American Board of Trial Advocates
Best Attorneys
Multi Million Dollar
Million Dollar
Maryland Association for Justice
Super Lawyers
Awards 2015
The American
Super Lawyers
Top 50 Woman - Maryland
SuperLawyers
Top 100 - Maryland
Best Lawyers

Patients who receive medical treatment at Veterans Affairs hospitals, military medical facilities, and other federally operated healthcare institutions generally expect to have the same legal remedies available as those treated by private healthcare providers. While injured patients may pursue compensation when negligent medical care causes harm, claims against the federal government are governed by unique procedural rules that differ significantly from traditional medical malpractice lawsuits. A recent decision demonstrates how failing to comply with the Federal Tort Claims Act can prevent a medical malpractice claim from moving forward, regardless of the seriousness of the underlying allegations. If you believe you suffered injuries because of negligent care at a federal healthcare facility, speaking with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney can help ensure your claim is properly preserved.

Facts and Procedural History

Reportedly, the plaintiff underwent an elective surgical procedure at a Veterans Affairs medical center in Arizona. The plaintiff alleged that while under anesthesia, a physician administered medication and performed an additional medical procedure without obtaining informed consent. The plaintiff initially filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the physician in state court. The United States subsequently intervened, asserting that the physician was acting within the scope of federal employment during the procedure, removed the case to federal court, and substituted the United States as the defendant under the Federal Tort Claims Act. The federal court ultimately dismissed the malpractice action because the plaintiff had not exhausted the administrative remedies required by the FTCA before filing suit.

It is reported that after the dismissal of the malpractice action, the plaintiff filed additional lawsuits challenging the conduct of various federal agencies and government attorneys involved in defending the original case. The plaintiff asserted constitutional claims, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and allegations relating to fraud on the court, contending that government officials had acted improperly during the defense of the underlying medical malpractice litigation. The defendants moved to dismiss the action on multiple jurisdictional and procedural grounds. 

Continue Reading ›

When medical negligence results in the loss of a loved one, surviving family members often face overwhelming emotional and legal challenges. Maryland’s wrongful death laws are designed to allow eligible beneficiaries to seek compensation for the losses they have suffered, but strict procedural requirements govern those rights. A recent decision from a Maryland court demonstrates that even when a wrongful death action has already been filed, family members who fail to comply with Maryland’s intervention requirements may lose the opportunity to participate in any recovery. If you have lost a loved one because of suspected medical negligence, consulting an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible can help protect your rights.

History of the Case

Reportedly, the underlying medical malpractice claim arose after a nine-year-old child died following treatment at an urgent care facility. According to the complaint, the child was evaluated for severe abdominal pain and constipation, treated, and discharged without passing a bowel movement. The following day, the child became critically ill, was transported to a hospital, and later died from complications associated with a bowel obstruction.

Patients who suffer injuries because of negligent medical care often assume that filing a lawsuit before the statute of limitations expires is enough to preserve their rights. In Maryland, however, medical malpractice claims are governed by procedural requirements that are just as important as the allegations themselves. Before a case can proceed in circuit court, claimants generally must satisfy the requirements of the Maryland Health Care Malpractice Claims Act, including filing a claim with the Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office and submitting a Certificate of Qualified Expert. A recent decision from a Maryland court demonstrates that failing to comply with these mandatory steps can prevent a claim from moving forward, regardless of the underlying allegations. If you believe you have been harmed by negligent medical care, speaking with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney early in the process can help protect your rights.

Case Setting

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice complaint against a hospital in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, alleging that an intravenous line had been improperly inserted during an emergency room visit several years earlier. At approximately the same time, the plaintiff also filed a claim with the Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office involving the same allegations. The hospital moved to dismiss the circuit court action, arguing that the plaintiff had neither filed the required Certificate of Qualified Expert nor waived arbitration as required by Maryland’s Health Care Malpractice Claims Act. The circuit court agreed and dismissed the complaint.

Every surgical procedure carries risks, but patients also have the right to expect that their healthcare providers will exercise the degree of skill and care required by the medical profession. When a preventable surgical error causes a serious injury, the physical, emotional, and financial consequences can last for years. A recently reported Maryland jury verdict illustrates how allegations of negligent surgical care during childbirth can result in substantial compensation when a plaintiff proves that a healthcare provider failed to meet the applicable standard of care. If you or a loved one suffered harm because of a medical mistake, speaking with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney can help you understand your rights and determine whether you may have a viable claim.

Jury Awards Damages Following Alleged C-Section Negligence

Reportedly, a Montgomery County jury awarded approximately $825,646 to a woman who suffered a permanent bladder injury during a cesarean section performed at a Maryland hospital. According to the report, the plaintiff underwent a nonemergency C-section after labor failed to progress. Because she had previously undergone a cesarean delivery, scar tissue had formed between her bladder and uterus, creating additional surgical challenges. During the procedure, the physician allegedly made a significant incision into the patient’s bladder while separating the organs. The plaintiff contended that the physician negligently attempted to repair the injury before requesting assistance from a urologist, resulting in ongoing complications.

It is reported that although the patient’s child was delivered safely, the bladder injury did not heal properly, leading to the development of a vesicouterine fistula. Even after subsequent surgery corrected the abnormal connection between the bladder and uterus, the plaintiff reportedly continued to experience urinary dysfunction, bladder spasms, and incontinence requiring her to wear protective pads. The evidence further indicated that she had been advised not to become pregnant again because of the risk of additional complications. After a six-day trial, the jury found the physician liable and awarded $750,000 in noneconomic damages for pain and suffering, along with $75,646 for future medical expenses. According to the report, the noneconomic damages award fell below Maryland’s statutory cap applicable at the time of the verdict.  Continue Reading ›

Diagnosing rare medical conditions can present significant challenges. However, healthcare providers are still expected to recognize warning signs, order appropriate testing, and refer patients for additional evaluation when the accepted standard of care requires it. When a patient later suffers catastrophic harm because a serious condition went undiagnosed, the resulting medical malpractice litigation often turns on expert testimony establishing what reasonably competent physicians should have done under the circumstances. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how evidentiary rulings concerning expert opinions and medical literature can shape the outcome of a medical negligence trial. If you or a loved one suffered harm because a healthcare provider failed to diagnose a serious medical condition in a timely manner, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to discuss your legal options.

Factual and Procedural Setting

Allegedly, the decedent sought medical treatment over a period of approximately two years for symptoms that included shortness of breath, lightheadedness, and other cardiovascular complaints. Multiple healthcare providers evaluated the decedent, underwent cardiac testing, and were hospitalized on more than one occasion. Despite continued treatment, the decedent was never diagnosed with cardiac amyloidosis, a progressive condition caused by abnormal protein deposits in the heart.

Reportedly, the decedent died suddenly in December 2017. An autopsy concluded that the death most likely resulted from an arrhythmia caused by previously undiagnosed cardiac amyloidosis. The decedent’s family subsequently filed a medical malpractice action alleging that the defendants failed to recognize the condition, diagnose it during the years preceding the decedent’s death, and provide treatment that could have extended the decedent’s life. Following a jury trial, the jury found that none of the defendants breached the applicable standard of care. The plaintiffs appealed, challenging several evidentiary and procedural rulings made before and during trial.

Continue Reading ›

Many medical malpractice cases never reach a jury because they are resolved on procedural issues before the evidence of negligence is fully considered. Maryland law requires patients to satisfy specific pre-suit obligations, and courts will also examine whether a complaint contains sufficient factual allegations connecting each healthcare provider to the claimed injury. A recent Maryland decision demonstrates that even where a patient alleges inadequate follow-up treatment and worsening medical conditions, a lawsuit may be dismissed if these legal requirements are not met. If you believe you or a loved one suffered preventable injuries because of substandard medical care, an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney can help you understand whether you have a viable claim and the steps necessary to protect your rights.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff suffered serious pelvic injuries after being struck by a vehicle while incarcerated and was transported to a hospital for emergency treatment. After returning to the correctional facility, the plaintiff maintained that recommended follow-up care was denied and that the plaintiff continued experiencing severe back and hip pain, difficulty walking, and declining mobility. According to the complaint, repeated requests for additional treatment, including physical therapy and mobility assistance, were either delayed or inadequately addressed, resulting in worsening physical limitations.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed suit asserting several claims against correctional officials and healthcare providers. As relevant to the medical negligence allegations, the plaintiff contended that the healthcare providers failed to provide appropriate follow-up treatment, delayed physical therapy, failed to provide a wheelchair in a timely manner, and prescribed ineffective medications that did not adequately address the plaintiff’s condition. The healthcare defendants moved to dismiss the medical negligence claim, arguing both that the plaintiff failed to satisfy Maryland’s mandatory pre-suit requirements and that the complaint did not sufficiently allege malpractice.

Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice claims often involve allegations that a healthcare provider failed to recognize known risks, prescribed inappropriate treatment, or did not respond appropriately when complications developed. Before Maryland courts will consider whether a healthcare provider breached the applicable standard of care, however, injured patients generally must satisfy specific procedural requirements established by state law. A recent Maryland decision highlights both the importance of those procedural rules and the distinction between medical malpractice claims and other legal theories arising from medical treatment. If you suffered injuries because of negligent medical care, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights and ensure your claim is properly filed.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff received medical treatment for a hand injury that included prescription medications intended to manage pain and inflammation. After beginning the prescribed treatment, the plaintiff experienced severe gastrointestinal symptoms, including stomach pain and signs of internal bleeding. According to the complaint, the plaintiff later discovered that the medications carried warnings advising against their combined use because of an increased risk of serious gastrointestinal complications.

Patients who believe they have suffered injuries because of negligent dental or medical treatment often pursue multiple legal theories in an effort to obtain relief. However, even when serious allegations are made, courts must determine whether they have jurisdiction to hear the claims and whether the plaintiff has complied with Maryland’s procedural requirements for pursuing malpractice actions. A recent Maryland case illustrates the importance of understanding the distinction between federal and state claims before filing suit. If you believe you were harmed by negligent dental or medical care, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to ensure your claims are brought in the proper forum and in compliance with Maryland law.

History of the Case

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed suit in federal court against a dental practice and several individual defendants arising from dental treatment that the plaintiff claimed resulted in injury. After the defendants challenged the original complaint, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint asserting claims for dental malpractice, additional state-law theories, an alleged violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and allegations of unauthorized banking transactions.

Medical malpractice cases frequently focus on whether a healthcare provider complied with the applicable standard of care. In some situations, however, disputes arise over what patients were told about the providers responsible for their treatment and whether those representations affected a patient’s legal rights. A recent Maryland decision addressed whether claims for fraudulent misrepresentation and conspiracy arising from a hospital’s alleged statements regarding a surgeon’s relationship with the hospital were barred by Maryland’s medical malpractice statute of limitations. If you suffered harm due to negligent medical care or misleading conduct by a healthcare institution, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to discuss your legal options.

Facts and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff presented to a hospital emergency department in October 2015 with symptoms that led physicians to diagnose gallbladder disease. An on-call surgeon evaluated the plaintiff, confirmed the diagnosis, and recommended emergency surgery. The surgeon subsequently performed a procedure to remove the plaintiff’s gallbladder.

Reportedly, the plaintiff later underwent additional surgery at another hospital after complications developed following the initial procedure. During the course of treatment, the plaintiff learned facts that formed the basis of a medical malpractice claim against both the surgeon and the hospital. Continue Reading ›

Medical malpractice cases involving delayed cancer diagnoses often present difficult questions regarding causation, timing, and the impact of missed opportunities for treatment. When healthcare providers fail to order appropriate testing or recognize warning signs of a serious condition, patients may lose valuable time during which a disease remains more treatable. A recent Maryland decision addressed whether a patient could proceed with claims arising from an alleged delay in diagnosing parotid gland cancer. If you believe a healthcare provider failed to diagnose a serious illness in a timely manner, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your potential claims.

Factual and Procedural Setting

Allegedly, the plaintiff sought medical care after experiencing swelling, tenderness, and pain in the area near the right ear. The plaintiff had a history of thyroid cancer and underwent diagnostic evaluation, including imaging studies. Although certain abnormalities were identified, the plaintiff contended that healthcare providers failed to pursue an adequate oncological workup to determine whether cancer was present.<

Reportedly, one defendant physician evaluated the plaintiff in 2019 and attributed the symptoms to other conditions rather than parotid gland cancer. According to the plaintiff, the physician did not order additional diagnostic testing, such as a PET scan, MRI, or ultrasound, nor did the physician discuss the potential need for such studies. The plaintiff maintained that the applicable standard of care required further investigation. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information