Maryland Injury Law Center

January 2, 2020

Metformin NDMA Cancer Lawsuits

October 9, 2020 Update: As predicted here 10 months ago, metformin has been recalled.

The FDA and Health Canada are testing metformin for cancer-causing N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA). If this testing shows NDMA levels far above the FDA’s acceptable daily intake limit of 96 nanograms, Metformin lawsuits could quickly become a large mass tort claim. The number of lawsuits if this drug is causing cancer would be astronomical.

We are a long way from that. The context with metformin, and why everyone should measure twice and cut once when looking at this issue, is this is a medically necessary drug for many patients? No one is suggesting that patients stop taking metformin to control their diabetes (although I think patients should talk about their NDMA concerns with their doctors).

November 14, 2019

Choudhry v. Fowlkes: Recovery of Economic Damages for Loss of Household Services

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The Maryland Court of Special Appeals decision last week, in Choudhry v. Fowlkes 2019 WL 5677904 (Md. App., Nov. 1, 2019) is probably the most significant new development in Maryland personal injury law in 2019. Choudhry articulates a new 3-part rule for when plaintiffs in wrongful death cases can recover economic damages for loss of “household services.”

I love this case because it is a virtual treatise about how to put together a loss of household services case in Maryland. I don’t love the case because I think it raises the bar higher for making such a claim than most Maryland Circuit Court judges have been applying.

Loss of Household Services

October 21, 2019

Shoulder Dystocia Bench Trial Verdict | $5.7 Million

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Last week, I summarized a recent bench trial in a birth injury case. I find these bench trial decisions to be useful and informative. They provide a unique perspective on what facts and testimony really matter in a birth injury case. In a jury trial, you just get a verdict. You do not get any meaningful explanation of what mattered and why. Appellate opinions focus on the law and not so much on the resolution of factual issues. These bench trial decisions are like detailed case studies that allow us to see how the facts were presented by each side, how the expert testimony was weighed, and exactly how the fact-finder reached their decision.

So I looked for another birth injury case with the judge as to the decider of fact. I found Coleman v. United States, 200 F. Supp. 3d 1350 (M.D. Ga. 2016), another Memorandum Decision from a birth injury bench trial in federal court.

The plaintiffs filed suit on behalf of themselves and their injured child, J.D. The healthcare providers involved in this birth injury case were employees of a federally funded health clinic in Albany Georgia. The federal government assumes liability for malpractice claims against federally funded clinics, so the United States was the named defendant.

October 16, 2019

Recent Birth Injury Bench Trial | $8 Million Verdict

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

This week I was reading through recent appellate decisions from birth injury cases across the country and I came across a unique written decision from the federal court in Chicago in Zhao v. United States 2019 WL 3956412 (S.D. Ill. 2019).

This was a fairly typical birth injury case in which the baby suffered nerve damage because of a failure to diagnose fetal macrosomia and the mishandling of shoulder dystocia during delivery. What makes this case somewhat unique is that unlike most birth injury cases that get tried by juries, this case was resolved with a bench trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois (because it was against the United States in this case).

At the end of the trial, the judge awarded the plaintiff $8.2 million in damages, but more importantly, he wrote a very detailed Memorandum and Order analyzing the entire case.

October 14, 2019

Juul Vaping Lawsuits | Do You Need a Lawyer?

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Juul is facing lawsuits on multiple fronts. Our lawyers are focusing on vaping injury and vaping addition cases in young people who plaintiffs’ lawyers argue were targeted by Juul.

There is a vaping crisis in the country that snuck up on everyone. There are stories every week about the growing number of vaping-related illnesses and injuries appearing at hospitals. According to a recent Washington Post article, there are now 18 reported deaths related to a mysterious vaping illness, along with over 1,000 other possible cases of vaping-related injuries. It may well be that many of these specific cases have little to do with Juul. But this crisis has everyone taking a close look at Juul.

Click to enlarge

September 30, 2019

Maryland Cerebral Palsy Lawsuits

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

My firm handles birth injury malpractice cases. We have cases all over the country. Cerebral palsy is one of the most serious types of injuries we see in these cases. If you are a birth injury lawyer and you do not get emotionally invested in cerebral palsy cases, you do not have a pulse. Even defense lawyers who would shoot a puppy to get some minuscule evidentiary advantage at trial, usually have great empathy for the child and the family even if we disagree about why the injury occurred.

Cerebral palsy is a permanent physical and often cognitive disability in which the brain cannot control parts of the body. Cerebral palsy is not a disease. It is a static injury to the brain that occurs during childbirth or pregnancy. It is a non-progressive motor impairment that does not get better or worse over time. (Although some children who are diagnosed with cerebral palsy have seen that diagnosis change before age 5.)

This injury to the brain that results in cerebral palsy is because of negligent care in the delivery room cerebral palsy gives rise to a large volume of birth injury malpractice lawsuits which can generate very large verdicts and settlements.

September 18, 2019

Maryland’s Red Flag Law

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

I rarely write about legal issues that do not relate to personal injury cases. But Maryland’s red flag law has gotten so much attention and there is SO MUCH incorrect information out there, I feel like writing a post about it.

Reaction to the seemingly endless stream of mass shootings across the country has generated unprecedented political pressure for gun control laws. Last year, Maryland became one of a handful of states that responded to this pressure by enacting new laws aimed at curbing random gun violence.

Does Maryland Have a Red Flag Law?

Last September the Maryland legislature passed a new type of gun control law which is commonly known as a “red flag” law. Maryland’s red flag law was signed by Governor Hogan took effect on October 1, 2018. Maryland’s red flag law is one of the toughest in the nation and one of the most frequently invoked.

September 3, 2019

Delmarva Shorebirds and the Local Govt Tort Claims Act

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

I love minor league baseball games. I’ve been to a few Delmarva Shorebirds games. It really is a fun environment.

One thing I really like? Any kid that really wants a baseball will get one at the game one way or another. The Frederick Keys, Bowie Baysox, and the Aberdeen Iron Birds (I’m told, I have not seen an Iron Birds game but the stadium is awesome).

There is an interesting lawsuit in Wicomico County involving Jared Breen, a little known former minor league prospect of the Baltimore Orioles. He is suing the Delmarva Shorebirds and Wicomico County after his career was cut short by a collision with an unpadded wall. The Orioles drafted Breen in the 24^th round of the 2013 Major League Baseball draft. After being drafted, Breen began his minor league career playing shortstop for the Delmarva Shorebirds.

August 21, 2019

Love, Barnes and McKew: Just File Suit

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

These small independent claims adjusters are absolutely the worst. I just hung up with an adjuster from Love, Barnes & McKew (or LBM Insurance Adjusters) who does rent-an-adjuster work in “the Washington-Baltimore Corridor, Northern Virginia, Southern Maryland and Maryland’s Eastern Shore.”

Nonsensical Offer

Why I send a demand package to these people is beyond me. I just hung up with the most irrational adjuster who I’m this close to naming, who told me that my 66-year-old client, with no prior injuries, whose car was totaled by a tractor-trailer should not have gotten diagnostic testing or worn a back brace after the accident. I really can’t remember a more irrational insurance adjuster in my career.

She refused to claim that this woman is faking her injuries but pointed out that her pain levels increased about the same time she started talking about a workers’ compensation claim. Now the woman retired from the National Cancer Institute years ago, but don’t let that interrupt the conspiracy. Now look, I realize that citing insurance adjusters for unreasonable offers is like giving out speeding tickets at the Daytona 500. But even in a business that a certain level of insanity is the norm (for plaintiffs’ lawyers, too), this is just insane.

Not for nothing, this adjuster confided in me she had been in a serious car accident. You would think this is a sign that an insurance adjuster is a sympathetic person who can feel better feel the pain of another human being. But, I’m telling you, it has the reverse effect on many of these adjusters. “My pain was so great. Yours was not.” I don’t want to get carried away, but it can’t help but remind you of the whole “abused are more likely to are more likely to abuse” adage. Continue reading

August 20, 2019

New Maryland Gross Negligence Opinion | Paramedic Malpractice

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

In Stracke v. Butler the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that a pair of ambulance paramedics from the Baltimore City Fire Department were immune from liability because their actions in transporting a man to the hospital were not “grossly negligent.”

This case involves the scope of immunity provided by the Maryland Fire & Rescue Company Act, Maryland Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings § 5-604 and its applicability to employees Baltimore City Fire Department employees who treated the patient that ultimately died.

I don’t like the gross negligence law we have in Maryland. I think § 5-604 is well-intended but ultimately foolish. But I have a hard time arguing that the court did not follow Maryland law.