Suing the State: one year to the Treasurer
A claim against the State of Maryland itself falls under the Maryland Tort Claims Act (MTCA), State Government § 12-106. As a condition precedent to suit, the claimant must submit written notice to the State Treasurer, or a designee of the Treasurer, within one year after the injury. Liability under the MTCA is also capped, generally at $200,000 per occurrence.
Suing a county or city: just 180 days
A claim against a county, municipality, or other local government follows an entirely different statute: the Local Government Tort Claims Act (LGTCA), Courts and Judicial Proceedings § 5-301 to § 5-304. Here, the notice window is notably shorter — just 180 days after the injury. Like the state-level rule, this notice requirement operates as a condition precedent to maintaining the lawsuit at all, not a mere formality.
A genuine asymmetry worth understanding from the start
Because these two notice periods come from entirely separate statutes, enacted and amended independently of each other, Maryland ends up with a real structural asymmetry: a claimant injured by state action gets roughly twice the notice window of a claimant injured by local government action, even though the underlying harm and the stakes for the claimant could be identical. Knowing which government entity is actually involved — and therefore which notice period applies — is a critical first step in any Maryland government claim.
Exactly who notice goes to varies by jurisdiction
Under the LGTCA, the correct recipient of notice depends on which local government is involved: notice to a county generally goes to the county commissioners or county council, while Baltimore City and certain other jurisdictions have their own specific designated recipients, such as the city solicitor. Getting this detail wrong, even when the notice itself is timely, has been a genuine source of litigation in Maryland courts.
Real, but narrow, exceptions exist on both sides
Both systems allow a court to excuse untimely notice in limited circumstances — generally where the claimant shows good cause for the delay, or where the governmental entity cannot show it was prejudiced by the delay. Maryland courts have also recognized a substantial-compliance doctrine, allowing notice that falls short of the statute's literal requirements to still count if it genuinely achieves the notice requirement's underlying purpose. Still, these exceptions are narrow, and relying on them is far riskier than simply meeting the applicable deadline in the first place.