Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Maryland Court Discusses Expert Support for Malpractice Claims

Published on: October 7, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

People harmed by incompetent medical care will often seek justice via the legal system, but a medical malpractice lawsuit can be dismissed before a court ever decides whether negligent care occurred. In a recent Maryland appellate decision, the court reviewed expert materials filed after a premature infant deteriorated from suspected sepsis and died. The expert identified serious concerns, but described the alleged failures collectively instead of connecting each defendant to a specific duty, breach, and injury. The ruling shows why precision matters in Maryland malpractice filings. If delayed diagnosis or treatment harmed you or a loved one, contact a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney promptly to protect your rights.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, an infant was born about eight weeks prematurely and transferred from the defendant hospital to another neonatal intensive care unit. After improving, the infant returned while bottle-feeding, breathing room air, and progressing toward discharge. Days later, the infant stopped showing feeding cues, became drowsy, ate less, and displayed fatigue, mottled skin, and abdominal distention.

Reportedly, the infant deteriorated the next day, required intubation, and was transferred with suspected sepsis. Providers treated Group B Streptococcus infection, septic shock or meningitis, a severe clotting disorder, and cardiovascular collapse. Neurological examinations revealed devastating injury. The parents withdrew life-sustaining treatment, and the infant died at 36 days old. Continue Reading ›

Why Maryland Medical Malpractice Claims Must Follow the Required Pre-Suit Process

Published on: September 27, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

Maryland patients generally must complete a specialized pre-suit process before pursuing a malpractice claim in court, even when the facts also support a federal civil rights claim. In a recent Maryland decision, a former inmate asserted that medical providers and detention officials caused a critical knee operation to be delayed. The court dismissed his malpractice claim without prejudice because he had not completed Maryland’s required process. If you were harmed by delayed treatment, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about preserving your claim.

Facts and Procedural History

Reportedly, the plaintiff developed a serious MRSA infection involving a previously replaced knee. Surgeons removed the prosthesis, inserted an antibiotic spacer, and arranged intravenous antibiotics. After continuing wound care, a surgeon scheduled an operation to remove the spacer and insert a fusion rod. The procedure was ultimately set for May 22, 2023.

Allegedly, officials transferred the plaintiff to another detention center on May 19, three days before the scheduled surgery. The medical transfer materials referred generally to a future knee operation and specialty referral but did not clearly state the imminent surgery date or the gravity of the infection. The plaintiff missed the procedure, which did not occur until August. He maintained that the delay allowed the infection to damage his leg bone, prevented placement of the planned fusion rod, and left him dependent on a cane or wheelchair.

Maryland Court Discusses Jury Instructions in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 26, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

Medical malpractice cases require jurors to determine whether a provider acted with the care and skill expected of a reasonably competent provider in a similar practice and under similar circumstances. In a recent Maryland case, the court considered whether general negligence instructions improperly influenced a jury that found a neurosurgeon liable for negligent treatment. The court upheld the verdict and explained how ordinary negligence principles relate to the professional standard governing health care providers. If negligent surgery or delayed treatment caused you harm, you should talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney who can assess your potential claim.

Facts of the Case

Allegedly, a patient visited a neurosurgeon after developing numbness in two fingers and experiencing intermittent neck and shoulder pain. The surgeon recommended an operation. During the procedure, the surgeon removed damaged spinal discs and fused vertebrae in the patient’s neck.

Reportedly, an infection developed at the surgical site. The patient returned to the hospital and consulted several physicians, including the surgeon, before being hospitalized because of the infection. Years later, he continued to experience neck pain and a severely restricted range of motion.

Maryland Court Discusses Why Medical Malpractice Experts Must Explain Causation

Published on: September 14, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

In a medical malpractice case, an expert must do more than identify care that may have fallen short. The expert must also explain how that care caused the injury the patient claims. A recent decision illustrates how unreliable reasoning and incomplete expert disclosures can end a case before trial. If you believe delayed diagnosis or treatment worsened your condition, it is advisable to consult a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about preserving the evidence needed to prove causation.

Case Setting

Reportedly, the patient underwent emergency surgery in June 2022 for a tear in his ascending aorta. After the operation, intensive care staff noted confusion, followed by weakness in both legs. Neurology recommended imaging to investigate a possible stroke, but the hospital deferred an MRI because transport and reduced monitoring posed safety concerns while the patient remained unstable. An MRI performed several days later showed a stroke. The patient later described ongoing cognitive and physical difficulties, while the hospital maintained that his physical strength had substantially recovered.

Allegedly, the patient, through his power of attorney, sued the hospital and treating physicians in federal court. The complaint asserted that the providers delayed imaging, failed to manage blood pressure appropriately, and did not consider a lumbar drain soon enough, worsening the stroke’s effects. After discovery, the hospital asked the court to exclude two experts’ causation opinions. The trial court excluded both and granted summary judgment because the patient had no admissible expert testimony connecting the challenged care to lasting injury. The patient appealed those rulings. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Medical Malpractice Claims in the Context of Bankruptcy Actions

Published on: September 2, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

Medical malpractice claims may become part of a bankruptcy estate when the underlying injury occurred before the patient filed for bankruptcy. In a recent case, the court considered whether a bankruptcy trustee could continue a medical malpractice action that the patient had failed to disclose during her bankruptcy case. The court allowed the trustee to pursue the claim for the benefit of creditors. If you were harmed by negligent medical care, a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney can evaluate your legal options.

Factual Setting and Procedural History

Allegedly, a patient underwent a total hysterectomy at a Washington, D.C. hospital in July 2015. She later maintained that the procedure had been performed improperly and caused injuries. In February 2019, she sent the hospital the notice required before filing a medical malpractice action.

Court Examines Exclusion of Experts in Medical Malplractice Cases

Published on: August 28, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

A malpractice case can end before a jury hears it when expert proof falls short. That risk is acute when postoperative injuries require specialists to connect treatment with lasting harm. A recent federal appeal examined whether two experts reliably linked delayed stroke mitigation to permanent neurological injury. If you believe negligent hospital care caused life-changing complications, consult a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney promptly about preserving evidence and securing the expert support your claim may require.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, a 42-year-old patient arrived at a hospital in June 2022 with severe chest pain and underwent emergency repair of an ascending aortic dissection. After six procedures concluded without identified complications, the patient entered intensive care in critical but stable condition. Confusion appeared the next day, followed by concern about altered brain activity and severe weakness in both legs. Neurology recommended magnetic resonance imaging and a head scan because of concern for a spinal cord stroke.

Reportedly, clinicians deferred the MRI because transport outside intensive care, reduced monitoring, and removal of wires used for blood-pressure management posed safety concerns. An MRI days later showed a stroke. The patient asserted that providers had not timely raised blood pressure or considered a lumbar drain. After rehabilitation, the patient claimed continuing limitations, while the defendants cited improved strength, mobility, and daily functioning. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Physical Examinations in Maryland Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: August 21, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

A medical malpractice lawsuit can force an injured patient to undergo another examination, this time at the defense’s request. That prospect raises immediate questions about privacy, physical discomfort, and how far discovery should reach. A recent federal ruling in Maryland confronted those concerns when the defense sought a flexible laryngoscopy to examine claimed vocal cord paralysis. If a surgical injury has disrupted your breathing, voice, or daily life, speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about protecting your rights during the claim process.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff consulted a surgeon about the thyroid gland in September 2023 and underwent a total thyroidectomy the following month. After surgery, the plaintiff experienced respiratory distress and stridor, a high-pitched sound associated with a narrowed or obstructed upper airway. The surgeon ordered reintubation approximately three hours later. Following extubation two days afterward, the plaintiff continued to experience intermittent stridor, swallowing difficulty, and a weak voice while receiving intensive care.

Maryland Court Discusses Timeliness of Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: August 14, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

Maryland permits only one wrongful death action for a person’s death, yet each beneficiary must act timely to pursue an individual recovery. A recent medical malpractice appeal examined whether a parent named as a use plaintiff could intervene after three years under the relation-back doctrine, serving as a stark reminder of why families must protect their rights before deadlines expire. If you lost a loved one due to negligent medical care, it is in your best interest to retain a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney who can help you navigate your claims.

Case Setting

Allegedly, a nine-year-old child with chronic constipation experienced severe abdominal pain after approximately two weeks without a bowel movement. A parent took the child to an urgent care facility on August 28, 2020. A physician administered an enema, examined the child’s abdomen, and discharged the child that evening even though the child had not passed a bowel movement. The next morning, the child developed vomiting and diarrhea, became unresponsive, and suffered cardiac arrest and gastrointestinal bleeding. The child died on August 30, 2020. An autopsy attributed the death to complications of bowel obstruction caused by congenital constipation.

Reportedly, one parent filed a medical malpractice claim with Maryland’s Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office on August 16, 2023, and waived arbitration. That parent filed a circuit court complaint on September 22, asserting negligence, wrongful death, and survival claims. The complaint identified the other parent as a use plaintiff. Service occurred after the three-year anniversary of the child’s death.

Maryland Court Discusses Procedural Requirements in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: August 7, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

Maryland medical malpractice claims must pass through a specialized pre-suit process before a claimant may pursue them in court. Missing an expert certificate or filing deadline can end a case without a decision on negligent care. This was demonstrated in a recent Maryland appellate decision that illustrated how strictly courts enforce those requirements. If you were injured by incompetent medical care, it is important to act promptly, and you should discuss your potential claims with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff received emergency-room care on June 3, 2021, and an intravenous line may have been inserted improperly into the plaintiff’s hand. Acting without counsel, the plaintiff filed both a circuit court complaint and a document presenting the same claim to Maryland’s Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office on April 19, 2024. The defendant hospital moved to dismiss the court action because the plaintiff had neither filed a certificate from a qualified expert nor waived arbitration as required by the Health Care Malpractice Claims Act.

Reportedly, the circuit court granted that motion on July 5, 2024. The plaintiff did not appeal but sent a letter requesting that the case remain on hold during a state medical board investigation. The letter lacked a certificate of service, and the court took no action. The administrative office later dismissed the claim because the plaintiff had not supplied the required certificate.

Maryland Court Discusses Medical Malpractice Claims Against Federal Entities

Published on: July 29, 2026 | by Arfaa Law Group

Patients who receive medical treatment at Veterans Affairs hospitals, military medical facilities, and other federally operated healthcare institutions generally expect to have the same legal remedies available as those treated by private healthcare providers. While injured patients may pursue compensation when negligent medical care causes harm, claims against the federal government are governed by unique procedural rules that differ significantly from traditional medical malpractice lawsuits. A recent decision demonstrates how failing to comply with the Federal Tort Claims Act can prevent a medical malpractice claim from moving forward, regardless of the seriousness of the underlying allegations. If you believe you suffered injuries because of negligent care at a federal healthcare facility, speaking with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney can help ensure your claim is properly preserved.

Facts and Procedural History

Reportedly, the plaintiff underwent an elective surgical procedure at a Veterans Affairs medical center in Arizona. The plaintiff alleged that while under anesthesia, a physician administered medication and performed an additional medical procedure without obtaining informed consent. The plaintiff initially filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the physician in state court. The United States subsequently intervened, asserting that the physician was acting within the scope of federal employment during the procedure, removed the case to federal court, and substituted the United States as the defendant under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The federal court ultimately dismissed the malpractice action because the plaintiff had not exhausted the administrative remedies required by the FTCA before filing suit.

It is reported that after the dismissal of the malpractice action, the plaintiff filed additional lawsuits challenging the conduct of various federal agencies and government attorneys involved in defending the original case. The plaintiff asserted constitutional claims, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and allegations relating to fraud on the court, contending that government officials had acted improperly during the defense of the underlying medical malpractice litigation. The defendants moved to dismiss the action on multiple jurisdictional and procedural grounds.