Articles Posted in Medical Malpractice

People that suffer adverse consequences due to inadequate medical care will often seek compensation via medical malpractice claims. In order for their claims to proceed, they must file them within the applicable statute of limitations. There are circumstances that allow for the tolling of the statute of limitations, however. For example, as demonstrated in a recent medical malpractice case, the discovery rule applied to toll the statute of limitations when the plaintiff’s doctor misled her regarding her symptoms. If you were hurt by an improperly performed procedure, it is advisable to confer with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer promptly.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that in 2008, the plaintiff sought treatment from the defendant due to headaches. The defendant recommended a surgical procedure, advising that it would relieve the pain but cause numbness behind each ear. The plaintiff underwent the procedure but was left with severe, disabling pain.

It is alleged, however, that the doctor assured the person that her condition was not unusual and that some people require a second surgery. The plaintiff decided against a further procedure. She was unaware of any wrongdoing until she searched online for articles about the doctor and discovered that other people had filed lawsuits for medical malpractice for similar surgery. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant in 2016, asserting medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and negligence claims. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that they were prohibited by the statute of limitations. Continue Reading ›

In Maryland, people injured by the negligence of healthcare providers have the right to pursue medical malpractice claims. They must do so within the time proscribed by the statute of limitations, however, otherwise, their claim may be dismissed. As discussed in a recent Maryland ruling, the statutory period generally begins to run when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of their claim. If you were injured by improperly rendered medical care, it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer promptly to avoid waiving your right to recover damages.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the defendant performed hip replacement surgery on the plaintiff in April 2010. The plaintiff experienced pain and complications immediately after the procedure. She continued to treat with a different orthopedic surgeon, who, in December 2010, opined, recommended revision surgery. In January 2014, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, alleging he negligently performed the hip replacement surgery.

Allegedly, the defendant moved for summary judgment asserting that, as a matter of law, the plaintiff had inquiry notice of her claims against him in December 2010, and therefore, her claims were barred by the statute of limitations. The court found in favor of the defendant and granted his motion. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Expert testimony is essential in Maryland medical malpractice cases as it helps the jury to understand complex medical issues and determine whether the defendant breached the standard of care, causing harm to the plaintiff. Thus, if a plaintiff is precluded from offering expert testimony, it may be devastating to their claims. Not all medical professionals are qualified to testify as an expert, however. Rather, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case, only providers that practice in the same specialty as the defendant or a related specialty will be permitted to testify on issues such as the standard of care and the defendant’s failure to uphold the standard. If you were hurt by the carelessness of a physician, you might be owed compensation, and it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff visited the defendant to obtain a chemical peel on the skin of her face. She subsequently suffered intense pain, chemical burns, and scarring. As such, she filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting claims of medical malpractice, failure to obtain informed consent, and other claims. The case proceeded to trial before a jury; during the trial, the court ruled that the plaintiff’s medical expert could not express an opinion about the standard of care for the chemical peel application because he was not board certified in a related specialty, as required by the Maryland Health Care Malpractice Claims Act. The plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the court. The plaintiff and defendant both appealed.

Expert Testimony in Maryland Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the court addressed the issue of whether the trial court erred in precluding the plaintiff’s medical expert from testifying. The court ultimately ruled that the trial court’s reasoning was sound and therefore affirmed the ruling. Maryland law provides that a healthcare provider may not be held liable for medical negligence unless it is established that the care given is not in accordance with the standards of practice among members of the same profession with similar training and experience in the same or similar communities at the time of the alleged act giving rise to the cause of action. Continue Reading ›

There are arguably benefits to pursuing claims in federal court; the process is more streamlined, cases generally move quicker, and parties must exchange disclosures, so they understand the issues early on. Only certain cases can proceed in federal court, though, and generally, those cases do not include medical malpractice claims. This was illuminated recently when a federal court dismissed a plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims, not due to lack of merit but because it lacked jurisdiction over his claims. If you were harmed by a careless physician, you have the right to seek redress, and you should meet with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss the best manner to proceed.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in federal court against the defendant, arguing that the doctors it employed failed to provide him with proper medical care or prescribe him with antibiotics, despite the fact that he was suffering from an infection. He also asserted that he was unjustly asked to leave the premises. In addition to filing his pro secomplaint, he filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court ultimately decided to grant his in forma pauperis application but dismissed his claims without prejudice.

Medical Malpractice Claims Pursued in Federal Courts

The federal courts have limited subject matter jurisdiction, as set forth in the federal rules. In other words, pursuant to the applicable statutes, federal jurisdiction can only be exercised over matters that present federal questions or where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the parties are of diverse citizenship. In other words, no defendant and plaintiff can reside in the same jurisdiction. Continue Reading ›

Pursuant to state and federal law, parties are permitted to pursue civil lawsuits, including medical malpractice claims, without the assistance of an attorney. Medical malpractice cases are challenging, however, and parties that file them without legal counsel are likely to make mistakes that impact their right to recover damages. This was demonstrated in a recent Maryland opinion delivered by the district court, in which it dismissed the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims because of a lack of jurisdiction. If you were hurt by the negligence of your doctor, it is in your best interest to retain the assistance of a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to help you pursue damages.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against hospital employees in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiff’s complaint asserted that jurisdiction was proper because the defendants forced him to do things against his will. To his complaint, he attached a document that indicated he was discharged from a psychiatric program due to his failure to comply with the program rules and an order from a judge that committed him involuntarily to the hospital where the defendants worked. The plaintiff also moved to proceed in forma pauperis. The court granted the motion but also dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint.

Jurisdiction In Medical Malpractice Matters

In the opinion dismissing the complaint, the court explained that federal courts have limited jurisdiction. As such, a federal district court may only preside over a case if it possesses the authority granted by the Constitution and statutory law to do so. Thus, if a party wishes to proceed in federal court, they must allege and, if challenged, must show that the federal court can exercise subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Continue Reading ›