Medical malpractice claims often hinge on whether healthcare providers adhered to the appropriate standard of care and whether any failure to do so directly impacted a patient’s health and treatment outcomes. Generally, expert testimony is necessary to establish the standard of care and causation; as such, if expert testimony is…
Medical malpractice cases often hinge on expert testimony to establish whether a healthcare provider’s actions deviated from the standard of care and whether those actions directly caused harm. If a party fails to comply with procedural rules, however, they may be precluded from introducing expert testimony, as discussed in a…
Vaccine-related injury claims often involve complex legal hurdles, particularly when federal immunity statutes like the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act come into play. The PREP Act provides broad legal protections for entities involved in vaccine administration, significantly impacting the ability of plaintiffs to seek damages in traditional courts.…
In medical malpractice claims, plaintiffs must adhere to procedural requirements to ensure their cases are properly heard by the courts. When these requirements are not met, courts may dismiss the claim even before addressing its merits. A recent Maryland case highlights the importance of complying with federal pleading standards and…
The tragic loss of a loved one due to alleged medical negligence can have devastating consequences. Recently, a Howard County jury awarded a historic multi-million verdict in a medical malpractice and wrongful death case involving a 22-year-old college student. The verdict demonstrates the importance of retaining an attorney who understands…
While medical malpractice cases often stand alone, it is not uncommon for a plaintiff to pursue medical negligence and product liability claims in the same action. As discussed in a recent Maryland ruling in which the plaintiff sought damages following a hip replacement, such actions are generally permissible as long…
In Maryland, defendants in medical malpractice claims will often try to divert blame to avoid liability. For example, they may attempt to assert that the plaintiff assumed the risk of the harm they ultimately suffered. The assumption of the risk defense only applies in limited circumstances, however, as discussed in…
In Maryland, determining liability in medical malpractice cases often involves a detailed examination of the actions of all parties involved. In some cases, this may include an assessment of the potential liability of third-party practitioners. This was demonstrated in an opinion recently issued by a Maryland court that highlights the…
Under Maryland law, the doctrine of informed consent requires that healthcare providers disclose information that is material to a patient’s decision-making regarding their medical treatment. This duty extends to communicating risks, alternatives, and other essential information that would allow patients to make informed decisions. Recently, a Maryland court issued an…
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…