Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Timely and coordinated healthcare is essential, particularly when vulnerable patients rely on managed care systems for home-based support. In a recent medical malpractice case, the plaintiff alleged that a healthcare provider’s failure to act on a care assessment contributed to a patient’s decline and eventual death. While the complaint raised concerns about medical negligence in care coordination, the case was ultimately dismissed due to a failure to meet the legal requirements for bringing such claims. If you believe that care mismanagement harmed your loved one, a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney can help you understand the procedural and substantive steps necessary to bring a viable claim.

Factual History and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiff’s mother, who was dually enrolled in Medicare and Medicaid, was assessed by a contractor acting on behalf of the government. The contractor determined she met the “nursing facility level of care” and required the assistance of a personal care aide. The plaintiff contended that this Level of Care (LOC) Assessment was transmitted to the healthcare provider through a system designed to ensure that healthcare entities receive and act on such assessments in real-time.

Allegedly, the defendant claimed it never received the LOC Assessment and, as a result, failed to provide the home-based services prescribed. It is further alleged that this failure led to a month-long lapse in care from late August through mid-September 2023, contributing to the patient’s worsening condition and her death in October 2023. The plaintiff filed suit, asserting claims for negligence and breach of contract. The case was later removed to federal court on diversity grounds. Continue Reading ›

In life-threatening medical situations, even brief delays can determine whether a patient lives or dies. A recent Maryland medical malpractice case exposes how failing to act swiftly in an emergency surgical context may lead to a preventable and tragic outcome and the importance of expert testimony in establishing liability for such errors. If you were hurt by a medical professional’s careless failure to provide competent care, it is smart to talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your options for seeking damages.

Factual Background and Procedural History

It is alleged that the decedent arrived at the hospital’s emergency department with complaints of severe abdominal pain and vomiting. Reportedly, imaging studies revealed signs of bowel obstruction and fluid accumulation. Despite these findings, the hospital did not immediately consult a surgeon or initiate appropriate pre-operative measures.

It is reported that the patient’s condition deteriorated overnight, and by the time surgical intervention was attempted, the bowel obstruction had progressed to sepsis and multi-organ failure. The patient died shortly after the delayed procedure. The decedent’s estate brought a wrongful death and survival action against the hospital, alleging that the delay in surgical care constituted a breach of the applicable standard of care. Continue Reading ›

People who undergo surgical procedures in hospitals anticipate that they will receive attentive care, not only during the procedure but also after. It is not uncommon, though, for medical professionals to fail to closely monitor patients following surgical procedures to ensure timely intervention if complications arise. A recent Maryland medical malpractice case highlights the devastating consequences of failing to respond to postsurgical symptoms and what evidence an injured party must offer to demonstrate liability for such errors. If you were hurt by inadequate care in a hospital, it is smart to speak to a trusted Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent spinal surgery at a hospital in Maryland and was discharged shortly thereafter. The next day, he returned to the emergency room, reporting weakness in his legs. Medical staff performed certain evaluations but discharged him again with no imaging or surgical consultation. Later that same day, he was brought back to the hospital by ambulance, now unable to move his legs and exhibiting signs of serious neurologic decline.

It is reported that after this third visit, an MRI revealed a spinal epidural hematoma, a condition requiring emergency intervention. The plaintiff underwent a second surgical procedure, but by that time he had suffered permanent paralysis. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging that the hospital and its staff breached the standard of care by failing to perform appropriate diagnostic tests and delaying surgical intervention. Continue Reading ›

During pregnancy, the changes an expectant mother’s body goes through increase the risk of certain complications. Such risks can extend beyond pregnancy, and healthcare providers must be diligent in diagnosing and treating any complications that arise. If they are not, the consequences can be devastating. Even in cases in which liability seems clear, medical professionals will often deny liability, which is why expert testimony is essential. This was demonstrated in a recent Maryland medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff sought compensation for the defendant’s failure to identify and treat a dangerous neurological condition when she was postpartum. If you were harmed by the incompetence of a medical professional, it is important to understand your rights, and you should talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney.

Factual History and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a new mother, presented to the emergency department with complaints of worsening headaches and neurological symptoms in the days following delivery. Reportedly, she was evaluated, discharged, and sent home without undergoing a brain scan. It is further alleged that the plaintiff returned to the hospital the next day after experiencing vomiting and impaired coordination.

It is reported that upon her return, the medical staff again failed to perform neuroimaging and treated her symptoms as unrelated to any neurological condition. Later that day, the plaintiff suffered a severe stroke due to cerebral venous sinus thrombosis. She was admitted to the intensive care unit and experienced permanent brain damage. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the hospital, alleging that the staff’s failure to recognize her symptoms and order appropriate testing constituted a breach of the standard of care. Continue Reading ›

Medical professionals must exercise due diligence in monitoring and treating patients with mental health conditions, regardless of the treatment settings, and if they fail to do so, it may constitute medical malpractice. The legal consequences of inadequate healthcare services in correctional settings were demonstrated in a recent case involving the tragic suicide of a detainee at a federal facility. If you or a loved one suffered harm because of inadequate medical care, it is advisable to speak to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney regarding your rights.

Factual Background and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff, acting on behalf of herself and as the representative of a deceased detainee’s estate, brought a wrongful death and medical malpractice action against the defendants. In it, she alleged that while under the care of the jail and its healthcare providers, the decedent committed suicide. The plaintiff claimed that the defendants failed to adequately monitor, treat, and provide mental health accommodations for the decedent despite known risk factors and a documented history of psychiatric concerns.

It is further reported that the United States substituted itself for the defendants under the Federally Supported Health Centers Assistance Act, which treats certain nonprofit healthcare providers as employees of the federal government when acting within the scope of a qualifying grant-supported activity. Consequently, the plaintiff’s claims against the defendants were converted into claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA), and those claims were later voluntarily dismissed.

The District, however, remained a defendant in the litigation and initiated a third-party action seeking indemnity from the defendants, relying on contractual provisions obligating the defendants to hold the District harmless for liabilities arising from medical services rendered under the contract. Unity responded with a motion to dismiss, arguing that the court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction over the indemnity claim and that because the United States had already substituted itself in the defendant’s place, it was immune from further litigation. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice claims often hinge on whether healthcare providers adhered to the appropriate standard of care and whether any failure to do so directly impacted a patient’s health and treatment outcomes. Generally, expert testimony is necessary to establish the standard of care and causation; as such, if expert testimony is precluded, it can greatly impair their ability to present compelling claims, as shown in a recent Maryland case. If you or a loved one were injured by a physician’s misdiagnosis or failure to diagnose a medical condition, it is in your best interest to meet with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice to determine your potential claims.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a woman in her early 30s, sought medical advice from her gynecologist regarding her ability to conceive. In 2018, the defendant, a board-certified obstetrician and gynecologist, performed blood tests to assess the plaintiff’s fertility. The physician incorrectly informed the plaintiff that her test results were normal when, in fact, they indicated diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), a condition that reduces a woman’s egg supply and fertility potential.

It is reported that the physician failed to refer the plaintiff to a fertility specialist or recommend immediate treatment, such as in vitro fertilization (IVF), which could have maximized her chances of conception. The plaintiff continued trying to conceive naturally, unaware of her declining fertility. Eighteen months later, after further unsuccessful attempts to conceive, the plaintiff consulted a fertility specialist and was formally diagnosed with severe DOR. By that time, her condition had worsened considerably, and despite undergoing multiple rounds of IVF and fertility treatments, she was unable to achieve a successful pregnancy. Continue Reading ›

Continue Reading ›

Vaccine-related injury claims often involve complex legal hurdles, particularly when federal immunity statutes like the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act come into play. The PREP Act provides broad legal protections for entities involved in vaccine administration, significantly impacting the ability of plaintiffs to seek damages in traditional courts. A recent federal appellate decision underscores the difficulty of overcoming these statutory protections in vaccine litigation. If you or a loved one suffered harm from a vaccine, it is smart to meet with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand your options.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiffs, parents of a deceased minor, filed a lawsuit against the defendant, a pharmaceutical company, along with government and medical entities, claiming that the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine caused the minor’s death. The minor received two doses of the vaccine at a pediatric clinic and later developed flu-like symptoms, which ultimately resulted in cardiac failure and death. The plaintiffs contended that the vaccine caused myocarditis, leading to fatal heart complications.

It is reported that the plaintiffs asserted claims under the PREP Act, alleging willful misconduct by the defendant in the production and distribution of the vaccine. Additionally, they pursued state tort law claims, including wrongful death and medical malpractice, against both the pharmaceutical company and the healthcare providers involved in administering the vaccine. The defendants moved to dismiss the claims, arguing that the PREP Act provides immunity against such lawsuits and that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust the required administrative remedies. The court granted the defendants’ motion and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›