Cal. Civ. Code § 6-836.1
Md. Code Ann., Environment Art. Title 6, Subtitle 8 — Lead Poisoning Prevention Program
Operative Text
In an action in which the owner’s immunity from liability under § 6-835 or § 6-836 of this subtitle is challenged, upon motion by any party and prior to authorizing further proceedings in the action, the court shall: (1) Allow discovery limited solely to the issue of the owner’s immunity under § 6-835 or § 6-836 of this subtitle; (2) Determine if there are any disputes of material fact as to whether the owner is entitled to immunity under § 6-835 or § 6-836 of this subtitle; (3) Hold an evidentiary hearing on issues of material fact as to the immunity, if any, which shall, upon request of any party, be before a jury; and (4) Determine as a matter of law whether the owner is entitled to immunity from liability under § 6-835 or § 6-836 of this subtitle.
Under Md. Code Ann., Env. §§ 6-801 to 6-852 § 6-836.1, when a property owner's immunity from lead-paint liability is contested in court, the law requires a structured preliminary process before the case can move forward. The court must first allow limited discovery focused only on the immunity question, then assess whether genuine factual disputes exist, hold an evidentiary hearing if needed (with a jury if any party requests one), and finally rule as a matter of law on whether immunity applies. This procedural framework ensures that immunity claims under §§ 6-835 and 6-836 are resolved before broader litigation proceeds.
Plain English — not legal advice.
Property owners who have claimed immunity under §§ 6-835 or 6-836 should be aware that Md. Code Ann., Env. §§ 6-801 to 6-852 § 6-836.1 establishes a specific court process for testing that immunity before a full trial. Compliant operators typically maintain thorough documentation of their lead-paint compliance efforts—such as inspection records, certifications, and remediation histories—so that relevant evidence is readily available during the limited discovery phase this provision authorizes. Consulting legal counsel familiar with Maryland's lead-paint immunity framework is a common step for owners facing a challenge to their immunity status.
General guidance for property managers — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult an attorney for advice on your case.
Md. Code Ann., Env. §§ 6-801 to 6-852 § 6-836.1 gives tenants and other parties the right to challenge a property owner's claimed immunity from lead-paint liability through a defined court process, including the ability to request a jury hearing on disputed facts. This means that an immunity defense does not automatically end a case—the court must work through discovery, factual disputes, and a legal determination before proceedings can advance or be dismissed. Tenants who believe an owner's immunity claim is unfounded may wish to consult a tenant-rights organization or legal aid provider familiar with Maryland's lead-paint laws to understand the options available under this provision.
General guidance for tenants — not legal advice for your specific situation. Consult a tenant-rights organization or attorney for advice on your case.
Generated October 12, 2026 — auto-generated, not yet human-reviewed. See /transparency for methodology.
Effective Timeline
References Out
Rules and statutes cited by this regulation
References In
No inbound references recorded yet for this provision.