In celebration of The Baltimore Sun newspaper's 175th Anniversary, the annual Baltimore Book Festival (BBF) will be held at Mount Vernon Place, September 28-30, 2012. Admission is free.
Among many other interesting events such as exhibitors, panel discussions, cooking demos, walking tours, live music, workshops, etc., the festival will feature over 200 celebrity and local authors.
Recent books by Attorney and Author Charles Jerome Ware include best-sellers:
(1) The Secret Science of Winning Lotteries, Sweepstakes and Contests;
http://amzn.com/1432793888
(2) Understanding the Law: A Primer;
http://amzn.com/1440111456
(3) The Immigration Paradox: 15 Tips for Winning Imigration Cases;
http://amzn.com/1440171920
(4) Legal Consumer Tips and Secrets: Avoiding Debtors' Prison in the United States; and
http://amzn.com/1462051847
(5) Quince (15) Consejos Para Ganar Casos Del Inmigracion.
http://amzn.com/1462068952
[www.CharlesJeromeWare.com; facebook.com/BaltimoreBookFestival; Baltimore Office of Promotion & The Arts]
Friday, September 14, 2012
Thursday, September 13, 2012
WASHINGTON MEDICAL MALPRACTICE: Fundamentals of DC Medical Negligence: PART 1
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors contains a premier medical malpractice (medical negligence) practice that is truly "here to make a difference". The firm and its affiliates have a successful track record of high recoveries in medical negligence and wrongful death cases.
The reader is advised, counselled and urged to contact a knowledgeable attorney about his or her possible claim since, among other things, D.C. and state laws are constantly subject to change in this important area of medical negligence. Contact us for a free initial consultation.
A. The Washington, D.C. Standard for Medical Negligence (Professional Negligence):
The D.C. standard of care for all actions in negligence is "reasonable care under the circumstances".
The D.C. standard of care for professionals, however, is "the degree of care reasonably expected of other professionals with similar skills acting under the same or similar circumstances".
[The District has adopted a national standard for physicians, not a local standard. See generally O'Neil v. Bergan, 452 A.2d 337 (D.C. 1982) (attorneys); Morrison v. MacNamara, 407 A.2d. 555 (D.C. 1979). Punitive Damages; counsel.cua.edu/DCLAW/Pres.Inj./General;]
B. Statute of Limitations:
The statute of limitations for medical negligence claims in Washington, D.C. is three (3) years
[D.C. Code Annotated, §12-301 (2008)].
As with most states, the 3-year statute of limitations begins when the medical malpractice (medical negligence) claimant (1) actually knows of the injury, (2) the cause of the injury, and (3) has evidence of a medical mistake.
The medical negligence claimant's knowledge includes not only "actual notice" but also "inquiry notice," which is defined as "investigating matters affecting one's affairs such that an investigation would have led to the uncovering of these three factors."
[D.C. Code, § 12-301 (2008)].
Minors, mentally incompetent, or imprisoned medical malpractice victims may bring their action within three years following the removal of their disability [D.C. Code Ann. §12-302 (2008)]. A wrongful death action must be brought within one year of the date of death [D.C. Code Ann. § 16-2702 (2008)].
C. Contributory or Comparative Negligence:
Washington, D.C. is one of the five (5) current jurisdictions in the United States that follows and abides by the doctrine of "contributory negligence" in medical negligence cases [Stager v. Schneider, 494 A. 2d 1307 (D.C., 1985)]. This means that even if a medical negligence claimant is only one percent (1%) at fault for his or her injury, their claim is barred.
Part 2 of this blog on the fundamentals of D.C. Medical Negligence will be forthcoming.
The reader is advised, counselled and urged to contact a knowledgeable attorney about his or her possible claim since, among other things, D.C. and state laws are constantly subject to change in this important area of medical negligence. Contact us for a free initial consultation.
A. The Washington, D.C. Standard for Medical Negligence (Professional Negligence):
The D.C. standard of care for all actions in negligence is "reasonable care under the circumstances".
The D.C. standard of care for professionals, however, is "the degree of care reasonably expected of other professionals with similar skills acting under the same or similar circumstances".
[The District has adopted a national standard for physicians, not a local standard. See generally O'Neil v. Bergan, 452 A.2d 337 (D.C. 1982) (attorneys); Morrison v. MacNamara, 407 A.2d. 555 (D.C. 1979). Punitive Damages; counsel.cua.edu/DCLAW/Pres.Inj./General;]
B. Statute of Limitations:
The statute of limitations for medical negligence claims in Washington, D.C. is three (3) years
[D.C. Code Annotated, §12-301 (2008)].
As with most states, the 3-year statute of limitations begins when the medical malpractice (medical negligence) claimant (1) actually knows of the injury, (2) the cause of the injury, and (3) has evidence of a medical mistake.
The medical negligence claimant's knowledge includes not only "actual notice" but also "inquiry notice," which is defined as "investigating matters affecting one's affairs such that an investigation would have led to the uncovering of these three factors."
[D.C. Code, § 12-301 (2008)].
Minors, mentally incompetent, or imprisoned medical malpractice victims may bring their action within three years following the removal of their disability [D.C. Code Ann. §12-302 (2008)]. A wrongful death action must be brought within one year of the date of death [D.C. Code Ann. § 16-2702 (2008)].
C. Contributory or Comparative Negligence:
Washington, D.C. is one of the five (5) current jurisdictions in the United States that follows and abides by the doctrine of "contributory negligence" in medical negligence cases [Stager v. Schneider, 494 A. 2d 1307 (D.C., 1985)]. This means that even if a medical negligence claimant is only one percent (1%) at fault for his or her injury, their claim is barred.
Part 2 of this blog on the fundamentals of D.C. Medical Negligence will be forthcoming.
JAMES JAGER, Actor: "The Shakespeare Whisperer"
From the national general practice law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors: "Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference".
James Jager, a legal assistant in this law firm, is frequently referred to as "The Shakespeare Whisperer" because of his commitment and his interest in the works of the great playwright, his uncanny ability to translate Shakespeare into forms for public understanding and appreciation, and his gift of teaching about this complex and sophisticated dramatist.
Mr. Jager will be appearing (acting) in Shakespeare's "Richard III", probably Shakespeare's greatest villain, from October 5th to the 28th, 2012, at the Patapsco Female Institute Historic Park, 3691 Sarah's Lane, Ellicott City, Maryland 21043, for the Chesapeake Shakespeare Company's "Movable Shakespeare" production.
Keep the conversation going.
James Jager, a legal assistant in this law firm, is frequently referred to as "The Shakespeare Whisperer" because of his commitment and his interest in the works of the great playwright, his uncanny ability to translate Shakespeare into forms for public understanding and appreciation, and his gift of teaching about this complex and sophisticated dramatist.
Mr. Jager will be appearing (acting) in Shakespeare's "Richard III", probably Shakespeare's greatest villain, from October 5th to the 28th, 2012, at the Patapsco Female Institute Historic Park, 3691 Sarah's Lane, Ellicott City, Maryland 21043, for the Chesapeake Shakespeare Company's "Movable Shakespeare" production.
Keep the conversation going.
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
CONNECTICUT MEDICAL MALPRACTICE: Physician/Therapist Patient Abuse
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is a premier medical malpractice law firm which is: "Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference".
The reader is advised, counselled and urged to consult with a medical malpractice attorney with related legal questions about a possible claim.
A brief survey of Connecticut/therapist patient sexual abuse cases:
(1) $2,750,000 Verdict Against Research Physician Hospital:
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – HOSPITAL NEGLIGENCE – NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION – FAILURE TO DETECT RESEARCH PHYSICIAN MOLESTED CHILDREN DURING RESEARCH PROJECT – PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURIES AND DAMAGES.
(3) $100,000 Verdict Against Psychiatrist:
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - PSYCHIATRY - ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINOR PLAINTIFF PATIENT - DEFENDANT DENIES ALL ALLEGATIONS.
The reader is advised, counselled and urged to consult with a medical malpractice attorney with related legal questions about a possible claim.
A brief survey of Connecticut/therapist patient sexual abuse cases:
(1) $2,750,000 Verdict Against Research Physician Hospital:
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – HOSPITAL NEGLIGENCE – NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION – FAILURE TO DETECT RESEARCH PHYSICIAN MOLESTED CHILDREN DURING RESEARCH PROJECT – PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURIES AND DAMAGES.
In this matter, the plaintiff alleged that the defendant hospital was negligent in failing to monitor and oversee the work of a researcher at the hospital who was performing a growth study on children. The plaintiff alleged that as a child in the study he was molested and otherwise inappropriately treated by the research physician and the defendant failed to realize the true nature of the molester (Connecticut).
(2) $100,000 Verdict Against Therapist and Health Service:
This was an action brought by the male plaintiff against the defendant health service alleging negligence on the part of the defendant’s female employee therapist in allegedly seducing the plaintiff, causing ineffective treatment and relapse into alcoholism.
(3) $100,000 Verdict Against Psychiatrist:
MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - PSYCHIATRY - ALLEGED SEXUAL ABUSE OF MINOR PLAINTIFF PATIENT - DEFENDANT DENIES ALL ALLEGATIONS.
This was a malpractice action brought by the female plaintiff, age ten when she commenced treating with the defendant psychiatrist for symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder. The plaintiff, who was age 20, by the time of trial, contended that during the course of her treatment with the defendant psychiatrist, she was sexually molested by the defendant physician (Connecticut).
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
MARYLAND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE, PART 3: A PRIMER by Attorney Charles Jerome Ware
[This is Part 3 of this blog whose previous postings were on Friday, September 7th, 2012 (Part 1) and on Monday, September 10th, 2012 (Part 2). When confronted with any legal problem, including medical malpractice, the reader is specifically advised, counselled, and urged to seek competent and professional legal advice]
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is a premier Maryland medical malpractice firm which is: "Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference."
The liability of any local government in Maryland is capped at $200,000 per claim and $500,000 per occurrence. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-303 (Supp. 1997). Local governments are immune from liability for punitive damages. Id. The purchase of liability insurance does not waive the entity’s immunity [See Quecedo v. Montgomery County, 264 Md. 590, 287 A.2d 257 (1972) (holding that in the absence of statute to the contrary, a county that maintains liability insurance does not waive its immunity)].
Charitable hospitals carrying liability insurance in an amount not less than $100,000 are not liable for damages in excess of the limits of coverage. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-632 (Supp. 1997). However, that immunity does not extend to the employees of charitable hospitals [Wood v. Abell, 268 Md. 214, 300 A.2d 665 (1973)].
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is a premier Maryland medical malpractice firm which is: "Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference."
Periodic Payments of Damages
Maryland courts and arbitration panels are afforded the power to order that future damages be paid in the form of periodic payments, subject to adequate security [Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-109 (1995)]. Upon the death of a claimant receiving periodic payments, the unpaid balance for future medical expenses reverts to the defendant. Id.Collateral Source Rule
In Maryland, evidence of the claimant’s receipt of payments from collateral sources may not be admitted to reduce his damages [Schreiber v. Cherry Hill Construction Co., 105 Md. App. 462, 660 A.2d 970 (Ct. Spec. App.), cert. denied, 340 Md. 500, 667 A.2d 341 (1995)].Pre-Judgment Interest on Tort Claims
Maryland law does not recognize pre-judgment interest on tort claims for personal injury [Lawhorne v. Employers Ins. Co. of Wausau, 343 Md. 111, 680 A.2d 518 (1996)].Patient Compensation Funds and Physician Insurance
Maryland does not have a patient compensation fund or a program of state-sponsored liability insurance for physicians.Immunities
Under Md. Code Ann., State Gov’t § 12-104 (Supp. 1997), the state has waived its sovereign immunity to the extent of $100,000 per claim. However, such immunity still applies with respect to punitive damages and pre-judgment interest [Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-522(a) (Supp. 1997)]. A claimant must provide written notice of his claim within one year of the injury. If the claim is denied, a lawsuit must be filed within three years after the cause of action arises or the claim is barred [Md. Code Ann., State Gov’t § 12-106 (Supp. 1997)].The liability of any local government in Maryland is capped at $200,000 per claim and $500,000 per occurrence. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-303 (Supp. 1997). Local governments are immune from liability for punitive damages. Id. The purchase of liability insurance does not waive the entity’s immunity [See Quecedo v. Montgomery County, 264 Md. 590, 287 A.2d 257 (1972) (holding that in the absence of statute to the contrary, a county that maintains liability insurance does not waive its immunity)].
Charitable hospitals carrying liability insurance in an amount not less than $100,000 are not liable for damages in excess of the limits of coverage. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-632 (Supp. 1997). However, that immunity does not extend to the employees of charitable hospitals [Wood v. Abell, 268 Md. 214, 300 A.2d 665 (1973)].
Monday, September 10, 2012
MEDIA BIAS?: BABY BLACK BOY DISAPPEARS "Despite Pleas, Missing South Carolina Boy Falls By Wayside"
From the national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors: "Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference."
Is the media biased against missing children who are non-white and male? That is just one of the issues being raised in a South Carolina missing child case where the victim (the child) is an 18-month-old black boy.
This wonderful baby boy is every bit as cute as Jon Benet Ramsey or Caylee Anthony, or any other precious missing child but, despite pleas for national attention from the media, attention to this tragic case has not been forthcoming from the media.
Could this lack of attention to 18-month-old baby Amir Jennings be caused by his race, black, and/or his gender, male?
Check on this. You be the judge. Keep the conversation going.
[see, "Despite pleas, missing South Carolina boy falls by wayside," Meg Kinnard, Columbia, South Carolina, cpf.cleanprint.net, Associated Press (AP), 09/09/2012, Newsday, www.newsday.com; www.msnbc.msn.com; NBCNews.com; news.yahoo.com; www.miamiherald.com]
Is the media biased against missing children who are non-white and male? That is just one of the issues being raised in a South Carolina missing child case where the victim (the child) is an 18-month-old black boy.
This wonderful baby boy is every bit as cute as Jon Benet Ramsey or Caylee Anthony, or any other precious missing child but, despite pleas for national attention from the media, attention to this tragic case has not been forthcoming from the media.
Could this lack of attention to 18-month-old baby Amir Jennings be caused by his race, black, and/or his gender, male?
Check on this. You be the judge. Keep the conversation going.
[see, "Despite pleas, missing South Carolina boy falls by wayside," Meg Kinnard, Columbia, South Carolina, cpf.cleanprint.net, Associated Press (AP), 09/09/2012, Newsday, www.newsday.com; www.msnbc.msn.com; NBCNews.com; news.yahoo.com; www.miamiherald.com]
MARYLAND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE, PART 2: A PRIMER by Attorney Charles Jerome Ware
(This is Part 2 of this blog which was posted on Friday, September 7, 2012)
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is a premier Maryland medical malpractice firm which is :"Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference."
Maryland imposes a limit on recoverable non-economic damages for any personal injury cause of action for medical malpractice accruing after July 1, 1986. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-108 (Supp. 1997). The limit was originally $350,000, but for causes of actions arising on or after October 1, 1994, the limit has been increased to $500,000. Id. Beginning October 1, 1995, and every October 1 thereafter, the limit on non-economic damages is increased by $15,000. Id. Non-economic damages include pain and suffering, inconvenience, physical impairment, disfigurement, loss of consortium, and other non-pecuniary damages, but not punitive damages. Id. The damage cap applies to each “direct victim” of the tort and all those claiming injury by or through him [Id.; Oaks v. Connors, 339 Md. 24, 660 A.2d 423 (1995) (a single cap applies to the injured person’s claim and the spouse’s consortium claim). This statute does not violate Maryland’s constitution. Murphy v. Edmonds, 325 Md. 342, 601 A.2d 102 (1992)].
Prior to the 1994 amendment, the statute had been held not to apply to wrongful death cases [United States v. Streidel, 329 Md. 533, 620 A.2d 905 (1993). However, the statute now provides that the cap applies to wrongful death, and that the total recovery of all beneficiaries in a wrongful death case cannot exceed 150 percent of the cap. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-108 (Supp. 1997)].
Medical Malpractice Cap
____________________________________________________
[see, www.millerandzois.com/maryland-medical-malpractice-cap]
[No attorney-client relationship is established with anyone merely through this abovereferenced blog and/or information. Always seek personal professional advice and consultation].
The national law firm of Charles Jerome Ware, P.A., Attorneys and Counsellors, is a premier Maryland medical malpractice firm which is :"Still working. Still committed. Still here to make a difference."
EXPERT TESTIMONY
Expert testimony is required in all successful Maryland medical malpractice cases. Maryland Code, § 3-2A-04 of the Courts & Judicial Proceedings Article (CJP), requires a person who wishes to pursue a claim against a health care provider for damages due to medical injury to file the claim with the Director of the Health Claims Arbitration Office.
JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY
In Maryland, joint tortfeasors are jointly and severally liable; each must assume and bear the responsibility for the misconduct of all [Carroll v. Kerrigen, 173 Md. 627, 197 A. 127 (1938); Cooper v. Bikle, 334 Md. 608, 640 A.2d 1120 (1994)].
CONTRIBUTION
In Maryland a joint tortfeasor who pays more than his pro rata share has a right of contribution against other joint tortfeasors whose liability was extinguished by the judgment or settlement and who have not paid their pro rata share. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-1402 (Supp. 1997). The tortfeasors’ pro rata shares are determined by dividing the judgment equally among the tortfeasors [Lahocki v. Contee Sand & Travel Co., 41 Md. App. 579, 398 A.2d 490 (Ct. Spec. App. 1979), rev’d on other grounds sub nom. General Motors Corp. v. Lahocki, 286 Md. 714, 410 A.2d 1039 (1980)].
VICARIOUS LIABILITY
In Maryland, a hospital may, under appropriate circumstances, be held responsible for the negligent acts of its independently- contracted physicians, based on principles of apparent agency [Mehlman v. Powell, 281 Md. 269, 378 A.2d 1121 (1977) (holding that an apparent agency relationship existed because the hospital did nothing to indicate an emergency physician’s true status as an independent contractor)].
DAMAGES
As in most other states, the issue of damages continues to be a major issue in Maryland.
Prior to the 1994 amendment, the statute had been held not to apply to wrongful death cases [United States v. Streidel, 329 Md. 533, 620 A.2d 905 (1993). However, the statute now provides that the cap applies to wrongful death, and that the total recovery of all beneficiaries in a wrongful death case cannot exceed 150 percent of the cap. Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 11-108 (Supp. 1997)].
Medical Malpractice Cap
on Damages in Maryland
| Medical Malpractice (MD CODE, CTS. & JUD. PROC. §3-2A-09) | |||
| Cause of action arises on or after | Limit on all claims from same medical injury (except wrongful death) | Limit on all claims if wrongful death cases is filed with two or more beneficiaries | Total limit |
| 10/1/1996 | $530,000.00 | $795,000.00 | $1,325,000.00 |
| 10/1/1997 | $545,000.00 | $817,500.00 | $1,362,500.00 |
| 10/1/1998 | $560,000.00 | $840,000.00 | $1,400,000.00 |
| 10/1/1999 | $575,000.00 | $862,500.00 | $1,437,500.00 |
| 10/1/2000 | $590,000.00 | $885,000.00 | $1,475,000.00 |
| 10/1/2001 | $605,000.00 | $907,500.00 | $1,512,500.00 |
| 10/1/2002 | $620,000.00 | $930,000.00 | $1,550,000.00 |
| 10/1/2003 | $635,000.00 | $952,500.00 | $1,587,500.00 |
| 10/1/2004 | $650,000.00 | $975,000.00 | $1,625,000.00 |
| New Malpractice Cap | | ||
| 1/1/2005 | $650,000.00 | $812,500.00 | $812,500.00 |
| 1/1/2006 | $650,000.00 | $812,500.00 | $812,500.00 |
| 1/1/2007 | $650,000.00 | $812,500.00 | $812,500.00 |
| 1/1/2008 | $650,000.00 | $812,500.00 | $812,500.00 |
| 1/1/2009 | $665,000.00 | $831,250.00 | $831,250.00 |
| 1/1/2010 | $680,000.00 | $850,000.00 | $850,000.00 |
| 1/1/2011 | $695,000.00 | $868,750.00 | $868,750.00 |
| 1/1/2012 | $710,000.00 | $887,500.00 | $887,500.00 |
| 1/1/2013 | $725,000.00 | $906,250.00 | $906,250.00 |
| 1/1/2014 | $740,000.00 | $925,000.00 | $925,000.00 |
| 1/1/2015 | $755,000.00 | $943,750.00 | $943,750.00 |
[see, www.millerandzois.com/maryland-medical-malpractice-cap]
[No attorney-client relationship is established with anyone merely through this abovereferenced blog and/or information. Always seek personal professional advice and consultation].
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)