Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Maryland courts require expert testimony in medical malpractice cases to help juries understand complex medical information. However, not all expert testimony is admissible, as illustrated in a recent Maryland case in which the court considered whether a pharmacist’s testimony was relevant and appropriate in a claim involving informed consent. If you believe you were harmed by negligent medical care, it is wise to confer with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to evaluate your options.

Facts of the Case and Procedural Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiffs filed a wrongful death and survival action against a hematologist-oncologist and his medical group, claiming a failure to obtain informed consent regarding the administration of a drug used alongside radiation therapy. The decedent, who had prostate cancer, later developed Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, a rare and severe skin disorder, and subsequently died from pneumonia.

Reportedly, the plaintiffs retained a pharmacist as an expert to testify about the drug’s risks and alternatives. The pharmacist’s deposition included details on the drug’s side effects, lack of FDA approval for prostate cancer treatment, and potential risks for elderly patients. However, the trial court excluded his testimony, determining that his expertise did not extend to informed consent requirements, which led to a jury verdict in favor of the defendants. The plaintiffs appealed. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice lawsuits are complex, and plaintiffs pursuing such claims must adhere to strict procedural rules to succeed. Sadly, the failure to comply with court-mandated deadlines or provide adequate evidence can result in the dismissal of claims, as illustrated by a recent Maryland case. If you or a loved one believe you were harmed by medical negligence, it is important to consult a skilled Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to ensure your rights are protected.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the plaintiffs brought a medical malpractice lawsuit against multiple defendants, alleging breaches in medical care that led to Johnson’s death. During the discovery phase, the plaintiffs failed to comply with court orders to provide necessary responses to the defendants’ discovery requests. As a result, the court sanctioned the plaintiffs by precluding them from presenting evidence to support claims of breach of duty or proximate cause. Subsequently, the defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that without such evidence, the plaintiffs could not establish their claims.

Maryland applies its choice of law rule, lex loci delicti, which mandates that the substantive law of the place where the injury occurs governs cases involving tort claims. In medical malpractice cases where the injury or malpractice occurred out of state, Maryland courts must determine whether local or out-of-state laws, including damages caps, are applicable. For example, a recent case examined Maryland’s approach to determining the appropriate damages cap for a plaintiff injured by an out-of-state healthcare provider. If you believe you were injured due to medical negligence, it is wise to consult a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to help you understand your legal options.

Facts and Procedure

It is alleged that the plaintiff, who resides in Maryland, sought liposuction services from the defendant, a Virginia-based medical provider, at an office located in Alexandria, Virginia. Reportedly, the plaintiff underwent the procedure in Virginia, after which she returned home to Maryland, where she soon developed severe complications, including infections that led to permanent physical and emotional injuries. It is alleged that during the procedure, the defendant administered insufficient pain relief and prescribed inadequate post-operative care, which contributed to the plaintiff’s prolonged suffering.

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in Maryland, asserting claims of medical negligence and lack of informed consent, seeking damages for her injuries. The jury awarded substantial damages, including non-economic damages for pain and suffering. However, the court later reduced the award to comply with Maryland’s cap on non-economic damages, applying the state’s limitation on such awards in malpractice claims. The plaintiff appealed, contending that Virginia’s higher damages cap should apply since the medical procedure occurred in Virginia, and the tort, therefore, arose there. Continue Reading ›

Maryland healthcare providers are expected to provide patients with competent care, which includes informing them of the risks associated with prescribed treatments. While state courts typically oversee medical malpractice cases, federal courts may exercise jurisdiction over these state law claims in certain situations, such as when they are filed along with federal question claims. If claims granting a court subject matter jurisdiction are dismissed, though, it may subsequently result in the dismissal of state law medical malpractice claims as well, as shown in a recent Maryland case. If you were injured due to inadequate medical care or lack of informed consent, speaking with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney can help clarify your legal options.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff, an inmate in a Maryland state correctional facility, filed a federal lawsuit asserting medical malpractice and lack of informed consent against healthcare providers at Jessup Correctional Institution. The plaintiff reportedly claimed that his medical team failed to inform him of the seizure risks associated with Tramadol, a medication prescribed to manage his chronic pain due to Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease (CMT).

It is reported that Tramadol, which was initially discontinued due to seizure risk, was reinstated by the institution’s Pain Committee following a review that determined its pain management benefits outweighed the risks. Despite this, the plaintiff allegedly suffered a seizure that required hospitalization and led to a diagnosis necessitating lifelong anti-seizure medication. The plaintiff filed his case in federal court, alleging that the lack of informed consent for Tramadol constituted negligence under Maryland state law. The defendants moved to dismiss the state law claims, arguing that the federal court lacked jurisdiction or that the claims were insufficient under Maryland’s legal standards. Continue Reading ›

Maryland law allows people harmed by medical errors to seek compensation, but in order to demonstrate fault, they usually must offer expert testimony. However, in cases where the court deems expert testimony to lack a sound scientific basis, it may preclude such testimony from impacting the verdict. Recently, a court issued an opinion highlighting the standards courts apply to ensure the reliability of expert witnesses in cases involving allegations of medical negligence. If you believe you have been harmed due to a healthcare provider’s negligence, you should consult with a Baltimore medical malpractice lawyer promptly.

Case Setting

It is reported that the plaintiff sought to hold the defendant accountable for alleged medical errors after undergoing treatment that resulted in significant injuries. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant’s failure to follow established medical protocols during surgery led to her injuries, including long-term complications. As part of her case, the plaintiff introduced testimony from a medical expert who argued that the healthcare provider had deviated from the standard of care.

Allegedly, however, the defendant contested the admissibility of this testimony, asserting that the expert’s claims were speculative and lacked a factual basis. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion to exclude the expert’s testimony, finding that the opinions were not grounded in scientifically recognized standards. Without this testimony, the plaintiff was unable to substantiate her claims, leading the court to dismiss the case. The plaintiff appealed, challenging the exclusion of her expert’s testimony. Continue Reading ›

Under Maryland law, people harmed by negligent medical care can pursue damages via medical malpractice claims. They must comply with the statutory requirements, though, including filing a certificate of a qualified expert, and if they fail to do so, their claims may be dismissed. In a recent ruling, a Maryland court discussed the timeliness of expert certificates in a matter in which it ultimately rejected the plaintiff’s explanation for his delay. If you were hurt by the carelessness of a healthcare provider, you may be owed damages, and you should meet with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that in 2018, the plaintiff, who has autism spectrum disorder, received treatment at the defendant’s facility. He claimed that during treatment, he was subjected to noise exposure therapy involving distressing and loud sounds, leading him to injure himself by hitting his head against a window. As a result, he alleged that he suffered a brain injury and experienced increased self-injurious behavior. In 2021, the plaintiff, through his mother, filed a medical malpractice claim in the Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (HCADRO), alleging the defendant’s negligence.

Allegedly, the plaintiff missed the statutory deadline to file a certificate of a qualified expert (CQE) but was granted an extension. He eventually submitted a letter from a doctor, which purported to serve as the CQE, and then filed multiple motions, including motions for summary judgment and extensions of time to file a new CQE. The defendant waived arbitration, and the case was transferred to the trial court. After reviewing the motions, the trial court denied the plaintiff’s requests and dismissed the case due to the plaintiff’s failure to file a compliant CQE. This dismissal led to the plaintiff’s appeal. Continue Reading ›

People who seek medical care have the right to receive timely and suitable treatment, regardless of the setting in which the care is provided. Sadly, many people housed in federal facilities fall victim to missed and delayed diagnoses, inappropriate treatment, and other acts of medical malpractice. While people harmed by such medical errors have the right to pursue claims against the parties that caused their injuries, they must adequately support such claims, or else they may be dismissed at the outset, as illustrated in a recent Maryland case. If you endured losses due to inadequate medical treatment, it is advisable to speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your possible claims as soon as possible.

Procedural and Factual History

It is alleged that the plaintiff, who was housed in a federal facility, filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, the medical director of the facility, alleging that the defendant was negligent in providing appropriate medical care. The plaintiff experienced chronic pain and mobility issues, which he claimed were inadequately addressed by the defendant.

According to the plaintiff, the failure to provide timely treatment and necessary interventions resulted in prolonged suffering and worsened his medical condition. Despite seeking medical assistance multiple times within the facility, the plaintiff argued that the treatment provided was substandard and amounted to negligence. After exhausting internal remedies, the plaintiff pursued legal action, asserting that the defendant’s failure to provide adequate medical care constituted medical malpractice. Continue Reading ›