Medical Malpractice

The Importance of Procedural Rules in Maryland Arbitration Cases

Published on: April 8, 2016 | by Arfaa Law Group

In Castles of Love Assisted Living Homes, LLC v. Blanks, the court addressed the following question. Did the defendant fulfill Maryland Rule 15-403 by sending its notice of rejection of a health care arbitration award through regular mail as opposed to certified mail?

The facts of the case are as follows. The plaintiff resided at a nursing home from the year 2008 until she died. The plaintiff complained that, during her time at the home, she sustained a number of injuries and became mute due to an infection caused by a feeding tube. The plaintiff filed a negligence lawsuit against the nursing home and sought compensatory damages for more than $100,000.

As required by Maryland law, the case went through arbitration. The arbitration panel reviewed the facts of the case and ruled in favor of the plaintiff, awarding her $25,000 in non-economic damages and over $3,000 in arbitration expenses. The Health Care Arbitration Office (HCAO) sent a document to both parties detailing its ruling. Upon receiving the letter, the defendant responded to the HCAO, rejecting its decision. The defendant sent the letter to HCOA by certified mail and sent a copy of the letter to the plaintiff by regular mail.

Maryland Court Examines Standard of Care in Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: March 25, 2016 | by Arfaa Law Group

The Court of Special Appeals in Maryland recently reexamined a lower court’s judgment granting summary judgment in favor of a doctor defendant in a medical malpractice claim. In Puppolo v. Sivaraman, the plaintiff’s wife died due to the use of heparin, an anticoagulant used to stop blood clotting during dialysis.

Heparin isn’t usually given when the patient’s platelet level falls below 50. This is because when heparin is given to a patient whose platelet level is below 50, it can be very detrimental to a patient and even cause death. As a result, there are strict protocols that must be followed when administering heparin, including monitoring the patient’s platelet levels and stopping heparin if platelet levels fall below 50.

In the case at hand, the plaintiff’s wife’s platelet level was 1, but she was still given two doses of the drug. Not long afterward, she died. The plaintiff then filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the wife’s physician, claiming the physician breached the duty of care owed to his wife through the improper administration of heparin.

“Res Ipsa Loquitur” in Maryland Malpractice Cases

Published on: March 18, 2016 | by Arfaa Law Group

Unfortunately, medical errors injure countless patients each year. In Maryland malpractice cases, the fact that a patient suffered harm does not automatically mean that a physician was negligent. Instead, in order to show medical negligence, the patient must establish his or her injury was the result of the physician failing to exercise the standard of care another physician in the same specialty would have used in the same or similar circumstances.

To prevail on a traditional medical malpractice claim, the plaintiff must show the following elements. First, the medical professional must have owed a legal duty to the patient. Second, that duty must have been breached, meaning the medical professional failed to adhere to the standard of care generally used in their specialty. Third, the medical professional’s breach was a proximate cause of the patient’s injury and resulting damages. Each of these elements must be established in order for a plaintiff to be able to recover any compensation.

“Res ipsa loquitur” is Latin for “the thing that speaks for itself.” When a case is tried under the theory of res ipsa loquitur, the circumstantial evidence in the case is so strong that it eliminates possible causes of the patient’s injury other than the physician’s negligence.

Damages in Maryland Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: March 11, 2016 | by Arfaa Law Group

Medical errors can result in serious and long-term injuries to a patient. In the worst of cases, medical malpractice can even cause a death. If you or someone close to you has been harmed by a medical professional’s negligence, we can help. Our skilled Baltimore injury attorneys can thoroughly analyze the facts of your situation to determine the appropriate damages in your case.

Damages are defined as the monetary compensation that is awarded to a plaintiff who has been injured through the wrongful conduct of another party. Damages are intended to measure the extent of a plaintiff’s harm in financial terms. Damages are supposed to restore the injured party to the position in which he or she was prior to the defendant’s wrongdoing.

In Maryland, a victim of medical malpractice may be able to seek both economic and non-economic damages. Economic damages refer to compensation for objectively quantifiable monetary losses, such as medical bills, future medical costs, rehabilitation costs, loss of income, future loss of income, and property damage. Put another way, economic damages are those that can be typically calculated from documents and records. For example, to establish medical bills, you would obtain your medical records from each health care provider to show the cost of the treatment you have received. Additionally, you can ask a health care provider for a report about your future medical care, including any upcoming procedures, treatment, or therapy. Similar documentation would be required to establish lost wages and property damage.

Maryland Court Permits Habit Testimony in Medical Malpractice Case

Published on: March 4, 2016 | by Arfaa Law Group

In Rosebrock v. Eastern Shore Emergency Physicians, LLC, the Maryland Court of Special Appeals dealt with the admissibility of habit evidence under Maryland Rule 5-406. Specifically, it considered whether habit evidence of an ER physician could be entered into evidence.

The facts of the case are as follows. A patient was taken to the emergency room on a backboard due to knee, hip, and lower back pain after a fall. The ER physician ordered an x-ray of the patient’s knees and hips. The x-ray came back negative, at which point the physician discharged her, stating she had minor knee and hip contusions. There is no record that the physician examined the patient’s back, despite the fact that she conveyed her back was hurting to the triage nurse.

The patient went home but continued to suffer back pain. She visited other physicians, and later tests showed that she did indeed have a fractured vertebrae and needed spinal fusion surgery. Tragically, the surgery resulted in an infection that caused a brain injury to the patient. She ended up in a persistent vegetative state and remained in that state until her death seven years later.