Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Maryland Court Discusses Pursuing a Federal Medical Malpractice Claim

Published on: October 22, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

The law does not require people pursuing medical malpractice claims to be represented by an attorney. In most instances, though, it is prudent for people harmed by incompetent medical care to seek legal counsel, otherwise, they may unintentionally waive their right to recover damages by making procedural errors. This was illustrated in a recent Maryland case in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint for failing to meet the federal pleading standards. If you sustained losses because of deficient medical care, it is in your best interest to meet with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your options for seeking justice.

Case History

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice complaint pro se, and submitted an application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The plaintiff appeared to allege personal injury at the defendant’s nursing facility, medical malpractice at a hospital in Chicago, and the termination of her worker’s compensation benefits by the state of Illinois.

Allegedly, the complaint also mentioned legal malpractice without clear connections to the named defendants. The allegations further deteriorated, with the plaintiff asserting that a “microchip” had been implanted inside her, unnamed individuals were plotting her murder, and she had been targeted for other reasons. The court reviewed her complaint to determine if it met the pleading requirements established by federal law. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Demonstrating Lack of Informed Consent in Maryland

Published on: October 17, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

Under Maryland law, people who are not adequately advised of the risks associated with a procedure may be able to seek compensation via informed consent claims. In a recent opinion issued in a lack of informed consent case, the court discussed what evidence a plaintiff must produce to show that they suffered harm other than what was disclosed as a potential risk or that they could not provide valid consent. If your doctor failed to inform you of the risks of a procedure and you suffered harm as a result, you should meet with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to determine your options for seeking damages.

Procedural and Factual History

It is reported that the plaintiff was diagnosed with a relapse of Grave’s disease and underwent thyroidectomy surgery at the defendant’s medical center in October 2016 after alternative treatments failed. Following the surgery, the plaintiff claimed to have suffered injuries allegedly caused by the procedure. he filed a pro se lawsuit, alleging that he was not properly informed about the risks associated with the surgery, specifically, the risks to his laryngeal nerve, vocal cord, and parathyroid glands.

Allegedly, the plaintiff also alleged medical malpractice during the surgery and post-operative care. The parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment on the medical malpractice claim, and the court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant. A bench trial was conducted to address the remaining informed consent claim. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Causation in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: October 11, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

In order to recover damages in a Maryland medical malpractice case, the plaintiff must not only prove that the defendant deviated from the standard of care but also that said departure caused the plaintiff’s harm. As discussed in a recent Maryland opinion, if a plaintiff fails to establish either component of medical malpractice, their claims will be dismissed. If you were hurt by incompetent medical care, it is sensible to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your possible claims as soon as you can.

Case Background

It is reported that the decedent suffered from chronic cirrhosis, hepatitis B, and hepatitis C, which eventually led to his death. He received medical care from the defendant during his time in a federal facility between September 2015 and March 2017. Thirteen individual healthcare providers, employed or contracted by the defendant, were involved in the decedent’s care. The plaintiff claims that the medical care the decedent received was so inadequate that it amounted to medical malpractice under Maryland law.

Specifically, the plaintiff alleged that the decedent suffered repeated life-threatening esophageal bleeds and should have been referred to a specialist, like a gastroenterologist, who could perform outpatient procedures to monitor and treat his condition and should have been treated for his chronic hepatitis B infection. The defendant moved for summary judgment. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Explains Expert Credentials in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 30, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

In Maryland medical malpractice cases, the strength of the plaintiff’s case often depends on the testimony of a qualified medical expert. If a plaintiff’s expert is unable to testify, it becomes challenging for the plaintiff to recover damages. Maryland law allows only specific individuals to provide expert testimony, and experts who lack the necessary qualifications may be prohibited from testifying. This was illustrated in a recent Maryland case in which the court precluded the plaintiff’s expert from testifying pursuant to Maryland’s 25 percent rule. If you have suffered harm due to a medical procedure gone wrong, it’s crucial to consult with an experienced Maryland medical malpractice attorney who can guide you on what compensation you may be able to recover for your injuries.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is reported that in December 2002, the plaintiff underwent a procedure to treat a brain aneurysm, which resulted in bleeding, a stroke, and significant physical and mental impairment. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant doctor and hospital, alleging that they provided substandard care and failed to obtain the plaintiff’s informed consent for the procedure. A doctor was called as an expert witness by the plaintiff to testify about the standard of care and informed consent. However, the trial court excluded his testimony on both issues, and the court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants. The plaintiff appealed. On appeal, the appellate court reversed, and the defendants appealed the matter further.

The Court’s Review and Ruling:

On appeal, the primary issue before the court was the interpretation of Maryland’s 25 Percent Rule. This rule restricts expert witnesses from dedicating more than 25 percent of their professional activities to activities directly involving testimony in personal injury claims. The court ultimately determined that the plaintiff’s expert did not meet the requirements of the 25 Percent Rule and should not have been allowed to testify regarding the standard of care, reversing the intermediate court ruling. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Explains Deliberate Indifference Versus Medical Malpractice

Published on: September 21, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

In cases where doctors harm their patients, most often, the harm is unintentional. However, in some situations, a physician’s actions may be so egregious that they are considered deliberate. Typically, claims of deliberate indifference to a patient’s medical needs arise in the context of medical treatment provided to incarcerated individuals. It’s essential to recognize the distinctions between deliberate indifference and medical malpractice claims, as highlighted in a recent Maryland case. If you have been injured as a result of a doctor’s negligent or intentional actions, it is advisable to consult with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to assess the potential claims you may be able to pursue.

Case Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff, who is housed in a federal facility in Maryland, filed a lawsuit against the defendant. He claimed, in part, that in July 2020, he injured his right knee while attempting to access the top bunk in his cell using a plastic chair provided to him. He alleged that despite seeking medical attention for over a year, he received minimal treatment, including Tylenol, and was promised referrals to providers that never materialized. He also claimed that in July 2022, he was attacked by other inmates, aggravating his knee injury. His lawsuit asserted, among other things, that the defendant violated his Eighth Amendment rights by failing to provide timely and appropriate care for his knee condition. The defendant moved to dismiss his claims.

Deliberate Indifference Versus Medical Malpractice

The court granted the defendant’s motion. In doing so, the court explained that in order to establish a claim for denial of medical care under the Eighth Amendment, a plaintiff must demonstrate that the defendant’s actions or omissions were done with deliberate indifference to a serious medical need. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Explains Evidence of Damages in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: September 16, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

In Maryland medical malpractice cases, a plaintiff who establishes a defendant’s liability may be granted damages for their economic harm, including the cost of any past medical care and future care they will need and lost wages. To recover such damages, however, they must adequately demonstrate their actual financial losses. In a recent Maryland medical malpractice case, the court analyzed what constitutes sufficient evidence of the economic harm caused by a defendant’s negligence. If you sustained losses because of a careless doctor, it is prudent to meet with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to discuss your rights.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff sued the defendant doctor and the defendant hospital for alleged medical malpractice following a car accident that injured his right leg. The plaintiff asserted a medical negligence against the defendant doctor and an apparent agency claim against the defendant. During the trial, the defendant moved for summary judgment regarding apparent agency, and the court delayed its ruling.

Reportedly, after the trial, both the defendants moved for summary judgment arguing that there was insufficient evidence of economic damages, and the court again delayed its ruling. The jury ultimately found in favor of the plaintiff and determined that the defendant doctor was an agent of the defendant hospital. Both defendants filed motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on economic damages, and the court denied these motions. The defendants then appealed. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses The Duty to Provide Emergency Medical Care

Published on: September 7, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

Pursuant to federal law, health care providers generally must provide people suffering from critical health concerns with emergency care, regardless of their ability to pay. As such, if a medical facility refuses to treat an indigent patient, they can be liable for civil damages. As discussed in a recent Maryland case, however, this duty to provide emergent care ends when a person is admitted as an inpatient. If you were hurt by inadequate medical care, it is wise to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

Case Background

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in federal court, alleging that he received inadequate care in July 2019, at the defendant’s health care center. He further claimed that this care violated the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) and that the United States, the defendant, and the defendant’s employees were liable for medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and patient abandonment under state tort law. The plaintiff later dismissed his claims against the United States. The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the EMTALA claim or, alternatively, for summary judgment. The plaintiff initially consented to dismissal without prejudice but later opposed it. The court treated the motion as one for summary judgment.

The Duty to Provide Emergency Care

The court began by discussing EMTALA, highlighting that its purpose is to ensure hospitals provide emergency care to all, regardless of their ability to pay. It imposes a duty on hospitals to screen and stabilize emergency conditions. If a hospital admits a patient for inpatient treatment in good faith, its obligations under EMTALA end. Liability under EMTALA is limited and does not cover misdiagnosis or general malpractice.

Recent Maryland Medical Malpractice Verdict Highlights the Impact of the Damages Cap

Published on: August 29, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

A recent verdict issued in a Maryland medical malpractice case highlights the challenges of recovering compensation for the losses caused by medical negligence in light of Maryland’s current damages caps. The case arose out of a nursing home patient’s tragic death, which was ultimately brought about by negligence. While the damages compensation awarded to the plaintiffs in the case were significant, they will be largely reduced due to Maryland’s cap on non-economic harm in Maryland medical malpractice cases. If you or a loved one suffered an injury in a nursing home, it would benefit you to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer regarding what damages you might be able to recover.

The Plaintiff’s Harm and Subsequent Verdict

It is alleged that A jury in Baltimore County recently awarded over $9 million to the family of a pastor who died in 2020 due to an infected bedsore he developed while staying at a nursing home. The pastor had been living at the nursing home for around six months after suffering a stroke. The family’s lawsuit claimed the nursing home was negligent in allowing the pastor to develop a severe pressure wound on his lower back which became infected. Evidence showed the pastor was left on his back for long periods without repositioning and was not properly cleaned, which may have worsened the bedsore. He ultimately died from sepsis and complications related to the bedsore.

It is reported that at the conclusion of a week long trial, the jury concluded the nursing home was negligent and awarded $8 million in damages for the pastor’s pain and suffering and $1 million for the emotional harm endured by his family. The judgment will be reduced to just around $1 million, though, because of Maryland’s cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice claims. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Distinguishes Medical Malpractice From Other Claims

Published on: August 23, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

People who are confined in federal facilities often, unfortunately, suffer harm due to inadequate medical care. While such losses are arguably grounds for pursuing medical malpractice claims, they may give rise to other claims as well, and it is important to understand the distinctions and what evidence is needed to demonstrate liability for various claims. In a recent Maryland ruling, the court explained the differences and ultimately ruled that the plaintiff failed to assert facts that would allow him to recover damages. If you were hurt by the negligence of your doctor, you may be owed compensation, and you should consult a Maryland medical malpractice attorney at your earliest convenience.

Factual and Procedural Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a state inmate, filed a Section 1983 lawsuit against the defendants, his medical provider during his incarceration, alleging they were deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs related to the treatment of a hand injury. Specifically, while he was incarcerated, the plaintiff suffered a hand fracture and underwent surgery to implant a metal plate and pins. After his surgery, the pins became embedded under his skin and infected, requiring additional treatment.

It is reported that the plaintiff alleged the medical providers were deliberately indifferent by failing to properly treat the complications. Following the completion of discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgment, providing exhibits and an affidavit describing the plaintiff’s treatment. Namely, they noted that after the plaintiff’s injury, he was given x-rays, pain medication, referrals to an orthopedic surgeon, antibiotics, and wound care. His on-site doctors consulted with the surgeon regarding follow-up care. The plaintiff opposed summary judgment, disputing aspects of his treatment. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Rules of Procedure in Medical Malpractice Cases

Published on: August 14, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

It is not uncommon for people harmed by medical malpractice to suffer additional harm at the hands of their healthcare providers. While those individuals harmed by medical negligence are permitted to pursue multiple causes of action against their healthcare providers in the same lawsuit, they must nonetheless comply with any applicable procedural rules and statutes of limitations. If they fail to do so, they may be barred from pursuing certain claims, as illustrated in a recent Maryland ruling. If you suffered harm due to incompetent medical care, it is advisable to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about what claims you may be able to pursue.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit in January 2020. He named several parties as defendants, including a hospital where he underwent a surgical procedure. Subsequently, in July and August of 2022, more than two years after the plaintiff filed his initial complaint, he moved to amend the complaint to add new claims against the hospital for gross negligence, fraudulent misrepresentation, and punitive damages. In support of his motion to amend the complaint, the plaintiff stated he discovered new supporting facts in the months prior to his proposed amendment.

It is reported that the trial court denied the motions to amend, explaining that the new claims were brought too late after the initial filing, set forth different legal theories of liability, and were proposed after discovery had closed. The court also found the plaintiff failed to explain why facts he received two months before discovery ended necessitated the amendment. The plaintiff then moved for reconsideration. Continue Reading ›