American Board of Trial Advocates
Best Attorneys
Multi Million Dollar
Million Dollar
Maryland Association for Justice
Super Lawyers
Awards 2015
The American
Super Lawyers
Top 50 Woman - Maryland
SuperLawyers
Top 100 - Maryland
Best Lawyers

Published on: | by

While people typically think of malpractice cases arising in the context of treatment for conditions of the body, dentists can be liable for malpractice as well. Dental malpractice claims, like other claims against health care providers, must be filed within the statutory time frame; otherwise, the injured party may waive the right to recover damages. The statute of limitations can be extended, though, in cases in which a person does not discover the cause of his or her harm immediately after it occurs. In a recent Maryland opinion issued in a dental malpractice case, the court discussed when the discovery rule applies to extend the statutory period. If you suffered harm due to a negligent dentist, it is smart to meet with a Maryland dental malpractice lawyer as soon as possible to protect your right to seek compensation.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that in May 2015, the plaintiff consulted with the defendant dental center about having his wisdom teeth removed. He believed that a certain surgeon would be performing the procedure under twilight anesthesia, but the defendant dentist extracted his teeth using only a local anesthetic. After the procedure, his tongue was numb. He called the defendant center the next day it was open and reported he could not feel his tongue and was advised it was a normal side effect.

Allegedly, he returned to the defendant center four days later and then a week after that and was advised that his tongue would get better with time. Ultimately, he saw a second dentist in November 2015. While the dentist was surprised that the plaintiff could not feel his tongue, he did not indicate it was due to something the defendant dentist did. In July 2018, the plaintiff underwent a medical examination, after which the doctor advised him his tongue numbness was caused by a transection during his wisdom tooth extraction. The plaintiff then filed a malpractice claim against the defendants, who moved for summary judgment on the grounds the claim was barred by the statute of limitations. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

People harmed by the incompetence of their doctors have the right to pursue compensation via medical malpractice claims. As plaintiffs are the parties that institute cases, they generally get to determine where the case will be filed and what court will preside over the matter. Defendants have the right to request that cases be transferred to other counties, though, via motions for transfer for forum non conveniens. The courts must evaluate numerous factors to determine if a transfer is appropriate, and if they fail to do so, any transfer may be overturned, as demonstrated in a recent opinion issued in a Maryland primary malpractice case. If you were injured by the errors of a primary care physician, it is in your best interest to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your options.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff visited the defendant primary care practice with complaints of pain, redness, and swelling in her left foot. She was seen by a nurse practitioner and diagnosed with gout. She visited the defendant medical express center with similar complaints two days later and was advised that she had cellulitis and a wound infection.

It is reported that three days later, the plaintiff went to the emergency department of a hospital due to a worsening of her symptoms. She was diagnosed with gas gangrene, and her foot was amputated. She subsequently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants in Baltimore City. The defendants filed a motion for transfer to Baltimore County for forum non conveniens. The court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

There are numerous claims a person harmed by incompetent medical care may pursue. For example, a person may assert a medical malpractice claim or failure to obtain a patient’s informed consent claim. While parties can pursue both claims in one action, they each have different elements that must be proven to recover damages. As such, it may be improper for a defendant to introduce evidence that a defendant obtained a plaintiff’s informed consent prior to a procedure in a matter in which she is solely asserting a medical malpractice claim. The ramifications of evidence relevant to other claims were the topic of a recent Maryland opinion in a surgical malpractice case in which the plaintiff argued the trial court erred in admitting improper evidence. If you suffered harm because of a negligently performed procedure, it is smart to meet with a Maryland surgical malpractice lawyer regarding your options for seeking damages.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that the defendant performed a surgical repair of the plaintiff’s hernia. She was discharged with instructions and a prescription for pain medication. The evening after she was discharged, she experienced abdominal pain and was advised to fill her prescription. Five days later, she returned to the hospital with complaints of pain, nausea, vomiting, and constipation. She was transferred to the emergency department, where it was determined that she was suffering from a perforated colon.

Allegedly, she underwent an emergency procedure to repair the perforation, and the record noted she was suffering from a missed colotomy. She had to undergo several additional procedures to repair her harm. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting a medical malpractice claim. Prior to trial, she filed a motion asking the court to preclude the defendant from introducing evidence of informed consent and that the harm suffered was a known risk of the procedure. The court denied the motion as premature, but during the trial, such evidence was introduced. The jury issued a defense verdict, and the plaintiff appealed, arguing the admission of informed consent evidence was improper. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

People who suffer traumatic injuries in car accidents are often transported to hospitals for medical treatment. If the care they receive while hospitalized is inadequate, though, it may compound their harm and cause new trauma. While hospitals can be held accountable for the harm caused by their employees, it is more difficult to establish liability for losses brought about by physicians who are independent contractors. Recently, a Maryland appellate court discussed what a plaintiff must prove to demonstrate a hospital is responsible for harm caused by a contractor in a medical malpractice case. If you were hurt by a careless doctor, it is advisable to speak with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your options for seeking damages.

The History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff was involved in a car accident that caused critical injuries to his left arm and his legs. First responders arrived at the scene and transported the plaintiff to the defendant hospital’s trauma center, which was located within the same building as the hospital. After he was admitted, the plaintiff was treated by the defendant doctor, who was an independent contractor within his role as an on-call orthopedic surgeon for the center.

Allegedly, when the plaintiff arrived, he was disoriented and confused and was unable to sign the consent form, which stated that the treating physicians were not employees or agents of the hospital. Another party signed on his behalf, however. While he was in the trauma center, the plaintiff’s legs were amputated. He subsequently filed a malpractice claim against the defendants, alleging that if the defendant doctor complied with the standard of care, his right leg could have been saved and that the defendant hospital was vicariously liable for the defendant doctor’s negligence. The trial court ultimately issued a judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of the hospital, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Stage IV metastatic breast cancer is a devastating disease for which, tragically, there is no cure. As such, many people lose their lives to metastatic breast cancer each year. While stage IV breast cancer is not curable, it is treatable, and some people are able to live for several years after they are diagnosed. If they are robbed of the opportunity to undergo treatment due to medical negligence, though, their family members cannot recover wrongful death damages after their passing, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland opinion delivered in an oncology malpractice case. If you lost a loved one due to the incompetence of an oncologist, it is smart to meet with a knowledgeable Maryland medical malpractice attorney to evaluate your potential claims.

The Decedent’s Harm

It is reported that in 2006, the decedent was diagnosed with stage III cancer in her left breast. She underwent a mastectomy, radiation, and chemotherapy. For the next three years, her CT scans were normal. In April 2013, however, she underwent a CT scan that indicated new and possibly cancerous lesions that were not present in previous studies. The radiologist forwarded the report from the 2013 CT scan to the defendant, the decedent’s treating oncologist, who did not prescribe any follow-up tests or advise any of her providers.

Allegedly, in February 2016, the decedent was diagnosed with Stage IV cancer after she injured her shoulder. She died a year and a half later. The plaintiff, her husband, then instituted a wrongful death lawsuit against the defendant, arguing that if the decedent had been diagnosed in 2013, she would have lived an additional two and a half years. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant, stating the plaintiff failed to present a viable wrongful death claim. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

When healthcare providers face liability for incompetent medical care, it is uncommon for them to admit fault. In some cases, they may go as far as to blame the plaintiffs for the injuries they sustained, arguing their carelessness caused or contributed to their harm. In Maryland and many other jurisdictions, contributory negligence is a valid defense. In a recent opinion issued in the federal court for the District of Columbia, the court explained what a defendant must show to establish a plaintiff’s contributory negligence in a medical malpractice case. If you were injured by a reckless physician, it is smart to meet with a trusted Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss your potential claims.

The Plaintiff’s Injuries

It is reported that the plaintiff was a college student who played field hockey for her school. She suffered a concussion during a game, after which she visited the team trainer, who made an appointment for her to be seen by the defendant, the team physician. The defendant examined the plaintiff but did not believe she sustained a concussion and advised her to sit out for two games but did not offer any other treatment.

Allegedly, several months later, the plaintiff was treated with a neurologist who determined that, contrary to the defendant’s assertions, the plaintiff suffered a concussion and now had post-concussive syndrome. Thus, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the university and the defendant alleging, among other things, medical negligence claims. Following discovery, the parties moved for summary judgment. The defendants argued that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent and therefore should be denied the recovery of damages as a matter of law. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

It is not uncommon for injuries caused by medical malpractice to occur simultaneously with other harm. In such cases, the injured party may be able to pursue numerous causes of action in a single lawsuit. Depending on where the matter is filed, though, the dismissal of one claim may result in the court’s refusal to preside over the remaining claims. This was demonstrated in a recent Maryland case in which the court declined to exercise jurisdiction over state medical malpractice claims after dismissing federal claims. If you suffered harm because of negligent medical care, it is advisable to speak to a seasoned Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your options for seeking compensation.

The Plaintiff’s Harm

It is reported that the plaintiff was living in a federally owned facility when he fell down the stairs. He immediately began to experience pain and swelling in his right foot and ankle and visited the medical unit of the facility. He was provided a muscle rub and an ace bandage and advised to call the medical unit if his symptoms worsened. He was not advised to follow up and did not undergo any x-rays. His symptoms became more severe, and numerous days later, he was taken to the hospital, where it was determined that he suffered a fracture.

The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in the Maryland district court, alleging violation of his Eighth Amendment rights against the wanton and unnecessary infliction of pain. He filed a supplemental complaint as well, alleging medical malpractice claims against the defendant and arguing that the court had supplemental jurisdiction over such claims. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims on the grounds he had not alleged sufficient facts that, if proven to be true, would allow him to recover compensation. The court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss, then began to analyze the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Parents anticipating the birth of their children typically do not expect problems to arise during their delivery. Tragically, however, some infants die shortly after they are born due to errors made by medical professionals. While parents who lose their children due to birth injuries have the right to seek compensation for their losses, when the paternity of a deceased child is not clear, it may impact the father’s right to pursue claims against negligent healthcare providers. This was demonstrated in a recent Maryland ruling, in which the court affirmed the dismissal of the putative father’s claims. If your child sustained an injury at birth, it is prudent to speak to a Maryland birth injury attorney about your rights as soon as possible.

The History of the Case

It is reported that the mother, how was expecting twins, was treated by the defendant obstetricians throughout her pregnancy. The twins were delivered by the defendants, and sadly, one twin died shortly thereafter. The paternity of the twins was disputed, and the plaintiff filed an action to establish paternity. A DNA test revealed him to be the father, but the court did not issue an order to that effect.

Allegedly, the mother explored the option of filing a medical malpractice lawsuit and entered into a stipulation with the defendant in which the defendant agreed to toll the statute of limitations for a wrongful death claim. The mother later filed claims against the defendant. The plaintiff moved to intervene, but the mother objected to the motion on the grounds that it was untimely. His motion was denied, and he appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Frequently, there are multiple healthcare providers involved with the care of expectant mothers. For example, they may be treated by doctors, nurses, and in hospital settings. As such, if a child suffers a birth injury due to negligent prenatal care, the infant’s parents may be able to pursue malpractice claims against multiple entities. As shown in a recent Maryland case, though, plaintiffs must prove that each practitioner violated the applicable standard of care, and if they do not, some or all of their claims may be dismissed. If your child sustained an injury at birth because of incompetent medical care, it is wise to meet with a trusted Maryland birth injury lawyer to discuss your possible claims.

The Mother’s Care and Subsequent Claims

It is reported that the plaintiff mother was pregnant with the plaintiff infant and was treated by the defendant doctor throughout her pregnancy. She visited the defendant doctor when she was 37 weeks pregnant, which was considered full term, and reported reduced fetal movement. Her blood pressure was elevated, and a urinalysis revealed protein in her urine. She was then sent to the defendant hospital for further evaluation. After she was admitted, the defendant nurse took her blood pressure four times and noted it was increasing, and additional testing indicated she had protein in her urine.

Allegedly, the plaintiff mother was discharged that day. Four days later, she again visited the defendant doctor due to reduced fetal movement. Her blood pressure was elevated, and there was protein in her urine. As such, the defendant doctor proceeded with an emergency Caesarean section. The plaintiff infant was diagnosed with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, which was caused by insufficient oxygen during birth. The plaintiffs then filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendants, asserting their negligence caused the plaintiff infant to suffer birth injuries. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing the plaintiff failed to establish they breached the applicable standard of care. The court granted the motion as to the defendant hospital, and defendant nurse and the plaintiffs appealed. Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

When a doctor improperly performs a dental procedure, it can lead to decay, tooth loss, and lasting pain. Thus, a person harmed by a negligent dentist may be able to recover damages via a malpractice lawsuit. As with malpractice claims against doctors, though, people seeking compensation for harm caused by careless dentists must comply with jurisdictional and procedural rules; otherwise, their claims may be denied. This was demonstrated in a recent opinion in which the court dismissed the plaintiff’s claims because of his failure to abide by the conditions precedent under Maryland law. If you were harmed by a careless dentist, it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to determine whether you may be owed compensation.

The Plaintiff’s Injuries

It is reported that the defendant performed oral surgery on the plaintiff, which involved exposing the bone under his bottom gum, grinding it down, and closing the gum with sutures. After the surgery, the plaintiff’s lower dentures no longer fit properly. He was then advised that the surgery should not have been performed and that he would need dental implants. As such, he filed a lawsuit against the defendant in federal court, arguing he committed malpractice by performing the surgery.  The defendant filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction over the claims. The court ultimately granted the motion.

Pursuing Malpractice Claims in Maryland Federal Courts

Federal courts have limited jurisdiction. Thus, they must assume that a matter lies outside of their jurisdiction unless proven otherwise. The party asserting that jurisdiction is proper bears the burden of establishing subject matter jurisdiction. Typically, federal courts can only hear claims arising out of federal questions or where there is a diversity of citizenship, which requires the parties to be residents of different states and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. In the subject case, the court noted that the plaintiff had not alleged diversity jurisdiction or that the parties were citizens of different states. As such, the court found that diversity jurisdiction had not been established. Continue Reading ›

Contact Information
2002 Clipper Park Rd #300
Baltimore, MD 21211
Phone: (410) 889-1850Fax: (410) 235-3297

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2026, Arfaa Law Group
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design