Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Cancer is a devastating illness, but in many instances, patients can go into remission with treatment. Metastatic cancer, however, is usually fatal, and while treatment can help slow the progression of the disease, it cannot offer a cure. As such, a doctor’s delays in providing treatment to a patient with terminal cancer may not constitute malpractice, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case. If you lost a loved one due to a doctor’s delays in diagnosing or treating a terminal illness, it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about what claims you may be able to pursue.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent sought treatment for pian in his groin in 2013. He was subsequently diagnosed with prostate cancer. A bone scan in November 2014 showed that the cancer had spread to his hip. The cancer was reclassified as metastatic, which is fatal. The decedent treated with an oncologist for the next year and a half and then was incarcerated. During his confinement, his care was managed by the defendant health services company and its employees.

Reportedly, due to communication issues between the defendant and the decedent’s previous care providers, there was a three-month delay in prescribing and treating the decedent with a specific cancer drug. The decedent ultimately passed away, and the plaintiff brought medical malpractice claims and other causes of action against the defendant. The defendant then moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Under Maryland law, it is anticipated that doctors will provide their patients with competent care. Thus, if a doctor fails to properly perform their professional duties and a patient suffers harm as a result, the doctor may be found liable for medical malpractice. Doctors only owe duties to their patients, however. As such, they cannot be deemed responsible for harm that arises outside of the treatment offered pursuant to a doctor-patient relationship, as shown in a recent medical malpractice ruling.  If you were harmed by your healthcare provider’s recklessness, you may be owed compensation, and you should confer with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about your potential claims.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff wife underwent a cardiac ablation that was performed by the defendant. Two weeks after the ablation, she had a follow up visit with the defendant; she did not report any symptoms at that time. Eleven days later, though, she began experiencing symptoms of a stroke and was taken by ambulance to a hospital. A critical care specialist at the hospital called the defendant at the plaintiff husband’s urging and informed him of the plaintiff wife’s symptoms.

Allegedly, the specialist asked the defendant about the ablation and asked him if he had any ideas regarding the plaintiff’s symptoms. The defendant did not inform the specialist that an atrio-esophageal fistula (AEF) could be a side effect of an ablation and could cause the plaintiff wife’s symptoms. The plaintiff wife was subsequently diagnosed with AEF after she suffered a series of strokes that left her in a vegetative state. The plaintiffs instituted medical malpractice claims against the defendant, who moved for summary judgment on the grounds that there was no patient-doctor relationship at the time of the call from the specialist to the defendant. The trial court granted the motion, and the plaintiff husband appealed.    Continue Reading ›

Federal courts have limited jurisdiction. In other words, they can only hear cases that set forth federal questions or set forth claims that meet the minimum amount of controversy and arise between diverse citizens. As such, medical malpractice claims typically do not fall within the purview of the federal courts. While federal courts often do not have original jurisdiction over Maryland medical malpractice claims, they can exercise supplemental jurisdiction over them if they are filed in cases that also assert federal questions. If the federal question claims are dismissed, it is likely that the medical malpractice claims will be dismissed without prejudice as well, as discussed in a recent Maryland case. If you were hurt by a doctor’s negligent care, it is in your best interest to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to determine what measures you must take to protect your interests.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff was confined to a federal facility. While there, he made numerous requests for treatment of chronic back and nerve pain, but his requests were denied. He subsequently filed a lawsuit against the doctor and nurse in charge of his medical care in the facility, stating, among other things, that their negligent failure to provide him with necessary medical care caused him harm. He asserted federal claims against the defendants as well. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing in part that the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims should be dismissed because he failed to comply with the requirements imposed by the Maryland Health Care Malpractice Claims Act (the Act).

Most people that serve on juries in Maryland medical malpractice cases lack independent knowledge regarding the standard of care that applies to physicians or what is required under the standard. As such, a plaintiff alleging that they suffered harm because of a doctor’s negligence will typically need to retain an expert to explain the standard to the jury at trial. Additionally, the expert must link the defendant’s breach of the standard to the plaintiff’s eventual harm. The expert’s opinion must be based on adequate data and methodology, though, otherwise, it may be inadmissible, as explained in a recent opinion delivered in a Maryland medical malpractice case. If you suffered losses due to the carelessness of a physician, it is smart to confer with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about what evidence you must offer to establish liability.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, who was expecting her first child, treated with the defendant throughout the course of her pregnancy. The care administered included a routine screening test to determine the biophysical profile of the fetus. The test was administered when the plaintiff was 34 weeks pregnant, and the test results were normal. The defendant recommended that the plaintiff undergo the test each remaining week of her pregnancy, but the plaintiff went into labor six days later.

Allegedly, the baby was delivered via c-section due to her intolerance of labor. She needed to be resuscitated at birth and was admitted to the intensive care unit. She was later diagnosed with permanent brain injuries. The plaintiff instituted medical malpractice claims against the defendant. The plaintiff’s expert opined testified that the defendant should have ordered the screening test to be conducted twice weekly and that his failure to do so constituted negligence. The defendant moved for summary judgment and to strike the causation testimony of the plaintiff’s expert. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Expert testimony is a critical component of Maryland medical malpractice cases. As such, if a defendant successfully moves to preclude a plaintiff’s expert from testifying, it most likely will be devastating to the plaintiff’s case. This was demonstrated in a recent opinion delivered by a Maryland court, in which the court explained that striking the plaintiff’s expert testimony effectively rendered a judgment against the defendant moot. If you were hurt by the negligence of a doctor, you should talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss what damages you may be owed.

Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the decedent visited a hospital after he sustained injuries in an assault. When he arrived, he was examined by the defendant, a neurosurgeon. He later suffered a seizure and died. His mother, the representative of his estate, filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, in which she alleged that he breached the standard of care by failing to transfer the decedent to the intensive care unit or administer anticonvulsants to him.

Allegedly, during discovery, the plaintiff identified a medical expert who would offer testimony regarding the standard of care. During the trial of the matter, the expert failed to comply with a subpoena to produce certain documents related to the income he earned by testifying as an expert in medical malpractice matters. He was held in contempt and sanctioned, but the jury ultimately found in favor of the plaintiff. Continue Reading ›