Maryland Injury Law Center

October 26, 2006

Value of Medical Malpractice Claims for Missed Diagnosis of Heart Attacks

Yesterday’s USA Today ran a story about the often preventable tragedy of undiagnosed heart attacks. It told the story of James Pettry, who woke early one morning short of breath and sweating profusely. His wife dialed 911. The paramedics gave Mr. Pettry oxygen and aspirin and then used an electrocardiogram machine to examine the heart’s electrical function. They believed he had a heart attack and took him 3 miles to the hospital. The emergency room doctor disagreed. The doctor ran some tests, diagnosed him with anxiety, and sent Mr. Pettry home nearly five hours later.

We all know where this story is going. Mr. Pettry died the next day, joining the list of thousands every year who die every year from heart attacks left undetected. In fact, researchers from New England Medical Center in Boston reported in the New England Journal of Medicine in April 2000 that emergency room doctors mistakenly send home one in 50 heart attack victims. Other studies have documented higher rates of missed heart attack diagnosis.

The defendant says that his patient died from chronic heart disease that had no connection to the symptoms that landed him in the ER.

October 9, 2006

Independent Medical Examinations

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

More and more personal injury lawyers in Maryland accident cases are doing battle over the ‘independent’ medical examination. Attorneys argue over everything from who should conduct the examination, how far the plaintiff should have a drive for the examination, to more substantive issues such as the examining doctor’s financial records. However, one thing that plaintiff personal injury lawyers sometimes overlook is the fact that their client may have already had such a medical examination before they even became involved in the case if the case involves an uninsured motorist or used PIP coverage.

Most insurance policies have a provision whereby the insurance company can ask for the policyholder to attend a medical examination with a physician of its choosing before the insured receives payments. This is can be used as a condition precedent to any insured receiving PIP benefits or uninsured motorist benefits. Does Maryland law allow it? No one really knows for sure.

The Maryland accident lawyer must be careful where PIP has already been paid or where uninsured motorist coverage applies. Often, the insurance claims adjuster has a copy of the report compiled by the insurance company’s doctor months or even years before it must be disclosed to the plaintiff’s lawyer (for example, before a suit has been filed or before discovery answers are due).

October 5, 2006

How Maryland Personal Injury Lawyers Should Deal with Motions to Compel Discovery

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

More often than ever before, our lawyers are having difficultly getting timely answers to discovery from defense lawyers. I do not think this is some nefarious plot. Rather, I think defense lawyers are used to answering discovery whenever they feel like it because no one holds their feet to the fire.

As a matter of practice, attorneys should send out a letter as soon as the discovery is late. Not to be difficult for the sake of being difficult but to make sure that the lawyer has complied with Maryland Rule 2-431, which does not allow the filing of discovery motions until there has been attempts to resolve it and a certificate under the rule accompanies the motion). What I see happening is that lawyers let discovery failures go and when they finally realize there is a problem, they have not complied with the letter or spirit of Maryland Rule 2-431.

I think judges are becoming more serious about the spirit of Maryland Rule 2-431 in trying to resolve discovery disputes. I attached one letter that requested discovery in a motion to compel in a Prince George’s County wrongful death/survival action case and the motions judge’s law clerk called me to ask if this was the only letter I had written. Fortunately, I had written several letters. But the point is lawyers in Maryland really need to push the opposing lawyer for discovery as opposed to writing a single form letter and then filing a motion.

October 1, 2006

Maryland Cap on Non-Economic Damages

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The cap on pain and suffering damages in Maryland for claims arising after today has increased to $680,000. This is also the maximum cap on any non-medical malpractice wrongful death case if there is only one claimant. The wrongful death cap with two or more beneficiaries in a non-medical malpractice case is now $1,020,000.

The pain and suffering cap in Maryland in medical malpractice cases as the result of a bill that the General Assembly passed last year remains at $650,000. This is also the maximum cap on medical malpractice wrongful death cases if there is only one claimant. The wrongful death cap with two or more beneficiaries in medical malpractice cases that arise after today is $812,500.

September 30, 2006

Judge Kaplan and Judge Gordy

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

Baltimore City Chief Judge Joseph H.H. Kaplan officially retires tomorrow after a long distinguished career on the bench. Judge Clifton J. Gordy, who will also retire himself in November, will replace him as Chief Judge. I have been in front of Judge Gordy and Judge Kaplan in the last year (regrettably losing motions before both judges). I also had a weeklong trial in front of Judge Gordy a few years ago. Judge Gordy and Judge Kaplan are both highly respected by plaintiffs’ and defense lawyers in Baltimore. They always treated the lawyers and parties that came before them with respect. I will miss them.

September 27, 2006

Truck Accident Verdict Statistics

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

I provide data from Jury Verdict Research frequently on this blog because I think it is helpful for personal injury lawyers to see the national prevalence of specific classes of cases. Below is a list of recovery percentages in truck accident cases that go to trial:

Broadside Collisions	61%
Head-On Collisions	$71%
Intersection Collisions	58%
Multiple Vehicle Collisions	73%
No Contact Accidents	52%
Truck, Overall	60%

Jury Verdict Research also offers statistics on the median compensatory awards for a few different categories of truck accidents:

Head-On Collisions	$532,034
Intersection Collisions	$85,000
Truck Accidents Overall	$90,000

I suspect that most truck crash attorneys would agree that both the likelihood of recovery and the amount of recovery is higher in Maryland, but I have seen no state-specific data on truck accident cases. If anyone knows of any data in Maryland or in any other state, please let me know.

September 25, 2006

Interview with Maryland Court of Appeals Chief Judge Robert M. Bell Regarding Certiorari

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The Maryland Daily Record published in an interview on Friday with Maryland Court of Appeals Chief Judge Robert M. Bell who had some interesting comments on seeking certiorari that I think would interest any personal injury lawyer seeking an appeal to a higher court where the appeal is not a matter of right. Below is an excerpt of that interview as it relates to petitions for certiorari:

Question: What are the most important points that lawyers and their clients should remember when preparing a petition for certiorari?

Answer: When drafting a petition for certiorari, one should focus on getting the court interested in the case, so one should be focused on what makes that case unique. And the more one is able to do that concisely, the more likely it is that the court is going to be inclined to grant certiorari. Also, bear in mind that the court is not going to be particularly interested in reviewing the case if it has 10 or 12 issues; the fewer points of interest, the more likely it is that we will take the case.

September 21, 2006

Maryland Trial Lawyers Association Auto Negligence Section

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

The Maryland Trial Lawyers Auto Negligence Seminar will be held on Friday, November 10, 2006 (the courts are closed that day in observance of Veterans’ Day) at the Comfort Inn Conference Center, 4500 Crain Highway (Route 301) Bowie, Maryland 20716 from 9:00 am – 3:00 pm. For registration forms, click here. This should be a great seminar for Maryland personal injury lawyers trying auto accident cases. The topics and speakers are:

Panel 1: Trying an Auto Case Before a Jury

Speakers: Circuit Court Judges

September 21, 2006

New Drug for Cerebral Palsy Victims (July 2022 Update)

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

A preliminary study reported in Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology found that low doses of pamidronate increase bone density in children with spastic cerebral palsy (CP). All the children in the study had spastic quadriplegia, a severe form of cerebral palsy characterized by muscle stiffness in all four limbs and the mouth and tongue. These cerebral palsy victims often have decreased mobility and cognitive deficiencies. The hope is that this new drug improves bone density, improving a weakness in many cerebral palsy victims who, because of their decreased mobility, are at higher risk for fractures.

The University of Nebraska Medical Center in Omaha studied 23 children with severe cerebral palsy and could not walk. At the beginning of the study, the patients’ bone mineral density was below the normal level for children their age. After a year, the Nebraska researchers found significant increases in bone mineral density. Nine children had at least one fracture and up to five fractures prior to the study. Only one fracture occurred during the 12-month treatment period and the average annual fracture rate fell from 0.98 to 0.004 per year.

What a blessing it would be if science could make more dramatic advances for cerebral palsy victims. This drug is not a panacea for people who suffer from cerebral palsy. But progress is progress. Let’s hope it keeps coming.

September 20, 2006

Maryland Negligent Security Appellate Opinion and Case Law

by Ronald V. Miller, Jr.

This is a 14 year-old post but updated on May 3, 2020 to give the current state of negligent security law in Maryland.

the Maryland Court of Special Appeals decided the case of Veytsman z. New York Palace, Inc. The issue in Veytsman was whether a nightclub had a duty to protect its patrons from being attacked by fellow patrons.

The court found that the nightclub had no such duty, affirming Baltimore City Circuit Judge Evelyn Omega Cannon’s ruling. The opinion underscores how difficult it is to hold nightclubs responsible for altercations that invariably occur in nightclubs, bars, and restaurants. But I also want to explain how to bring a negligent security case in Maryland.