Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Maryland Court of Appeals to Address Whether the Wrongful Death Act Allows for Damages for Reduced Life Expectancy

Published on: October 13, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

In an opinion delivered in July, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland ruled that Maryland’s wrongful death statute must be strictly construed, and therefore, a decedent’s beneficiaries cannot recover damages by showing that the defendant’s negligence shortened the life of the decedent, unless they establish that the defendant also caused the decedent’s death. The ruling may be overturned, however, as the Court of Appeals recently agreed to examine the lower court finding to determine a patient’s terminal condition can give rise to a wrongful death claim based on the assertion that they would have lived years longer if the diagnosis had been made and life-prolonging therapy started sooner. If you suffered the loss of a loved one because of medical negligence, it is advisable to speak to a trusted Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss what damages you may be owed.

The Decedent’s Family’s Appeal

It is reported that the Court of Appeals agreed this month to examine a lower court finding that said family members suing for wrongful death must establish that the doctor’s carelessness caused their loved one’s death, not just that they were denied additional time with them. The decedent’s family lost their appeal to the Court of Special Appeals, which dismissed their argument that she would have lived another 2 1/2 years if the defendant had correctly identified her deadly breast cancer in 2013.

The Previous Ruling

In July, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals held that the state’s wrongful death legislation must be strictly construed to apply solely when a wrongful act causes the death of another, as the law states. The court said in its ruling that the defendant’s alleged failure to diagnose the decedent’s fatal cancer did not cause her death because an accurate diagnosis would not have prevented her death from the disease. The court explained that, in a wrongful death suit, death is the only injury for which plaintiffs can sue. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Pursuing Damages Under the Federal Tort Claims Act

Published on: October 8, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

It is not uncommon for people treated in federal facilities to suffer harm due to incompetent medical care. While people injured by the medical negligence of federal employees have the right to pursue damages, they generally must comply with the rules set forth under the Federal Tort Claims Act (the FTCA) and any other applicable laws; otherwise, their claims may be dismissed. This was explained in a recent ruling in which a Maryland court illustrated the pre-requisites for pursuing medical malpractice claims in federal court. If you suffered damages due to the carelessness of your treatment provider, it is advisable to meet with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to evaluate your options for pursuing compensation.

History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, who lived in a federal facility, fell from his bed and injured his leg. He visited the medical department, where he was examined and underwent an x-ray. He was informed that his x-ray did not indicate any injuries to his leg and knee and was directed to exercise. A month later, he returned to the medical center as his pain had increased to the point where he could no longer walk but was merely diagnosed with a muscle strain.

Allegedly, an additional x-ray taken approximately nine months after his fall indicated he suffered from avascular necrosis in his right hip and would need to undergo a hip replacement. He then filed a lawsuit against his treatment providers and the federal government, asserting, among other things, medical malpractice claims under the FTCA. The defendants moved to dismiss the claims, arguing that the plaintiff failed to comply with the proper procedure for pursuing such claims. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Establishing the Existence of a Treatment Relationship in a Malpractice Case

Published on: September 24, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

Doctors that fail to provide their patients with competent care may be deemed liable for medical malpractice. While there are multiple elements a plaintiff seeking damages for medical malpractice must establish, the core element is a doctor-patient relationship. If a plaintiff cannot establish that such a relationship existed, it will most likely result in a dismissal of their claims. This was demonstrated in a recent case in which a pro se plaintiff sought damages for what she alleged constituted medical malpractice. If you were hurt by incompetent medical care, it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer regarding what evidence you must produce to recover damages.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff was an employee at the bank when she filed a claim for disability benefits through the bank’s disability program. The defendant nurse was the nurse case manager assigned with administering the plaintiff’s leave. She did not treat the plaintiff, however. The plaintiff and the bank’s insurer later disagreed as to whether she could return to work.

Allegedly, the plaintiff stated she incurred substantial medical costs and lost thirty percent of her salary for three months because she was not allowed to resume her job duties. She then filed a lawsuit against many of the parties associated with handling her disability claim, including the defendant nurse, who she alleged committed medical malpractice. The defendant nurse moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that she failed to state a claim for damages. The court ultimately ruled in favor of the nurse. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Lack of Informed Consent Claims Under Maryland Law

Published on: September 20, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

Many medications cause known side effects. Typically, however, a doctor prescribing a drug will determine the benefits outweigh the dangers of taking them. Doctors cannot make this determination for their patients, though, and therefore they have an obligation to advise them of the risks of harm associated with the treatment they recommend. If they do not, they may be held responsible for losses their patients subsequently suffer, even if they arise out of established risks. Lack of informed consent claims must be filed in a timely manner; however, otherwise, they may be time-barred, as demonstrated in a recent ruling issued by a Maryland court. If you sustained injuries due to your doctor’s failure to advise of the risks associated with a treatment, you should meet with a knowledgeable Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss what claims you may be able to pursue.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that in 2010, the plaintiff was treated by the defendant pulmonologist due to complaints of shortness of breath and a chronic cough. The defendant diagnosed the plaintiff with numerous lung conditions and initial treated him with a steroid. When the plaintiff did not improve, the defendant doctor prescribed Cytoxan. He slowly began to improve and continued to take the medication until May 2013.

Allegedly, the plaintiff married in 2016. After trying to conceive for a year with no success, he visited a fertility specialist, who determined he had no viable sperm. The specialist attributed this to Cytoxan toxicity. The plaintiff then filed a lack of informed consent claim against the defendant. The defendant moved for dismissal, arguing the plaintiff’s claims were barred by the statute of limitations. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Explains Privileged Quality Assurance Documents in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 10, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

In Medical malpractice cases, the records, notes, and charts produced by the defendant doctor are often key in establishing liability. Not all materials created by doctors are discoverable, however, as some are protected from disclosure by privilege. In a recent Maryland ruling issued in a hospital malpractice case, a court discussed what materials are privileged in medical malpractice claims pursued against the United States government. If you suffered injuries due to a careless physician, it is smart to speak to a skilled Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss what evidence you must produce to recover damages.

The History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs filed a medical malpractice case against the United States government alleging their minor child suffered harm due to negligent care provided by anesthesiologists when he underwent surgery at a federally owned hospital. One of the anesthesiologists testified during his deposition that he wrote himself an email following the surgery, setting forth his recollections regarding the procedure. The plaintiffs requested the email in discovery, after which the anesthesiologist advised he had written it to the other anesthesiologist involved in the procedure.

Court Explains Judicial Estoppel in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 6, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

While people generally do not think of bankruptcy and medical malpractice claims as related, a recent ruling issued in a Maryland medical malpractice case suggests otherwise. Specifically, the court found the doctrine of judicial estoppel barred a plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims due to the position she took in an unrelated bankruptcy matter. While the plaintiff’s waiver of the right to pursue malpractice claims was inadvertent, the case highlights the consequences of failing to disclose potential causes of action in other forums. If you were harmed by medical malpractice, it is in your best interest to meet with a trusted Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to determine what measures you can employ to protect your interests.

History of the Case

It is reported that in 2012 the defendant performed abdominal surgery on the plaintiff. The plaintiff suffered numerous side effects following the surgery, and in early 2016, she filed a lawsuit against the defendant, alleging medical negligence and failure to obtain informed consent.

Allegedly, although the plaintiff did not pursue medical malpractice claims against the defendant until 2016, she admitted she knew as early as the summer of 2013 that she intended to sue the defendant. In 2014, in between her surgery and subsequent malpractice suit, she filed a petition for bankruptcy. In her petition, she indicated that she had no contingent or unliquidated claims of any kind. In 2017, the defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims, arguing they were barred by the doctrine of judicial estoppel. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Sufficiency of Expert Opinions in Dental Malpractice Cases

Published on: August 28, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

In Maryland, dental malpractice claims, like other allegations of medical malpractice, must typically be proven via expert testimony. Thus, if a court deems a plaintiff’s expert testimony inadmissible, it will likely result in a ruling in favor of the defendant. If an expert report is sufficient under the evidentiary standards, however, it should not be deemed inadmissible, even if the expert did not review the plaintiff’s treating records prior to issuing the report, as explained in a recent ruling issued by a Maryland appellate court in a dental malpractice case. If you were hurt by incompetent dental care, it is smart to speak to a Maryland dental malpractice lawyer about your options for seeking compensation.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the defendant performed surgical removal of the plaintiff’s wisdom teeth. Following the procedure, the plaintiff experienced a permanent loss of feeling in her tongue. As such, she filed a dental malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, alleging he negligently severed her lingual nerves during the surgery. The defendant moved for summary judgment, and the court granted the motion, dismissing the plaintiff’s claims. The plaintiff then appealed.

Sufficiency of Expert Opinions in Dental Malpractice Cases

In granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the trial court relied in part on the defendant’s assertion that the plaintiff’s expert opinion was unreliable because he did not review the medical records from her treating providers. The appellate court explained that juries could not infer medical negligence without testimony from experts, as issues relating to the standard of care and medical causation are beyond the understanding of the average layperson. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Pleading Requirements in Maryland Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: August 23, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

Medical malpractice actions are generally complex, and Maryland law imposes greater evidentiary and pleading standards on plaintiffs pursuing negligence claims against medical providers. A plaintiff that fails to abide by the obligations imposed by the Maryland Health Care Malpractice Claims Act (HCMCA) runs the risk of having his or her claims dismissed, regardless of whether they are valid. In a recent Maryland ruling issued in a urology malpractice case, a court discussed the pleading requirements imposed on plaintiffs in medical malpractice cases. If you suffered harm due to incompetent medical care, it is advisable to meet with a skillful Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss what you must prove to recover damages.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent numerous urological surgeries and procedures in November 2014 to address calculi on his kidneys and kidney stones and to replace existing ureteral stents. Employees of the defendant healthcare provider performed the procedures. The plaintiff was scheduled to undergo a cystoscopy and removal of the stents at a later date, but the defendant never performed the surgeries.

Allegedly, as a result of the delay in performing the follow-up procedures, the plaintiff developed chronic urinary tract infections, pain, hematuria, and numerous large stones within his bladder and kidneys. He subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting medical malpractice claims. The defendant moved for dismissal, arguing that the plaintiff failed to comply with the pleading requirements imposed by the HCMCA. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Declines to Toll Statute of Limitations in Psychiatric Malpractice Case

Published on: August 16, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

People suffering from mental illnesses often require medication to manage their symptoms and enable them to lead typical lives. Thus, if a doctor fails to prescribe a patient necessary psychiatric medication and the patient suffers harm as a result, it may constitute medical malpractice. In Maryland, medical malpractice claims generally must be filed within three years of the date of the alleged injury. While the statute of limitations can be tolled for certain reasons, such as the plaintiff’s mental incapacity, the plaintiff bears the burden of proving it would be unjust to bar claims as untimely, as discussed in a recent Maryland psychiatric malpractice case. If you were hurt by a negligent mental health professional, it is in your best interest to speak to a Maryland psychiatric malpractice lawyer about your possible claims.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff was released from a medical center without necessary psychiatric medication. The defendant was the head liaison for the center. The plaintiff subsequently suffered severe withdrawal symptoms, which he argued led to erratic behavior and his subsequent arrest and incarceration. Thus, he filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, alleging his negligent care caused the plaintiff to suffer irreparable harm. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss, but the court denied it. After discovery, he moved for dismissal via summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff’s claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitations.

Tolling the Statute of Limitations for Equitable Reasons

After reviewing the pleadings and discovery, the court granted the defendant’s motion and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. In Maryland, the statute of limitations for the plaintiff’s claims was three years from the date of the occurrence. The court explained that the date of accrual of a claim arises occurs when the plaintiff has sufficient facts about the harm he suffered so that a reasonable inquiry will reveal his cause of action. The statute of limitations may be tolled, however, if factors other than the plaintiff’s conduct would make it unconscionable to enforce the limitations period. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Discovery Rule in a Dental Malpractice

Published on: August 6, 2021 | by Arfaa Law Group

While people typically think of malpractice cases arising in the context of treatment for conditions of the body, dentists can be liable for malpractice as well. Dental malpractice claims, like other claims against health care providers, must be filed within the statutory time frame; otherwise, the injured party may waive the right to recover damages. The statute of limitations can be extended, though, in cases in which a person does not discover the cause of his or her harm immediately after it occurs. In a recent Maryland opinion issued in a dental malpractice case, the court discussed when the discovery rule applies to extend the statutory period. If you suffered harm due to a negligent dentist, it is smart to meet with a Maryland dental malpractice lawyer as soon as possible to protect your right to seek compensation.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that in May 2015, the plaintiff consulted with the defendant dental center about having his wisdom teeth removed. He believed that a certain surgeon would be performing the procedure under twilight anesthesia, but the defendant dentist extracted his teeth using only a local anesthetic. After the procedure, his tongue was numb. He called the defendant center the next day it was open and reported he could not feel his tongue and was advised it was a normal side effect.

Allegedly, he returned to the defendant center four days later and then a week after that and was advised that his tongue would get better with time. Ultimately, he saw a second dentist in November 2015. While the dentist was surprised that the plaintiff could not feel his tongue, he did not indicate it was due to something the defendant dentist did. In July 2018, the plaintiff underwent a medical examination, after which the doctor advised him his tongue numbness was caused by a transection during his wisdom tooth extraction. The plaintiff then filed a malpractice claim against the defendants, who moved for summary judgment on the grounds the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›