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 ››

 Posted on November 10, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

A six year old boy went to Baltimore-Washington Medical Center complaining of a fever, swollen tonsils, and unexplained hip pain. The hospital, located in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, allegedly failed to perform a "rapid strep test" – standard safety protocol at hospitals in such situations. It has been alleged that this medical error led to the amputation of the boy’s legs as that was the only way to save his life.

A year later, his parents have filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the Maryland hospital, and the doctor who failed to adequately treat the boy, seeking compensation for his medical costs. The family alleges that, because the boy was wrongly diagnosed as suffering from a hip strain and nasal congestion, his strep infection worsened. In addition, they allege that the standard of care dictates he should have been given antibiotics, even if just as a precaution. Instead, his condition continued to deteriorate as he went untreated. When the boy’s parents rushed him back to the hospital, it was only to learn it was too late. The strep infection, which had gone undiagnosed, had entered the boy’s bloodstream. The infection was so severe that it had begun to attack the child’s organs.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 21, 2011 in Criminal Defense

Baltimore Maryland Criminal Attorney discusses case evaluation and the plea bargain process. The ability to objectively and dispassionately evaluate a case is critical to being an effective criminal defense attorney. Far too often I witness inexperienced or simply ineffective attorneys taking cases to trial only to pursue defenses that have no realistic chance of success. The unavoidable fact of this business is that sometimes your client is guilty as charged and the State can easily prove it. In defense attorney parlance these are known as "dead up cases". Criminal defense attorneys need to recognize and accept that this is true when confronted with such a case and advise their clients honestly as to their situation.

This is not to say that there is nothing an attorney can do for their client in a situation like this – far from it. I have represented thousands of clients throughout my career who have been able to significantly reduce the consequences of a conviction by recognizing that trial was not an option and pursuing an effective strategy to minimize the damage. I had a case last week that is a terrific example of this in the Circuit Court for Baltimore County. The client accepted the situation as I explained it to him and did what I told him to do and it worked out extremely favorably by any measure. Here are the facts:

My client is a 40 year old divorced father of 3. In the latter part of the last decade he was running a successful construction company, was happily married and was providing a very nice lifestyle for his family including living in a large single family home. Then the economy crashed. As we all know, the construction industry was among the hardest hit industries and his company was not spared. In a period of less than 2 years, his business imploded, his wife left him and his house was foreclosed upon. He found himself living in an apartment with custody of his three children, trying to figure out a way to keep a roof over their heads and put food on the table.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 20, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

A couple in Pennsylvania has filed two medical malpractice lawsuits following, what should have been, a routine organ transplant.

The couple alleges that the organ transplant went awry when, despite test results indicating the donor-spouse had hepatitis C, the hospital transplanted her kidney into her husband. Hepatitis C is an incurable infectious disease that attacks the liver causing a wide range of problems including damage, cirrhosis, cancer or failure.

The first lawsuit was filed against the hospital and various staff members. The suit, filed by the donee and the donor, alleges negligence. The couple states that the donor’s blood results were available months before the organ transplant, but that the hospital and physicians missed them. The organ transplant, which took place in April, was preceded by a blood test on January 26 which indicated that the donor had hepatitis C. The hospital never notified the donor of these results or disqualified her as an organ donor. Another test, which occurred weeks after the organ transplant, also indicated the presence of the infection. It was not until a month after the kidney transplant had taken place when the donor was notified of these results.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on October 04, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

In early 2003, a Pennsylvania pharmacist died of a heart attack while at work. In 2009, a jury found his family doctor negligent and awarded the man’s widow $4 million. Later, after determining the delay in the conclusion of the case was improper, the presiding Judge awarded the man’s widow an additional $1.2 million in damages. Last month, the Pennsylvania Superior Court upheld that $5.2 million award in the medical malpractice case.

This case is an example of the catastrophic results of a doctor failing to correctly diagnose and treat his patient. The man went to see the doctor four days before his death as a result of unexplained chest pain, jaw pain and anxiety. The doctor advised him that these symptoms were the result of anxiety. However, the man’s attorneys argued that the the doctor made a critical error by failing to take into account the following: the man was overweight, he had high cholesterol, he had high blood pressure and he had a history of heart disease in his family. On the day of his death, the man again contacted the doctor as a result of his symptoms persisting. By the time the doctor returned his call, the man was already in cardiac arrest.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 23, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

A woman in Pennsylvania was recently awarded one of the highest sums ever recorded in a medical malpractice suit after an infection went unnoticed and nearly killed her. The lawsuit was based upon medical negligence and medical errors committed by a home nurse that was treating the woman, who was suffering from Crohn’s disease. The woman was receiving care from a home nurse when the R.N. failed to recognize that she had an infected catheter. As a result of the nurse failing to refer the patient to a physician to treat the infected catheter, both of the woman’s legs were amputated below the knee. This was a result of the infection spreading to the bloodstream.

The jury in this case awarded the woman $23.12 million after hearing about the failure of the nurse to treat the bacteria-infected catheter and found both the nurse and the employer negligent. The damages were based on compensatory awards of economic damages for medical expenses and lost wages, as well as non-economic damages associated with pain and suffering. A medical malpractice case requires a plaintiff to establish that a health care provider undertook care of a patient, and thus had a duty to the patient; the duty was breached by the health care provider upon their failure to perform at the standard level of care; and that damages to the plaintiff resulted. A finding of negligence means the jury thought that the evidence showed that the woman’s health care provider committed a medical error resulting from an omission which deviated from the standards of practice generally accepted in the medical community, and found that this failure caused injury to the patient.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on September 16, 2011 in Family Law

In our August 25, 2011 blog we discussed custody evaluation as one of the services that can be available to parties subject to domestic litigation. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County is one of the County courts that currently offers custody evaluations to those litigants with highly contested custody matters. They also offer co-parent education classes, custody mediation, home studies and supervised visitation. These services are currently offered to parties who qualify at no cost. The litigant or the litigant’s attorney needs to either file a motion with the Court requesting these services or request the service at the scheduling conference.

Commencing October 3, 2011, the Circuit Court will begin charging for these services, due to a decrease in funding received from the State Judiciary. The fees will be as follows:

• Co-Parent Education Classes: $35 per person
• Custody Mediation: $100 per person
• Home Study: $100 per study to be split between the parties
• Custody Evaluations:$450 per study to be split between the parties

Continue Reading ››