Articles Posted in Medical Malpractice

Published on: | by

Maryland’s federal court typically lacks original jurisdiction over medical malpractice matters. However, the court may exercise supplemental jurisdiction over these claims when they are part of the same case or controversy as claims that do fall within the court’s original jurisdiction. If the claims providing the original jurisdiction are dismissed, though, the federal court will often decline to retain supplemental jurisdiction over the medical malpractice claims, resulting in their dismissal as well. This was demonstrated in a recent Maryland medical malpractice case in which the court dismissed both the constitutional and state law claims asserted by the plaintiff. If you were harmed by a doctor employed by the federal government, you should talk to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about what claims you may be able to pursue.

The Factual and Procedural History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff, who was housed in a federal facility, experienced chest pains and was sent to the medical unit. Despite a history of heart problems, the defendant, a nurse, allegedly refused to provide an EKG or any treatment, violating established protocol. The plaintiff submitted an administrative remedy request, leading to an investigation confirming the nurse’s failure to follow protocol. The defendant presented the plaintiff’s medical records, showing a history of chest pain evaluations, consultations with specialists, and a recent visit where his vital signs were normal.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit alleging that the defendant’s neglectful actions violated his constitutional rights and amounted to medical malpractice. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint via summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff failed to offer sufficient evidence in support of his claims. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Members of the military typically receive care from doctors employed by the Department of Defense. If the care they receive is inadequate and causes injuries or other harm, they may be able to pursue medical malpractice claims against the federal government. As with all medical malpractice cases, such claims must be brought in a timely manner; otherwise, they will be deemed waived. In a recent medical malpractice case, a court issued an opinion discussing the timeliness of medical malpractice claims against the military, ultimately finding that the plaintiff’s claims could proceed. If you were injured by incompetent medical treatment, it is smart to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

Case History

Allegedly, the defendant performed a surgical procedure on the plaintiff. The plaintiff suffered complications, which led to multiple admissions and additional surgeries. The plaintiff subsequently filed a medical malpractice and informed consent claim against the defendant, alleging that the defendant breached the standard of care during knee surgery and failed to obtain informed consent.

It is reported that during the trial, the plaintiff’s expert witness testified that the defendant breached the national standard of care by opting for aggressive surgery when less invasive options were available. The jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff on the malpractice claim but rejected the informed consent claim. The defendant then moved for judgment in his favor as a matter of law, arguing that the plaintiff’s expert witness lacked a basis for knowledge of the national standard of care. The court denied the defendant’s motion, and the defendant appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Members of the military typically receive care from doctors employed by the Department of Defense. If the care they receive is inadequate and causes injuries or other harm, they may be able to pursue medical malpractice claims against the federal government. As with all medical malpractice cases, such claims must be brought in a timely manner; otherwise, they will be deemed waived. In a recent medical malpractice case, a court issued an opinion discussing the timeliness of medical malpractice claims against the military, ultimately finding that the plaintiff’s claims could proceed.  If you were injured by incompetent medical treatment, it is smart to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that in January 2019, while serving in the United States military, the decedent requested a medical screening for breast cancer. Despite recommendations from an oncologist for a diagnostic MRI based on family history, possession of the BRCA2 gene mutation, and physical symptoms, the decedent’s primary care physician incorrectly ordered a screening MRI.

It is reported that the decedent’s subsequent requests for the appropriate diagnostic procedures were denied by the Department of Defense’s health insurance, leading to a delayed breast cancer diagnosis. Ten months later, the decedent, now terminally ill, filed a medical malpractice claim with the Department of Defense. The claim was denied as untimely, and after exhausting administrative remedies, the plaintiff’s estate brought the case to court under the Administrative Procedure Act. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Maryland has particular rules that parties who wish to pursue medical malpractice claims must follow. Specifically, they must produce a certificate of a qualified expert asserting that the defendant breached the standard of care and that said breach proximately caused their harm. If the plaintiff fails to meet this requirement, or their expert’s certificate is deemed inadequate, their claims may be dismissed, as demonstrated by a recent ruling issued in a Maryland medical malpractice case. If you suffered losses because of inadequate medical care, it is wise to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney at your earliest convenience.

 Case Setting

It is alleged that in March 2018, the plaintiff sought medical help due to chest pain and pressure. Despite initial assurances from emergency medical personnel, the plaintiff asserted that there was a delay in cardiac intervention at the defendant hospital, causing damage to his heart. After filing the HCADRO claim, the plaintiff waived arbitration and, in January 2022, submitted a Certificate of Qualified Expert and a report prepared by the plaintiff’s expert, challenging the sufficiency of the defendant doctor’s actions. By April 2022, HCADRO issued an order to transfer the case.

It is reported that following these proceedings, the plaintiff, still representing himself, filed a complaint in the circuit court on June 24, 2022, against the defendant doctor and defendant hospital. Both defendants filed motions to dismiss, asserting, among other things, that the plaintiff’s expert’s Certificate of Qualified Expert, claiming it did not establish a breach of the standard of care or causation. Despite the plaintiff’s subsequent motion for an extension of time to respond, the court granted both of the defendants’ motions to dismiss and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In Maryland, if a doctor negligently performs a surgical procedure in a hospital, both the doctor and the hospital may be liable for the patient’s harm. Determining the proper parties to sue in a medical malpractice case can be challenging, though, as in some matters, parties will take measures to conceal their relationships. As explained in a recent Maryland medical malpractice case, a plaintiff pursuing a claim for fraudulent concealment must set forth certain allegations. If you incurred damages because of an improperly performed procedure, it is important to contact a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about your options.

Facts and Procedure of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent surgery for gallbladder disease, which was performed by the defendant. He subsequently developed complications, allegedly due to the negligence of the defendant. The plaintiff also asserted that the defendants failed to inform him of the risks of surgery and did not obtain informed consent. After a series of surgeries and evaluations, the plaintiff filed a claim in the Maryland Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (HCADRO) in 2018, followed by the current medical negligence action against the defendant in 2023.

It is reported that the plaintiff also argued that the hospital where the defendant performed the surgery fraudulently concealed its relationship with the defendant and conspired to commit fraud against the plaintiff. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the claims were time-barred under Maryland law. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In medical malpractice cases, to establish liability and damages the plaintiff will typically have to retain one or more medical experts. As such, it is not uncommon for a defendant to try to defeat a plaintiff’s claims by arguing that their expert should not be permitted to testify. As discussed in a recent medical malpractice ruling, the courts engage in a multi-step process when faced with challenges to the admissibility of expert opinions. If you suffered losses due to the carelessness of a doctor or dentist, it is wise to meet with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney promptly.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs brought a medical malpractice suit against the defendant, alleging negligence in the dental care administered to plaintiff-wife. The claim asserted that a proper biopsy and diagnosis by the defendant in August or December 2015 could have prevented a subsequent neck dissection and radiation therapy.

Reportedly, the defendant moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the opinions of the plaintiffs’ expert witness were inadmissible. First, the defendant contended that the plaintiff’s expert could not provide admissible evidence to establish causation. Second, the defendant asserted that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated the existence of any causation evidence related to a specific appointment. Lastly, the defendant argued that the plaintiffs failed to provide evidence that the defendant breached the standards of care during certain treatments. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In Maryland medical malpractice cases, the strength of the plaintiff’s case often depends on the testimony of a qualified medical expert. If a plaintiff’s expert is unable to testify, it becomes challenging for the plaintiff to recover damages. Maryland law allows only specific individuals to provide expert testimony, and experts who lack the necessary qualifications may be prohibited from testifying. This was illustrated in a recent Maryland case in which the court precluded the plaintiff’s expert from testifying pursuant to Maryland’s 25 percent rule. If you have suffered harm due to a medical procedure gone wrong, it’s crucial to consult with an experienced Maryland medical malpractice attorney who can guide you on what compensation you may be able to recover for your injuries.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that in December 2002, the plaintiff underwent a procedure to treat a brain aneurysm, which resulted in bleeding, a stroke, and significant physical and mental impairment. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant doctor and hospital, alleging that they provided substandard care and failed to obtain the plaintiff’s informed consent for the procedure. A doctor was called as an expert witness by the plaintiff to testify about the standard of care and informed consent. However, the trial court excluded his testimony on both issues, and the court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The plaintiff appealed. On appeal, the appellate court reversed, and the defendants appealed the matter further.

The Court’s Review and Ruling:

On appeal, the primary issue before the court was the interpretation of Maryland’s 25 Percent Rule. This rule restricts expert witnesses from dedicating more than 25 percent of their professional activities to activities directly involving testimony in personal injury claims. The court ultimately determined that the plaintiff’s expert did not meet the requirements of the 25 Percent Rule and should not have been allowed to testify regarding the standard of care, reversing the intermediate court ruling. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In cases where doctors harm their patients, most often, the harm is unintentional. However, in some situations, a physician’s actions may be so egregious that they are considered deliberate. Typically, claims of deliberate indifference to a patient’s medical needs arise in the context of medical treatment provided to incarcerated individuals. It’s essential to recognize the distinctions between deliberate indifference and medical malpractice claims, as highlighted in a recent Maryland case. If you have been injured as a result of a doctor’s negligent or intentional actions, it is advisable to consult with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to assess the potential claims you may be able to pursue.

Case Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff, who is housed in a federal facility in Maryland, filed a lawsuit against the defendant. He claimed, in part, that in July 2020, he injured his right knee while attempting to access the top bunk in his cell using a plastic chair provided to him. He alleged that despite seeking medical attention for over a year, he received minimal treatment, including Tylenol, and was promised referrals to providers that never materialized.  He also claimed that in July 2022, he was attacked by other inmates, aggravating his knee injury. His lawsuit asserted, among other things, that the defendant violated his Eighth Amendment rights by failing to provide timely and appropriate care for his knee condition. The defendant moved to dismiss his claims.

Deliberate Indifference Versus Medical Malpractice

The court granted the defendant’s motion. In doing so, the court explained that in order to establish a claim for denial of medical care under the Eighth Amendment, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s actions or omissions were done with deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In Maryland medical malpractice cases, a plaintiff who establishes a defendant’s liability may be granted damages for their economic harm, including the cost of any past medical care and future care they will need and lost wages. To recover such damages, however, they must adequately demonstrate their actual financial losses. In a recent Maryland medical malpractice case, the court analyzed what constitutes sufficient evidence of the economic harm caused by a defendant’s negligence. If you sustained losses because of a careless doctor, it is prudent to meet with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to discuss your rights.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff sued the defendant doctor and the defendant hospital for alleged medical malpractice following a car accident that injured his right leg. The plaintiff asserted a medical negligence against the defendant doctor and an apparent agency claim against the defendant. During the trial, the defendant moved for summary judgment regarding apparent agency, and the court delayed its ruling.

Reportedly, after the trial, both the defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that there was insufficient evidence of economic damages, and the court again delayed its ruling. The jury ultimately found in favor of the plaintiff and determined that the defendant doctor was an agent of the defendant hospital. Both defendants filed motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on economic damages, and the court denied these motions. The defendants then appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Pursuant to federal law, health care providers generally must provide people suffering from critical health concerns with emergency care, regardless of their ability to pay. As such, if a medical facility refuses to treat an indigent patient, they can be liable for civil damages. As discussed in a recent Maryland case, however, this duty to provide emergent care ends when a person is admitted as an inpatient. If you were hurt by inadequate medical care, it is wise to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

Case Background

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in federal court, alleging that he received inadequate care in July 2019, at the defendant’s health care center. He further claimed that this care violated the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) and that the United States, the defendant, and the defendant’s employees were liable for medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and patient abandonment under state tort law. The plaintiff later dismissed his claims against the United States. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the EMTALA claim or, alternatively, for summary judgment. The plaintiff initially consented to dismissal without prejudice but later opposed it. The court treated the motion as one for summary judgment.

The Duty to Provide Emergency Care

The court began by discussing EMTALA, highlighting that its purpose is to ensure hospitals provide emergency care to all, regardless of their ability to pay. It imposes a duty on hospitals to screen and stabilize emergency conditions. If a hospital admits a patient for inpatient treatment in good faith, its obligations under EMTALA end. Liability under EMTALA is limited and does not cover misdiagnosis or general malpractice.

 

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 © 2024, Arfaa Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design