Posted on June 10, 2011 in Medical Malpractice

Earlier this month the Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene Office of Health Care Quality published a report regarding medical malpractice in Maryland hospitals. The report is a review of the safety and care provided to patients in Maryland hospitals. The report compiles information collected by the OHCQ in 2010 relating to serious adverse events that affected patients or their families.

The adverse events that hospitals are required to report include a rather long list of mistakes that are possible because of hospital error, medical malpractice (negligence), or inattention. Patient falls are the most frequently reported event. In 2010, there were 88 reported cases resulting in serious disability or death. Of these 88 reported cases, 10 resulted in loss of limb or function of limb, 52 required surgical interventions, 20 required medical intervention and 6 resulted in death of the patient.

Hospital-acquired pressure sores / ulcers, which are associated with high morbidity (medical complications) and mortality (death) once they reach Stage 3 and 4, were reported 59 times in 2010 making it the second most frequently reported event. However, none of the reported cases in 2010 resulted in death.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 10, 2011 in Divorce

A bill has been proposed in Massachusetts that would prevent parents from having sex in their home until their divorce is final, Fox News Reported on May 19, 2011. More specifically, the bill would prevent divorcing parents from “conducting a dating or sexual relationship within the home” until their divorce is final. Those who favor the bill have stated that the bill is meant to shield children from unnecessary problems or domestic violence while their parents divorce is underway. Those who oppose the bill say it is infringing on parents rights.

Currently, not only is adultery a ground for divorce in Maryland, it is still codified as a crime in the Maryland Criminal Code. In our experience, it is wise to consult a mental health professional before introducing your child to a new relationship, especially while a divorce is pending. The effects of a divorce on children vary from child to child, however a mental health professional can provide some guidance and advice based on the child’s developmental, emotional, and physical age.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 07, 2011 in Divorce

A divorce or separation is much more than two people parting ways, as there are often many other items that arose out of the marriage that must be resolved in order for parties to legally part ways. These items can be addressed in a separation agreement or are eventually resolved in divorce litigation. It is important to consider each of the following items at the beginning stages of pursuing a Maryland divorce:
• Child Custody – If you and your spouse have children, then custody of the children will need to be decided. Custody is comprised of two parts in Maryland, legal custody and physical custody. Legal custody involves decisions regarding the child involving health, education and religion. Physical custody is the time spent with each parent. Both forms of custody can be shared by parents, or awarded to only one parent. For more information see our September 10, 2010 blog.
• Child Access Schedule – Not only does custody of the children need to be decided but also when each parent will have access with the children. You need to consider the school year, summer vacation, holidays and school breaks. Also many parents designate how their children will communicate with the other parents when not in their care • Child Support-Child support is awarded in many cases to account for a difference in time sharing of the children, or a difference in income of the parties. For more information on child support, see our September 11, 2009 blog
• Dependency Exemption for Child(ren)- You need to consider who will designate the children for purposes of the tax dependency. Will you and your spouse alternate, each take one child, etc?
• Health Insurance – You need to consider who will cover the children on their health insurance. Also, if you are currently covered by your spouses insurance, or covering your spouse, will you continue to do so until your divorce is final?
• Uninsured Medical Expenses for Kids-Typically parties may divide this evenly or in proportion to their incomes. If one parent is bearing the whole expense, and it is significant, it will be used for child support calculations.

• Division of Marital Property – You should consider how all of the property accumulated during your marriage will be divided such as, furnishings, household items, electronics, collections, tools, equipment, cars, trucks, boats, ATV’s, RV’s etc.
• Retirement/Pension Accounts- All retirement accrued by either party during the marriage is marital and therefore your spouse has rights to it. You should consider how these accounts will be divided, if at all.
• Investment Accounts /Stock Options/Profit Sharing Plan – Like retirement accounts, all accounts opened during the marriage or monies invested during the marriage are marital and you should consider how they will be divided • Marital Home – You should decided if one party will stay in the home, and if so will there be a buy out, or will the home be sold? Additionally, were any pre-marital monies invested by either party that they are entitled to? Last, an understanding of how much the home is worth and how much equity is in the home will be helpful in these considerations.
• Any Other Real Property Issues-Are there any second homes that were purchased during the marriage? If so, who will retain the rights to these homes or will they be sold?
• Alimony- There are many factors considered in deciding whether alimony will be awarded in your matter. For more information visit our October 2, 2009 blog.
• Monetary Award- A monetaryl award can be awarded in a matter where the division of property by title is inequitable. The theory is that it balances the marital estate.
• Marital Debt- All debt accumulated during the marriage, by either party is martial and it must be decided who will be responsible for the debt.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 06, 2011 in Divorce

As we have previously discussed in our blogs, many family law matters are decided outside of Court, with the assistance of attorneys. However, what happens when the parties, who have employed attorneys to assist in their divorce litigation, decide to take matters into their own hands? As the Maryland Daily Record reported on June 2, 2011, the Baltimore law firm of Tydings and Rosenberg is facing such a situation right now. The firm’s 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 is now seeking the fees, as Ms. Zorzit can not afford to pay for the work that has already been done, but Mr. Zorzit can. The Circuit Court for Baltimore County denied the firms request for the fees, the case was appealed to the Maryland Court of Appeals, and a decision is awaited.

Continue Reading ››

 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 ››