Posted on June 28, 2010 in Vascular Surgery Malpractice

A Harford County, Maryland jury has awarded a 53-year-old woman $3.5 million in a medical malpractice case against two surgeons Dr. Roger E. Schneider, chairman of Upper Chesapeake Health System, and his partner, Dr. Mark D. Gonze, and their business, Vascular Surgery Associates. The woman underwent surgery for blocked arteries in 2007, with a terrible outcome. The woman claimed that the doctors used an improper grafting technique, which led to blood loss and damage to the woman’s spinal cord, which left the woman paraplegic, in constant pain and unable to walk. The award consisted of $1.3 million for noneconomic damages (pain, suffering, etc.), $2 million for future medical bills, and more than $200,000 for her past bills.

This verdict is interesting because it occurred in Harford County. That county is well-known by plaintiffs’ lawyers, defense lawyers and insurance companies to be a very conservative venue for trying cases. Whenever I go to a court ordered settlement conference for a medical mapractice case that I am handing in that county, the chief judge always reminds me that we are in Harford County and he claims that there hasn’t been a malpractice verdict in favor of a plaintiff for years. It seems he will have to admit that the tide has turned. The reality is that a good case is a good case regardless of where it is to be tried, as the case above indicates.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 24, 2010 in Controlled Dangerous Substances (CDS)

As a Former Assistant United State’s Attorney and current Maryland Federal Criminal Attorney I have handled hundreds of Federal Drug Cases. Before as a prosecutor and now as a defense attorney I am often amazed at how quickly and often lawyers plead their client’s guiilty in highly defensible cases.

I take the opposite approach and employ a scorched earth policy of fighting every case on every level before even considering a plea to include attacking the validity of search warrants which many attorneys never even consider. Here is a written motion to suppress we filed in a case recently attacking the warrant and moving to suppress the evidence.

Mr. Doe is charged in a two count indictment with knowingly, intentionally, and unlawfully possessing with the intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine and knowingly, intentionally and unlawfully possessing with the intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841 on April 12, 2002. A search and seizure warrant was executed on that date at Mr. Doe’s residence, 1234 Main Street Anytown, Maryland. Additionally, the police also executed warrants on the Red Roof Inn, Room #123 in Jessup, and Bank of America Bank Account # and Safe Deposit Box #.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 21, 2010 in Dr. Mark Midei and St. Joseph Hospital - Stent Malpractice

Attorneys Andrew G. Slutkin, Jamison G. White and the law firm of Silverman Thompson Slutkin & White have filed one of the first medical malpractice lawsuits against Dr. Mari Midei, Midatlantic Cardiovascular and St. Joseph Medical Center as a result of Dr. Midei unnecessary implanting a patient with a cardiac stent during cardiac catheterization. The lawsuit, which is sure to be followed by many others, makes claims for medical negligence; negligent hiring, retention and/or supervision; fraud; concealment; negligent misrepresentation; battery; intentional infliction of emotional distress and loss of consortium. A copy of the lawsuit can be viewed here

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 21, 2010 in Uncategorized

Today the Maryland Court of Appeals issued an opinion on the proper use of voire dire in Maryland criminal trials.

Facts: Charles & Drake were tried together on charges stemming from the death of Bryant Jones. Both were convicted of second degree murder. Prior to the trial, the State submitted 3 voir dire questions concerning “CSI type” scientific evidence. Over defense counsel’s objection, the trial judge asked a single question which he drafted stating that he assumed the jurors watched TV such as CSI and Law and Order and that those shows relied on scientific evidence to convict- therefore, if “you are currently of the opinion or belief that you cannot convict a defendant without scientific evidence, please rise.” The Court of Special Appeals ruled that the question was appropriate. The Court of Appeals reversed.

Ruling: The Court noted that the language of the voir dire question suggested that the jury’s only option was to convict, regardless of the evidence presented. This suggestive question poisoned the jury thereby depriving the defendant of the right to a fair trial.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 16, 2010 in Paraplegia / Quadriplegia Malpractice

A Florida jury has ordered a woman’s ex-doctor to pay $36.6 million in a medical malpractice case for failing to properly perform a steroid injection, causing damage to the woman’s spinal cord. The woman now has a disfigured right arm and suffers from constant pain since the pain management doctor left her with a four-inch hole in her spinal cord. The woman had sought treatment from the doctor for a car accident.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have successfully handled many medical malpractice cases involving spinal cord injuries. These injuries can be catastrophic, causing a life-time of pain, medical and other care expenses and lost income. Recently, I obtained a record settlement in the case of a woman who was paralyzed during spinal cord stimulator surgery. Now, I am representing a man who suffered a spinal cord injury during disk surgery, causing him to suffer paralysis. Malpractice causing a person to be paralyzed deserves to be compensated, due to the extreme nature of the injury.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 14, 2010 in Dr. Mark Midei and St. Joseph Hospital - Stent Malpractice

As I mentioned in a recent blog post, administrative charges have been filed by the Maryland Board of Physicians against Dr. Mark Midei, the Towson cardiologist accused of medical malpractice for implanting unnecessary cardiac stents in more than five hundred people. A copy of an article detailing the charges can be found here.

I was unable to easily find online a copy of the Maryland Board of Physicians’ Complaint against Dr. Mark Midei charging document, so I obtained a copy from the Board. You can view the document by clicking here

Read more here:https://www.marylandmedicalmalpracticelawyerblog.com/dr_mark_mideis_license_revoked/

We handle cases like these all of the time in my practice.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 11, 2010 in Dr. Mark Midei and St. Joseph Hospital - Stent Malpractice

Dr. Mark Midei, the cardiologist accused of implanting unnecessary cardiac stents in over five hundred people, has been administratively charged by the Maryland Board of Physicians, according to the charging document made public today. The charges include “gross overutilization of health care services” and “willfully making a false report or record in the practice of medicine.”

The charges stem from an investigation by St. Joseph Medical Center, which began after a St. Joe employee claimed that Dr. Midei was fraudulently implanting patients with cardiac stents. St. Joe’s investigation, which examined only a two year time frame during which Dr. Midei performed 2000 stent procedures, found that approximately one in four cardiac stents that he emplaced (over 500 patients) were unnecessary.

In my opinion, the charges are certain to be sustained in this high-profile instance of medical malpractice. It is one thing for a patient or a patient’s lawyers to accuse a doctor of malpractice, but when Dr. Midei’s former employer and peers on the medical board accuse him of widespread malpractice, common sense dictates that it has merit.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 10, 2010 in Emergency Room Malpractice

A Pennsylvania jury has awarded $1.2 million to the widow of a man in a medical malpractice suit against a hospital and two doctors. The man died in 1999, two days after he was sent home from an emergency room, complaining he had chest pains and had been vomiting for three days. An autopsy determined that he had an ulcerated esophagus and the cause of death was sepsis caused by the perforated esophagus, which allowed food to go into his pleural cavity.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have successfully handled a number of medical malpractice cases against emergency room doctors for failing to timely diagnose and treat life threatening conditions. The rule is “if there is any doubt, you can’t rule it out.” Here, a simple radiology test, such as an x-ray or esophageal sonogram would have showed what was going on with this man. To see some of the cases I have handled, click here.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on June 02, 2010 in Uncategorized

Maryland Criminal Attorney reviews Miranda decision by Supreme Court. In its recent decision in Berghuis v. Thompkins the Supreme Court, in what some view as a paradoxical ruling, ruled that a defendant must affirmatively invoke his right to remain silent or his right to an attorney after being advised of his Miranda Rights. In other words, the Court ruled that a defendant must speak in order to invoke his right not to speak.

In this case, Thomkins was arrested for murder. He was taken into custody and read the Miranda Rights that are familiar to most all of us who have ever seen an episode of Law and Order. After being advised of his right to remain silent, Thomkins did just that; he remained silent throughout almost 3 hours of questioning by the detective. The detective finally broke Thomkins’ silence by asking him if he prayed to God to which he replied that he did. The Detective then asked him if he prayed to God for forgiveness for shooting the victim in this case and Thompkins answered in the affirmative.

The statement was introduced against Thomkins at trial over his counsel’s objection and he was convicted of murder. In yet another 5-4 ruling by the Roberts Court, the Conservative wing of the court upheld the conviction and ruled that a defendant must affirmatively invoke the right to remain silent. Justice Sonya Sotomayor wrote the dissent and noted that ” Criminal Suspects must now unambiguously invoke their right to remain silent – which counter-intuitively requires them to speak”. She went on to note that this ruling inescapably leads to the conclusion that a “suspect will be legally presumed to have waived their rights even if they have given no clear expression of their intent to do so’.

Continue Reading ››

 Posted on May 27, 2010 in Childbirth Malpractice

An Illinois hospital, a nurse midwife and the nurse’s employer have agreed to a $9.5 million to settle a lawsuit filed by family who alleged that they were responsible for causing their son to be born with cerebral palsy. The woman was admitted to the hospital in labor and the nurse failed to get a doctor when the woman requested one after she began experiencing complications.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have successfully handled a number of cerebral palsy and other birth injury medical malpractice cases. These cases are always tragic as they permanently affect the life of a child and his or her family. Often times, these tragedies can be prevented with proper care that meets the standard of care.

Continue Reading ››