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

People that suffer adverse consequences due to inadequate medical care will often seek compensation via medical malpractice claims. In order for their claims to proceed, they must file them within the applicable statute of limitations. There are circumstances that allow for the tolling of the statute of limitations, however. For example, as demonstrated in a recent medical malpractice case, the discovery rule applied to toll the statute of limitations when the plaintiff’s doctor misled her regarding her symptoms. If you were hurt by an improperly performed procedure, it is advisable to confer with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer promptly.

The Plaintiff’s Claims

It is reported that in 2008, the plaintiff sought treatment from the defendant due to headaches. The defendant recommended a surgical procedure, advising that it would relieve the pain but cause numbness behind each ear. The plaintiff underwent the procedure but was left with severe, disabling pain.

It is alleged, however, that the doctor assured the person that her condition was not unusual and that some people require a second surgery. The plaintiff decided against a further procedure. She was unaware of any wrongdoing until she searched online for articles about the doctor and discovered that other people had filed lawsuits for medical malpractice for similar surgery. She subsequently filed a lawsuit against the defendant in 2016, asserting medical malpractice, lack of informed consent, and negligence claims. The defendant moved to dismiss the plaintiff’s claims on the grounds that they were prohibited by the statute of limitations. Continue Reading ›

In most medical malpractice cases, the defendant will contest both liability and damages. In some instances, though, the defendant will concede fault but will argue that the plaintiff failed to adequately support their request for damages or that certain compensation should not be granted. Recently, a Maryland court addressed the issue of whether a plaintiff should be able to make a per diem request in closing arguments when the defendant had been precluded from presenting evidence regarding the plaintiff’s medical bills or lost wages at trial, ultimately ruling that the request was proper. If you were hurt by a negligent doctor, it is smart to talk to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about what damages you may be able to recover.

Facts of the Case

It is reported that the plaintiff, a former inmate, sued the defendant, a company that provides medical services to correctional facilities, for misdiagnosing his fractured wrist, which later required extensive surgery. The defendant admitted liability, and the case went to trial on damages. The plaintiff sought non-economic damages only, and the court granted his motion to exclude evidence of medical bills and lost wages. During the trial, the plaintiff’s expert testified that the delay in treatment caused a permanent injury.

In Maryland, dentists are considered healthcare providers, which means, among other things, they can be held liable for medical malpractice. A plaintiff pursuing medical malpractice claims against a dentist must not only offer evidence sufficient to demonstrate liability, but they must also comply with the applicable rules of procedure. If they fail to do so, their claim may be dismissed, as demonstrated in a recent ruling issued in a dental malpractice case filed in a Maryland federal court. If you suffered harm due to the carelessness of a dentist, it is wise to confer with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer about what claims you may be able to pursue.

Case History

It is alleged that the plaintiff suffered harm due to inadequate dental care that he received while incarcerated. He subsequently filed a lawsuit in federal court, alleging the dentist was negligent. He also requested to proceed with the lawsuit without paying the filing fee because of his status. The court granted his in forma pauperis request but decided to dismiss the case based on the grounds that it did not meet the requirements necessary for a successful claim.

Pursuing Medical Malpractice Claims Against Dentists Under Maryland Law

The court noted that the plaintiff claimed that the defendant denied his constitutional right to adequate medical care but failed to set forth facts sufficient to support his claim. While the plaintiff alleged negligence on the part of the defendant, the court pointed out that negligence or malpractice is not enough to make a constitutional claim for inadequate medical care. Continue Reading ›

In Maryland, people injured by the negligence of healthcare providers have the right to pursue medical malpractice claims. They must do so within the time proscribed by the statute of limitations, however, otherwise, their claim may be dismissed. As discussed in a recent Maryland ruling, the statutory period generally begins to run when the plaintiff knows or has reason to know of their claim. If you were injured by improperly rendered medical care, it is smart to speak to a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer promptly to avoid waiving your right to recover damages.

The Facts of the Case

It is reported that the defendant performed hip replacement surgery on the plaintiff in April 2010. The plaintiff experienced pain and complications immediately after the procedure. She continued to treat with a different orthopedic surgeon, who, in December 2010, opined, recommended revision surgery. In January 2014, the plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the defendant, alleging he negligently performed the hip replacement surgery.

Allegedly, the defendant moved for summary judgment asserting that, as a matter of law, the plaintiff had inquiry notice of her claims against him in December 2010, and therefore, her claims were barred by the statute of limitations. The court found in favor of the defendant and granted his motion. The plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

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 ›

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 ›

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.

Continue Reading ›

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 ›

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 ›

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 ›

Contact Information