Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Medical malpractice plaintiffs in Maryland must meet strict evidentiary and procedural requirements to prevail at trial. One of the most critical requirements is the presentation of expert testimony to establish the standard of care, a breach of that standard, and causation. If the expert does not testify at trial and their deposition cannot be admitted under applicable rules, the case cannot proceed. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how failing to properly secure expert testimony can prove fatal to a plaintiff’s malpractice claim. If you believe you were harmed by substandard medical care, it is essential to consult a knowledgeable Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to ensure your case is trial-ready.

Facts and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff fractured his hip in a fall and underwent hip replacement surgery at a Baltimore hospital. He was discharged in stable condition but returned to the hospital less than two weeks later with complaints of pain. He was diagnosed with hemorrhagic shock and hospitalized. The plaintiff and his wife subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the hospital and a consulting hematologist, alleging negligent management of his postsurgical care plan. The complaint also included a claim for loss of consortium.

It is alleged that the plaintiffs designated a hematology expert who was deposed during discovery and informed the defense that he would testify at trial. However, just days before trial, the plaintiffs contacted the court and opposing counsel to request a postponement, stating that their expert was on a humanitarian mission overseas and would not return in time for trial. Continue Reading ›

In Maryland, plaintiffs pursuing claims of medical malpractice must do more than allege poor outcomes; they must articulate a clear breach of the applicable standard of care and comply with statutory procedural requirements. Without these foundational elements, courts will dismiss the claim at the pleading stage, regardless of the severity of the alleged injury, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case. If you were harmed by negligent medical care in an emergency room or hospital, you should speak with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about whether you have a viable claim.

Case Setting

It is alleged that the plaintiff was taken to the hospital by ambulance on November 22, 2023, after accidentally shooting himself in the leg. Upon arrival at the emergency department, the plaintiff reportedly encountered hospital staff who laughed at him and used a racial slur. Despite this, he proceeded with treatment and allegedly informed providers of a bubble-like mass at the wound site, which he believed to be infected. The plaintiff asked for antibiotics, but it is reported that the attending physician chose instead to wash the wound with saline and discharged him with instructions to keep the leg clean and compressed.

In the realm of medical malpractice, the standard of care often serves as the linchpin between professional judgment and actionable negligence. This was illustrated in a recent Maryland decision in which the court considered whether a physician’s response to a patient’s abnormal EKG and reported chest pain met the legal standard required under Maryland law. The ensuing lawsuit, focused on both the adequacy of the care provided and the legal sufficiency of the jury instructions issued at trial, highlights how Maryland courts balance expert testimony, procedural precision, and legal standards in determining medical negligence. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to medical malpractice and you have questions about your options, it is wise to consult a skilled Baltimore medical malpractice attorney.

Case Setting

It is reported that the decedent, a middle-aged man with a notable family history of heart disease, began experiencing chest pain on February 10, 2020. The symptoms eased temporarily with the consumption of hot tea, prompting the patient to wait until February 13, 2020, to consult his primary care physician, the defendant. It is alleged that during that consultation, the defendant conducted an electrocardiogram (EKG), which returned abnormal results. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant diagnosed gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and esophageal spasms, while allegedly failing to emphasize the abnormality of the EKG or the need for immediate medical attention. The defendant provided referrals to a cardiologist and a gastroenterologist and advised follow-up in a month.

Allegedly, the defendant testified that he did urge the patient to go to the emergency room, but this instruction was not documented in the medical record. On February 15, 2020, two days after the appointment, the decedent was found dead at home. A private autopsy conducted by a forensic pathologist retained by the plaintiff concluded that the cause of death was a cardiac arrhythmia stemming from a thrombus in a coronary artery in the context of significant atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Continue Reading ›

When does a patient truly know they’ve been harmed, and who’s responsible for it? That question, often blurred by time, symptoms, and shifting medical advice, is at the heart of many medical malpractice cases. In a recent medical malpractice decision, the court confronted the delicate intersection of legal deadlines and patient awareness. A jury had ruled that the plaintiff’s case was too late, but the appellate court found that the jury never should have been cut out of the conversation. This case reaffirms that in complex malpractice claims, timing isn’t just everything, it’s something the jury must decide. If you suffered harm due to inadequate medical care, it is in your best interest to talk to an attorney about your potential claims as soon as possible.

Factual Background and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a urethral dilation procedure performed by the defendant urologist at the defendant clinic. Allegedly, after the procedure, the plaintiff began to experience a cascade of serious medical issues, including pain, fatigue, and neurological symptoms. It is alleged that these conditions progressively worsened over time, and the plaintiff continued to seek medical opinions to understand their cause.

It is reported that the plaintiff did not file her complaint until more than three years after the initial procedure. The defendants moved for judgment as a matter of law, asserting that the claim was time-barred under D.C. Code § 12-301(8), which imposes a three-year limitations period for medical malpractice actions. Continue Reading ›

In high-stakes medical malpractice litigation, the rules of evidence are more than procedural technicalities; they can be the difference between a fair trial and a mistrial. A recent decision from a Maryland court emphasizes the strict limitations on presenting evidence of liability insurance to a jury. When plaintiff’s counsel improperly introduced insurance-related language during trial, the court held that the error was too prejudicial to ignore, granting the defendant’s motion for a mistrial. This case serves as a reminder of the high bar courts impose when litigants attempt to reference insurance in the context of negligence claims. If you sustained losses due to the carelessness of a healthcare provider, you should talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your avenues for seeking justice.

Factual and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a calf-implant surgery on June 30, 2021. Following the procedure, the plaintiff received post-operative care from physician assistants employed by the defendant hospital. The plaintiff brought suit alleging negligent post-operative treatment, which was set for jury trial in April 2025.

In medical malpractice litigation, timing is everything, and so is consistency. In a recent Maryland medical malpractice case, the court rejected two early attempts to dismiss a patient’s medical negligence claims: a statute of limitations defense and a judicial estoppel argument. The ruling emphasizes that when factual disputes exist about when a plaintiff discovered her injury or whether her prior litigation statements contradict current claims, those questions must be answered through discovery, not resolved at the pleading stage. If you believe a healthcare provider’s incompetence caused you harm, it is wise to talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your rights.

Factual Background and Procedural History

It is reported that the plaintiff underwent an MRI in July 2020 to evaluate her temporomandibular joints. The imaging was interpreted by a radiologist employed by a medical group, later named as a third-party defendant. Allegedly, the radiologist failed to identify a suspicious mass in the plaintiff’s right parotid gland. It is alleged that had the mass been detected and properly reported, earlier follow-up testing and treatment could have prevented the plaintiff’s cancer from progressing to an incurable stage.

It is reported that the plaintiff initially filed a malpractice suit against several providers and institutions. Later, she filed a separate action naming the radiologist and his employer directly. That case was consolidated with the original litigation, and the newly added defendants moved to dismiss her claims. They asserted that the action was time-barred under Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations for malpractice and that the plaintiff’s statements in the earlier case precluded her claims under the doctrine of judicial estoppel. Continue Reading ›