Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Medical malpractice verdicts involving catastrophic injury frequently give rise to post-trial challenges focused not on liability but on how damages were presented to the jury and whether the resulting award can withstand appellate scrutiny. Hospitals and medical providers often argue that verdict forms, closing arguments, or large non-economic damage awards improperly influence jurors or exceed permissible bounds. A recent decision addresses these issues in the context of a complex malpractice case involving prolonged steroid treatment, permanent joint damage, and life-altering consequences for the patient. If you are the victim of medical negligence, it is advisable to speak to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to understand how courts evaluate both liability and damages in serious injury cases.

Factual and Procedural History

Allegedly, the plaintiff sought treatment from healthcare providers affiliated with the defendant medical center for management of severe Crohn’s disease. The treatment plan involved prolonged steroid therapy, which the plaintiff contended exceeded nationally accepted guidelines and exposed him to serious risks that were neither properly managed nor disclosed.

It is alleged that the plaintiff remained on high-dose steroids for several months beyond the recommended treatment window. During this period, his underlying condition failed to improve, and he developed significant complications, including deterioration of both hip joints. The plaintiff later required multiple hip replacement surgeries at a relatively young age. Continue Reading ›

When patients enter a hospital for surgery, they trust that the physicians and staff will follow accepted medical standards to ensure their safety. A recent Baltimore County jury verdict serves as a reminder that hospitals can be held accountable when preventable medical errors lead to a patient’s death. If you or someone you love suffered harm because of medical negligence, you may be owed damages, and you should talk to a  Baltimore medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

Case Background

It is reported that the decedent, a 77-year-old woman, underwent surgery at a Maryland hospital to treat early-stage rectal cancer. During the operation, the patient allegedly suffered massive internal bleeding and died on the operating table. According to the plaintiff, who was the patient’s daughter, the hospital and its surgical staff failed to anticipate and respond appropriately to the bleeding that occurred during the procedure.

It is alleged that the colorectal surgeon breached the standard of care by failing to plan for a foreseeable complication and not following all of the recognized steps that could have stopped the hemorrhage. The plaintiff’s attorney argued that the hospital also failed to have adequate equipment on hand and did not maintain sufficient safety measures to manage the emergency. The family maintained that if the correct procedures had been followed, the decedent would likely have survived and enjoyed additional years of life. Continue Reading ›

In complex medical malpractice litigation, discovery disputes often arise over how confidential medical information can be accessed and shared. A recent decision from a Maryland court highlights the limits on informal communications with treating physicians and reinforces the importance of complying with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The court’s ruling clarifies that even when both sides seek efficiency, patient privacy remains paramount. If you or a loved one has suffered harm due to negligent medical care, it is critical to confer with a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney about your options.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiffs, a married couple, filed a medical malpractice action asserting that several healthcare providers negligently delayed the diagnosis and treatment of adenoid cystic carcinoma in the plaintiff’s parotid gland. The complaint named multiple defendants, including several physicians and affiliated medical institutions. The plaintiffs asserted claims for negligence, failure to obtain informed consent, and loss of consortium.

It is reported that during discovery, two defendants moved for a qualified protective order that would allow their attorneys to speak informally and privately with certain physicians who had treated the plaintiff. These treating physicians were not employed by the defendants but had relevant medical knowledge about the plaintiff’s condition and care. The defendants argued that these informal, or ex parte, communications would promote fairness by offsetting what they described as a “discovery advantage” held by the plaintiffs, who were free to consult privately with their own physicians. They further contended that such communications would save time and litigation costs. Continue Reading ›

When individuals are held in detention, they depend on medical professionals to provide safe and attentive care for their known health conditions. A recent decision by a Maryland court highlights the importance of proper medical documentation and treatment planning when a patient reports allergies or adverse drug reactions. If you or a loved one suffered injury due to negligent medical care in a correctional or institutional setting, it is in your best interest to talk to a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Case Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a pretrial detainee at the Baltimore County Detention Center, submitted more than ten sick call requests between March and April 2024 seeking treatment for severe allergies. Despite these requests, he reportedly did not receive the prescribed medication, Zyrtec, on a consistent basis. On April 4, 2024, the plaintiff complained of worsening symptoms and was evaluated by the defendant, a registered nurse employed at the facility. The nurse noted the presence of rashes on the plaintiff’s face, neck, and back and prescribed Benadryl and another medication, Diflucan.

It is alleged that later that day, the plaintiff was placed in medical quarantine and informed that he would not be released unless he complied with the prescribed treatment. The plaintiff asserted that when he took Benadryl, he suffered an adverse reaction that included hives, throat swelling, and loss of consciousness. He maintained that he had previously warned medical staff that Benadryl aggravated his symptoms, yet the medication was prescribed and administered despite that known sensitivity. The plaintiff alleged that the nurse acted with deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment and that her actions caused lasting harm. He sought monetary damages totaling $500,000. Continue Reading ›

When patients enter a hospital for care, they trust that the facility has thoroughly vetted the competence of every physician granted privileges to treat patients there. A recent decision from Maryland demonstrates that hospitals cannot insulate themselves from liability for negligent credentialing merely because the physician involved is an independent contractor. If you or a loved one suffered harm due to negligent treatment by a hospital-affiliated physician, you should contact a Baltimore medical malpractice attorney to discuss your rights and legal options.

Case Background

It is alleged that the plaintiff, a minor, suffered severe neurological injuries shortly after birth at the defendant hospital. The infant’s mother was admitted for delivery, and labor was managed by an obstetrician who held privileges at the hospital but was not an employee. According to court filings, complications arose during labor, including fetal distress, but the attending physician allegedly failed to perform a timely cesarean section. The child was delivered in a compromised condition, suffering hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy and permanent disability.

It is reported that the plaintiff’s parents brought suit against both the hospital and the obstetrician, asserting claims for medical negligence and corporate negligence based on negligent credentialing. They alleged that the hospital knew or should have known that the physician had a history of prior malpractice claims, clinical performance issues, and disciplinary concerns. The plaintiffs contended that by granting and maintaining staff privileges without adequate review, the hospital failed to exercise reasonable care in ensuring patient safety. Continue Reading ›