Maryland Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog
Peninsula Regional Medical Center, located in Salisbury, Maryland is the latest Maryland hospital involved in medical malpractice suits arising from unnecessary stent procedures.
Baltimore Washington Medical Center Must Pay A $14,000 Fine
Baltimore Washington Medical Center, located in Anne Arundel County Maryland, was recently fined by the Maryland Department of Environment (MDE) a result of medical malpractice. The settlement agreement reached between the MDE and Baltimore Washington Medical Center stemmed from an error in which the hospital administered an improper dose of radiation. The MDE became involved because radiation doses are supposed to be limited to levels as low as reasonably achievable, pursuant to the Maryland Radiation Act.
Rare Bacterial Infection Leads to Severe Brain Damage in Infant – Who is at Fault?
When Myles Massey was born on September 1, 2007, along with his brother, Henry, a medical mystery began to unfold. The twin boys were born prematurely in a Washington state hospital, but it was only Myles who exhibited signs that something was wrong. It took years, but Myles’ family has finally determined the cause of the bacterial infection that overtook his small body, leaving him unable to walk or talk, while sparing his brother who developed normally.
The System of Disciplining a Rogue Physician
Almost one year after being charged with violating the Medical Practice Act and engaging in medical malpractice in Towson, Maryland, former St. Joseph’s Medical Center cardiologist Dr. Mark G. Midei has had his license revoked by the Maryland State Board of Physicians. This case has proven to be instructive as to the steps the Board takes when determining appropriate sanctions for misbehaving doctors.
Dr. Mark Midei’s license has been revoked
Dr. Mark Midei’s medical license was revoked today by the Maryland Board of Physicians. A copy of the Final Decision and Order can be found here. As set forth in decision, the Board found that Dr. Midei engaged in “unprofessional conduct” and “blatant falsehood.” It found that he is guilty of “failing to deal honestly with patients and colleagues,” that he created “willfully false reports,” and that he unnecessary implanted people with cardiac stents. The Board stated that it found Dr. Midei’s testimony “not credible.” The Board also indicated that Dr. Midei had economic motivation for his misconduct.
Doctor’s Offices vs. Hospitals – Who is More Prone to Medical Malpractice?
A study published in June 2011 provided a somewhat unexpected result – doctor’s offices and hospitals are equally as likely to be sued for medical malpractice. This finding is surprising because the majority of patient safety initiatives focus on inpatient care at hospitals. The finding of this study, however, indicates a need for the focus to shift to outpatient settings as well. The Journal of the American Medical Association study can be found here.
Military Medical Malpractice
A recurring controversy in the military is a legal doctrine – called the “Feres Doctrine” – which forbids any active-duty personnel from filing a medical malpractice case against military doctors. In the past, the United States Supreme Court declined to hear any challenges to the doctrine, but that might change as soon as this week. The Supreme Court decision of whether the Justices will hear a case could come as early as this week.
Failure to Diagnose Uterine Cancer
In August 2000, a Maryland patient visited her gynecologist and informed her that she was experiencing abnormal bleeding. The gynecologist, Dr. Moen, ordered an ultrasound to help her determine the cause of the bleeding, but did not perform an endometrial biopsy. The ultrasound was performed and subsequently interpreted by a radiologist, Dr. DeCandido. When interpreting the ultrasound, Dr. DeCandido did not notice and report a mass located on the patient’s right ovary that measured 1.5 centimeters.
Misdiagnosis of Cancer
Medical errors leading to malpractice litigation generally stems from two root causes: a health-care provider choosing the wrong method of care or a health-care provider choosing the right method of care but carrying it out incorrectly. The former is particularly relevant when a health-care provider makes a misdiagnosis.
Punitive Damages and Vicarious Liability in a Maryland Medical Malpractice Case
In a Maryland medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff seeks punitive damages against a doctor for conducting an unnecessary procedure, is the employer hospital vicariously liable for punitive damages?
In general, Maryland has uniformly applied a broad rule for punitive damages and held an employer vicariously liable for punitive damages for its employee’s tortious acts. Embrey v. Holly, 293 Md. 128, 137-38, 442 A.2d 966, 971 (1982). The nature of punitive damages is such that a punitive damage award may be apportioned between multiple wrongdoers depending upon the degree of culpability and the pecuniary status of each. Embrey, 293 Md. at 141, 442 A.2d at 973. In Embrey, which was a defamation case, the Court held that it was entirely proper to permit a jury to apportion punitive damages among multiple defendants, the speaker of the defamatory language and his employer radio station. Id. at 143, 442 A.2d at 974.
Continue Reading →
Ten years after being born, a newborn filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against University of Maryland hospital
In 2002, ten years after being born with among other things, cerebral palsy, mental retardation, and developmental delay, a newborn, through her guardian, filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against University of Maryland Medical System’s University of Maryland hospital. The newborn, through her guardian, alleged that hospital was negligent because it made the mother wait before conducting an emergency c-section, which resulted in severe injury to newborn. A jury in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City initially entered a verdict in favor of hospital. On appeal, the Maryland Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the case to the Circuit Court. A copy the judicial opinion regarding the case can be found here.
Malpractice From Failing To Timely Treat Septic Shock
In 2003 a twenty-seven year old man, Mr. Bennett, arrived at the Good Samaritan Hospital in Baltimore, Maryland. He entered the emergency department complaining of generalized weakness, vomiting and a bump on the head. Later that day, he was moved from the emergency department and admitted to the hospital. Despite his progressively septic (infected) state, the treating physician failed to follow safety rules that would have resulted in the recognition of the mans’ distress. Twelve hours later, the man was finally treated, for the first time, for sepsis. Less than twenty-four hours after he arrived at the Good Samaritan Hospital, the man was pronounced dead from severe septic shock.
Maryland Hospital Patient Safety Report
Earlier this month the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Office of Health Care Quality published a report regarding medical malpractice in Maryland hospitals. The report is a review of the safety and care provided to patients in Maryland hospitals. The report compiles information collected by the OHCQ in 2010 relating to serious adverse events that affected patients or their families.
Medical negligence is not the only basis for a medical malpractice lawsuit in Maryland.
Lack of informed consent can also be a basis for these cases involving hospitals, doctors and their patients. The doctrine of “informed consent” in Maryland requires that, prior to performing any type of medical procedure on a patient, a doctor must disclose to the patient a number of things to assist the patient in making an informed choice about whether to undergo the procedure. For example, Maryland case law states it is the duty of the physician to explain the procedure to the patient, warn him of the dangers associated with performing, advise of the probability of success of the procedure and advise of the alternatives to the procedure. The doctor or hosptial may even be required to advise the patient of “other factors,” such as whether there are more experiended physicians who do the procedure in the patient’s georgraphic area. Providing adequate informed consent is a requirement of all doctors and hospitals, and Johns Hopkins Hospital is no exception.
Failure to Obtain Informed Consent in Medical Malpractice Cases
Medical negligence is not the only basis for a medical malpractice lawsuit in Maryland. Lack of informed consent can also be a basis for these cases involving hospitals, doctors and their patients. The doctrine of “informed consent” in Maryland requires that, prior to performing any type of medical procedure on a patient, a doctor must disclose to the patient a number of things to assist the patient in making an informed choice about whether to undergo the procedure. For example, Maryland case law states it is the duty of the physician to explain the procedure to the patient, warn him of the dangers associated with performing, advise of the probability of success of the procedure and advise of the alternatives to the procedure. The doctor or hosptial may even be required to advise the patient of “other factors,” such as whether there are more experiended physicians who do the procedure in the patient’s georgraphic area. Providing adequate informed consent is a requirement of all doctors and hospitals, and Johns Hopkins Hospital is no exception.