Posted on June 06, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

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.

For example, there is the case of Mark Mahler. Mr. Mahler claimed that his doctor at Johns Hopkins Hospital failed to obtain his "informed consent" beucase the doctor did not disclose the major risks of an elective procedure to him, and he subsequently brought suit.
A copy the judicial opinion regarding the case can be found here. Following his surgery, Mr. Mahler claimed that he was not adequately advised of all of the risks of this particular procedure, and would not have undergone the surgery had he known of them. The Court evaluated the sufficiency of both the consent form that Mr. Mahler signed prior to the procedure and the discussion that he had with his doctor. The Court believed that the consent form created a question as to whether adequate consent was actually given to the patient as it contained a list of rather vague, generic complications that follow any procedure. Furthermore, the discussion that took place between Mr. Mahler and his doctor downplayed the risks of the procedure. For example, the doctors’ explanation of what the standard warnings for numbness and failure to achieve desired results meant did not in any way indicate that permanent numbness or unanticipated change in appearance was possible.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 06, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

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.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 03, 2011 in Driving Under the Influence

Ashttps://www.silvermanthompson.com/lawyer-attorney-1301140.html for the last 15 years I have seen just about every factual scenario possible when it comes to people charged with Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol. I have blogged many times about the fact that it has become increasingly difficult over the last 15 years to secure a "not guilty" finding in a DUI case. The laws have become much stricter with the introduction of the "Per Se" violation and the reduction of the legal limit for DUI for .10 to .08. So in an increasing number of cases, experienced attorneys need to recognize quickly whether or not a case is defensible or whether to focus on mitigation instead.

Most not guilty results in DUI cases these days come by attacking the stop and suppressing the evidence. Even that has become more difficult over the years as groups such as MADD have begun monitoring court rooms and applying other grass roots pressure to persuade judges to get "tougher" on DUI’s. I had a case today in Howard County that was both a rare first factual scenario for me and also a reflection of the increasing intolerance for drinking and driving in Maryland courts. Here are the facts:

My client is a 42 year old married man with two children. He has a good job and has never been in any kind of trouble in his life. One evening in March he went to a house party where he consumed 3 mixed drinks over a period of a couple hours. He then drank water for about an hour before driving home with his wife. Both he and his wife believed him to be "okay" to drive.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 01, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

All Baltimore, Maryland hospitals have been sued for allegedly causing a patient to die due to medical malpractice and the University of Maryland hospital is no exception. For example, there is the case of Elliot Muti. This 65 year old man allegedly died of medical malpractice about a month and a half after he experienced a heart attack (myocardial infarction). Before he was treated at the University of Maryland hospital, he underwent a cardiac catheterization which revealed a ninety-nine percent blockage of a heart artery that was not fit for a stent. He then was transferred to the University of Maryland hospital for heart bypass surgery. As part of this surgery, a tube was placed down Mr. Muti’s throat (intubation) to help him breathe. Later, the presence of air in the man’s chest cavity (a "pneumomediastinum") was discovered. A bronchoscopy revealed an injury to the trachea. Ultimately, the man developed pneumonia, an abnormal heart rhythm (ventricular tachycardia), and kidney (renal) failure which led to his death. A copy the judicial opinion regarding the case can be found here.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 01, 2011 in Divorce

As many of our clients are aware, going through a divorce process once is enough, let alone having to do it all over again. As the New York Times reported on May 30, 2011 , a New York man, Mr. Steven Simkin, is seeking to revise the divorce settlement him and his wife, Ms. Laura Blank reached in 2006, as the funds he was awarded were lost as a casualty to the Madoff disaster. As we have previously discussed, many parties reach a separation agreement or settlement agreement outside of court which resolves their marital issues.
When the parties reached their settlement in 2006, Ms. Blank chose to keep her funds out of the Madoff account, while Mr. Simkin chose to keep his with Mr. Madoff. Mr. Simkin argues that the settlement agreement, aka a contract, should be voided as the funds with Mr. Madoff did not even exist at the time of the divorce settlement. His argument relies on the “doctrine of “mutual mistake,” a well-established principle that allows for the cancellation of contracts, including divorce agreements, when both parties are innocently mistaken about an essential term. The case is currently with New York’s highest court and it is said that they are divided, as are many attorneys on the issue. The case could not only affect New York law, but the way that marital settlement agreements are handled throughout the country. Those who are against the revision of the agreement believe that it would allow for do-overs whenever an agreement does not go as planned. Many enter into these divorce agreements with no idea what the future holds, but it is a way of making a clean break from your spouse and moving forward.

For more information on marital settlement agreements, contact an experienced Maryland divorce attorney.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on May 25, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

The mother to a son born with cerebral palsy will eventually receive the full judgment of $10 million awarded to her by a Florida jury for medical malpractice, but she’ll have to wait for half of it. In 2003, while six months pregnant, the woman was to be transported after one hospital determined it didn’t have the right equipment to handle a premature baby and another said it lacked specialists for extremely premature births. Both of those hospitals, and doctors from each, were originally involved, but settled for a total of $1.4 million. Ultimately, however, the woman gave birth on the way to Arnold Palmer Hospital for Children in Orlando while in an ambulance. The child survived but suffered severe brain damage as a result of a lack of oxygen. In a medical negligence case, a jury found the Florida ambulance provider, EVAC, negligent for both the care they provided and for accepting the initial transport order.

After the $10 million judgment was handed down in the malpractice case, EVAC asked a judge to throw out the verdict or, alternatively, reduce the judgment amount. EVAC argued they could not refuse an order given by a doctor in the emergency room. A settlement was ultimately reached whereby EVAC will pay $5 million immediately (their insurance cap) and then sue its insurance company for bad faith and have it pay the rest.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on May 23, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

Recently, a New York District Judge ordered Mogen Circumcision Instruments of New York to pay compensatory and punitive damages totaling $10.8 million to a Florida boy and his parents following a medical instrument malfunction. Despite the instrument maker’s claims that injury arising from the use of their Mogen clamp was impossible, the boy lost a portion of his penis. This is not the first time Mogen has been at the center of a circumcision injury lawsuit. Mogen was involved in a 2007 Massachusetts lawsuit where it was forced to pay $7.5 million. In the current case, the baby lost the entire head (glans) of his penis. The judgment amount was based on the court’s determination the Mogen had to pay for both medical expenses and the years of therapy that the child will need.

Malpractice is sometimes to blame for circumcision mistakes and injuries as well. A jury in a 2009 case awarded $2.3 million to a baby and his parents after too much tissue was removed during his circumcision. Despite a nurse’s complaint of excessive bleeding, the baby’s pediatrician failed to respond; had he, the tip of the penis might have been reattached. As a result of the medical negligence, the baby lost a third of the glans of his penis. The New York jury found both the physician who performed the circumcision and the pediatrician negligent.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on May 20, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

A multi-million dollar cerebral palsy medical malpractice lawsuit recently settled out of court. Tripler Army Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii ultimately paid a family $11 million dollars in the settlement following a series of serious medical errors resulting in severe brain damage to their child. The child, who was born in 2005, was deprived of oxygen at birth and now suffers from cerebral palsy. A breakdown in communication amongst doctors triggered an hour-long delivery in which the child was born with her umbilical cord wrapped tightly around her neck. Round-the-clock care will likely be required for the rest of her life. This medical negligence case was not the result of misdiagnosis, but rather stemmed from a failure by doctors to take essential steps quickly enough to help the child while she was in distress during birth. The series of medical errors continued when doctors tried to resuscitate the child after delivery but mistakenly pumped air into her stomach, instead of lungs, when the respiratory tube was placed in her esophagus by an inexperienced intern.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on May 13, 2011 in Family Law

As a family law practitioner I have represented a number of petitioners and respondents in protective order hearings throughout the state of Maryland. Unfortunately, the purpose and intent of a protective order is often misinterpreted and misused by the litigants. The purpose of the domestic violence statute as defined by Maryland case law is to protect and aid victims of domestic violence by providing a quick and effective remedy and to prevent further harm to the victim. It is not intended to produce pendente lite orders relating to custody, support, and marital property that are effective for the duration of the Protective Order. Oftentimes, Petitioners attempt to use this necessary and important statute to do just what it was not meant to do – obtain custody of a child in common with the respondent.

I recently represented a respondent in a Final Protective Order hearing , in which the petitioner used the staute to attept to gain custody of their chid. In that case the petitioner alleged an assault upon him by the respondent that resulted in their infant child being bounced off the bed, where she was laying at the time, and landing on the floor. The police were called to the residence three times over the course of less than 24 hours and no one was arrested or left the residence. Ironically, the respondent fled the state the next day with the assistance of a domestic violence program due to continuing abuse by the petitioner upon her. Nevertheless, the petitioner filed a Temporary Protective Order, which was granted and awarded him custody of the parties infant child. My client was already out of the state (with the child) and once she was served with the Order did appear for the Final Protective Order Hearing. Once the Petitioner put on his case, the evidence in my opinion, was abundantly clear that even in the light most favorable to the petitioner, that there had been at most a mutual scuffle which was instigated by the petitioner and that petitioner’s only motivation in filing the protective order was to obtain custody of the child. This is a complete misuse of the domestic violence statute, i.e. protective order statute. At the conclusion of the petitioner’s case I made a Motion to Dismiss the Petitioner’s Protective Order as he had not met his burden of proof establishing by clear and convincing evidence that abuse had occurred. The Court agreed that even in the light most favorable to the petitioner, he had not met his burden and dismissed the Protective Order without the need for my client to put on her case. In this particular situation, the Court was keenly aware of the purpose and intent of the domestic violence statute and did not grant the Final Order.

Cases such as the above with baseless allegations are frequently filed with the Court with mal intent, and at the initial stage the Temporary Orders are granted because at the Temporary Protective Order stage of the process often the respondent is not even present. It is not until the Final Hearing that the respondent even has an opportunity to be heard. If you are either a Petitioner or Respondent, you would likely benefit from the assistance and advice of experienced legal counsel. For more information on your particular situation you should speak with an experienced family law attorney.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on April 21, 2011 in Criminal Defense

As an Aggressive and Experienced Maryland Criminal Defense Attorney, I have represented dozens of people who have been charged with Sexual Solicitation of a Minor. In most of these cases, the defendant is caught in a sting operation conducted by state of federal law enforcement.

I represented a client in one such case this week in Baltimore County Circuit Court. The State was seeking a sentence of 10 years in the Division of Corrections with all but 5 years to be suspended. I was able to get him a sentence of just 4 weekends to be served in the Baltimore County Detention Center. This, in spite of the fact that we ended up in front of a judge who is widely regarded as a very tough sentencing judge and the fact that we literally had no defense. How did this happen? The answer is we put together a compelling presentation of mitigating facts and circumstances to argue for a sentence much less than the State was demanding.

Continue Reading ››