Economic damages are sometimes referred to as "pecuniary" damages. Choudhry v. Fowlkes , 243 Md. App. 75, 85, 219 A.3d 107, 113 (2019), aff'd , 472 Md. 688, 248 A.3d 298 (2021). Economic damages refer to those which " ‘will not be awarded without proof of pecuniary loss.’ " Eastern Shore Title Co. , 453 Md. at 354, 160 A.3d at 1256 (quoting Restatement, § 905).

The Petitioner, Ms. Lolita Fowlkes, asks that we reverse a judgment of the Court of Special Appeals that had vacated an award of $500,000 against Dr. Shabbir Choudhry, Respondent, by a jury in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, for loss of household services, which she alleged she would have received from her adult daughter, Yenita Owens, who had died after having received medical treatment by Dr. Choudhry, among others. The Court of Special Appeals, in a published opinion, Choudhry v. Fowlkes , 243 Md. App. 75, 219 A.3d 107 (2019), held that in a wrongful death action, a parent could recover economic damages for loss of household services, but that Ms. Fowlkes had not produced sufficient evidence to have the claim submitted to a jury, pursuant to Maryland Rule 2-519. In so doing, the intermediate appellate court articulated a three-part "test" to evaluate claims for economic damages arising from the loss of household services performed for a parent by an adult child prior to her death. According to the intermediate appellate court:

Economic damages are sometimes referred to as “pecuniary” damages. Choudhry v. Fowlkes, 243 Md.App. 75, 85, 219 A.3d 107, 113 (2019), aff'd, 472 Md. 688, 248 A.3d 298 (2021).

As noted, Count I asserts a claim under Maryland's wrongful death statute, C.J. § 3-904(a). This statute '"allows the decedent's beneficiaries or relatives to recover damages for loss of support or other benefits that would have been provided, had the decedent not died as a result of another's negligence'" Choudhry v. Fowlkes, 243 Md.App. 75, 85, 219 A.3d 107, 112 (2019) (quoting Spangler v. McQuitty, 449 Md. 33, 53, 141 A.3d 156, 168 (2016)), aff'd, 472 Md. 688, 248 A.3d 298 (2021). The Maryland Court of Appeals has explained: "The primary beneficiaries of a wrongful death action are the spouse, parent, and child of the decedent.

[11, 12] We review a circuit court’s ruling on a request to take judicial notice under the clearly erroneous standard, keeping in mind " ‘[t]he principle that there is a legitimate range within which notice may be taken or declined and that there is efficacy in taking it, when appropriate[.]’ " Smith v. Hearst Corp., 48 Md. App. 135, 141, 426 A.2d 1 (1981) (quoting "Professor James Bradley Thayer in his Preliminary Treatise on Evidence (1898), at p. 300"). See Choudhry v. Fowlkes, 243 Md. App. 75, 98, 219 A.3d 107 (2019). Circuit and appellate courts may take judicial notice of "matters of common knowledge or [those] capable of certain verification."

Smith v. Hearst Corp., 48 Md.App. 135, 141 (1981) (quoting "Professor James Bradley Thayer in his Preliminary Treatise on Evidence (1898), at p. 300"). See Choudhry v. Fowlkes, 243 Md.App. 75, 98 (2019). Circuit and appellate courts may take judicial notice of "matters of common knowledge or [those] capable of certain verification." Faya v. Almaraz, 329 Md. 435, 444 (1993)