American Board of Trial Advocates
Best Attorneys
Multi Million Dollar
Million Dollar
Maryland Association for Justice
Super Lawyers
Awards 2015
The American
Super Lawyers
Top 50 Woman - Maryland
SuperLawyers
Top 100 - Maryland
Best Lawyers

Prisoners rely entirely on correctional healthcare providers for medical treatment, and when care is delayed or denied, the consequences can be severe. As a recent Maryland medical malpractice ruling demonstrates, however, a successful lawsuit against prison medical staff requires more than allegations of inadequate treatment. Courts demand strict compliance with Maryland’s Health Care Malpractice Claims Act before any malpractice action may proceed. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to inadequate medical care, consulting an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney is essential to understanding your rights and options.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff, an inmate at Roxbury Correctional Institution, experienced ongoing pain in his right knee beginning in March 2023. He sought treatment from prison medical staff and was provided ibuprofen, topical pain relief, an ace wrap, and eventually a cane. He reported worsening instability and asked for further evaluation, including an MRI. The plaintiff asserted that the defendants, including a physician assistant, failed to provide adequate follow-up care, failed to ensure timely prescription renewals, and gave him an improper knee brace.

It is reported that medical records attached to the complaint reflected multiple visits with nurses and providers. An X-ray was ordered and performed, which showed no fracture or swelling, though it noted an MRI could be considered if symptoms persisted. The physician assistant subsequently ordered a more supportive knee brace and continued pain management measures. Despite this, the plaintiff alleged he remained in daily pain, did not receive the brace promptly, and never received the MRI he requested. Continue Reading ›

When patients enter an emergency room, they expect prompt evaluation and stabilization, regardless of insurance status, background, or appearance. Federal law, through the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), protects that expectation by requiring hospitals to provide appropriate medical screening and stabilization. Yet as a recent Maryland case demonstrates, proving a violation of EMTALA requires more than a patient’s personal account; it requires evidence showing disparate treatment or failure to follow hospital protocols. If you were denied emergency medical care, speaking with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney can help you understand the law and your rights.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff sought emergency care at the defendant hospital after experiencing sharp chest pain. Despite an empty waiting room, she alleged that she waited for two hours without being evaluated. During that time, she fell and injured herself while attempting to get attention from hospital staff. Following the fall, the emergency triage team evaluated and treated her.

It is alleged that the plaintiff believed the delay in screening was racially motivated because she wore a mask with the phrase “Black Lives Matter.” She claimed that one of the nurses disagreed with her mask and allowed her to wait without medical attention. The plaintiff further asserted that she was prematurely discharged, forcing her to seek care elsewhere. At the same time, the defendant contended that she left against medical advice, supported by medical records documenting her decision. Continue Reading ›

When grieving families question the accuracy of a medical examiner’s conclusions, the stakes are deeply personal. Yet turning those concerns into a viable lawsuit is fraught with procedural hurdles, particularly when the defendant is a state agency. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how the doctrine of sovereign immunity and strict service requirements under the Maryland Tort Claims Act can bring a case to an abrupt end. For those considering legal action against a state medical examiner, this case highlights the importance of precise adherence to statutory procedures. If you believe an error in a death determination has harmed your family, it is crucial to consult with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.

Facts and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a complaint for medical malpractice against the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, asserting that state-employed physicians acted negligently when they certified her daughter’s 2018 death as a suicide instead of a homicide. The plaintiff sought both monetary damages and an order correcting the death certificate.

It is reported that the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff had failed to comply with statutory service requirements. Specifically, under Section 12-108 of the State Government Article, any complaint subject to the Maryland Tort Claims Act must be served on the State Treasurer. Instead, the plaintiff attempted to serve the Chief Medical Examiner directly, and her service did not meet the requirements of Maryland Rule 2-121 because it was not sent via certified mail with restricted delivery. The circuit court granted the motion to dismiss when the plaintiff did not oppose it, and later denied her motion for reconsideration. Continue Reading ›

When a loved one seeks emergency care, families trust that medical professionals will act quickly and competently to prevent harm. Yet when that trust is broken, the consequences can be devastating. Medical negligence claims against federal healthcare providers present an additional layer of complexity, as both federal law and state malpractice rules come into play. A recent Maryland decision demonstrates just how critical expert testimony is in proving negligence. If you or someone close to you has suffered harm in a federal medical facility, it is vital to speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney who can guide you through these legal hurdles.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs, surviving family members of a deceased patient, filed a wrongful death and survival action alleging that the decedent died as a result of negligent care received at a federal facility in Maryland. The decedent was transported to the emergency room with complaints of fatigue, abdominal pain, and vomiting of dark material. Diagnostic imaging revealed an incomplete small bowel obstruction, and the treatment plan included placement of a nasogastric (NG) tube to relieve pressure and reduce the risk of aspiration.

It is alleged that attempts to place the NG tube were initially unsuccessful when performed by a physician. A nurse was ultimately able to insert the tube, and the physician conducted basic checks that appeared to confirm correct placement. However, subsequent imaging was inconclusive, and the patient’s condition deteriorated rapidly. A CT scan eventually revealed that the NG tube had been misplaced into the patient’s lung, resulting in a pneumothorax and ultimately death from respiratory complications.

Continue Reading ›

In medical malpractice lawsuits involving reproductive care and genetic testing, plaintiffs must plead their claims with particularity. If they fail to articulate what standard of care applies and how a provider’s conduct violated it, the courts may dismiss the case at the pleading stage. This was demonstrated in a recent medical malpractice case in which claims brought after an erroneous embryo transfer were dismissed for failure to plausibly allege negligence. If you experienced harm due to a provider’s deviation from accepted reproductive care standards, it is critical to seek guidance from a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand your legal rights.

Factual Background and Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiffs sought in vitro fertilization (IVF) services in order to have a child free of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), a serious genetic disorder that had affected their other children. The plaintiffs pursued IVF in conjunction with preimplantation genetic diagnostics, aiming to ensure that only embryos unaffected by DMD would be implanted. Although several embryos were tested and deemed healthy, others were identified as genetically compromised.

Allegedly, during a June 2020 embryo transfer, a DMD-affected embryo was mistakenly transferred to the plaintiff, resulting in a pregnancy that was ultimately terminated after the error was discovered. The plaintiffs later filed a lawsuit asserting claims of negligence, gross negligence, and breach of contract. Continue Reading ›

In Maryland, plaintiffs pursuing claims of medical malpractice must clearly allege a breach of the applicable standard of care along with facts supporting causation. If a complaint lacks this foundation, courts will dismiss the claim before discovery even begins. A recent decision issued by a Maryland court illustrates how a failure to plead these elements, even when alleging serious injury, can result in dismissal at the pleading stage. If you were harmed by negligent care in an emergency room or hospital, you should talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your potential claims.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was injured in a motor vehicle collision and taken to a local emergency department operated by a hospital system. The plaintiff allegedly suffered a traumatic brain injury, an actively bleeding open head wound, and other injuries described as serious, disabling, and permanent in nature. According to the complaint, the plaintiff experienced a prolonged delay before being treated and was allegedly treated rudely and dismissively by the attending emergency physician.

It is alleged that the attending physician interacted in what the plaintiff perceived to be a “hostile environment” and that her demeanor was cold and unprofessional. The plaintiff further alleged that the hospital and physician exhibited discriminatory treatment, asserting that they failed to evaluate and treat her injuries in a manner consistent with how they would have treated similarly situated white patients. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice plaintiffs in Maryland must meet strict evidentiary and procedural requirements to prevail at trial. One of the most critical requirements is the presentation of expert testimony to establish the standard of care, a breach of that standard, and causation. If the expert does not testify at trial and their deposition cannot be admitted under applicable rules, the case cannot proceed. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how failing to properly secure expert testimony can prove fatal to a plaintiff’s malpractice claim. If you believe you were harmed by substandard medical care, it is essential to consult a knowledgeable Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to ensure your case is trial-ready.

Facts and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff fractured his hip in a fall and underwent hip replacement surgery at a Baltimore hospital. He was discharged in stable condition but returned to the hospital less than two weeks later with complaints of pain. He was diagnosed with hemorrhagic shock and hospitalized. The plaintiff and his wife subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the hospital and a consulting hematologist, alleging negligent management of his postsurgical care plan. The complaint also included a claim for loss of consortium.

It is alleged that the plaintiffs designated a hematology expert who was deposed during discovery and informed the defense that he would testify at trial. However, just days before trial, the plaintiffs contacted the court and opposing counsel to request a postponement, stating that their expert was on a humanitarian mission overseas and would not return in time for trial. Continue Reading ›

In Maryland, plaintiffs pursuing claims of medical malpractice must do more than allege poor outcomes; they must articulate a clear breach of the applicable standard of care and comply with statutory procedural requirements. Without these foundational elements, courts will dismiss the claim at the pleading stage, regardless of the severity of the alleged injury, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case. If you were harmed by negligent medical care in an emergency room or hospital, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about whether you have a viable claim.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff was taken to the hospital by ambulance on November 22, 2023, after accidentally shooting himself in the leg. Upon arrival at the emergency department, the plaintiff reportedly encountered hospital staff who laughed at him and used a racial slur. Despite this, he proceeded with treatment and allegedly informed providers of a bubble-like mass at the wound site, which he believed to be infected. The plaintiff asked for antibiotics, but it is reported that the attending physician chose instead to wash the wound with saline and discharged him with instructions to keep the leg clean and compressed.

When people seek emergency medical care following traumatic events, they rightfully expect competent, compassionate, and timely treatment. When care falls short of these expectations, the consequences can be severe, and it may constitute grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims. It can be challenging to demonstrate liability in claims against healthcare providers, however. A recent decision from a Maryland court illustrates some of the legal and procedural hurdles plaintiffs face when pursuing medical malpractice claims in federal court. If you were harmed by negligent medical treatment, it is critical to consult an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.

Background of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, following a motor vehicle accident, was transported to a hospital emergency department where she alleged she sustained a traumatic brain injury, a bleeding head wound, and other serious harm. She contended that she waited an unreasonable amount of time before being treated, and that the attending physician treated her in a disrespectful and impersonal manner.

Courts are generally reluctant to allow appeals of partial judgments while a case is still pending unless there is a compelling justification for doing so. A recent opinion issued in a Maryland medical malpractice case demonstrates the high bar litigants must meet to demonstrate that they should be permitted to appeal a non-final judgment. If you suffered harm due to incompetent medical care, it is smart to talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your options as soon as possible.

Case Setting

This medical negligence action arises out of care the plaintiff, proceeding pro se, received at Suburban Hospital in October 2015. The plaintiff alleged that the hospital failed to prevent a pulmonary embolism and sought damages for medical malpractice and lost economic opportunities. The parties filed cross-motions for partial summary judgment, with the plaintiff pursuing direct liability theories against the hospital and the defendants seeking dismissal of various claims.

In an August 2024 decision, the court dismissed several of the plaintiff’s claims. Specifically, the court held that the plaintiff failed to present expert evidence to support corporate negligence theories, such as failure to train or supervise. The court also dismissed the plaintiff’s claims for lost profits, finding a lack of evidentiary support. However, it denied summary judgment on the plaintiff’s respondeat superior theory of liability, finding genuine disputes of fact regarding whether the treating physician was an apparent agent of the hospital and whether his conduct caused the plaintiff’s injury. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information