Articles Posted in Maryland Medical Malpractice Law

Published on: | by

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 ›

Published on: | by

Maryland imposes strict requirements on parties that wish to pursue medical malpractice claims. Specifically, among other things, the Maryland Code dictates that a person that wants to seek damages from a health care provider for harm related to their treatment must first fulfill certain procedural requirements. If they neglect to do so, their claim will most likely be dismissed, as demonstrated in a recent opinion issued by a Maryland court. If you were harmed by inadequate medical treatment, it is wise to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to determine your possible claims.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff and his wife sought fertility treatment from the defendant. They underwent an IVF procedure, during which ten eggs were retrieved and fertilized. Due to COVID-19, embryo transfers were prohibited for a period of time. The plaintiff requested and ultimately received a transfer of the couple’s embryos to another facility. Due to dissatisfaction with communication with the defendant, a dispute over charges, and other issues, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit asserting claims against the defendant. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint due to procedural defects. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Procedural Requirements for Seeking Damages for Medical Malpractice

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court ruling. The court explained that a plaintiff that wishes to pursue a medical malpractice case must submit a claim to the Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office (HCADRO) Director. They must also file a Certificate of Qualified Expert with the HCADRO director. Filing the claim and certificate with the HCADRO director are conditions precedent that must be met prior to filing an action in court. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

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 ›

Published on: | by

Under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, a federal statute, healthcare providers are essentially prohibited from refusing to provide critical care to patients in emergency situations simply because the patient does not have health insurance. While the EMTALA does not supplant state medical malpractice laws, it can provide a cause of action for pursuing claims against healthcare providers. Recently, a Maryland court discussed what a patient seeking damages under the EMTALA must prove to prevail. If you suffered harm due to insufficient care during a medical emergency, it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was bitten by a Cane Corso dog when he was walking around his neighborhood. He returned home, where he proceeded to have a panic attack. He then called an ambulance and was transported to the defendant’s hospital. When he was at the hospital, he was asked if he had health insurance and stated that he did not.

Allegedly, after the conversation, the plaintiff asserts that the hospital staff did not follow critical screening protocols or the standard screening or treatment for dog bites. He was ultimately discharged with medication. He continued to complain of pain and panic attacks as a result of the dog bite. He subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting EMTALA claims. The defendant then moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s lawsuit. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Pursuant to Maryland law, people harmed by medical malpractice have the right to seek compensation via civil claims. Parties that file medical malpractice lawsuits must comply with procedural rules, however, otherwise their claims may be dismissed, regardless of whether they have merit. This was emphasized recently when a Maryland court affirmed the dismissal of a medical malpractice case due to the plaintiff’s failure to properly serve the defendant. If you sustained losses because of negligent medical care, you might be owed compensation, and you should speak to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about what you must do to establish liability.

Procedural History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a pro se lawsuit against the defendant seeking damages for numerous causes of action, including medical malpractice. Three weeks after the plaintiff filed his complaint, the trial court issued a writ of summons for the defendant. Approximately four months later, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the complaint due to insufficient process, insufficient service, and lack of jurisdiction. The court granted the defendant’s motion, and the plaintiff appealed.

Procedural Rules for Pursuing Maryland Medical Malpractice Claims

On appeal, the court affirmed the trial court ruling. The court noted that the plaintiff attempted to serve the defendant on three occasions. During the first attempt, he delivered a handwritten summons that did not include the court’s seal. In the second attempt, he delivered one page of the court-issued summons but not the entire summons or the complaint. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

There are risks associated with most medical care, and doctors typically inform their patients of such risks before proceeding with treatment. Simply because a physician informs their patient of the potential complications that could arise during a procedure does not mean that they cannot be held liable for medical malpractice, though. Further, in most instances, the fact that a doctor obtained a patient’s informed consent is irrelevant to the issue of whether the doctor was negligent, as discussed in a recent Maryland medical malpractice matter. If you sustained injuries during an improperly performed procedure, you might be owed compensation, and you should consult a Maryland medical malpractice attorney.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant performed a routine colonoscopy on the plaintiff. During the procedure, the defendant perforated the plaintiff’s colon. The plaintiff subsequently needed to undergo numerous surgeries, had permanent symptoms of short bowel syndrome and suffered other injuries. As such, he instituted a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. Prior to trial, the plaintiff moved to preclude the defendant from introducing or discussing the doctrine of informed consent on the grounds that it was legally irrelevant, as he was not asserting an informed consent claim.

It is reported that the defendant argued that the doctrine of informed consent was relevant to his defense of assumption of the risk. The court granted the plaintiff’s motion, and following a trial, the jury found in favor of the plaintiff, awarding him the cost of his medical care and over $600,000 in noneconomic damages. The defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in granting the plaintiff’s motion. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

People suffering from cancer and other critical illnesses typically expect their doctors to offer treatment that alleviates their disease or extends their life. Unfortunately, not all physicians provide their patients with competent care, and their negligence often diminishes their patients’ chances of achieving good outcomes. Recently, a Maryland court addressed whether such carelessness constitutes grounds for recovering damages in a medical malpractice case, ultimately ruling that it does not, rejecting the loss of chance doctrine. If your health was damaged by a careless physician, it is in your best interest to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about your options for seeking damages.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that the decedent was diagnosed with Stage 3 breast cancer in 2006. She had a mastectomy, followed by chemotherapy and radiation. She then underwent a series of diagnostic scans, all of which were negative for metastatic disease. A diagnostic test conducted in 2013 showed a new lesion on her clavicle that was potentially cancerous. The defendant, the decedent’s oncologist, reviewed the scan but did not order further testing or advise the plaintiff of the lesion’s presence.

Allegedly, three years later, the decedent underwent testing that showed that her breast cancer had metastasized to her clavicle. The decedent continued to treat but passed away in 2017. Her husband and their children filed a survival and wrongful death action against the defendant. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that the theory the plaintiffs based their case on, the loss of chance doctrine, was not recognized in Maryland. The court granted the motion as to the wrongful death claim. The plaintiff appealed, but the ruling was upheld. He then petitioned for writ of certiorari requesting that the court answer whether Maryland’s Wrongful Death Statute permits recovery of damages where the actions of a doctor shortened the life of a terminally ill patient. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The duties and standards of care imposed on medical professionals are not within the understanding of the average person. As such, in most Maryland medical malpractice cases, the plaintiff will need to hire an expert to explain such matters to the jury and to establish causation. There are requirements a person must meet to qualify to testify as an expert, though, as discussed in a recent Maryland ruling. If you were hurt by a negligent doctor, you should speak to a trusted Maryland medical malpractice attorney about what evidence you must produce to recover damages.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is alleged that the defendant surgically extracted the plaintiff’s wisdom teeth. Prior to the procedure, the defendant advised the plaintiff she may experience complications, including numbness and tingling. After the surgery, the plaintiff could not speak or move her tongue. She was advised that her condition would improve over time, but it did not. She still had paresthesia at her follow-up appointment weeks later.

Reportedly, six months after the surgery, the plaintiff was treated by a different oral surgeon who diagnosed her with neurotmesis. The plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant and named two experts who would provide expert testimony on her behalf. The defendant argued that the plaintiff’s experts’ testimony was inadmissible and, therefore, judgment should be entered in his favor as a matter of law. The court granted his motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

While many people undergo surgery without any complications, there are risks associated with most procedures, and problems that arise during what seems like a routine procedure can result in lifelong impairment. To ensure that their patients adequately understand the potential issues that they could face, doctors have an obligation to advise patients of the potential consequences of surgery prior to getting their permission to proceed. If they fail to do so, they may be liable for the failure to obtain informed consent, as demonstrated in a recent opinion issued in a Maryland medical malpractice case. If you suffered harm due to the negligence of a doctor, it is smart to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your potential claims.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs’ infant son underwent a routine tonsil removal and bilateral implantation of tubes in his ears. During the surgery, the infant went into cardiac arrest and suffered a lack of oxygen to the brain, causing him to suffer permanent brain damage. The plaintiffs subsequently instituted a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants, the doctors who performed the surgery, pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act.

Allegedly, they asserted, in part, a lack of informed consent claim in which they alleged that the defendants failed to disclose the material consequences and risks associated with the surgery in consideration of the fact that the infant had sickle cell anemia and reactive airway disease. The court subsequently set forth findings of fact and conclusions of law. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Doctors accused of committing medical malpractice will often try to avoid liability by claiming factors other than their negligence caused their patients harm. For example, they may argue that an outside force intervened and brought about the injury in question, thereby superseding their fault. Recently, a Maryland court examined superseding and intervening causes in a medical malpractice case in which the defendant relied on the defense to avoid liability. If you were harmed by the negligence of a doctor, you might be owed compensation, and you should speak to an assertive Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your possible claims.

Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the decedent visited the defendant, an anesthesiologist and pain management doctor, for treatment of chronic pain in her neck and arm. The defendant administered an epidural steroid injection to the plaintiff. In the week after the injection, the decedent began experiencing double vision, balance issues, nausea, and vomiting.  She was admitted to the hospital but rapidly declined, and she passed away approximately two weeks after the injection.

Reportedly, the decedent’s cause of death was determined to be fungal meningitis. The plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, arguing that she negligently used drugs from a compounding pharmacy and that such drugs caused the decedent’s illness and eventual demise. The defendant argued that the pharmacy’s conduct was a superseding and intervening cause of the decedent’s death and requested a jury instruction on such causes. The court granted her request, and the jury ultimately found that the defendant was negligent, but the pharmacy’s acts were the superseding and intervening cause of the decedent’s death. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information
2002 Clipper Park Rd #300
Baltimore, MD 21211
Phone: (410) 889-1850Fax: (410) 235-3297

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Arfaa Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design