Facts
- Andrew David Toms operated a dairy farm in Frederick County, Maryland, with a herd of about 90 cattle.
- A church-sponsored fireworks display occurred on adjacent property on September 9, 2012.
- The display was conducted pursuant to a permit and was supervised by a deputy fire marshal.
- No misfires or malfunctions occurred during the fireworks display.
- Toms alleged the noise startled his cattle, causing a stampede inside his dairy barn.
- Toms claimed four cows died and he suffered property damage, disposal costs, and lost milk revenue.
- Toms sued the church sponsor, the fireworks company, an employee, and another entity, alleging negligence, nuisance, and strict liability based on an abnormally dangerous activity.
Issues
- Whether noise emanating from the lawful discharge of fireworks can constitute an abnormally dangerous activity supporting strict liability under Maryland law.
- Whether, applying Restatement (Second) of Torts § 520 factors, a lawfully permitted and supervised fireworks display should be treated as abnormally dangerous on the facts presented.
Decision
- The Court of Appeals of Maryland affirmed judgment for the defendants.
- The court held that lawfully discharging fireworks, under Maryland’s regulatory scheme and on these facts, is not an abnormally dangerous activity.
- Because the activity was not abnormally dangerous, strict liability did not apply to the alleged harms attributed to the noise of the fireworks.
Legal Principles
- Maryland determines whether an activity is abnormally dangerous by applying the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 520 factors.
- Compliance with a substantial statutory and regulatory scheme may substantially reduce risk and weigh against classifying an activity as abnormally dangerous.
- A lawfully permitted and supervised fireworks display, without malfunction, is not abnormally dangerous for purposes of imposing strict liability based on its noise effects on neighboring property.
- Strict liability is generally unwarranted where the risks associated with an activity can be materially reduced through reasonable care and regulatory controls and where the activity is of common usage and has community value.
Conclusion
The court rejected strict liability for harms allegedly caused by noise from a lawfully permitted and supervised fireworks display, concluding that such a display is not an abnormally dangerous activity under Maryland’s Restatement-based analysis and affirming judgment for the defendants.