When grieving families question the accuracy of a medical examiner’s conclusions, the stakes are deeply personal. Yet turning those concerns into a viable lawsuit is fraught with procedural hurdles, particularly when the defendant is a state agency. A recent Maryland decision illustrates how the doctrine of sovereign immunity and strict service requirements under the Maryland Tort Claims Act can bring a case to an abrupt end. For those considering legal action against a state medical examiner, this case highlights the importance of precise adherence to statutory procedures. If you believe an error in a death determination has harmed your family, it is crucial to consult with an experienced Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to protect your rights.
Facts and Procedural Background
It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a complaint for medical malpractice against the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, asserting that state-employed physicians acted negligently when they certified her daughter’s 2018 death as a suicide instead of a homicide. The plaintiff sought both monetary damages and an order correcting the death certificate.
It is reported that the defendant moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that the plaintiff had failed to comply with statutory service requirements. Specifically, under Section 12-108 of the State Government Article, any complaint subject to the Maryland Tort Claims Act must be served on the State Treasurer. Instead, the plaintiff attempted to serve the Chief Medical Examiner directly, and her service did not meet the requirements of Maryland Rule 2-121 because it was not sent via certified mail with restricted delivery. The circuit court granted the motion to dismiss when the plaintiff did not oppose it, and later denied her motion for reconsideration. Continue Reading ›
Published by Arfaa Law Group












