Medical Negligence

Court Discusses Establishing Liability in Maryland Medical Malpractice Cases

July 11, 2022 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

Negligence in the context of medical care can cause extensive injuries; as such, the law permits people harmed by the carelessness of their treatment providers to seek compensation via medical malpractice claims. Merely establishing negligence is not sufficient to recover damages from reckless providers, however. Rather, a plaintiff must also show that the defendant’s negligence caused their alleged harm, as explained in a recent Maryland medical malpractice matter. If you suffered damages due to incompetent medical care, you should confer with a Maryland medical malpractice lawyer regarding your rights as soon as possible.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that in 2015, the defendant performed a myomectomy on the plaintiff to remove a uterine fibroid. Following the surgery, she experienced significant pain that ultimately prompted her to seek additional care. Testing showed evidence of an infection, and she underwent a subsequent surgery that revealed she had a perforated bowel. She underwent a third surgery a week later, in which it was established that she had a perforated rectum as well.

It is reported that the plaintiff instituted a medical malpractice case against the defendant. The case proceeded to trial, and the defendant moved for judgment as a matter of law. The court denied his motion. The jury found in favor of the plaintiff, after which the defendant renewed his motion and filed a motion to alter the judgment. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Discusses Venue in Cases Arising Out of Negligence

July 6, 2022 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

Generally, Maryland law affords plaintiffs the right to file lawsuits in the venue of their choice. There are specific parameters they must abide by, however, and if a defendant believes the plaintiff’s chosen venue is improper, it can move to transfer the case to another court. Recently, a Maryland court explained the grounds for relocating a case on the basis of improper venue in a matter in which the plaintiff alleged that she suffered harm due to the negligent insertion and removal of an IUD birth control device. If you sustained losses due to negligent medical care, it is in your best interest to meet with a Maryland medical malpractice attorney to assess your options for seeking damages.

The Facts of the Case

It is alleged that the plaintiff underwent an IUD birth control device implantation in 2010. The procedure was performed at Baltimore city clinic owned by the defendant. In 2018, the plaintiff visited the defendant’s Baltimore County clinic to have the IUD removed by the defendant nurse practitioner. The IUD broke during the process of removal, leaving a fragment in the plaintiff’s uterus. She underwent a subsequent surgery to remove the portion left behind, but it was unsuccessful, and she had to undergo a hysterectomy.

Reportedly, the plaintiff subsequently filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, naming the clinic, the nurse practitioner, and three foreign companies involved in manufacturing and distributing the IUD as defendants. The defendant clinic and defendant nurse practitioner moved to transfer the matter to the Circuit Court for Baltimore County because the plaintiff’s chosen venue was improper. The trial court granted the motion, and the plaintiff appealed. Continue Reading ›

Maryland Court Allows Testimony of Plaintiff’s Expert Witnesses in Dental Malpractice Case

November 17, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

In Maryland, actions brought under the Health Care and Malpractice Act include lawsuits for negligent dental treatment, in addition to medical malpractice. To establish a dental negligence action, opinion testimony from a dental or medical expert witness is generally required. In an August 11, 2021 case, the Court of Special Appeals considered whether a lower court erred in determining that the expert opinions of the plaintiff’s witnesses were inadmissible evidence, which then served as the basis for granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants.

The plaintiff in the case alleged that she suffered a permanent loss of feeling in her tongue as a result of her oral surgeon severing lingual nerves in her jaw during the extraction of her wisdom teeth. She filed a lawsuit asserting malpractice claims against the doctor, the surgery center, and the dentist who treated her afterward.

The plaintiff designated two expert witnesses to testify that her injury was more likely than not caused by a severed lingual nerve, which was preventable had the defendants not deviated from the standard of care when removing her wisdom teeth. Following discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgement, arguing that the plaintiff’s expert opinion evidence was insufficient. The trial court granted the motion, finding that the expert opinions were inadmissible because they relied on impermissible inferences of negligence and were not based on the plaintiff’s treatment records.

Plaintiff Alleges Prescribed Medication Caused Infertility in Maryland Medical Malpractice Action

October 21, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

In some situations, a health care provider may violate the standard of care by not informing a patient of the potentially serious side effects of a medication. In a September 24, 2021 case, the plaintiff brought claims for medical malpractice and lack of informed consent against his doctors, alleging that he was not properly informed of the high infertility risks of his prescribed medication. The case came before the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland on review of the lower court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of one of the defendants.

In March of 2010, when the plaintiff was in his mid-20s, he was hospitalized for cough and shortness of breath. Thereafter, the plaintiff sought treatment from a pulmonologist, who prescribed increasing dosages of Cytoxan. The plaintiff’s care was assumed by a second doctor in February of 2011, who continued treatment with Cytoxan, without significant improvement, until the plaintiff was fully weaned off the medication in May of 2013.

In 2016, the plaintiff was diagnosed with infertility due to Cytoxan toxicity. The plaintiff brought a medical malpractice action in 2018 against the two doctors who treated him. The plaintiff alleged that he was not properly informed of the high infertility risks of Cytoxan, and as a result, he did not have his fertility monitored or take any other action to preserve his ability to have children. The circuit court granted summary judgment as to the claims of the first doctor as time barred. The plaintiff appealed that decision.

Maryland Plaintiff Brings Dental Malpractice Action for Permanently Numb Tongue

September 21, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

In Maryland, medical malpractice lawsuits are subject to the statute of limitations, which provides the deadline by which an action must be filed, or it may be dismissed as untimely. There are some exceptions to the general rule, however, as explained by the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland in an August 6, 2021 opinion.

The plaintiff in the case had his wisdom teeth removed on May 29, 2015. The following morning, the plaintiff realized that he had no sensation in his tongue. The plaintiff immediately contacted the dental center to address the issue and scheduled an appointment with the doctor who had performed the surgery. The plaintiff alleged that, at the June 11 appointment, the doctor told him that it could take up to one year for his tongue to regain full sensation, but that, with time and the use of pain medication, his tongue would get better.

After consulting with an attorney, on July 17, 2018, the plaintiff filed a claim against the doctor and the dental center, asserting that the doctor had severed the plaintiff’s lingual nerve during the extraction of his wisdom teeth. The circuit court, finding that the injury accrued on June 11, 2015, dismissed the action as barred by the statute of limitations.

Maryland Plaintiff Sues Doctor and Hospital for Negligence Following Bilateral Amputation

September 3, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

Whether a hospital may or may not be held liable for the negligence of a physician or staff member depends on a number of factors, including whether the doctors are employees of the hospital, or independent contractors. In a July 20, 2021 opinion, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland reviewed a medical malpractice claim against a hospital for the alleged negligence of its doctors under an apparent agency theory.

The plaintiff in the case was badly injured in a car accident on the Capital Beltway. He was transported to the hospital in an ambulance, during which time the plaintiff testified that he was in and out of consciousness. It was undisputed that the doctor who treated the plaintiff at the hospital’s trauma center was an independent contractor. Ultimately, after multiple surgeries, the plaintiff’s legs were amputated above the knee, and his left arm was permanently damaged.

The plaintiff brought claims against the doctor and hospital, alleging that the doctor was negligent in providing medical and surgical care, and that the hospital was vicariously liable for the doctor’s alleged negligence under a theory of apparent agency. Following a trial, the jury returned a verdict against the doctor, finding that he committed medical malpractice, and against the hospital, finding that the doctor was its apparent agent. The plaintiff was awarded economic and noneconomic damages of over 6 million dollars. The trial court, however, granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict in favor of the hospital as to the issue of apparent agency. The plaintiff then sought review from the appeals court.

Maryland Plaintiff Files Medical Negligence Claim for Allegedly Botched Surgery

August 3, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

The evidence and testimony presented in a Maryland medical negligence case may be crucial to the outcome. If one party objects to the evidence offered by an opposing party, the trial court will decide whether it is admissible. In a July 12, 2021 medical malpractice case, the Court of Special Appeals considered whether or not the lower court had erred in allowing evidence of the informed medical consent process, when the plaintiff had not asserted an informed consent claim against the defendant.

The plaintiff in the case underwent an outpatient hernia repair surgery performed by the defendant. Five days later, the plaintiff returned to the hospital due to abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting. The plaintiff was transferred to the ER, and emergency surgery was performed to repair a colon perforation. She underwent two subsequent operations the following month.

The plaintiff filed a medical malpractice claim, alleging that her doctor breached the standard of care for failure to inspect for a colotomy and failure to perform the appropriate surgery, among other claims. Although the plaintiff did not assert an informed consent action, the trial court allowed the defendant to testify about the risks and complications of surgery that he discussed with the plaintiff before her operation. After the trial, the jury found the defendant was not negligent.

Maryland Court Allows Plaintiffs to Proceed with Medical Malpractice Claim for Birth Injuries

June 20, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

In Maryland, expert testimony is generally required to establish a medical malpractice claim. In a May 26, 2021 opinion, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland considered whether evidence of negligence, which included opinions of two medical experts, was sufficient to survive a summary judgment motion in a medical malpractice case.

The plaintiff in the case was receiving prenatal care from the defendants during her pregnancy. At 38 weeks, she reported decreased fetal movement at a routine prenatal visit. She was referred to the hospital for further evaluation, where she received care from a delivery nurse and physician. Ultimately, the physician diagnosed her with gestational hypertension and discharged her the same day. Four days later, the plaintiff was admitted to the hospital with high blood pressure and had an emergency Caesarean section. Her son was born with multiple health conditions, including a brain disorder.

The plaintiffs filed medical malpractice claims, alleging negligence against the doctor for failing to deliver her son four days earlier, against the nurse for failing to initiate the hospital’s chain of command policy, and against the hospital. After the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the nurse and hospital, the plaintiffs sought review of the decision on appeal.

Maryland Plaintiff Prevails on Medical Negligence Claim Arising from Spinal Surgery

June 3, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

In Maryland, performing surgery on a patient without their informed consent may be grounds for a medical malpractice suit. Generally, a medical expert is required to provide evidence of a doctor’s alleged negligence. In a March 15, 2021 opinion, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland reviewed a lawsuit against a surgeon for performing an allegedly unnecessary procedure on the plaintiff without her informed consent. The matter came before the court on appeal after a jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff in the case had sought medical treatment from the defendant for low back pain radiating through her left leg and foot. After several examinations, the defendant recommended surgery on both the left and right side of the spine, despite the lack of any symptoms on the plaintiff’s right side. Following the laminectomy and bilateral laminectomy, the plaintiff experienced physical and neurological pain and disability. The plaintiff then brought a medical negligence suit against the defendant, alleging that the surgery to the right side of her spine was performed unnecessarily and without informed consent.

Before the trial, the court granted the plaintiff’s motion to preclude any evidence or testimony concerning disciplinary action taken, and later overturned, against the plaintiff’s expert medical witness. In so doing, the trial court found that such evidence was irrelevant to the credibility of the expert witness and that questions about it would be prejudicial. The case was then tried over several days, after which the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

Maryland Court Explains Doctrine of Informed Consent in Medical Malpractice Case

May 7, 2021 | by Foran & Foran, P.A.

A Maryland medical malpractice claim based on the lack of informed consent can be complicated in some cases, particularly when the patient is a minor. In a February 1, 2021 opinion, the Court of Special Appeals of Maryland analyzed the duty of healthcare professionals and the doctrine of informed consent in Maryland.

The sixteen-year-old plaintiff in the case had been diagnosed with early-onset preeclampsia during the second trimester of her pregnancy. The medical team met with the plaintiff and her mother to discuss the treatment options, which included terminating the pregnancy, inducing labor for vaginal delivery, or cesarean section. Although her doctors continued to recommend a cesarean section for the wellbeing of the fetus, the plaintiff repeatedly confirmed her decision to avoid the procedure. In addition, the plaintiff signed two consent forms explicitly declining a cesarean section with the understanding that inducing vaginal delivery would impose additional stress on the fetus and that the infant would have a better chance of survival if a cesarean section was performed. Following induced vaginal labor, the baby was born with severe mental and physical disabilities that require life-long dependent and medical care.

The plaintiff filed suit against the hospital, claiming that the hospital had violated her right to informed consent with respect to her delivery options. The jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded damages of approximately 230 million dollars. The hospital appealed on the grounds that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s findings on the issue of breach of informed consent.