Archive for the ‘Damages’ Category

How Do I Choose A Lawyer? A Helpful Guide

Monday, June 20th, 2011

One of the most important things you can do if you are considering a lawsuit is to spend time doing a proper search for the lawyer, who will be handling your case.

Just because a law firm or a lawyer has a fancy webpage or an eye-catching ad in your local phone directory or even a professional looking TV commercial does not mean that this lawyer has a clue what he/she is doing in the specialized areas of medical malpractice or catastrophic personal injury.

We invite you to read and consider the issues and questions raised in our White Paper – “How to Choose a Lawyer.”

If you have other ideas or questions that you believe would be helpful to our readers in their search for a lawyer, post your reply on this topic so others may benefit by your insights.

 

Image courtesy of www.quadtechint.com

 

Week in Review: (June 13 – June 17, 2001) Eye Opener Health, Law and Medicine Blog

Saturday, June 18th, 2011

Eye  Opener’s Week in Review

 

Jason Penn

From the Editor:  Today marks the end of week two as “guest” editor for the Eye Opener. I can tell you that the title “editor” is a misnomer. When it comes to the Eye Opener and its panel of bloggers, very little (if any) editing takes place. Consistently, our blawgers provide you with timely and topical posts. This week was no different. Let’s take a retrospective look at what the “Eye Opener” offered this week (and, of course, a sneak peek at the week ahead.)

– Jason Penn, Guest Editor

 

(Many thanks to Jason and all those back at the firm, who helped get the word out on some great topics this past week while I’ve been wrapping-up week #2 of the trial from hell…….Brian Nash)

July 1 – New Residents, New Rules……Again!

By: Theresa Neumann

While the loss of sleep is rarely a topic on Gray’s Anatomy (or any made-for-television medical drama), it is a genuine quandary for non-actor, medical residents. This past Monday, Theresa Neumann explored the ACGME’s limitations on the hours worked by medical residents in the United States. As Theresa explained, the overall maximum hours per week will not change; it remains at 80 hours.  One big change is the limit on the maximum continuous duty period for first year residents; this will be decreased from 24 to 16 hours.  It will remain 24 hours for residents after their first year, but recommendations include “strategic napping.” Curious about the other changes?  Read more

Newest Word on Crib Safety: Ban the Bumpers?

By: Sarah Keogh

Sleep isn’t only important for medical residents; it is also important for the smallest members of our families. As Sara Keogh explained on Tuesday, Maryland is considering regulations to ban the sale of crib bumpers. For many years, more and more emphasis has been placed on infants sleeping in safe cribs without any additional “stuff” in them. This has included the elimination of lots of former nursery staples. Baby blankets, stuffed animals, pillows and other loose items have been banned from the crib by safety experts for years. As requirements for cribs have required slats that are closer together, the utility of using a bumper to help a child from getting stuck between crib slats has been eliminated. More recently, the Consumer Product Safety Commission has developed even newer crib safety standards, including eliminating the use of drop-sides, and warned against the use of sleep positioners. Yet, despite the advice to put babies to sleep only on their backs in cribs empty of everything except a well fitting mattress and fitted sheet, many parents and caregivers persist in using other items in cribs. Now, with an increasing number of deaths associated with crib bumpers, Maryland is considering a stronger stance. Read more

Legal Boot Camp Class Four. Sean and Kristy’s Story: How a Jury Award is Conformed to the Cap

By: John Stefanuca

On Wednesday blogger Jon Stefanuca broke out his calculator:  bootcamp style.  In the state of Maryland, there is a cap on the damages that can be awarded.  But what happens when a jury returns a verdict in excess of the statutory amount?  Mathematics and law intersect.

To see the results, and a detailed explanation of how it all works, you can read more ….

 

Confusion with Advanced Directives: Palliative Care, End-of-Life and Hospice Care

By: Theresa Neumann

With the death of the always controversial Jack Kevorkian, we revisited a post by Theresa Neumann.  Breathing a little life into the post (pun intended), Theresa provides an excellent primer for readers that are facing end of life situations.  The differences are nuanced and can be difficult to understand at a most difficult time. Are you sure you know the difference between palliative, end-of-life and hospice care?  Read more

Acquired Brain Injuries: Subdural Hematomas

By: Theresa Neumann

When Humpty Dumpty fell, they were able to put him back together again.  Because our lives are nothing like a children’s nursery rhyme, when we fall, we get hurt.  A head injury is particularly serious. Have you ever bumped your head and developed a “goose-egg?” It’s truly amazing how fast that big bruise under the skin grows. That bruise, or hematoma, is from a broken blood vessel, usually a vein. The pressure from the swelling helps with clotting, along with the blood’s own clotting factors. This types of hematoma typically takes a week or more to go away. If it’s on the forehead, it’s often followed by one or two “black eyes.”  That’s because the blood tends to spread along  tissue planes, and gravity notoriously pulls everything downward causing it to pool in the eye sockets, where the blood cells degrade and their components are reabsorbed by the body. Unlike a fairy tale, however, this goose-egg can be serious.  Read more

Sneak Peak of the Week Ahead:

As I told you at the beginning, the Eye Opener’s writers continue in their efforts to provide you with timely and topical blogs for your reading pleasure. As evidenced by the above, this past week was no exception. The Eye Opener and its writers are excited about the week ahead too!  Here’s a sneak peak of what’s in store for you:

  • Service dogs for children:  more than just a pet
  • Changes in Sunscreen:  will regulation prevent cancer?
  • HIV Patients:  Increased risk for developing cancer
  • Legal Boot Camp is back in session and Part III of our Cerebral Palsy tutorial.

Wishing You and Yours a Great Week Ahead!

Images courtesy of:

www.theepochtiems.com

www.sleepzine.com

www.nailsmag.com

www.aginglongevity

 

 


Legal Boot Camp Class Four. Sean and Kristy’s Story: How a Jury Award is Conformed to the Cap.

Wednesday, June 15th, 2011

From the Editor. Please see our disclaimer at the end of this blog for a better understanding of the limitations of this series and our mission statement.

Last week, we published a blog about Sean and Kristy. You will recall that Sean died from excessive bleeding when the nurse overdosed him with anticoagulation medication after a major surgery. You will also recall that after careful consideration Kristy decided to file a medical malpractice claim against the nurse and her employer, the hospital.

Now, let’s skip forward.  Kristy’s Complaint stated two causes of action: survival and wrongful death. Under the survival claim, Kristy was the only named Plaintiff because she was named Personal Representative of Sean’s Estate. Only a personal representative can bring a survival action on behalf of a decedent. Kristy and Kira (Sean’ daughter) were both named Plaintiffs under the wrongful death count. Generally speaking, only a parent, spouse, or child (with some exceptions) can bring claims for wrongful death.

At the conclusion of the trial, the jury returned a verdict of 2.5 million with 1 million awarded in the survival action and 1.5 million awarded in the wrongful death action. Furthermore, in the wrongful death action, the jury awarded Kristy 1 million dollars and Kira 500,000 dollars.  All of these damages were for pain and suffering.  You will recall that Maryland has a cap on non-economic damages. The cap imposes a limitation of about 812,000 dollars when the jury’s award is for wrongful death and survival (this is regardless of the number of claims or claimants).

How will the Court reduce the verdict so that it conforms to the statutory cap? The answer is mandated by statute: the Court must make proportionate reductions in order to reduce the jury award to the statutory cap.  Here is how it works:  The total recovery in this case is 2.5 million (1 million under the survival action, 1.5 million under the wrongful death action). 1.5 million represents 60% of the total recovery of 2.5 million.  1 million represents 40% of the total recovery.

Now, 40% of the 812,000 cap is 320,800 dollars. 60% of the 812,000 cap is 487,200 dollars. Therefore, the monetary award under the survival action will be reduced by the Court to 324,800 dollars. The overall award under the wrongful death action will be reduced by the Court proportionately to 487,200 dollars.

Furthermore, proportionate reductions are necessary to conform the wrongful death award to the cap.  An overall amount of 1.5 million was awarded in the wrongful death action.  From that award, the jury gave Kira 500,000 dollars and Kristy 1 million dollars.  One million represents about 67% of the total recovery in the wrongful death action. Kira’s award of 500,000 dollars represent 33.3%. Applying these percentages to the capped wrongful death recovery of 487,200 dollars, Kira’s award will be reduced from 500,000 dollars to 160,776 (33% of 487,200) dollars. Kristy’s award of 1 million dollars will be reduced to 326,424 dollars (67% of 487,200). This is all Maryland law will permit them to recover. Justice or injustice, what do you think?

Related Posts:

Malpractice Wrongful Death Lawsuit by Couple Falsely Accused of Abusing Their Child Filed Against Children’s Hospital

Maryland’s Cap and a Message from the former MAJ President re the Goings-On in Annapolis

Legal Boot Camp (First Class): The Story of Pam – Maryland’s Law on Earning Capacity

“Wrongful Death and Survival Actions”

Disclaimer: As is the case with all of our blogs and the writings posted on our website, we are not offering legal advice to our readers. This information in our series,Legal Boot Camp, is being presented in the hope that we can provide some education about the law in Maryland and the District of Columbia. The law in the field of personal injury (and particularly in our sub-specialty of medical malpractice) can be complex and confusing at times. Even in these two jurisdictions where we are licensed to practice, the laws and their interpretation by the courts can vary significantly. It is simply our hope that by presenting this series – Legal Boot Camp - that we can provide a better understanding of some legal principles that can come into play when bringing a civil claim or lawsuit for damages as a result of the wrongdoing of others.

For those who do not live in either Maryland or the Washington, D.C., we hope that we can at least raise some issues for you to consider when you speak with an attorney licensed to practice in the state in which you live. Many times the basic concepts of law are similar. We hope that by raising some of these issues applicable to Maryland and the District of Columbia, you will at least have a basic understanding of some terms and principles that may apply to your situation. Don’t be afraid to raise these issues with your attorney. Education – be it in law or medicine – is our main goal.
Finally, please see our introductory blog for Legal Boot Camp for a better understanding of our mission in presenting this series.

 

Week in Review: (June 6 – June 10, 2011) Eye Opener Health, Law and Medicine Blog

Saturday, June 11th, 2011

 

A Word of Special Thanks…

From the Editor:

I am so grateful to my bloggers and friends at the firm for all their hard work this week. I started a  multi-week trial this past Tuesday, but in my absence, the Eye Opener kept rolling right along thanks to them. Special thanks to Jason Penn, who took over the task of making sure the schedule was kept and the blogs got posted.

Brian Nash

 

From Jason Penn -

It is time to take a look back at the week that was.  With the temperatures soaring in the Baltimore-Washington area, the Eye Opener did its best to keep pace with the thermometer.  Five posts, five days.  All while the lawyers prepared for upcoming trials.  Not too shabby, if you ask me.  Without further ado, lets take a look at retrospective look:

The Death of a Baby – Economic Realities

By: Michael Sanders

The loss of a child, particularly an infant, is one of the most difficult and painful horrors anyone could every have to deal with.  Writing about it isn’t much easier.  Nonetheless, on Monday, blawger Michael Sanders’ post provided insight into the economics of lawsuits involving the death of an unborn child.  It is truly a “must read” for anyone that is contemplating taking legal action for the loss of their child.  The interplay between gestation, age of death and so-called “survival actions” is particularly tricky.  Mike lays out Maryland’s law on the topic and gives helpful primer for parent and practitioner alike.  Read more

Can A Simple Image Guide Nutrition?

By: Sarah Keogh

Obesity in America, particularly among our youth is a serious problem.  The problem itself certainly isn’t new but the approaches to promote healthy eating certainly have been. On Tuesday, Sara Keough pulled up to the table and reviewed the new MyPlate image and its impact on America’s unhealthy eating habits.  As I am sure you know, there have been a variety of methods to improve our nation’s eating habits. In most recent memory is the ostracized food pyramid and the First Lady’s “Let’s Move Campaign” (and associated dance moves). Sara provided her perspective on the new eating tool as both an individual and a parent.  I personally am curious: for the parents out there, will this change the way you handle your children’s nutrition?  Read more

Legal Boot Camp (Class Three): Sean and Kristy’s Story – Wrongful Death and Survival Actions

By: Jon Stefanuca

On Wednesday, Jon Stefanuca provided the third installment of our Legal Boot Camp. With class in session, Jon presented the following scenario:  Last month, Sean turned 24.  He and Kristy are married. Their daughter, Kira, is 2-years old. Sean just entered medical school. Kristy’s parents support them, while Sean is in school.  Sean has never held a job.  Kristy is a stay at home mom. A month ago, Sean was driving home when a drunk driver pushed him off the road. In the accident, Sean broke his sternum. He also sustained a number of vascular injuries, which caused internal bleeding. He was rushed to the nearest hospital. Soon after his arrival, Sean underwent surgery to stop the bleeding.

Sean was recovering beautifully. Unfortunately, on his third day in the hospital, he developed rapid breathing, shortness of breath, and his chest pain got worse. A CT scan of the chest revealed that Sean had a pulmonary embolism. The physician ordered 100 mg of anticoagulation medication.  The nurse misread the order and made a mistake in its administration. The overdose caused Sean to have extensive bleeding. Sean was scheduled for discharge within the next 3 days. Instead, he died within a few hours.

What legal action could Kristy take?  Read more

Dealing with Cerebral Palsy: A Resource for Parents and Family (Part II)

By: Jason Penn

On Thursday, Jason Penn provided us with Part II of his series “Dealing with Cerebral Palsy:  A Resource for Parents and Family.”  Part II of the series takes a look at educating children with cerebral palsy.  Children that have special needs that impact his/her ability to learn at school often qualify for an Individual Education Plan.

An IEP is a legal document created to ensure your child’s teacher, staff and administration understands his learning and other limitations and utilizes the best practices to ensure that he gets the education that he/she deserves.  Curious about an IEP?  Read more

How Much Is Your Marriage Worth?

By: Michael Sanders

To finish up the week, Michael Sanders returned, and asked the question: What is Your Marriage Worth?  If you’re married, there is category of damages that you may be able to recover – damage to your marriage. It’s called Loss of Consortium and is an important element of damages in the right circumstances. It is a legal recognition that the marital relationship itself – separate and apart from the injury to the individual – is a protected interest that is deserving of compensation if it has been harmed by the negligence of another person.  Read more…

Sneak Peak of the Week Ahead:

With the weather taking a turn for the better (hopefully), and the local sports teams showing renewed vigor, we are going to keep up the pace. As you finish up this week, and turn to the next, you can look forward to the following:

  • Service dogs for children:  more than just a pet
  • Subdural Hemorrhages – “Man, is my head aching…”
  • HIV Patients:  Increased risk for developing cancer
  • Crib bumpers & safety
  • Legal Boot Camp is back in session and Part III of our Cerebral Palsy tutorial.

Have a safe weekend, Everyone!

How Much is Your Marriage Worth?

Friday, June 10th, 2011

When you’re injured as a result of someone else’s negligence, it’s easy to see why you have a legal claim. You are entitled to recover for the injuries that you suffered, including economic damages (lost wages, medical bills, etc.) and non-economic damages (pain and suffering). However, if you’re married, there is another category of damages that you may be able to recover – damage to your marriage. It’s called Loss of Consortium and is an important element of damages in the right circumstances. It is a legal recognition that the marital relationship itself – separate and apart from the injury to the individual – is a protected interest that is deserving of compensation if it has been harmed by the negligence of another person.

Loss of consortium has an interesting history. Under Common Law (which roughly translates to “the olden days” in this circumstance) a woman had no right to sue for loss of consortium. It was only the man who had the right. That was because the woman was essentially seen as the man’s property. If she was injured and unable to provide her usual domestic or bedroom duties as a result of someone else’s negligence, the man could recover for the loss of such services. He had basically lost some of the value of his property so he was entitled to compensation. Eventually, the courts (most courts, at least) recognized the unfairness of such a one-sided system and ruled that women could also make such a claim if their husband suffered an injury. However, there are still some states (Virginia, for example) that do not recognize loss of consortium at all, no matter who tries to bring it.

Back to the present day. A loss of consortium claim arises when one spouse suffers a serious injury that impairs the marital relationship. An easy example is if a husband suffers a traumatic brain injury as a result of a doctor’s negligence. In that circumstance, the man would be able to file a claim for his own damages, of course, but he and his wife could also allege loss of consortium because the brain injury impacts the marriage. The couple will now find it more difficult to do the things they use to do together as man and wife – going out together, caring for their children, taking vacations, intimacy, and the day-to-day marital difficulties that arise because the husband now has a brain injury. In Maryland, a jury can award monetary damages for the couples’ loss of companionship, affection, assistance and yes, sexual relations. It is notoriously difficult to put a dollar figure on such injuries, but the law recognizes the right of a husband and wife to recover financially if their marriage has been damaged. How much money to award for such injury is for the jury to decide. Like other damages, it is always the plaintiffs’ burden to prove that the marriage has been injured, which is usually done through the testimony of the husband and wife.

Speaking of intimacy, some pundits say that loss of consortium is just a code-word for damage to the couples’ sex life. This is not entirely true as the marital relationship entails far more than just sex, but these pundits have a point. A loss of consortium claim usually does include an allegation that the couples’ sex life has been impacted. If you are bringing a lawsuit, you have to understand that when you allege loss of consortium, you are opening up the door on the most intimate parts of your life. Defense attorneys will often ask highly personal questions – how often did you have sex before the injury, how often do you have sex now, how exactly does the injury make sex more difficult, have either of you ever strayed from the marriage, etc. Some couples are understandably reluctant to discuss such things. Thankfully, most defense attorneys are just as uncomfortable asking these questions as the plaintiffs are answering them, so the questions tend to be over with relatively quickly. Be aware, though, that if you do file a loss of consortium claim, your sex life may become an issue in open court.

In the District of Columbia, a loss of consortium claim is for similar damages, but with a slight difference. While in Maryland the claim belongs to both the husband and the wife and is brought by them jointly, in the District of Columbia the claim belongs solely to the non-injured spouse. Any money awarded by the jury for loss of consortium goes to the non-injured spouse rather than to the couple jointly.

Lastly, Maryland’s cap on non-economic damages applies to claims for loss of consortium. There is no separate cap for this claim. In other words, there is a single cap that applies to all allegations of injuries, whether it’s an injury to the individual or an injury to the marriage.  The Maryland Legislature does not allow a couple to receive more money for injury to the marriage above and beyond the cap, even if a jury decides that that money should be given. Just another example of how Maryland’s cap punishes plaintiffs.

Have you ever suffered an injury that impacted your marriage? Did you file a loss of consortium claim? What was the result?

Related Nash and Associates Links

Maryland’s alleged healthcare “crisis”

Insurance and Traumatic Brain Injury

Acquired Brain Injuries

 

 

The death of a baby – the economic realities

Monday, June 6th, 2011

I recently wrote a blog about the grief that parents suffer when they lose an unborn child. At the risk of sounding crass, I want to now discuss the economics of lawsuits involving the death of an unborn child. For those contemplating taking legal action for the loss of their child, I hope this provides some useful information for you to consider.

Maryland courts have carved out specific rules for when an unborn child is considered a person capable of recovering damages in the event of death. The primary rule is that if a baby is actually born alive, no matter at what gestational age, that baby is considered a person with legal rights. So, if a 20-week baby is born alive and then dies one minute later, that baby is considered a “person,” and a lawsuit can be filed on behalf of the estate for that baby’s pain and suffering, otherwise known as a Survival Action.

(This leads to an interesting question – does a fetus feel pain? See Related Links below). The parents of the unborn child can also file what is known as a Wrongful Death action for their own economic and non-economic damages resulting from the death of their baby, primarily their grief and emotional loss over the death of their child. Survival actions and Wrongful Death actions are two separate claims, although they are usually pursued in the same lawsuit.

When a baby dies before birth, however, another question has to be asked: was the baby viable or not? Viability means that a baby is able to live outside the womb, even though he or she may require serious medical intervention. The current thinking is that babies are viable at around 22 weeks. The courts have made the rule that if an unborn child dies before the age of viability, that baby is not yet a “person” and has no legal rights. There can be no Survival Action and there can be no Wrongful Death action. If, however, the baby has reached the age of viability, then the baby is considered “a person” with legal rights, even if the baby was never born alive. Confusing? Yes it is.

The Maryland Courts were following the ruling in Roe v. Wade that a mother had a constitutional right to abort a non-viable baby. Therefore, a non-viable baby was not legally considered a person. If the baby was not a person, then no lawsuit could be filed on behalf of the estate of that baby, nor could the parents file a wrongful death action. So in order for a Survival Action or a Wrongful Death action to lie for an unborn baby, that baby has to have reached at least 22 weeks of gestation.

To make things even more confusing, the Maryland courts have carved out an exception to the above rules. Let’s consider the example of a non-viable baby (i.e., less than 22 weeks gestation) who dies before birth as a result of someone else’s negligence that injures the mother.

A common situation occurs when the mother (let’s say she’s 8 weeks pregnant) is injured in a car accident and suffers a miscarriage as a result. Looking at the above rules, one would think that no claim is allowed. However, the courts have said not so fast. In this circumstance, while the mother cannot recover for the grief of losing her child (because the child is non-viable and, therefore, not legally a person), she can recover for similar damages, including:

  • The depression, anguish, and grief caused by the termination of the pregnancy;
  • The manner in which the pregnancy was terminated;
  • Having to carry a baby which was killed by someone else’s tortious conduct; and
  • Having to witness the stillborn child or the fetal tissue that was to be her child.

I realize this itemization of damages sounds awfully close to the damages permitted in a Wrongful Death action – the very damages that are not allowed in the case of a non-viable baby. It is confusing, to say the least. The courts are trying to find a way to compensate a woman who is injured and loses her non-viable baby as a result of someone else’s negligence, while remaining true to prior precedent in this state that there is no Wrongful Death action allowed in the case of a non-viable baby.

Lastly, keep in mind that Maryland’s cap on non-economic damages applies to cases involving the death of an unborn baby. Economic damages (medical bills, lost wages) are usually very small in such cases. There are no lost wages because we’re talking about a baby, and the medical bills are usually small.

The value of these cases is in the emotional pain and suffering of the parents, and the physical pain and suffering of the baby (assuming a viable baby). Under Maryland law, the maximum allowable recovery for such a claim is $868,750 in a medical negligence action (assuming Mom and Dad both file a wrongful death action).

Under the hypothetical of the mother seeking recovery for the loss of a non-viable baby, the maximum allowable recovery is $695,000 if the allegation is medical negligence, and $755,000 if the allegation is non-medical negligence. (The Maryland Legislature has for some strange reason imposed different caps depending on whether the negligence is medical or non-medical, e.g., a car accident).

As for the question of whether an unborn child feels pain, please click on the link below for a blog by Brian Nash on this very issue.

Related Nash and Associates Links

Does a fetus feel pain

Hysteria over malpractice “crisis”

 

 

 

Week in Review: (May 29 – June 4, 2001) Eye Opener Health, Law and Medicine Blog

Saturday, June 4th, 2011

From the Editor:

We didn’t get to post as many blogs as usual this past week due to the simple fact that our lawyers/blawgers were spread around the country doing depositions and meetings, in court and getting ready for some major trials coming up very soon.

Sometimes the real practice of law (which is what we do when we’re not on WordPress blawging away) just gets in the way (read – big smiley face).

Brian Nash

 

Here’s what our blawgers wrote this past week. We hope you enjoy! Oh – thanks for stopping by too.

Summer Vacation Checklist: Add Vaccination to Your List

By: Theresa Neumann

Ahhh, summer vacation is coming. Passport? Airline tickets? Three 1oz containers? Zipper-lock bag? Sunblock? Camera? Vaccination status?

Summer is typically the busiest time for vacationers to explore new territories, or even old ones. Granted, the economy has replaced some travelers’ grand plans with much more modest ones, but many are still planning trips to Mexico and other foreign destinations. The summer is also a big time for missionary groups to head to under-served areas to provide assistance and medical care. The events of September 11th have forever changed travel for the United States and countries all over the world. There is now a new concern…..your vaccination status! Read more

The Grief of Losing an Unborn Child

By: Mike Sanders

For parents who have lost an unborn child, the sense of grief is no different than if the child had been born and then died. Unfortunately, our society seems less sympathetic to the loss because there is no infant that we have seen and gotten to know. We all recognize the agony of losing an older child. Even if we haven’t experienced it ourselves, we can at least try to understand how sickeningly awful it must be. We can then offer our support and love and condolences to those who have experienced it. With an unborn child, however, it’s different. We have a tendency to minimize the grief associated with losing an unborn child, as if the fact that the child wasn’t yet born makes him or her less real. Even medical providers are guilty of this. I’ve had women tell me that their doctors tend to treat miscarriage or stillbirth as a medical condition, not the loss of a loved one. For the parents of such children, however, the loss is deep and real and long-lasting. Read more

Legal Boot Camp: The Story of Mark and Susan – Common Law Marriage in Maryland

By: Jason Penn

Mark and Susan had been living together in a small apartment in Baltimore for 12 years. Both of their names were on the lease and they share a used car to commute back and forth to their jobs. Both names appeared on the utility bills and although they never had an actual “ceremony,” they always considered themselves to be husband and wife. Mark and Susan always assumed that the state of Maryland would consider their relationship to be a “common law marriage.” Ten months ago, Susan began experiencing unfamiliar stomach pains. Her doctor assured her that she was fine and that no follow-up examinations were necessary. Six months ago, Susan was diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer. Tragically, Susan died last week. Mark is certain that Susan was the victim of medical malpractice and wants to file an action for medical malpractice. Mark is now concerned that his common law marriage might not be valid.  Is it? Read more

Home Births: Increasingly Popular But Are They Safe?

By: Sarah Keogh

Many little girls grow up fantasizing about what they want to be when they grow up; perhaps they want to be the President, or an artist, or a doctor, or an architect. Others might be daydreaming about being a princess or an astronaut. However, I do not know of many little girls who grow up dreaming about how they would like to bring a child into this world. Yet once these girls grow up into adults, many of them feel strongly about having a birth plan that is just as magical as all of their other dreams. Images of a comfortable labor or a display of womanly strength may play a role; perhaps they want music or a particular image available to them. Some want as few interventions as possible, while others would prefer an epidural at the hospital door. No matter what vision of childbirth a woman has, the desired end result is almost universally a healthy child. Read more ….

Sneak Peak of the Week Ahead

  • Two Sessions (yes, it’s almost summer) of our Legal Boot Camp Series –
  • Parents of children with Cerebral Palsy – Part II
  • Loss of Consortium – some things about this claim you need to understand
  • ….AND even more….

Have a Great Weekend, Everyone!

Legal Boot Camp (Second Class): The Story of Mark and Susan– Common Law Marriage in Maryland

Wednesday, June 1st, 2011

From the Editor – Please see our disclaimer at the end of this blog for a better understanding of the limitations of this series and our mission statement. Brian Nash

Their Story

Mark and Susan had been living together in a small apartment in Baltimore for 12 years. Both of their names were on the lease and they share a used car to commute back and forth to their jobs. Both names appeared on the utility bills and although they never had an actual “ceremony,” they always considered themselves to be husband and wife. Mark and Susan always assumed that the state of Maryland would consider their relationship to be a “common law marriage.” Ten months ago, Susan began experiencing unfamiliar stomach pains. Her doctor assured her that she was fine and that no follow-up examinations were necessary. Six months ago, Susan was diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer. Tragically, Susan died last week. Mark is certain that Susan was the victim of medical malpractice and wants to file an action for medical malpractice. Mark is now concerned that his common law marriage might not be valid.  Is it?

Common Law Marriage

A “common law marriage” is one in which the parties may hold themselves out as a husband and wife, and under certain circumstances, be deemed married without a marriage license or ceremony. Maryland does not allow the creation of a “common law” marriage, a relationship in which a couple lives together but have not participated in a lawful ceremony. Unlike some other states, in Maryland a couple cannot acquire marital rights and responsibilities by living together for a particular period of time. However, Maryland does recognize as valid, common law marriages created in other states if the legal requirements of those states have been met.

Because of Maryland’s law, despite living together, owning a car and holding themselves out as “man and wife,” Mark and Susan’s relationship is not recognized as a valid marriage by the state of Maryland.

In the setting of a medical malpractice (or personal injury) claim, this has serious consequences. For example, in a medical malpractice lawsuit alleging wrongful death, the basis of such a lawsuit is essentially that due to the negligence of a health care provider, such as a doctor, nurse, physician’s assistant or hospital, a loved one has died. The death is considered to be “wrongful” because you, as a Plaintiff, are alleging that it was the negligence of the health care provider that cause your loved one’s death.

Typically, the person or persons allowed to recover for wrongful death are those members of the decedent’s immediate family, such as spouse, children or mother or father—depending on who the ‘legal beneficiaries’ are in each given situation. Sadly, for Mark, it is highly unlikely that he would qualify as one of Susan’s beneficiaries since they were never, under Maryland law, legally married.

An in-depth discussion of Wrongful Death, Survival Actions and filing medical malpractice actions in the state of Maryland and District of Columbia is also covered in our White Paper:  “Wrongful Death and Survival Actions.”

Disclaimer: As is the case with all of our blogs and the writings posted on our website, we are not offering legal advice to our readers. This information in our series,Legal Boot Camp, is being presented in the hope that we can provide some education about the law in Maryland and the District of Columbia. The law in the field of personal injury (and particularly in our sub-specialty of medical malpractice) can be complex and confusing at times. Even in these two jurisdictions where we are licensed to practice, the laws and their interpretation by the courts can vary significantly. It is simply our hope that by presenting this series – Legal Boot Camp - that we can provide a better understanding of some legal principles that can come into play when bringing a civil claim or lawsuit for damages as a result of the wrongdoing of others.
For those who do not live in either Maryland or the Washington, D.C., we hope that we can at least raise some issues for you to consider when you speak with an attorney licensed to practice in the state in which you live. Many times the basic concepts of law are similar. We hope that by raising some of these issues applicable to Maryland and the District of Columbia, you will at least have a basic understanding of some terms and principles that may apply to your situation. Don’t be afraid to raise these issues with your attorney. Education – be it in law or medicine – is our main goal.
Finally, please see our introductory blog for Legal Boot Camp for a better understanding of our mission in presenting this series.

 

Week in Review: (May 22 – 28, 2011) The Eye Opener Health, Law and Medicine Blog

Saturday, May 28th, 2011

From the Editor – Brian Nash

Last week’s posts by our blawgers were packed with information about a variety of topics ranging from the medicine you need to know about concussions, living with cancer, cerebral palsy resources and the potential risks of overdosing your child with medications.

On the legal front, we began a series I’m personally excited about. We call it Legal Boot Camp. It will be a series for those in our practice jurisdictions of Maryland and Washington, D.C. Our teacher’s face is on – lesson plans in place. We hope you learn some things about the laws that can affect your lives in the areas of personal injury – particularly medical malpractice law.  Our first class took place with a piece by Sarah Keogh that examines the law in Maryland on the right to claim loss/diminished earning capacity. If you’re wondering if you can have such a claim even if you weren’t working when you were injured, Sarah has some information for you. Check it out. Turn in your class card and have some fun.

We wrapped up the week with a piece by yours truly on a wonderful community outreach program by our local baseball heroes, the Baltimore Orioles. Aptly named – OriolesREACH, this initiative has a number of wonderful events, charities and missions that are worth knowing about. One in particular, Shannon’s Fund, is a great program to help those in need while dealing with the financial burdens while dealing with cancer. It is run by the University of Maryland Medical Center. Read about our challenge to our brethren before the bar in the Greater Baltimore Area.

Without further ado, here are the blogs we posted this past week …. and a sneak peak of the week ahead.

Concussions: The Message of Brian Roberts’ Injury Should Not Go Unheeded

Posted by Brian Nash

Anyone who follows sports is well aware that finally the old school mentality of “gut it out and get back in there” following blows to the head are coming (not too soon) to an end. Committees have been formed, articles written and the national spotlight of the media have finally focused on this issue. Those recommendations, debates and guidelines are beyond the scope of this post. Nevertheless, those involved in sports…Read more >

Children’s Medications: Coming Changes and Tips to Avoid Overdose

Posted by Sarah Keogh

My children are both young; the youngest is now a little past her second birthday. In the last few years, we have had both infant and children medication in the house, liquid and tablets, and I have been very careful to make sure to double-check myself if I ever have to medicate either child to make sure that I am reading the correct dosing matrix for the correct concentration and for the correct child. More often than not, I have found that children need medication when their parents are tired. As parents know – children frequently…Read more >

 

Living With Cancer: What to Expect After the Diagnosis

Posted by Jon Stefanuca

About a million and a half people will be diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. this year. The devastating truth about cancer is that about one-third of these people will die from cancer at some point. For most, the diagnosis is unexpected and completely overwhelming.The cancer does not just affect how one feels, it undermines all sense of security and stability. It changes lifestyles and redefines relationships. So often the emotional trauma is equally shared among family members and loved ones. Read more >

New Blog Series: Legal Boot Camp

Posted by Brian Nash

I’m really pleased to announce a new series we’re starting today. If you’re a reader of our blog, you know that we post numerous times a week on health, safety, medicine and related law topics. That’s what we do in our firm – we represent people who are injured by the negligence of health care providers and those who suffer catastrophic injuries in non-medical settings as well. So, sharing what we believe is some good information about medical, health and safety issues is our mission. We strongly believe that our social networking should be about giving good information, engaging in dialogue about relevant issues – just plain good, old sharing. Read more >

Legal Boot Camp (First Class): The Story of Pam – Maryland’s Law on Loss of Earning Capacity

Posted by Sarah Keogh

A 41-year-old woman, Pam, who was laid off from her job as a swimming instructor and swim coach in December of 2009, has been struggling to find a new position for the last few years. Even though Pam had been working as a swimming instructor full-time for the past 18 years, she felt that she needed to jump into a new career while waiting to find a new position as a swimming instructor and coach. Starting in October of 2010, her father died leaving her a rundown home that he had recently purchased with the intent of renovating it. Pam felt that she could put her physical fitness and knowledge of home aesthetics to work, not to mention the ideas she picked up watching renovations shows while unemployed, by renovating the home her father left… Read more >

Dealing with Cerebral Palsy: A Resource for Parents and Family

Posted by Jason Penn

Today’s society has become increasingly dependent on aggregators. We use a variety of methods to assemble and sort information so that we can easily consume it.  Mint.com and Quicken help with our finances and Google Reader helps to manage our online content. A quick search of the internet suggests that the parents of children withcerebral palsy do not yet have an objective aggregator of information to turn to.  Let’s consider this our attempt to provide parents in the Baltimore and Washington D.C. areas with a place to turn. Read more >

Charity Begins at Home: OriolesREACH Program Hits a Grand Slam with Us!

Posted by Brian Nash

I recently wrote a post about our local area charities and civic organizations who do so much for so many in our community. With that in mind, as I was happily reading the sports page in the warm glow of the Orioles’ 12th inning victory yesterday (5 in a row – Go O’s), I came across a piece about a new initiative for our military personnel by the Birds. While looking at the details of this worthy program, I noticed (ashamedly for the first time, I admit) a host of community programs being run by the Orioles. The team uses the name OriolesREACH for the community programs they sponsor, promote or fund. Read more >

Sneak Peak of the Week Ahead

Here’s a sampling of what’s coming next week on The Eye Opener: Views and Opinions from the Nash Community:

  • As families prepare for the upcoming holidays and summer vacation, Theresa Neumann has some important medical advice about what else needs to be included in your travel plans.
  • Legal Boot Camp: Prepare for our second class – get those pencils, pens, iPads and whatever else you need out and ready – there could be a pop quiz on next week’s primary on law.
  • What rights do babies-before-birth (fetal rights) have in our legal system? Do parents who lose a child just before birth have any rights of recovery? You’ll find out next week.
  • Home births are on the rise. Is that a good or a bad thing? Sarah Keogh weighs in on that issue in the coming edition of The Eye Opener

And….maybe even more to come…you can never tell….

Have a wonderful and safe Memorial Day Weekend. Best to All of You and Your Families and Friends from All of Us at Nash & Associates

Legal Boot Camp (First Class): The Story of Pam – Maryland’s Law on Earning Capacity

Thursday, May 26th, 2011

Image from cnbc.com

Wondering what “Legal Boot Camp” is all about? Check out our announcement, find out, come along, have some fun and learn some “law stuff” while you’re at it.   Please see our disclaimer at the end of this blog for a better understanding of the limitations of this series and our mission statement.

Class is now in session….

A 41-year-old woman, Pam, who was laid off from her job as a swimming instructor and swim coach in December of 2009, has been struggling to find a new position for the last few years. Even though Pam had been working as a swimming instructor full-time for the past 18 years, she felt that she needed to jump into a new career while waiting to find a new position as a swimming instructor and coach. Starting in October of 2010, her father died leaving her a rundown home that he had recently purchased with the intent of renovating it. Pam felt that she could put her physical fitness and knowledge of home aesthetics to work, not to mention the ideas she picked up watching renovations shows while unemployed, by renovating the home her father left and selling it for a profit. Since Pam thought that this could be her new vocation along with being a swim instructor, she formed a company for her new real estate and renovation business. She also bought a few additional run-down properties at auction. She started the renovations on the first house and completed a stunning new kitchen and had begun the demolition for a new bath by January of 2011. While still unemployed as a swimming instructor and before making any profit on her real estate business, Pam underwent a routine medical procedure at a local area hospital. Unfortunately, while still in the hospital following the procedure, she was severely injured and has been left paraplegic.

Now, Pam is considering filing a lawsuit as a result of the negligent care she received while hospitalized. Given the extent of her injuries, she will not be able to return to her job as a swimming instructor and she will have to hire workers if she is going to complete any additional renovations in the homes that she purchased. She may be able to work again, but not without significant assistance and not in either of her prior capacities. The question for today is what damages might she be able to claim in terms of a lost wages claim or a diminished earning capacity claim in Maryland.

Unemployment Not a Bar to Recovery for Loss of Earnings

In personal injury actions in Maryland, unemployment or self-employment without earning a profit at the time of injury are not a bar to recovery for loss of earning or loss of earning capability. In Ihrie v. Anthony, to Use of Gov’t Emp. Ins. Co., 205 Md. 296,107 A.2d 104 (1954), a woman was injured in a car accident while unemployed. She had previously worked in several jobs, both office positions and real estate work. Ihrie, 205 Md. at 303-304,107 A.2d at 107. After her injury, she was unable to continue to work in these types of positions, though there is some dispute about that. Id. at 304, 107 A.2d at 107. What is important to consider for Pam is that in the Ihrie case, the injured woman was allowed to recover. Id. at 309, 107 A.2d at 110.

The court held that “[t]he fact that the plaintiff was unemployed at the time of the accident and for several years prior thereto is not fatal to her right to recover.” Id. at 305, 107 A.2d at 107. In that case, like the one we are considering today, the woman who was injured had worked in the past and had a history of employment and wages to consider. The judges took the woman’s injuries and her past earning history into account in making their decision:

We are of the opinion that there was sufficient evidence of the permanence of the plaintiff’s injuries and of their impairing her earning power to warrant the submission of those issues to the jury and that there was sufficient evidence to serve the jury as a guide in measuring the extent of her loss of earnings.

Id. at 306-307, 107 A.2d 104, 108. Pam’s injuries and her past history of employment as a swim instructor should be presented at trial in her claim for loss of earnings. The past year and a half of unemployment should not bar her recovery since she has an eighteen-year history of employment to measure her loss of earnings for the future.

Can She Recover for Her Business?

What about Pam’s fledgling real estate business? She was working herself on the houses, which she will not be able to do moving forward. In order to complete the renovations and sell the homes, she will have to hire renovators at a significant expense. Since her business did not yet have a profit, she does not have the same sort of earnings history as she does for her past job as a swim instructor. However, she may still be able to recover for a loss of earning capacity.

In Anderson v. Litzenberg, 115 Md. App. 549, 694 A.2d 150 (1997), the court found that if someone is self-employed in a not yet profitable business at the time of their injury, they may still be able to recover for their loss of earning capacity. The case examined the situation of a man who was injured in an accident while he was partially self-employed in a real estate business that was not making a profit. Id. The court examined the question of loss of earning capacity. Id. The court defined impairment of earning capacity as the “lost capacity to earn, rather than what a plaintiff would have earned.” Id. at 572, 694 A.2d at 161 (internal citations omitted). The court explains that:

It is generally recognized that impairment of earning capacity seeks to compensate the plaintiff for a reduction in his ability to earn through his personal services. Once the fact of impaired earning capacity is established, the plaintiff must submit evidence so that the extent of the impairment can reasonably be determined. The prevailing proper measure of lost earning capacity is the difference between the amount that the plaintiff was capable of earning before his injury and that which he is capable of earning thereafter. Essentially, the plaintiff must establish the disparity between the market value of his services before and after the injury.

The objective is to place [the victim] in the same economic position as would have been … had the injury not occurred. We seek to accomplish this goal by a formula which … consists of determining what [plaintiff's] annual earning power would have been but for the injury, deducting what it will be thereafter, multiplying the result by [plaintiff's] expectancy, and discounting the product to present value.”

Id. at 572-73, 694 A.2d at 161-62 (internal citations omitted). This would be the formula that would need to be considered in Pam’s case. The necessary proof would need to be provided of Pam’s former earning capacity before her injury and whatever earning capacity she has with her injury. However, Anderson makes clear that the specificity of earning capacity need not be as great as that of lost earnings – as it would be nearly impossible to know for certain what sort of profit Pam might make in the future. See id.

There are many factors to consider when deciding whether to file a personal injury action for medical malpractice. One of the considerations is certainly whether the potential damages award makes it worthwhile to undertake the costs of litigating for the wrong inflicted upon the injured party. Have you ever been involved in a case involving lost earnings or loss of earning capacity in a personal injury case? Was there unemployment involved? This seems likely to be a more frequent question with the current economic realities in our country.

Related Posts:

Every bad outcome or injury does NOT a malpractice case make! Some practical advice.

Should you sue a healthcare provider? Some guidelines to help you decide.

 

Disclaimer: As is the case with all of our blogs and the writings posted on our website, we are not offering legal advice to our readers. This information in our series,Legal Boot Camp, is being presented in the hope that we can provide some education about the law in Maryland and the District of Columbia. The law in the field of personal injury (and particularly in our sub-specialty of medical malpractice) can be complex and confusing at times. Even in these two jurisdictions where we are licensed to practice, the laws and their interpretation by the courts can vary significantly. It is simply our hope that by presenting this series – Legal Boot Camp - that we can provide a better understanding of some legal principles that can come into play when bringing a civil claim or lawsuit for damages as a result of the wrongdoing of others.

For those who do not live in either Maryland or the Washington, D.C., we hope that we can at least raise some issues for you to consider when you speak with an attorney licensed to practice in the state in which you live. Many times the basic concepts of law are similar. We hope that by raising some of these issues applicable to Maryland and the District of Columbia, you will at least have a basic understanding of some terms and principles that may apply to your situation. Don’t be afraid to raise these issues with your attorney. Education – be it in law or medicine – is our main goal.