Posted on February 03, 2012 in Medical Malpractice

In 2007, an active lieutenant with his local Sheriff’s Department made the decision to undergo weight-loss surgery. At 6-foot-1 and 375 pounds, the risk of a routine laparoscopic gastric bypass surgery seemed slight compared to his many weight-related health risks. Then suddenly, the day after the procedure, he went into respiratory failure and had to be placed in critical care. For over a week, he showed signs of complications but doctors did not take him back into surgery to repair the problem for eight days. This was a serious medical error, even based on the testimony of the hospital’s own experts who admitted that most bariatric doctors would have performed the surgery as soon as the patient exhibited the symptoms, but certainly no later than six days after.

As a result of the delay in treatment, the patient’s blood pressure dropped and he experienced a "low-flow stroke,’ meaning his brain was not getting enough blood, causing him to remain comatose for two weeks following the surgery. Then, in another shocking medical mistake, doctors failed to give him eye drops while he remained on a respirator which resulted in a permanent loss of his eyesight. This avoidable complication was a clear breach of the standard of care.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 24, 2012 in Medical Malpractice

A Hartford, Connecticut boy’s family has filed a medical malpractice suit against his pediatrician, alleging that the doctor’s failure to timely diagnose the child’s bacterial meningitis lead to the 7-year-old losing his eyesight.

The boy went to his pediatrician complaining of severe headaches. However, this symptom went unnoticed and he was diagnosed with an ear infection, the first of several medical errors. He returned to the doctor when his condition did not improve but was sent away by a receptionist who said there was nothing more the office could do for him. When the child was finally sent for a CT scan, he was only diagnosed with a migraine. This was yet another medical mistake in the young boy’s care. This several day delay in diagnosis allowed the condition to worsen, and the infection to spread.

Bacterial meningitis is a potentially fatal condition where the membranes that cover the brain and spinal cord become inflamed as result of a bacterial infection. The CDC has stated that early diagnosis is critical to the successful treatment of bacterial meningitis.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 23, 2012 in Criminal Defense

Maryland Criminal Attorney -The Supreme Court today in a rare showing of unity among its liberal and conservative members, ruled that the police may not secretly place a GPS monitoring device on a suspect’s vehicle to track his movements without first obtaining a search and seizure warrant. The Roberts Court which has come to be defined in many people’s views by controversial 5-4 decisions ruled unanimously today that a person’s automobile is covered under the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches of a person’s right to be secure in their houses, papers and "effects". Here are details:

The government obtained a search and seizure warrant to put GPS on Jones wife’s vehicle. The warrant authorized an install of the device in the District of Columbia within 10 days. The agents installed the tracking device in Maryland on the 11th day after the warrant was issued. They then tracked the vehicle for 28 days and secured information resulting in an indictment of Jones and others on conspiracy and drug trafficking charges. The DC court suppressed the data obtained while the vehicle was parked at Jones residence but not while the vehicle was on public streets- stating that Jones had no reasonable expectation of privacy. The DC circuit reversed concluding that the admission of evidence obtained by warrantless use violated the Fourth Amendment. The Supreme Court agreed- citing the Fourth Amendment’s protection of a persons right to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects." The Court held the Government’s physical intrusion on an "effect" for the purpose of obtaining information constituted a search.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on January 13, 2012 in Criminal Defense

Can the Police search your car without a warrant? As a Criminal Defense Attorney, this is one of the questions that I am asked most often. The answer to the question is generally speaking yes so long as the police have probable cause. This is an exception to the warrant requirement in the Constitution known as the Automobile Exception. The rationale is that unlike a person’s home for instance, automobiles are by their very nature movable objects creating a sort of inherent exigency that justifies allowing police to search without requiring them to leave the scene to obtain a warrant.

While the automobile exception is certainly a long recognized exception to the warrant requirement, it does not mean that the police can search a person’s car without a warrant in every situation. As I said, the police must have probable cause or some other basis upon which to rely to search the vehicle. One common situation in which police search a person’s vehicle without probable cause is the so called "search incident to arrest". However, the Supreme Court recently changed the rules regarding searches incident to arrest in a very significant way in a case called Arizona v. Gant. Prior to Gant the police would routinely search a person’s car after affecting a lawful arrest, even if the arrest was for relatively minor traffic offenses such as driving while on a suspended license. In the Gant case, the Court limited the searches incident to arrest to situations in which the person arrested was within reaching distance of the passenger compartment a the time of the search and it was reasonable to believe that the vehicle contained evidence of the offense for which the person was being arrested. I successfully defended a client charged with Possession with the Intent to Distribute Marijuana utilizing this new case in Baltimore City Circuit Court last week. Here are the facts:

My client was operating his vehicle in a lawful manner in Baltimore City one day last fall. A police officer did a random check of his license plate through MVA and found that the registered owner of the vehicle’s license was suspended for failing to pay child support and that he also had a warrant for his arrest for not paying child support. The officer looked up the description of the individual in the MVA computer and found that it very closely matched the operator of the vehicle. He conducted a traffic stop and quickly confirmed that the operator was in fact the registered owner. He immediately place my client under arrest for the outstanding warrant and placed him in the back of his police cruiser.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 20, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

In late March, a Maryland teen died at Johns Hopkins Hospital after she was deprived of oxygen during routine wisdom tooth surgery. Her parents have since brought a medical malpractice suit against the oral surgeon and anesthesiologist who performed the dental procedure.

At the outset of the surgery, the teen was administered a standard dose of anesthesia. This dose was not sufficient to perform the surgery and an additional dose was administered. Shortly afterwards, the teen’s heart rate began to slow.

The medical malpractice suit, brought in Howard County, alleges that the doctors were negligent in their care of the teen. The suit states that they committed a serious medical error when, during the course of the surgery, the teen’s heart rate slowed to 40 beats per minute and her oxygen level began to drop, but doctors failed to resuscitate her. By the time emergency personnel arrived, the teen had no pulse and had suffered permanent and irreversible brain injury.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 05, 2011 in Criminal Defense

Any Experienced Baltimore Criminal Defense Attorney will tell you that it is a very bad idea indeed to take your divorce lawyer ( or personal injury lawyer, or real estate lawyer or…) with you to criminal court. I have blogged many times about this issue but it still never ceases to amaze me how many people do just that, in spite of the stakes.

Legal situations obviously don’t get more serious or perilous than ones in which your very freedom is on the line. Unfortunately, too often people in these situations tend to simply call the only attorney they know or retain whoever their Aunt Lucy or Uncle Joe tells them to call. For whatever reason people rarely investigate an attorney’s background or qualifications prior to retaining the attorney. This is in most instances a colossal mistake that can have devastating consequences for the client. I was retained last week by a client in exactly this situation in a https://www.silvermanthompson.com/lawyer-attorney-1300820.html case. Here are the facts.

My client and his wife of twenty years are currently in the midst of a less than amicable divorce and custody battle. My client works with disabled children and his wife is a Registered Nurse. Neither has a criminal record. As we all know, divorce and custody fights are often emotionally charged situations that can become volatile or even violent; and that is what happened in this case.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on December 01, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

In early 2010, the family of a 17-year-old girl with a rare genetic disorder brought a medical malpractice suit against the Johns Hopkins Hospital alleging that the Johns Hopkins doctors and nurses provided inappropriate treatment to the disabled girl.

The Baltimore City jury that heard the medical malpractice suit found the staff at Johns Hopkins negligent in restraining the girl in a manner that caused extensive bruising. The girl, a long-time patient at Johns Hopkins Hospital, was extremely frail as a result of her condition and required special treatment. The girl’s father alleged that following an overnight stay at Johns Hopkins Hospital on March 12, 2007, he noticed "numerous bruises" on the girl’s body in addition to a "large lump on her forehead." Johns Hopkins Hospital staff provided no explanation for the bruises other than "spontaneous bruising" caused by her disorder. The girl’s father was not satisfied with this response, and brought the medical malpractice suit against Johns Hopkins Hospital. Ultimately, the jury found that Johns Hopkins Hospital was negligent and committed malpractice for the bruises awarded the girl $250,000.00.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 23, 2011 in Divorce

As we reported on June 6, 2011, a novel issue was presented to the Court of Appeals involving law firm intervention in divorce in order to seek attorney’s fees. In the case of Tydings & Rosenberg LLP v. John Zorzit, Tydings & Roseberg former client, Julie Zorzit, after employing the firm to do a substantial amount of work, met privately with her husband, John Zorzit, and waived all rights for her attorney’s fees to be paid by her husband. The firm was seeking the fees, as Ms. Zorzit could not afford to pay for the work that had already been done, but Mr. Zorzit could. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County denied the firms request for the fees, and the case was appealed to the Maryland Court of Appeals.

On October 30, 2011, the Maryland Daily Record reported that the Court of Appeals found in Tydings & Rosenberg’s favor and held that family law attorneys can intervene in a divorce proceeding in order to ensure that they are paid for their services. The Court stated that The Maryland Code, Family Law Article § 7-107, the statute governing attorneys fees in divorce matters, gives the Court the authority to award counsel fees to a party’s lawyer directly, and therefore Tydings & Rosenberg had the right to intervene. The Court affirmed the parties’ divorce but vacated other provisions in their Judgment of Absolute Divorce and sent the case back to the Circuit Court for Baltimore County to be heard on the issue of attorney fees.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 23, 2011 in Divorce

On Saturday, November 12, 2011, the Carroll County Times provided commentary on the differences between celebrity divorces, such as Kim Kardashian, and divorces for residents of Maryland. As we reported in our April 18, 2011 blog, as of October 1, 2011, Maryland has eliminated the 2 year waiting period to seek a divorce, making obtaining a divorce in Maryland a bit easier, although not as easy at it is for Kim K.

Previously, one filing for a divorce had to specify whether both parties, or just the moving party was seeking the divorce. If both parties were seeking a divorce, then only a one year separation period was required, if only one party was seeking the divorce, then a two year separation period was required. This distinction is no longer as of October 1, 2011 and separation, whether mutual or non mutual is only required to be one year to file for a divorce. As we mentioned in our April 18, 2011 blog, proponents of this legislation believe that it is one step closer to reducing the waiting period to obtaining a divorce, making a Kim K. divorce a future reality for Marylanders.

For more information on Maryland divorce, contact an experienced Maryland divorce attorney

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on November 15, 2011 in Criminal Defense

From a criminal defense attorney’s view, it is incomprehensible that Sandusky’s lawyer allowed his client to be interviewed by Bob Costs yesterday. As a father of two children, I am so glad he did because this "alleged" child predator all but guaranteed he will spend the rest of his life behind bars. Based on what I heard, Sandusky all but admitted his guilt. Consider this:

COSTAS: Innocent? Completely innocent and falsely accused in every aspect?

SANDUSKY: Well I could say that, you know, I have done some of those things. I have horsed around with kids. I have showered after workouts. I have hugged them and I have touched their leg. Without intent of sexual contact. But – so if you look at it that way – there are things that wouldn’t – you know, would be accurate.

And this:

BOB COSTAS: Are you sexually attracted to young boys, to underage boys?

JERRY SANDUSKY: Am I sexually attracted to underage boys?

Continue Reading ››