Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Families entrust skilled nursing facilities with the care of their most vulnerable loved ones, relying on staff to prevent complications like bedsores that can quickly become life-threatening. When that trust is broken, the results can be devastating. A recent decision from a Maryland court demonstrates that in malpractice cases against nursing facilities, success depends not only on the care provided, but also on whether the plaintiff submits expert testimony that meets Maryland’s strict statutory requirements. If you or a loved one suffered preventable injuries in a long-term care setting, it is critical to consult a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Case Background

It is alleged that the decedent, after suffering a stroke, was admitted to the defendant skilled nursing facility for post-acute care. The patient was entirely dependent on staff for mobility and hygiene. Despite being assessed as high risk for skin breakdown, the patient allegedly developed pressure ulcers within days of admission. These ulcers worsened into serious infections, and the patient ultimately passed away.

It is reported that the decedent’s family, through the widow, filed a negligence and wrongful death complaint against the facility. They asserted that staff failed to reposition the patient, provide proper documentation, ensure adequate nutrition, and implement effective care plans. The plaintiffs submitted a certificate of a qualified expert from a registered nurse, who opined that the facility’s breaches caused the development of the pressure ulcers. Continue Reading ›

When patients turn to hospitals for treatment, they expect to leave healthier, not with new complications. For military retirees and others receiving care at federal facilities, the consequences of medical negligence can be devastating, and the path to justice is not always straightforward. A recent ruling from a Maryland court demonstrates that even when serious injuries occur, medical malpractice claims rise or fall on the strength of expert testimony. Without reliable experts, courts will not allow these cases to move forward. If you or a loved one sustained losses due to negligent treatment at a federal or military hospital, speaking with a Baltimore medical malpractice lawyer is the critical first step toward protecting your rights.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a military retiree, presented to a federal medical center in 2018 for treatment of plantar warts. A surgical resident performed cryotherapy using liquid nitrogen. According to the complaint, the procedure caused a large blister on the plaintiff’s foot. Despite the plaintiff’s reports of severe pain, medical staff allegedly refused to drain the blister.

It is reported that the plaintiff later sought outside treatment, where the blister was eventually drained. The plaintiff asserted that the delay in proper care resulted in permanent nerve damage and chronic pain. He filed suit under the FTCA, bringing claims that the resident improperly administered liquid nitrogen, that the resident failed to request supervision, that the attending physician failed to provide supervision, and that the staff failed to properly treat the blister after the procedure. Continue Reading ›

Even when people are incarcerated, they remain entitled to timely and adequate medical treatment. Delays in providing essential care, such as physical therapy after surgery, can lead to lasting harm. A recent decision by a Maryland court illustrates the distinction between medical negligence claims under Maryland law and constitutional claims under the Fourteenth Amendment. While the plaintiff’s medical malpractice allegations were dismissed, the court allowed his constitutional claims against medical providers to proceed. If you or a loved one has suffered harm due to delayed or inadequate care in a correctional facility, it is essential to seek guidance from a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a pretrial detainee at the time, sustained severe injuries after multiple assaults while in custody. Following one attack in September 2023, the plaintiff underwent surgery to repair a broken leg and torn meniscus. He was discharged with orders for physical therapy.

It is reported that the plaintiff claimed his physician delayed authorizing the necessary therapy, which postponed his rehabilitation for approximately one month. During this time, he remained immobilized, which allegedly worsened his condition. The plaintiff further asserted that the physical therapist failed to begin treatment despite receiving orders from the attending physician. He contended these delays caused long-term impairment of mobility and required additional sessions that he still had not received. Continue Reading ›

When a patient undergoes emergency surgery, every moment of post-operative care matters. Hospitals and physicians are expected to act swiftly if complications arise, particularly when symptoms suggest neurological injury. Delays in diagnosis and treatment can result in permanent impairment, yet as a recent medical malpractice ruling makes clear, strong medical evidence is indispensable. Without reliable expert testimony, even serious allegations of malpractice cannot move forward. If you or a loved one has suffered life-changing complications after surgery, consulting an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney is an essential step in protecting your rights.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff was transported to the defendant hospital in June 2022 with severe chest pain and was diagnosed with an ascending aortic dissection. The plaintiff underwent emergency surgery, which was completed without complication, and he was transferred to the intensive care unit under the supervision of the defendant physicians.

It is reported that shortly after surgery, the plaintiff exhibited signs of neurological decline. His medical chart reflected disorientation, confusion, and bilateral lower extremity weakness. A neurologist recommended an MRI due to concerns of a spinal cord infarction. The MRI was delayed several times for safety reasons, despite persistent symptoms. When the imaging was eventually performed on June 22, it revealed that the plaintiff had suffered a stroke. 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 ›