Harford County Jury Awards $3.5 Million in Medical Malpractice Claim

On May 13, 2010, after 12 days of testimony, a Harford County jury awarded Victoria B. Little of Belcamp, Maryland more than $3.5 million in damages against Dr. Mark Gonze and Dr. Roger Schneider of Vascular Surgery Associates, LLC in Bel Air, Maryland.

Ms. Little, a longtime resident of Harford County presented to Upper Chesapeake Medical Center for an aortobifemoral bypass due to blockage in her aorta.  The procedure, if done properly would have bypassed the blockage and restored blood flow to her legs.  Instead, Ms. Little during the procedure lost over 5,100 milliliters of blood, which is more than her total blood volume in her body.  As a result she suffered a prolonged period of low blood pressure and loss of oxygen to her tissues and organs, that led to a spinal cord injury.  Due to the negligence of both doctors, Ms. Little is now confined to a wheelchair and will never be able to walk again.  

The Honorable Stephen M. Waldron, who presided over the two week trial, indicated he has not heard of a bigger award in Harford County, Maryland.  Unfortunately, Maryland puts caps on pain and suffering and it is estimated that the maximum amount Ms. Little will receive is $680,000.00.

If you, a family member, or someone you know has sustained a serious and permanent injury as the result of medical negligence, please contact Portner & Shure and speak with one of our Maryland medical malpractice lawyers for a free consultation.  

Green v. N.B.S. Inc.: Court of Appeals Upholds Broad Interpretation of Cap on Non Economic Damages

On July 21, 2009, the Maryland Court of Appeals issued a ruling that will have a dramatic impact on how the cap on noneconomic damages is applied to tort cases.  The Court, in Green v. N.B.S. Inc., held that claims brought under the Consumer Protection Act are to be considered torts, and hence subject to the cap limiting awards on noneconomic damages.  The argument set forth by the Appellant contended that the cap on noneconomic damages is only applicable to torts that are considered common-law torts, and not to civil wrongs like the statutory violation in this case. 

Ultimately, the ruling by the Court of Appeals will have the lasting effect of broadening the applicability of the cap on noneconomic damages.  The Appellant's contention in this case was that the cap only applied to torts like negligence.  With this ruling on the books, the cap on noneconomic damages will apply to all torts, be they from civil rights violations, automobile accidents or medical malpractice. 

A ruling like the one described in Green gives reason to explore why there is a cap on noneconomic damages in the first place.  The cap on noneconomic damages essentially serves to protect the wrongdoer, and punish the innocent victim who's suffering goes far beyond the scope of economic damages.  The cap also is inherently biased against individuals who are at lower incomes or who do not work.  For example, if a child, housewife, or senior citizen suffers a severe head injury in an automobile accident, the economic damages available may be limited because the victim is not working.  However, the noneconomic damages incurred from injuries sustained in the automobile accident may be significantly higher.  The system, as it's currently designed, sets forth the unfortunate implication that the injuries suffered by children, housewives and the elderly are somehow worth less than injuries suffered by others. 

Many states that had passed caps on noneconomic damages have since repealed them.  Hopefully, Maryland will do the same. 

If you or a relative has suffered an accident-related injury, be it a car accident or otherwise, please contact Portner & Shure.