Articles Posted in Maryland Medical Malpractice Law

Published on:

If you or someone close to you has been hurt because of a medical professional’s carelessness, error, or wrongdoing, our diligent Baltimore health care malpractice attorneys can help. At Arfaa Law Group, we understand the nuances of this area of the law and can put our knowledge to use in your case. We are here to answer your questions and address your concerns at every step of the way.

Medical malpractice cases in Maryland and across the United States are about establishing fault on the part of a medical professional. In litigation, there are many tactics that the plaintiff and defense can use to build their case. The Court of Appeals of Maryland, Maryland’s highest court, recently had to decide if evidence regarding the negligence of several non-parties should have been admitted at trial. The court ultimately held that the negligence of the non-parties was properly admitted because it was essential to give the defendant physician a fair trial. Put another way, the defendant, who was generally denying malpractice in a claim, could present evidence of a non-party’s negligence and causation as an affirmative defense.

In the case at hand, a man died as a result of a fatal stroke that he suffered in 2010. The man’s estate and widow filed a medical malpractice claim against the defendant radiologist and three subsequent treating physicians, claiming that their negligence led to the man suffering the stroke. However, before the trial, each of the other named defendants settled the case outside court. Thus, the case was only against one remaining defendant.

Continue Reading

Published on:

If you or someone close to you has been harmed by a physician’s negligence in a hospital setting, we can help. At Arfaa Law Group, our Baltimore hospital negligence attorneys understand how to navigate these types of claims and can put our knowledge to use in your case. You can rest assured that we will scrutinize the facts of your case and come up with a strategy to effectively respond to any motions for summary judgment that you may face in the process.

Under Maryland law, a party is entitled to summary judgment only when there is “no genuine issue as to any material fact, and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Put another way, the proponent of summary judgment must make a prima facie showing of their entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating the absence of any material issues of fact in the case. Essentially, summary judgment is appropriate when the moving party establishes that the opposing party cannot win, even if all credibility conflicts are resolved in the opposing party’s favor. For instance, if a jurisdiction requires the plaintiff in a medical malpractice claim to produce an expert witness to establish the case, summary judgment may be proper if a plaintiff cannot produce a qualified expert.

This is actually what happened in the case of Hannon, et al. v. Mercy Medical Center, in which the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland affirmed the trial court granting summary judgment to the defendants in a Maryland medical malpractice case, prior to the scheduled trial, holding that the plaintiff failed to secure a medical expert to testify on their behalf during trial. This was sufficient reason for the trial court to grant the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

Published on:

If you have been injured due to a surgeon’s negligence, it is important to reach out to a seasoned Baltimore surgical malpractice attorney who can evaluate the facts of your case. At Arfaa Law Group, we understand how important is it to keep ourselves informed about medical malpractice law so that we can come up with an effective legal strategy in your case. With years of experience, you can rest assured that we know how to navigate these types of cases.

In a recent decision, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland, Maryland’s intermediate appellate court, held that the trial court erred by giving jury instructions on negligence that led jurors to assess the physician’s conduct in a medical malpractice case from a reasonable person standpoint. Jurors in medical malpractice cases must assess not how a reasonable person would have treated the patient but instead what a reasonable medical professional in the same specialty should have done under the same or similar circumstances.

After years of neck and shoulder pain, the plaintiff in this case sought help from the defendant neurosurgeon. At that time, they discussed both surgical and nonsurgical treatments. The plaintiff agreed to the surgeon’s recommendation of a four-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion surgery. The plaintiff’s recovery went well, but there were subsequent complications. The plaintiff ultimately filed a claim against the surgeon for malpractice and failure to obtain informed consent.

Continue Reading