an injured person’s civil claim generally seeks compensation or another civil remedy. A criminal case does not decide every question that may arise in a related civil claim.
Different purposes and burdens of proof
The burdens of proof differ. The State must prove criminal guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In most civil negligence and personal-injury cases, the plaintiff must prove the claim by a preponderance of the evidence—meaning the evidence makes the claim more likely true than not. Some civil issues use a different standard. Because the standards and legal elements differ, an acquittal does not automatically resolve a civil claim arising from the same event.
When a criminal disposition may matter in a civil case
A criminal conviction also does not automatically establish every fact or element needed for civil liability. Maryland appellate decisions have described a general rule that a criminal conviction is not admissible simply to establish the truth of the underlying facts in a civil damages action arising from the offense. That rule does not answer every evidence question: a statement made in a plea proceeding, a conviction offered for a permitted purpose, or a specific statutory exception may raise a different issue. The court must consider the applicable evidence rules and the purpose for which the evidence is offered.
A related but separate doctrine is issue preclusion, sometimes called collateral estoppel. It may prevent a party from relitigating an issue that was actually decided and necessary to a final judgment, but only when the doctrine’s requirements are met, including that the party to be bound had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issue. A criminal case involving different parties does not automatically bind someone who was not a party or in privity with a party to that case.
When a statutory violation may support a civil claim
A violation of a criminal statute or regulation may also matter in a civil negligence case, but it does not automatically create a civil cause of action or establish negligence in every situation. Under Maryland’s “Statute or Ordinance Rule,” the provision generally must protect a specific class that includes the injured person, and the violation must proximately cause the kind of injury the law was intended to prevent. The precise statute, claim, evidence, and procedural posture matter.
Separate proceedings, separate deadlines
The two cases may proceed on different schedules and can affect one another in practical ways, including evidence preservation, testimony, settlement, and timing. Whether one case should be paused while the other proceeds is a case-specific procedural question. A civil damages claim should be evaluated under its own elements and filing deadline even if a criminal investigation or prosecution is pending.
Related Maryland Cases and Authorities
Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101; Md. Code, Ins. §§ 19-110, 19-511; Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kuhl, 296 Md. 446, 450–52 (1983); Burruss v. Board of County Commissioners, 427 Md. 231, 249–50 (2012); Brooks v. Lewin Realty III, Inc., 378 Md. 70, 78–79 (2003); Blackburn Ltd. Partnership v. Paul, 438 Md. 100, 111–12, 126 (2014).