Articles Posted in Maryland Medical Malpractice Law

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 ›

Published on: | by

Patients place significant trust in medical professionals to explain the benefits and risks of treatment so they can make informed decisions about their care. When that communication breaks down, even routine procedures can give rise to confusion and uncertainty. People injured due to a doctor’s failure to obtain informed consent have the right to pursue legal claims, but if they fail to follow procedural guidelines, their claim may be dismissed. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how the sufficiency of a plaintiff’s pleadings can shape the outcome long before a case reaches trial, especially when informed consent is at issue.  If you sustained losses due to medical errors, you should speak to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand your rights.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff sought dermatological care from the defendant physician at a local skin surgery practice for a small bump on the plaintiff’s nose. During that appointment, the defendant elected to inject Kenalog into the area, a decision intended to reduce the bump’s size.

It is alleged that within days of the procedure, the plaintiff observed that the bump grew larger rather than smaller. The plaintiff later challenged the adequacy of the information provided before the injection and questioned whether the risks associated with Kenalog had been properly explained. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

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 ›

Published on: | by

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.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

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 ›

Published on: | by

When patients arrive at urgent care facilities with symptoms of serious medical distress, prompt and competent treatment is essential to prevent further harm. If they do not receive timely care, the consequences can be devastating, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case. If you have suffered an injury due to inadequate care at an urgent care center or hospital, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your legal rights.

Factual Background and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff began experiencing symptoms of heat exhaustion after spending a morning in high temperatures at a Maryland campground. The plaintiff became lightheaded and disoriented and was taken to the defendant’s urgent care clinic. Upon arrival, the plaintiff was semi-conscious and unable to communicate coherently. According to the complaint, clinic staff failed to appreciate the urgency of the plaintiff’s condition and did not initiate appropriate medical interventions to treat what was later identified as severe dehydration.

It is alleged that the nurse who initially assessed the plaintiff dismissed dehydration as the cause of symptoms and attributed the plaintiff’s condition to unrelated factors, such as hormone therapy. Despite visible signs of distress, including fainting, muscle spasms, and loss of consciousness, the clinic delayed the administration of IV fluids and failed to conduct timely diagnostic testing. The first significant medical intervention, the administration of fluids, occurred more than 50 minutes after the plaintiff’s arrival. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Advances in reproductive technology not only allow people who have trouble conceiving to become parents but also allow people to take the steps necessary to avoid passing on genetic disorders. If a reproductive endocrinologist errs when providing medical services, they can be held accountable for any harm they cause, but proving liability can be challenging, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case. If you were hurt by the carelessness of a physician, it is wise to speak to an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney regarding your rights.

Factual Background and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiffs, a married couple, sought in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment to conceive a child without the genetic disorder Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD), a condition that affected their other children. They underwent IVF at the defendant fertility clinic, where genetic testing was performed to identify embryos free of DMD. Allegedly, the plaintiffs were assured that only healthy embryos would be preserved and transferred while the embryos carrying the genetic disorder would be discarded.

It is alleged that in 2020, the plaintiffs returned to the clinic to proceed with the transfer of their last remaining healthy embryo. However, unbeknownst to them, the clinic had not discarded the embryos carrying DMD, and embryologists mistakenly selected and transferred an embryo affected by the disorder. The plaintiffs later learned of the error when a physician at a government-affiliated hospital informed them of the mistake. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In Maryland, incarcerated individuals who receive substandard medical care may have legal recourse against healthcare providers under state medical malpractice laws. However, such cases often involve complex procedural hurdles, including compliance with the state’s medical malpractice filing requirements and statutory limitations. A recent decision from a Maryland court highlights these challenges while also demonstrating that the courts will aim to protect a plaintiff’s right to pursue medical negligence claims. If you sustained injuries due to inadequate medical care, it is advisable to meet with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against two healthcare providers contracted to deliver medical services at the federal facility where he was housed. The plaintiff alleged that both entities failed to diagnose and treat his multiple sclerosis (MS) in a timely manner, causing him prolonged suffering and exacerbation of his condition. He contended that his repeated complaints about symptoms were ignored and that necessary diagnostic testing was not performed.

It is alleged that the plaintiff initially filed an amended complaint asserting claims under the Eighth Amendment and Maryland’s Declaration of Rights, as well as a claim under precedent that allows lawsuits against government entities for unconstitutional policies. However, the court dismissed the constitutional claims, leaving only the claim against the healthcare providers. The plaintiff later sought to file a second amended complaint to add medical malpractice claims under Maryland law, contending that the providers negligently failed to diagnose and treat his MS. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Medical malpractice claims against government entities, such as the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), are often difficult to establish due to strict legal requirements under the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA). This was highlighted by a recent decision out of Maryland in which the court ultimately upheld a finding that the plaintiff did not meet the burden of proof for his claims. If you or a loved one has suffered harm due to medical negligence in a correctional facility, you should talk to an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to clarify your legal rights.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff, an inmate in federal custody since 2009, filed suit against the United States and the Federal Bureau of Prisons, alleging medical malpractice under the FTCA. The plaintiff had been diagnosed with open-angle glaucoma before entering custody, and his vision was already substantially impaired at the time of his incarceration. Over the years, he underwent multiple transfers between facilities and received various treatments, including eye surgeries and prescription eye drops.

It is alleged that the plaintiff sought consistent medical assistance to administer his prescription eye drops, which he claimed were necessary to prevent further vision deterioration. He also requested additional accommodations, including braille instruction, darker tinted glasses, and a specialized lock for visually impaired individuals. The plaintiff contended that the failure to provide him with these accommodations, as well as the delay in scheduling a recommended laser surgery, directly contributed to his worsening eyesight. 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 © 2025, Arfaa Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design