Over $850 Million in Verdicts and Settlements
AV Preeminent badge
Super Lawyers badge
Avvo Rating badge
Best Law Firms badge
TNTL badge

In Maryland, the doctrine of informed consent requires a physician, before a patient undergoes a non-emergency medical procedure, to explain the proposed medical procedure to the patient including warning the patient of the benefits, risks and alternatives. The District Court for the District of Maryland recently had the occasion to review this law in the case of Robertson v. Iuliano, et al.

When most hear about complications during childbirth most immediately think of the child. Obviously the birthing process is a delicate one, and infants are quite vulnerable to long-term harm that results from prolonged oxygen deprivation, the applications of excess force, and other incidents. However, it is important not to forget that mothers are just as susceptible to serious injury and even death caused by problems during childbirth. In fact, according to some recent reports, the most serious maternal complications are actually on the rise in the United States.

Popular movies and television shows involving lawyers and lawsuits sometimes create misperceptions about how the justice system actually works. For one thing, while courtroom drama makes the most riveting entertainment, in reality the vast majority of cases end with amicable agreements between the parties involved. Actual trials are certainly more an exception than a rule.

The birth of a child is supposed to be one of the happiest moments in the life of a family. Unfortunately, for some the memorable occasions turns into a nightmare. That is because, at rates far higher than many suspect, childbirth can result in complications and injuries to the mother or child. Because of the delicate nature of the situation, when a new child is hurt during birth, the consequences are often quite severe. Birth injuries can prove to cause lifelong harm and can even be fatal.

It is every medical patient’s worst nightmare. You go to the doctor to have routine tests performed. To your relief, everything comes back negative. You are in the clear. But, a few months later you begin to experience some health problems. Another doctor’s visit is scheduled, and more tests are done. This time the news is much worse. It’s cancer, and it has spread significantly. If you had received treatment earlier the options might be better, but now things look bleak.

The Post-Gazette reported recently on serious allegations of malpractice against a pathologist for misreading Pap smear slides and missing the presence of cancer in a patient. According to the story, a young woman was shocked when she was diagnosed with cervical cancer shortly after giving birth to her son. She had diligently received annual testing in the past which, she assumed, would have identified the cancer earlier. A lawsuit eventually filed in the case claims that for five years the pathologist in charge of decisions about the test reading told the women that everything was fine. The doctor did not identify the presence of any abnormal cells or order more testing to clarify ambiguity.

In an opinion reported on November 27, 2012, the Court of Appeals of Maryland held that a settlement agreement executed in a Maryland medical malpractice case involving Mercy Medical Center was not effective to end the hospital’s liability. A copy of the Court of Appeals opinion can be found here.

Johns Hopkins Hospital researchers recently uncovered a startling figure regarding hospital medical malpractice: 40,500 intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients die each year as a result of misdiagnosis, as opposed to life threatening conditions that cannot be treated.

After pushing hospitals to replace paper records with electronic ones, many policymakers now believe the next step in improving the quality of medical care is to reduce the number of errors made by doctors. One study recently found that putting a child’s photo in their electronic hospital chart reduced one type of medical error – a patient getting a test or treatment intended for someone else due to a doctor’s misplaced orders. An article about the study can be found here.

In late June, one of the largest medical malpractice verdicts in Maryland was handed down by a Baltimore City jury against Johns Hopkins Hospital along with Johns Hopkins Health Systems Corp. The jury awarded the family of a child born with cerebral palsy and seizure disorder $55 Million.

In May, following a one week medical malpractice trial in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, a jury returned a verdict of One Million Dollars in favor of the two sons of a woman who died as a result of an allergic reaction to dye used during a medical procedure. The plaintfffs alleged that the women had a history of severe allergies to bee stings and should not have had the dye. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here.

In a decision handed down by the Court of Special Appeals on June 6, 2012, Maryland’s intermediate appellate court clarified section 3-2A-02(c)(2)(ii)1B of the Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article of the Annotated Code of Maryland, which sets forth the requirement that, if the defendant in a medical malpractice action is board certified in a specialty, any expert witnesses who testifies that the defendant violated the standard of care must be board certified in the same or a “related” specialty. A copy of the Court of Special Appeals opinion can be found here.

Contact Information