Family Disputes Over Division of Wrongful-Death Proceeds: What Should an Attorney Do?
Published .
The general concept
A disagreement among relatives about settlement proceeds creates both a case-management problem and a potential conflict of interest. Maryland wrongful-death damages belong to statutory beneficiaries individually and are apportioned according to the injury resulting from the death. A family relationship or status as an estate heir does not, by itself, establish an equal share. The attorney must distinguish the wrongful-death recovery from any survival recovery payable to the estate and determine who the attorney represents before advising on allocation.
Protect each person’s interests and the disputed funds
The attorney should identify all potential statutory beneficiaries, name them as plaintiffs or use plaintiffs as required by Maryland Rule 15-1001, complete and document a good-faith, reasonably diligent search, and provide the required notice. A use plaintiff is not automatically the filing attorney’s client. The attorney should make that limitation clear and recommend independent counsel when the person needs advice about intervention, damages, settlement, or allocation. The attorney should not give confidential case advice to an unrepresented beneficiary or imply that the attorney represents that person.
If the attorney holds settlement proceeds and beneficiaries or other persons claim competing interests, Maryland Rule 19-301.15(e) requires the disputed portion to remain separate in trust until the dispute is resolved. Any portion whose ownership is not disputed should be distributed promptly. The attorney should provide a clear accounting and suggest a prompt resolution process, such as a written allocation agreement, mediation, or an appropriate court proceeding. The attorney should not distribute the contested share based solely on the instructions of the family member who retained the attorney or is acting as personal representative.
Address conflicts before negotiating allocation
A lawyer jointly representing family members may face a conflict when their views differ about the settlement amount, each person’s damages, litigation strategy, or allocation. Under Maryland Rule 19-301.7, the lawyer must determine whether the conflict can be waived under the Rule; a direct claim by one client against another in the same proceeding cannot be handled by the same lawyer even with consent. Informed consent in writing is not a cure for every conflict. If the lawyer cannot provide competent and diligent representation to each client, the lawyer should not continue the joint representation and must take steps to protect each client’s interests, including advising separate counsel and addressing withdrawal as the rules require.
A wrongful-death settlement should account for all beneficiaries’ interests. Maryland decisions require mutual consent of all beneficiaries or court approval in the circumstances addressed by the cases. If the beneficiaries cannot agree on allocation, counsel should not assume that the settlement can be completed by paying the person who filed suit or by dividing the net proceeds equally. The appropriate course may be to seek court approval or a judicial determination, with notice to affected beneficiaries and a record of the proposed allocation and efforts to obtain informed agreement.
Related Maryland Cases and Authorities
Md. Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings § 3-904(c), (f); Maryland Rules 15-1001, 19-301.4, 19-301.7, and 19-301.15(e); Walker v. Essex, 318 Md. 516 (1990); Ace American Insurance Co. v. Williams, 418 Md. 400 (2011); Carter v. Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust, 439 Md. 333 (2014).