The Maryland Court of Appeals has ruled that a defendant may use photos showing relatively little property damage to a vehicle to argue that the plaintiff did not have a significant personal injury.
The decision is Mason v. Lynch. There is also a great dissent on the issue; it makes the point that there is a substantial body of scientific literature that actually disproves the argument that “minor” impacts do not cause serious neck injuries. Accordingly, the dissent argues, a lawyer should not be able to make the argument that an injury is not real or significant simply based on the lack of property damage seen in photographs.
							Day on Torts

