Articles Posted in Maryland Medical Malpractice Law

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 ›

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 ›

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