Articles Posted in Maryland Medical Malpractice Law

People harmed by negligent medical care will often seek damages from the parties responsible for their losses via medical malpractice claims. Under Maryland law, however, before filing a complaint, a plaintiff must file a claim with the Health Care Malpractice Claims office, and if they fail to do so, they may be precluded from proceeding with their lawsuit, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case. If you were injured by an incompetent doctor, you might be able to recover damages, and you should speak with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered harm during a stay at the defendant’s facility. Specifically, she was injured in two accidents; in the first, she fell from the bed due to the facility’s alleged failure to secure the mattress properly, and in the second, she fell again while being lifted to the bed. She then filed a lawsuit against the defendant three days before the statute of limitations expired.

Allegedly, the defendant moved to dismiss the case, arguing that the plaintiff did not file her claims in the Health Care Malpractice Claims office (HCMCO), as required by Maryland’s Health Care Malpractice Claims Act (the Act). The trial court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

In most medical malpractice cases, the defendant will contest both liability and damages. In some instances, though, the defendant will concede fault but will argue that the plaintiff failed to adequately support their request for damages or that certain compensation should not be granted. Recently, a Maryland court addressed the issue of whether a plaintiff should be able to make a per diem request in closing arguments when the defendant had been precluded from presenting evidence regarding the plaintiff’s medical bills or lost wages at trial, ultimately ruling that the request was proper. If you were hurt by a negligent doctor, it is smart to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about what damages you may be able to recover.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, a former inmate, sued the defendant, a company that provides medical services to correctional facilities, for misdiagnosing his fractured wrist, which later required extensive surgery. The defendant admitted liability, and the case went to trial on damages. The plaintiff sought non-economic damages only, and the court granted his motion to exclude evidence of medical bills and lost wages. During the trial, the plaintiff’s expert testified that the delay in treatment caused a permanent injury.

Many people struggle to conceive children or carry a pregnancy to term. Luckily, advances in medicine and technology allow people to become parents in non-traditional ways, including through the use of a gestational carrier. There are risks associated with working with a gestational carrier, however, including the possibility that the carrier’s underlying health conditions may lead to complications during pregnancy. Thus, they typically must undergo a stringent screening process; if a doctor fails to vet a gestational carrier appropriately, it can lead to serious issues and, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case, likely constitutes malpractice. If you were harmed by a doctor’s recklessness, it is in your best interest to contact a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your possible claims.

Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs entered into a gestational carrier contract with a woman who failed to disclose her pregnancy complications. The plaintiffs’ doctor proceeded with an embryo transfer without receiving prior medical records or clearance from the carrier’s regular obstetrician, which resulted in the carrier developing severe preeclampsia and delivering prematurely at 25 weeks. The infant died 21 days after birth. The plaintiffs filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the doctor and the fertility center, and the case proceeded to trial. The jury ultimately awarded the plaintiffs over $40 million. The defendants appealed on numerous grounds, including the assertion that the trial court admitted improper rebuttal evidence from the plaintiff mother.

Rebuttal Evidence in Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the defendants argued that the trial court erred by allowing the plaintiff mother to provide improper rebuttal testimony that addressed matters already addressed in the plaintiffs’ case-in-chief. The plaintiffs disagreed, arguing that the defendant’s testimony went beyond plaintiff mother direct testimony by introducing new evidence, and it was necessary that plaintiff mother was able to rebut her testimony so the jury would not be left with an “erroneous impression.” Continue Reading ›

Many people in Maryland receive medical care in federally funded facilities. If the care they receive is inadequate, and they suffer harm as a result, they have the right to seek damages via medical malpractice claims. Such claims must be pleaded carefully, however, as pleading errors can result in the dismissal of a plaintiff’s case, as illustrated in a recent opinion issued by a Maryland court. If you suffered harm because of negligent health care, you should speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your possible claims.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a complaint alleging medical malpractice and negligence claims against the United States of America and numerous individual defendants pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (the Act). The claims alleged that the individually named defendants failed to provide the defendant with adequate medical care following surgery to repair dislocated and fractured bones in his left hand, causing his injury to worsen when he was housed in a federal facility. The defendants moved, inter alia, to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims against the individually named defendants on the grounds that they were barred by the Act.

Pursuing Medical Malpractice Claims Under the Federal Tort Claims Act

The court granted the defendants’ motion to the extent that it sought dismissal of the claims against the individual defendants. In its opinion, the court explained that the Act must be narrowly construed. Thus, pursuant to the Act, any claim alleging harm caused by the negligence of federal employees may not be brought against individual employees of the federal government who were acting within the scope of their employment when the allegedly harmful conduct occurred. Continue Reading ›

It is an unfortunate fact that people confined to federal facilities are often the victims of incompetent medical care. In such instances, they have the right to seek compensation for their losses. As with any other civil claim asserted under Maryland law, they must abide by procedural rules, and if they neglect to do so, their claims may be dismissed. If you sustained harm at the hands of a neglectful health care provider, it is in your best interest to confer with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to discuss your rights.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff was confined to a federal facility. When he first arrived, he told a staff member that he required a special diet due to health issues. Regardless, he received a normal diet. Throughout the course of his confinement, he requested medical care for various issues, including a swollen and bloody eye following an assault, a facial fracture, and other issues, but was denied treatment each time.

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking claims against the nurse that worked in the facility, the medical provider that offered care in the facility, and other entities, alleging he was denied medical care and seemed to allege that the plaintiff was the victim of medical malpractice. One set of defendants filed an answer followed by a motion for judgment on the pleadings, while another filed a motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, a motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff did not file a response to either motion. The court, upon reviewing the plaintiff’s complaint and the defendants’ motions and briefs, found in favor of the defendants and granted their motions. Continue Reading ›