Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

Maryland Court Discusses Rebuttal Evidence in Medical Malpractice Cases

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

Many people struggle to conceive children or carry a pregnancy to term. Luckily, advances in medicine and technology allow people to become parents in non-traditional ways, including through the use of a gestational carrier. There are risks associated with working with a gestational carrier, however, including the possibility that the carrier’s underlying health conditions may lead to complications during pregnancy. Thus, they typically must undergo a stringent screening process; if a doctor fails to vet a gestational carrier appropriately, it can lead to serious issues and, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case, likely constitutes malpractice. If you were harmed by a doctor’s recklessness, it is in your best interest to contact a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your possible claims.

Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiffs entered into a gestational carrier contract with a woman who failed to disclose her pregnancy complications. The plaintiffs’ doctor proceeded with an embryo transfer without receiving prior medical records or clearance from the carrier’s regular obstetrician, which resulted in the carrier developing severe preeclampsia and delivering prematurely at 25 weeks. The infant died 21 days after birth. The plaintiffs filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the doctor and the fertility center, and the case proceeded to trial. The jury ultimately awarded the plaintiffs over $40 million. The defendants appealed on numerous grounds, including the assertion that the trial court admitted improper rebuttal evidence from the plaintiff mother.

Rebuttal Evidence in Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the defendants argued that the trial court erred by allowing the plaintiff mother to provide improper rebuttal testimony that addressed matters already addressed in the plaintiffs’ case-in-chief. The plaintiffs disagreed, arguing that the defendant’s testimony went beyond plaintiff mother direct testimony by introducing new evidence, and it was necessary that plaintiff mother was able to rebut her testimony so the jury would not be left with an “erroneous impression.” Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Explains Expert Qualifications in Medical Malpractice Cases

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

Expert testimony is essential in Maryland medical malpractice cases as it helps the jury to understand complex medical issues and determine whether the defendant breached the standard of care, causing harm to the plaintiff. Thus, if a plaintiff is precluded from offering expert testimony, it may be devastating to their claims. Not all medical professionals are qualified to testify as an expert, however. Rather, as demonstrated in a recent Maryland case, only providers that practice in the same specialty as the defendant or a related specialty will be permitted to testify on issues such as the standard of care and the defendant’s failure to uphold the standard. If you were hurt by the carelessness of a physician, you might be owed compensation, and it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff visited the defendant to obtain a chemical peel on the skin of her face. She subsequently suffered intense pain, chemical burns, and scarring. As such, she filed a lawsuit against the defendant, asserting claims of medical malpractice, failure to obtain informed consent, and other claims. The case proceeded to trial before a jury; during the trial, the court ruled that the plaintiff’s medical expert could not express an opinion about the standard of care for the chemical peel application because he was not board certified in a related specialty, as required by the Maryland Health Care Malpractice Claims Act. The plaintiff filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied by the court. The plaintiff and defendant both appealed.

Expert Testimony in Maryland Medical Malpractice Cases

On appeal, the court addressed the issue of whether the trial court erred in precluding the plaintiff’s medical expert from testifying. The court ultimately ruled that the trial court’s reasoning was sound and therefore affirmed the ruling. Maryland law provides that a healthcare provider may not be held liable for medical negligence unless it is established that the care given is not in accordance with the standards of practice among members of the same profession with similar training and experience in the same or similar communities at the time of the alleged act giving rise to the cause of action. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Evidence Needed to Establish Dental Malpractice

Published on: March 6, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

Dentists, like all healthcare providers, have an obligation under Maryland law to abide by the standard of care imposed on their profession. If they deviate from the standard of care and cause a patient to suffer harm, they can be found liable for any damages that arise out of their negligence. In order to recover compensation in a dental malpractice lawsuit, though, a plaintiff must adequately demonstrate fault and damages, as discussed in a recent Maryland ruling. If you suffered injuries due to dental malpractice, it is wise to confer with a Maryland dental malpractice lawyer about what damages you may be owed.

The Factual and Procedural History of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a dental malpractice lawsuit against the defendant dentist, alleging that he improperly extracted all four of her wisdom teeth, causing permanent numbness and pain in her mouth and tongue area. Specifically, she alleged that during the removal of two of the teeth, the defendant failed to take the proper precautions required by the standard of care and caused severe injuries to her lingual nerves.

Allegedly, the plaintiff also asserted additional claims relating to a breach of the post-operative standard of care and lack of informed consent for the surgery. The defendant filed a motion for partial summary judgment seeking to dismiss the claim for dental malpractice regarding the alleged trauma to the plaintiff’s nerves.

Maryland Court Discusses Medical Malpractice Claims Under the Federal Tort Claims Act

Published on: February 28, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

Many people in Maryland receive medical care in federally funded facilities. If the care they receive is inadequate, and they suffer harm as a result, they have the right to seek damages via medical malpractice claims. Such claims must be pleaded carefully, however, as pleading errors can result in the dismissal of a plaintiff’s case, as illustrated in a recent opinion issued by a Maryland court. If you suffered harm because of negligent health care, you should speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your possible claims.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

It is reported that the plaintiff filed a complaint alleging medical malpractice and negligence claims against the United States of America and numerous individual defendants pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act (the Act). The claims alleged that the individually named defendants failed to provide the defendant with adequate medical care following surgery to repair dislocated and fractured bones in his left hand, causing his injury to worsen when he was housed in a federal facility. The defendants moved, inter alia, to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims against the individually named defendants on the grounds that they were barred by the Act.

Pursuing Medical Malpractice Claims Under the Federal Tort Claims Act

The court granted the defendants’ motion to the extent that it sought dismissal of the claims against the individual defendants. In its opinion, the court explained that the Act must be narrowly construed. Thus, pursuant to the Act, any claim alleging harm caused by the negligence of federal employees may not be brought against individual employees of the federal government who were acting within the scope of their employment when the allegedly harmful conduct occurred. Continue Reading ›

Court Discusses Immunity for the Treatment of COVID-19

Published on: February 20, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Maryland and other jurisdictions issued orders and laws impacting healthcare provider liability. While many of the orders and laws are no longer in effect, their ramifications are still present, as they can operate to bar medical malpractice claims. This was demonstrated recently when a court dismissed a plaintiff’s medical malpractice claim arising out of the negligent treatment of COVID-19 in a patient who later passed away. If you lost a loved one or sustained injuries because of inadequate medical treatment, it is in your best interest to confer with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about what damages you may be able to recover.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the decedent was admitted to the defendant’s hospital for the treatment of asthma. She was on dialysis at the time as well. She was tested for COVID-19 upon admission, and her test results were negative. During her stay, however, she was placed in a room with a patient being treated for COVID-19. The decedent tested positive for COVID-19 shortly thereafter. She declined rapidly and was placed on a ventilator. Sadly, she succumbed to the illness; her cause of death was listed as pneumonia and COVID-19.

Allegedly, the plaintiff filed a wrongful death action against the defendant on behalf of the decedent’s estate. In her complaint she asserted a single count of medical malpractice, in which she alleged the defendant’s negligence in exposing the decedent to COVID-19 and failing to provide her with adequate care caused her death. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that they were immune pursuant to COVID-19 laws in effect at the time of the decedent’s care. Continue Reading ›

Federal Court Discusses Jurisdiction in Medical Malpractice Claims

Published on: February 12, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

There are arguably benefits to pursuing claims in federal court; the process is more streamlined, cases generally move quicker, and parties must exchange disclosures, so they understand the issues early on. Only certain cases can proceed in federal court, though, and generally, those cases do not include medical malpractice claims. This was illuminated recently when a federal court dismissed a plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims, not due to lack of merit but because it lacked jurisdiction over his claims. If you were harmed by a careless physician, you have the right to seek redress, and you should meet with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer to discuss the best manner to proceed.

Factual and Procedural Background of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in federal court against the defendant, arguing that the doctors it employed failed to provide him with proper medical care or prescribe him with antibiotics, despite the fact that he was suffering from an infection. He also asserted that he was unjustly asked to leave the premises. In addition to filing his pro secomplaint, he filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court ultimately decided to grant his in forma pauperis application but dismissed his claims without prejudice.

Medical Malpractice Claims Pursued in Federal Courts

The federal courts have limited subject matter jurisdiction, as set forth in the federal rules. In other words, pursuant to the applicable statutes, federal jurisdiction can only be exercised over matters that present federal questions or where the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 and the parties are of diverse citizenship. In other words, no defendant and plaintiff can reside in the same jurisdiction. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Duties Pharmacists Owe Patients

Published on: February 6, 2023 | by Arfaa Law Group

Pharmacists are considered health care providers under Maryland law. As such, if they fail to abide by the standard of care they can be held liable for any harm caused by their negligence. Typically, to demonstrate that a pharmacist committed malpractice, a plaintiff must show that the pharmacist breached a duty owed. As such, absent proof of a duty owed, the plaintiff’s claim will most likely fail. This was evident in a recent Maryland case in which the court ruled that a pharmacist had no duty to warn a patient of the dangers of taking a medication and dismissed her claim. If you were hurt by the carelessness of a pharmacist or doctor, it is advisable to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about your rights.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff suffered permanent harm after taking a medication she was prescribed after she was exposed to toxic mold. Specifically, she developed acute gastritis, which later became chronic, and was hospitalized several times. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the drug and the pharmacy that filled her prescription. As to the pharmacy, she alleged that it failed to warn her of the potential side effects of the medication, thereby causing her harm. The defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims. The court granted the motions.

Duties Pharmacists Owe Patients

As to the pharmacy, the court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim for which the court could grant relief. Specifically, her complaint did not set forth facts that, if proven to be true, demonstrated a plausible right to relief. The court noted that a plausible claim must be more than merely speculative or conceivable.

Court Discusses Expert Requirements in Maryland Medical Malpractice Cases

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

Pursuant to Maryland law, parties that wish to pursue medical malpractice claims must submit a certificate of qualified expert in conjunction with their complaint. If they fail to meet this requirement, their complaint will most likely be dismissed. While the expert providing the certificate must meet certain requirements, they do not have to practice in the precise specialty as the defendant, as discussed in a recent Maryland case. If you were harmed by a careless physician, it is important to understand what evidence you must offer to recover damages, and you should speak to a Maryland medical malpractice attorney as soon as possible.

Procedural History of the Case

It is alleged that the defendant surgically removed the plaintiff’s dental implants and installed replacements. The procedure required the defendant to create bone grafts and place the implants. The procedure ultimately failed, causing the plaintiff extreme pain. The plaintiff developed an infection and had to undergo additional surgery to remediate the issues caused by the initial procedure.

Reportedly, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant. In conjunction with his complaint, he submitted a certificate of qualified expert, as required under Maryland law. The defendant moved to strike the certificate and dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint on the grounds that the expert was not qualified. The court granted the defendant’s motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Jurisdiction In Medical Malpractice Matters

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

Pursuant to state and federal law, parties are permitted to pursue civil lawsuits, including medical malpractice claims, without the assistance of an attorney. Medical malpractice cases are challenging, however, and parties that file them without legal counsel are likely to make mistakes that impact their right to recover damages. This was demonstrated in a recent Maryland opinion delivered by the district court, in which it dismissed the plaintiff’s medical malpractice claims because of a lack of jurisdiction. If you were hurt by the negligence of your doctor, it is in your best interest to retain the assistance of a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to help you pursue damages.

History of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against hospital employees in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The plaintiff’s complaint asserted that jurisdiction was proper because the defendants forced him to do things against his will. To his complaint, he attached a document that indicated he was discharged from a psychiatric program due to his failure to comply with the program rules and an order from a judge that committed him involuntarily to the hospital where the defendants worked. The plaintiff also moved to proceed in forma pauperis. The court granted the motion but also dismissed the plaintiff’s complaint.

Jurisdiction In Medical Malpractice Matters

In the opinion dismissing the complaint, the court explained that federal courts have limited jurisdiction. As such, a federal district court may only preside over a case if it possesses the authority granted by the Constitution and statutory law to do so. Thus, if a party wishes to proceed in federal court, they must allege and, if challenged, must show that the federal court can exercise subject matter jurisdiction over the case. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Motions in Limine in Medical Malpractice Cases

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

Parties in medical malpractice cases typically rely heavily on expert testimony and other evidence to establish their positions; if a party is precluded from offering certain evidence, they may be unable to prove their assertions. As such, it is not uncommon for parties in medical malpractice cases to file motions in limine prior to trial, asking the courts to limit what evidence their opponents are permitted to introduce. In a recent Maryland medical malpractice case arising out of a negligently performed spinal surgery, a court explained the grounds for granting motions in limine. If you were injured due to the carelessness of your surgeon, it is wise to confer with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney about what claims you may be able to pursue.

The History of the Case

Allegedly, the defendant performed a lumbar endoscopic discectomy on the plaintiff. The plaintiff experienced extreme pain following the procedure. During a surgical follow-up visit, the defendant advised the plaintiff that she may have re-herniated one of the discs he repaired and that she had residual scar tissue surrounding her spine. The plaintiff underwent two additional procedures on her back that were performed by other physicians but continued to experience pain.