Articles Posted in Maryland Medical Malpractice Law

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice litigation often turns not only on clinical facts but also on procedural and evidentiary rules that determine whether a claim can proceed to trial. A recent Maryland decision highlights how expert witness qualifications and trial rulings can shape the outcome of complex negligence claims involving multiple healthcare providers. If you were harmed by negligent medical care, it is smart to speak to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the decedent underwent an upper endoscopy at an outpatient surgical facility and was discharged shortly after the procedure, despite multiple health conditions that could increase fall risk. After leaving the facility, the decedent fell outside while walking to a vehicle and later suffered complications that led to death.

It is alleged that the plaintiffs filed a medical negligence and wrongful death action against several healthcare providers and the facility, asserting that the defendants failed to properly assess fall risk, failed to monitor the patient adequately, and discharged the patient without appropriate assistance, such as a wheelchair. The plaintiffs supported their claims with expert certifications from physicians who opined that the defendants deviated from the applicable standards of care and that those deviations caused the decedent’s injuries and death. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice claims frequently depend not only on the quality of care provided but also on strict procedural requirements that govern when and how such claims may be brought. A recent Maryland ruling illustrates how delays in diagnosis and treatment, combined with alleged failures in care coordination, can raise significant negligence concerns and trigger threshold legal barriers. If you believe you have suffered harm due to delayed or inadequate medical treatment, you should consult with experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorneys to evaluate your legal options.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff sustained a serious musculoskeletal injury while engaging in physical activity, resulting in a torn pectoralis muscle that required prompt medical evaluation and potential surgical intervention. The plaintiff asserted that medical providers failed to timely diagnose the severity of the injury and delayed appropriate treatment.

It is alleged that initial medical evaluations mischaracterized the injury, and although a provider later recognized the likelihood of a significant tendon disruption, necessary follow-up care and specialist referrals were not promptly implemented. The plaintiff claimed that diagnostic testing, including imaging studies, was significantly delayed, and that recommended treatments, such as physical therapy and ultrasound, were not timely ordered or performed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice claims involving multiple providers can quickly become procedurally complex, particularly when federal employees are involved. In such cases, questions of immunity, jurisdiction, and pre-suit requirements may determine whether a claim proceeds at all, regardless of its underlying merits. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how the intersection of the Federal Tort Claims Act and the Westfall Act can significantly alter the course of litigation and even bar claims entirely. If you are pursuing a medical malpractice claim in Maryland, it is essential to consult with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney who understands how to navigate these procedural barriers and preserve your right to recovery.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the decedent, a 90-year-old patient, was admitted to a hospital with respiratory illness and remained under the care of multiple healthcare providers before dying approximately two weeks later.

It is alleged that during her hospitalization, the decedent received negligent medical care in several respects, including failure to screen for infection properly, failure to recognize aspiration risks, improper management of a feeding tube, misuse of medications, failure to follow advance directives, and inadequate monitoring following transfer to a lower level of care. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

When multiple incidents contribute to a patient’s injuries, courts must carefully determine whether a prior settlement bars recovery in a subsequent medical malpractice action. The one satisfaction rule prevents double recovery, but its application requires a detailed analysis of the injuries involved and the scope of any prior release. A recent Maryland decision clarifies these principles and demonstrates the importance of distinguishing between separate causes of harm. If you are dealing with overlapping injury claims in Maryland, it is important to consult with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney who can protect your right to full compensation.

History of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff sought emergency treatment for worsening back pain and neurological symptoms, where healthcare providers failed to diagnose a serious spinal condition requiring urgent intervention properly.

It is alleged that following this encounter, the plaintiff’s condition deteriorated significantly, leading to surgery and long-term complications, including loss of mobility and bodily function. The plaintiff subsequently filed a medical malpractice action against the providers involved. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice litigation requires more than proof of negligent care. It demands strict adherence to procedural rules, particularly those governing discovery and expert testimony. Courts rely heavily on these rules to ensure fairness and efficiency, and failure to comply can result in dismissal regardless of the merits of the underlying claim. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how discovery violations, especially those involving expert witnesses, can be fatal to a plaintiff’s case. If you are pursuing a medical malpractice claim in Maryland, it is essential to consult with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney who can ensure your case is properly developed and protected at every stage.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice action after her spouse received treatment during two hospital admissions, claiming that medical providers failed to prevent and properly treat pressure ulcers and related complications.

It is alleged that before initiating litigation, the plaintiff requested medical records and received a limited set, which she provided to a retained expert. Based on these materials, the expert concluded that the defendants deviated from the applicable standard of care in several respects, including failure to implement preventative measures. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

 Medical malpractice litigation often turns on expert testimony, particularly when a defendant attempts to shift blame to a non-party physician. Courts carefully police these efforts because juries cannot be asked to evaluate complex medical standards without proper evidentiary support. In a recent decision, Maryland’s highest court addressed whether a defendant may argue that a non-party medical provider caused a patient’s injuries without presenting expert testimony to establish that provider’s negligence. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to questionable medical care in Maryland, it is advisable to speak with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about how you can protect your rights.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff was diagnosed with kidney cancer and an enlarged lymph node, and a surgeon removed the cancerous kidney but left the lymph node in place due to its proximity to a major blood vessel. After surgery, the plaintiff received oncology care and chemotherapy, which appeared to reduce the size of the lymph node, leading providers to believe the cancer was in remission.

It is alleged that, over several years, imaging studies were performed without contrast dye, and radiologists interpreting those studies repeatedly reported no abnormal lymph node enlargement while noting that the scans were suboptimal. During this period, the plaintiff’s treating oncologist relied on those reports and continued monitoring rather than pursuing further intervention. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice litigation often turns not only on the merits of the claim but also on the ability of the parties to properly develop expert testimony addressing standard of care, causation, and damages. In surgical malpractice cases involving permanent airway or neurological injury, expert discovery is especially critical because the claims typically involve complex anatomy, operative decision-making, and long-term medical consequences. A recent Maryland court ruling shows how courts evaluate requests to modify discovery deadlines in a high-stakes medical negligence case and the importance of allowing sufficient time for expert preparation. If you were harmed by negligent surgical care in Maryland, you should consider consulting with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand your rights.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff sought medical consultation with the defendant surgeon regarding thyroid nodules that were causing difficulty swallowing. Although the nodules were benign and relatively small, the defendant recommended a total thyroidectomy and did not advise the plaintiff of less invasive or nonsurgical treatment options.

It is alleged that the defendant surgeon performed a total thyroidectomy at a Maryland medical center approximately one month later. Following the procedure, the plaintiff experienced respiratory distress accompanied by stridor, indicating a possible upper airway obstruction. Several hours after surgery, the defendant ordered reintubation to address worsening respiratory symptoms, and the anesthesia team performed the procedure without complication. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice claims arising in custodial settings often involve complex questions about who owed a duty of care, how medical services were delivered, and whether delays in diagnosis or treatment caused preventable harm. When incarcerated patients rely entirely on institutional healthcare systems, failures in medical response can have serious and lasting consequences. A recent decision from a Maryland court illustrates how courts distinguish between actionable medical negligence and claims that fail due to insufficient allegations of provider involvement or failure to comply with Maryland’s pre-suit requirements. The case highlights the procedural and substantive hurdles that medical malpractice plaintiffs must clear, even when serious illness is alleged. If you were harmed by delayed or inadequate medical care in Maryland, you should consider speaking with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to assess your claim.

Facts of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff was confined in a county detention facility where all medical care was provided through a contracted healthcare provider overseen by a medical director. During his confinement, he consumed facility drinking water that he believed was contaminated with harmful bacteria capable of causing gastrointestinal illness. After developing persistent vomiting and diarrhea, he submitted a sick call request seeking medical evaluation and treatment.

It is alleged that, despite submitting the sick call request, the plaintiff did not receive a timely response from medical staff. His symptoms continued, and he made additional efforts to obtain care by alerting correctional staff to his condition and requesting assistance in contacting medical personnel. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice litigation often turns on whether expert testimony on causation is sufficiently grounded in accepted scientific principles to be presented to a jury. In cases involving complex birth injuries, courts must evaluate competing expert opinions, examine the clinical literature, and determine whether the evidence meets the reliability threshold required under Maryland law. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how disputes over evidence and discovery can shape the outcome of a malpractice case long before trial. If your child suffered harm at birth due to negligent obstetrical care, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand your possible claims.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiffs brought a malpractice action on behalf of their child, who was born at thirty weeks’ gestation and later diagnosed with spastic diplegic cerebral palsy. They asserted that physicians at the defendant medical center failed to intervene with a timely Cesarean delivery despite evolving fetal heart rate patterns and clinical signs consistent with preeclampsia. They claimed that an earlier delivery would have prevented the child’s neurological injury.

It is alleged that the plaintiffs filed a complaint alleging medical negligence and lack of informed consent, asserting that the defendant’s personnel misinterpreted fetal monitoring data and failed to respond appropriately to changes in fetal status. According to the complaint, the infant’s post-birth acidemia, decreased tone, and need for immediate respiratory support were consistent with an intrapartum hypoxic event that should have been prevented. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Patients rely on their medical providers to communicate clearly about risks, alternatives, and potential complications so they can make informed choices about their care. When a provider fails to convey essential information before a procedure or delivery, the legal consequences may unfold years later in contentious litigation. A recent decision from a Maryland court demonstrates how the evidentiary burdens in informed consent claims can determine the outcome before a jury ever hears the case. If your child suffered harm at birth, it is smart to talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand how Maryland law applies to your circumstances.

Case Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff received obstetric care from the defendant physician during two pregnancies several years apart. During the first delivery in 2002, the baby was born without a diagnosis of shoulder dystocia, although a delivery record contained conflicting check marks referencing the condition. Both the plaintiff and the defendant recalled the first delivery as difficult but uncomplicated by shoulder dystocia, and no delivery note was written to document the event.

Reportedly, the plaintiff returned to the defendant for prenatal care in 2006 while pregnant with her second child. Because neither the plaintiff nor the defendant knew of any shoulder dystocia in the earlier birth, the defendant did not consider this factor when counseling the plaintiff about delivery options, and no discussion of a cesarean section took place. The plaintiff later went into spontaneous labor, and during delivery, a serious shoulder dystocia occurred, resulting in a permanent brachial plexus injury to the infant. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information
2002 Clipper Park Rd #300
Baltimore, MD 21211
Phone: (410) 889-1850Fax: (410) 235-3297

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2026, Arfaa Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design