September 4, 2015

Egregiously Careless Medical Mistake Results In $21 Million Jury Verdict

Earlier this year, a Detroit jury awarded $21 million to the family of a woman who died following a brain surgery that she was never supposed to undergo. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here. The 81 year-old presented to the hospital in January of 2012 for treatment of her bilateral jaw displacement (dislocated jaw). Unfortunately, upon her admission, hospital staff mixed up her CT Scan results with those of another patient, causing the doctors to believe that this woman had bleeding on her brain requiring emergency surgery.

Doctors immediately took her to the operating room where they drilled five holes into her head and remove the right side of her skull. Upon surgically reaching the woman’s brain, no bleed was found. Because of the woman’s age and health, she was unable to recover from the brain surgery and died after 60 days on life support. There also was an allegation in the lawsuit that the hospital attempted to cover up its mistake. The plaintiffs’ attorney was quoted in the article as saying that this procedure was “something that can be done in a dentist chair [but that] instead they took off the right side of her head, and killed her.” Interestingly, the jury at one point during deliberations sent a note to the judge asking whether they could demand that the hospital apologize for its “wrongful and outrageous conduct.” The hospital vowed to appeal.

The unfortunate lesson to be learned from this case is that these types of medical errors can happen to anyone. If you or a loved one were the victim of a medical mistake – whether it is obvious such as this one or subtle – give us a call for a free consultation at 410-385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

August 31, 2015

Federal Judge Awards $3.2 Million in Malpractice Case Involving Negligently Performed Shoulder Surgery

Not all medical malpractice lawsuits are decided by a jury. In some circumstances – such as those in which the Defendant doctor is an employee of the federal government – a judge decides whether the physician breached the standard of care and, if so, how much money to award. This is called a “bench trial.” In a recent bench trial in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, a Federal Judge awarded the victim of a medical mistake $3.2 million. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here.

In the Arizona case it was alleged that the Plaintiff – a board certified orthopedic surgeon with subspecialty training in spine surgery – consulted his primary care physician for a shoulder injury he sustained while lifting weights. That physician referred him for an MRI of the shoulder. It was determined that the Plaintiff would require rotator cuff surgery and so he was referred to the Defendant-doctor, an employee of the Department of Veteran’s Affairs, for the procedure. The MRI also revealed what was interpreted by the Radiologist to be a soft tissue mass in the shoulder. The Defendant, however, interpreted the MRI to show type of mass that was fluid-based “containing joint debris.” The Defendant told the Plaintiff that he would remove the fluid during the rotator cuff surgery. He did not, however, discuss any other type of mass with the Plaintiff and did not seek consent to remove any other type of mass.

When he opened the Plaintiff’s shoulder, the Defendant discovered that the object on the MRI was in fact a soft tissue mass, not a fluid pseudocapsule as he had expected. The Defendant nonetheless decided to excise (remove) the mass which was later determined by the pathology department to be benign. In the course of removing the mass, the Defendant caused permanent and irreparable damage to the Plaintiff’s axillary nerve which enervates the anterior deltoid. As a result, the Plaintiff experienced significant atrophy of his anterior deltoid muscle and lost the capacity to perform instrumented spine surgery, leaving him with a significant future wage loss.

The judge awarded the Plaintiff $2,900,000 for his lost wages and $300,000 for pain and suffering, for a total damages award of $3,200,000. Although bench trials are generally not favored by medical malpractice plaintiffs, in this case it appears that the Plaintiff was adequately compensated for his losses.

At STSW, we have successfully resolved numerous cases involving negligently-performed surgeries and also have experience trying bench trials. If you or someone you know has been injured as the result of a surgical mistake, call us for a free consultation at (410) 385 – 2225.

Bookmark and Share

August 28, 2015

A Medical Malpractice Plaintiff’s Best Friend: The Doctor/Hospital’s Own Clinical Practice Guidelines

No matter the jurisdiction, most jurors who are seated to hear a medical malpractice case/trial carry with them some inherent biases. In fact, it has been our experience that many jurors and inclined to give doctors a “pass” in certain circumstances because the doctor was trying to help the patient, and certainly not trying to deliberately hurt the patient. Moreover, many jurors have family and friends who are in the health care industry and thus they are naturally biased in favor of those individuals, no doubt after hearing the “horror” stories of allegedly unfounded medical malpractice claims. As a result, many jurors will actually scrutinize the Plaintiff’s case for any reason that they can find to blame the Plaintiff for the injury or adverse result. These inherent biases can often be difficult to overcome in a week or two-week trial. One way to combat these biases is to use the defendant doctor or defendant hospital’s own policies and guidelines against them.

The majority of hospitals and/or physicians in today’s health care industry have developed clinical practice guidelines for how to treat certain conditions. These guidelines give recommendations about examinations to perform when confronted with certain signs and symptoms, certain tests to perform, certain medications a patient should receive and the timeframe within which all of these things should occur so as to provide to the best care to a patient and/or rule out potentially life-threatening conditions. For example, when a patient comes into a hospital complaining of a sudden onset of chest pain, most hospitals follow a cardiovascular guideline, taking steps to rule out the potentially life-threatening conditions like a heart attack, pulmonary embolism (blood clot to lung) and an aortic dissection. Such steps include performing an EKG, ordering a CT scan of the Chest, drawing blood to perform serial laboratory studies to look at certain markers. In short, these guidelines are adopted by hospitals and health care providers to try and prevent common errors. The guidelines are premised upon the belief that health care providers are human and injuries are inevitable without checklists and systems in place to prevent the same.

During the discovery period of any medical negligence case against a doctor or hospital, we always inquire whether any applicable clinical practice guidelines exist with respect to the care and treatment of our clients. Whether the case deals with alleged negligence against an emergency room physician, a consulting specialist, a radiologist or a nurse, guidelines typically exist.

In some instances, the guidelines are actually not generated by the health care provider or hospital itself, but instead, generated by the professional organization that provides certification and/or licensure for these health care providers. For example, many cardiologists are members of the American College of Cardiology. That entity routinely publishes written guidelines on how to treat patients with certain conditions. These kinds of guidelines are equally as effective. If we, as the attorneys for the injured party, can show the defendant doctor that he/she did not follow a guideline of his/her institution or the guideline published by an professional association that they are part of, the doctor often time has difficulty explaining why he/she chose not to follow something that was clearly designed to prevent errors and/or, even worse, was unfamiliar with the guidelines as some physicians are. It is these two latter situations where we believe we are often able to overcome the jury’s preconceived biases against our clients and demonstrate to them that the doctor’s care was negligent.

If you or a loved one have been the victim of medical malpractice, call our law firm at 410-385-2225 for a free consultation.

Bookmark and Share

August 24, 2015

Pennsylvania Jury Awards $12.5 Million in Medical Malpractice Case

After a two-week trial this month, a Pennsylvania jury awarded more than $12 million to a 53 year-old man who became paralyzed after emergency room physicians delayed in recognizing and treating his spinal epidural abscess. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here. According to the National Institute of Health, a spinal epidural abscess is defined as a rare disorder caused by infection in the area between the bones of the spine and the membranes covering the spinal cord. Although not always able to be determined, the source is often bacteria that spread from other infections in the body, such as a urinary tract infection.

In the Pennsylvania case, the patient presented to Delaware County Memorial Hospital in June of 2011 complaining of neck pain and tingling in his left arm. His symptoms worsened overnight; he developed a fever, was having difficulty walking and was unable to urinate. These are classic symptoms of an infectious process in the spine. An infectious disease specialist was appropriately consulted the following day and a cervical epidural abscess in the neck was suspected. The infectious disease specialist ordered a stat (immediate) MRI but, unfortunately, the hospital Radiologist incorrectly interpreted the results as showing no signs of abscess or spinal cord compression. Accordingly, transfer to a facility with the proper capabilities to care for this patient was delayed an additional day and, in the meantime, his condition continued to deteriorate. By the time the accuracy of the radiologist’s reading of the stat MRI was questioned, the damage done to the patient’s spinal cord had become irreversible.

As a result of the delay in diagnosis and treatment, the patient became paralyzed in the arms and legs, lost bowel and bladder control as well as sexual function. He is no longer able to complete the most mundane of daily tasks – such as clothing, feeding or washing himself – without substantial assistance from his wife and others. Of course, he also is no longer able to work. The verdict included a $500,000 award to the patient’s wife for loss of consortium.
Cases such as the one described above are fact-intensive and often require qualified, credible experts to combat the defense’s argument that faster treatment would not have changed the outcome.

We have successfully resolved a number of medical malpractice cases involving the failure to timely recognize and treat infections. If you or a loved one believes you were the victim of such a medical mistake, call our experienced medical malpractice attorneys for a free consultation at (410) 385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

August 21, 2015

Medical Malpractice Cases: What Kinds of Damages Can Be Awarded?

In the context of any kind of medical malpractice lawsuit, there are generally two types of damages that can be claimed by the Plaintiff and/or ultimately awarded by a judge or jury: Non-Economic Damages and Economic Damages. Many times, our clients struggle with understanding the differences between these two types of damages and it is important to understand the distinction.

Economic damages are financial costs of an injured party’s trauma, including things such as past medical bills, future medical bills, future care costs and past and future wage/earnings loss. Future care costs, in particular, can often times range in the millions of dollars depending on the age of the injured party and the severity of the injuries suffered. For example, if a newborn infant has suffered a brain injury as the result of the negligence of an obstetrician, a medical expert known as a life care planner is often hired to project what types of care, equipment and services that child will require for the rest of their life, at each stage of their life. These types of damages include everything from the patient’s medications, motorized wheelchairs, physical/occupational/speech therapies, nursing care, in-home attendant care, etc. Other types of economic damages include the cost of modifying an injured party’s home to make it handicapped accessible for them or the provision of a modified van or car to allow them to operate it safely within the scope of their physical limitations. With respect to past or future loss of earnings/wages, once again, these damages can add up into the millions depending on the age of the plaintiff. In many instances, our office will retain an economist to examine what the injured party was earning prior to his/her injury and project those earnings forward to that individual’s reasonable work life expectancy (e.g., age 62, 65, 67 or 70). For individuals who are injured prior to the time that they enter the workforce, our economists are able to make projections as to their anticipated income based upon the education levels and work histories of their parents or guardians. There is no cap on economic damages.

Non-Economic damages, on the other hand, are designed to compensate an individual for less tangible losses related to the patient’s injury. In Maryland, this type of damage is generally referred to as the “pain and suffering” of the injured party. It is difficult to place a true number on this type of damage because often times the pain and suffering is immeasurable. Take for instance, someone who was injured through the fault of a health care provider and subsequently dies. Obviously, the pain and suffering they experienced is immeasurable as is the loss that the surviving family members (spouse, mother, father, children) have experienced. In Maryland, however, there are caps on non-economic damages. The current cap, for injuries occurring in 2015, stands at over $750,000 and legislation requires that it be raised each year by an additional $15,000. In the event of the death of an individual due to medical malpractice, certain family heirs are entitled to make a claim for the non-economic damages associated with the loss of their family member. This amount is also capped, but depends upon the number of beneficiaries that are bringing the claim.

In short, when making a claim for damages in a medical malpractice case in Maryland, our office will combine you or your family’s economic losses with the non-economic losses to reach a figure that we believe reflects the value of your case.

If you or a loved one are the victim of medical malpractice / medical error, call our offices at 410-385-2225 for a free consultation.

Bookmark and Share

August 14, 2015

Medical Malpractice Involving Failure to Prevent a Fall

Healthcare facilities have long understood that patients whose conditions include mobility problems are at an increased risk of falling and injuring themselves. In recognition of this fact, such facilities – including nursing homes – often institute internal policies and procedures governing the process of identifying those patients who are at high risk for falls as well as mechanisms for preventing those patients from falling.

The risk of falling for those patients with mobility impairments is exponentially higher when going to and from the restroom, when showering, and when changing clothes. During these times, a nurse or other healthcare provider should remain in close enough proximity to the patient to catch them if he or she appears unsteady or is about to fall. In the field of nursing, the term used to describe this close proximity is a “contact guard” and requires that the nurse maintain “contact” with a patient’s body so as to both support and assist them while ambulating. In the event that a patient should begin to fall, a nursing aid who is maintaining proper contact with a patient should thus be in a position to “catch” the patient and guide them to a walker, chair or to the floor in a manner that would avoid a traumatic fall/injury.
Unfortunately, physicians, nurses, and other staff at these facilities often violate their own policies and procedures by failing to provide contact guard assistance to patients at increased risk of falling. When a patient who is already at a heightened risk for falling does in fact fall, it can cause catastrophic injuries and aggravate the already-compromised condition of the patient. Falls also can cause significant setbacks in many patients’ road to recovery. Of course, in elderly patients, a fall can result in a shortened road to ultimate demise.

At Silverman, Thompson, Slutkin & White, our medical malpractice attorneys have successfully resolved a number of cases involving a healthcare facility’s negligent failure to prevent falls resulting in serious injuries and even death. If you or a loved one were injured as the result of a fall while being treated in a healthcare facility, call us for a free consultation at (410) 385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

August 14, 2015

Failure to Properly Interpret Radiological Studies Can Cause Catastrophic Consequences

Radiology is an area of medical specialty that involves the evaluation and interpretation of images and films generated by tests such as X-Rays, CT Scans, MRIs, Mammograms, Sonograms and Ultrasounds. Radiologists, the individuals who are trained to read and interpret these images, are often the first line of defense for a hospital or emergency room physicians as the radiologist can often see what the doctors treating the patient cannot: fractured vertebrae, broken bones, internal bleeding, aneurysms, pulmonary emboli and many other life threatening conditions. When a radiologist fails to properly read and interpret these kinds of studies, your health is at risk. For example, a radiologist may miss a fractured vertebrae in a patient’s neck or back on a CT scan or an MRI, a fracture that could, if the vertebrae becomes displaced toward the spinal cord, result in paralysis. Under different circumstances, a radiologist may miss an aneurysm or early stages of an aortic dissection (a tear in your main blood vessel coming out of your heart) that could rupture and cause you to die. When these kinds of errors happen, they may amount to medical malpractice. Although in most cases the radiologist does not communicate with the patient directly, the radiologist’s failure to properly read or interpret a study affects how emergency room physicians and other doctors care and treat their patients. Accordingly, if a radiologist misreads an image or film and mistakenly rules out the condition that you have, your doctors may fail to treat your for that condition.

Another common medical error that radiologists make is failing to timely read and interpret studies and/or failing to timely communicate those results to the physicians that have requested the studies. For example, all radiological studies that are requested while a patient is in the emergency room are ordered on a STAT (or immediate) basis. Most hospitals have policies and procedures that require radiologists who receive a STAT order for a radiological study to interpret those studies within a short period of time, typically a half hour to an hour, of the study being completed. These same hospitals also have policies and procedures that require the radiologists to communicate the results to the ordering doctor within a certain amount of time after the study is completed, typically 10-20 minutes.

Radiological studies are also commonly used to monitor patients with chronic conditions, like tumors, or diagnose patients with various forms of cancer. Not surprisingly, if these radiological studies are not read and interpreted properly, devastating consequences can occur. In some instances, radiologists simply fail to detect the presence of a tumor before it is too late to successfully treat a patient. In other instances, radiologists fail to detect that a known tumor has grown in size or has spread to other areas of the body.

Finally, another common radiological error that occurs is when a patient is receiving “contrast dye” in conjunction with a particular radiological study. This dye is injected into patients in order for radiologists to be able to see how it progresses through various anatomical structures, like blood vessels, to assist them in diagnosing or ruling out particular conditions. In many instances, the radiological study must be “timed” just right in order for the dye to be in the right position in the body in order for the radiologist to make a proper diagnosis. If the dye is not in the right location inside the body, the study can be of no use to the radiologist. In that circumstance, the radiologist cannot rule out a particular condition, and must ask or recommend to the ordering physician that the study be repeated. Failure to do so, can obviously lead to a condition or disease being missed.

If you or someone you love has suffered as the result of what you may believe is a radiologist’s failure to properly read or interpret a radiological study, we encourage you to call the medical malpractice lawyers at Silverman Thompson Slutkin & White for a free consultation. 410-385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

August 3, 2015

Medical Malpractice Involving Failure to Timely Diagnose and Treat Aortic Dissection

An aortic dissection is a serious condition in which the wall of the major artery carrying blood out of the heart – the aorta – tears. An aortic dissection can lead to aortic rupture or decreased blood flow to vital organs. Generally, symptoms of an aortic dissection come on suddenly and often include sharp, stabbing, tearing or ripping chest pain which moves to the shoulder, neck, arm, jaw and/or abdomen. The decreased blood flow to the remainder of the body caused by an aortic dissection can result in fainting, dizziness, sweating, nausea, pale skin, shortness of breath and an accelerated or slowed pulse.

When a patient presents with any combination of the above-mentioned symptoms, a cardiac event – including an aortic dissection – must be included in the differential diagnosis until definitively ruled out. A CT scan can easily be used to diagnose or rule out an aortic dissection but, critically, the CT scan must be performed with dye / contrast in order for the aortic dissection to be seen. Performing a CT scan without dye / contrast will prevent the physician from seeing the dissection, causing the physician to falsely believe that there is none.

An aortic dissection is a life-threatening condition that must be treated quickly. It can be managed with surgery if timely diagnosed but must be addressed before the aorta ruptures as statistics demonstrate that less than half of people with a ruptured aorta survive. The failure to timely diagnose and treat an aortic dissection can have catastrophic consequences for the patient up to, and including death.

As experienced medical malpractice attorneys, we have successfully pursued a number of medical malpractice cases involving aortic dissections. If you or a loved one suffered an aortic dissection that you think should have been diagnosed sooner or was improperly treated, call our malpractice lawyers at STSW for a free consultation at (410) 385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

July 24, 2015

Wrongful Birth Malpractice Resulting from Incorrectly Interpreted Genetic Testing

A pregnancy can be determined to be high risk for any number of reasons but one common factor that makes a pregnancy “high risk” is advanced maternal age. Women who become pregnant when they are older are more likely to carry fetuses with chromosomal abnormalities such as Down syndrome. Because of these risks of complication, some mothers-to-be elect to undergo genetic testing known as Chorionic Villus Sampling (“CVS”). CVS is a prenatal test in which a sample of chorionic villi is removed from the placenta for testing. When CVS reveals the presence of a condition that is likely to severely diminish the quality of life of the child, it is generally well within the pregnant woman’s rights to terminate the pregnancy. If that testing is not interpreted accurately – i.e., it is reported as normal – an unwanted, full term pregnancy can result and the parents of the child could have a claim for malpractice under Maryland law.

In addition to Down syndrome, another genetic or congenital abnormality that can occur due to advanced maternal age pregnancy is Smith Magenis Syndrome (“SMS”). SMS is a severe genetic disorder that can cause significant intellectual disability, delayed and impaired speech and language skills, severe sleep disturbances and severe behavioral problems. SMS occurs as the result of a defect on the 17th chromosome. Children who are born with SMS are likely to require a life-time of 24-hour supervision and are unlikely to ever live independently or be gainfully employed.

In medical malpractice cases involving the failure to accurately interpret prenatal genetic testing, the defendants often claim that the chromosomal abnormality is “subtle” or “hard to see.” To refute this defense, your medical malpractice attorney should be armed with experienced, credible experts in genetics who will explain to the jury that although genetic testing is complicated, those who are experienced in performing and evaluating such tests would have had absolutely no difficulty recognizing the chromosomal defect. Of equal importance is the use of genetic experts who have the ability to convey the intricacies of genetic testing to laypersons, such as members of a jury.

If you or a loved one elected to undergo genetic testing that you believe was incorrectly interpreted by a healthcare provider, call one of our experienced medical malpractice attorneys for a free consultation at (410) 385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

July 24, 2015

Colonoscopy Procedure Leads to Verdict Against Anesthesiologist

Last month, a Fairfax County, Virginia jury returned a verdict of $500,000 against a Bethesda, Maryland based anesthesiologist for her conduct during a colonoscopy procedure she oversaw. As reported by multiple news outlets, as the Plaintiff, a Virginia man, prepared for his colonoscopy in a medical suite, he pressed the record button on his smartphone, in an effort to capture the post-operative instructions that anticipated his doctor would give him. His smartphone, which was in his pants pocket and placed under the operating table during the procedure, ended up recording the entire procedure. When he returned to his home, the man pressed play and was shocked at what his phone had recorded. In short, what he heard was the entire operating room team, including his anesthesiologist and gastroenterologist, openly and viciously mocking him while he under anesthesia. For example, at the outset of the procedure, a medical assistant noted that the man had a rash. In response, the anesthesiologist warned her not to touch it, tell the young woman that she “might get some syphilis on your arm or something” then adding, “it’s probably tuberculosis in the penis, so you’ll be all right.” The anesthesiologist was also recorded telling the sedated man that “after five minutes of talking to you in the pre-op…I wanted to punch you in the face and man you up a bit.” In addition to the shocking commentary, the health care providers also instructed an assistant to lie to the man after the procedure and how the doctors would endeavor to avoid him after the colonoscopy. Lastly, the doctors also discussed placing a false diagnosis on his chart – stating that the man had hemorrhoids, when in fact he did not.

In reaching its ruling, the jury awarded the man $100,000 for defamation (spoken untruths), $200,000 for medical malpractice and $200,000 in punitive damages. Importantly, although the conversations were confined to the operating room and operating room team, Virginia law clearly stated that slander like the comments made by the health care providers need not be widely published, but rather, need only be said by one party to another and be understood by the second party as being a true fact, when in fact it is not. Although the defense attorneys attempted to argue that the comments were privileged communications between physicians regarding the diagnosis/condition of the plaintiff, the trial court disagree, noting that the conversations far exceeded the scope of the colonoscopy and involved multiple other health professionals in the operating suite. The defense lawyers also attempted to argue that the recording had been made illegally, however, Virginia is what is known as a “one party consent” state, meaning only one person has to agree to the recording for it to be legal.

This verdict has been widely described as one of the first of its kind by legal practitioners and scholars. Given the advances and pervasiveness of today’s technology, this author theorizes that it likely will not be the last. Although patients who are undergoing more traditional types of surgeries likely will not have cell phones or other recording devices in operating rooms, with more and more procedures taking place in office-type surgical suites, physicians must now be cognizant of not only how the perform a procedure, but the things they say during it regarding a patient. Cases such as this one only further strengthen the position of advocates for cameras in all operating rooms so that patients can be sure their rights are not being violated and that the skills of their surgeons can be checked and reviewed in the event of something going awry.

At STSW, our lawyers are well-equipped to litigate cases in the Baltimore and Washington D.C. areas in which patients’ rights have been victimized. Call our lawyers for a free consultation at 410-385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

July 17, 2015

Medical Malpractice Involving Failure to Timely Diagnose Stroke Resulting In “Locked-In Syndrome”

According to the National Stroke Association, a stroke occurs when blood flow to an area of the brain is cut off, and brain cells are deprived of oxygen and begin to die. When brain cells die during a stroke, functions controlled by that area of the brain such as memory and muscle control are lost. A stroke can have different impacts on people ranging from minor problems such as temporary weakness in limbs to more serious problems such as paralysis, losing the ability to speak or death. Moreover, in some people these issues are temporary and in others they prove to be permanent.

Given the devastating effects that a stroke can have, the importance in diagnosing and treating them quickly cannot be overstated. They key is quickly recognizing the symptoms. Classic stroke symptoms include sudden weakness or numbness in the face, arm, leg or one side of the body; sudden loss of vision, strength, coordination, sensation, or speech; and trouble swallowing. It is crucial that when a patient presents with any one or a combination of these symptoms, that the doctor include a stroke in the differential diagnosis.

One of the most serious conditions that can result from a delay in diagnosis of a stroke is what has been named “Locked-In Syndrome.” Locked-In Syndrome can occur as the result of a brain stem stroke. A person who suffers from Locked-In Syndrome is fully awake and conscious but is unable to speak, move their limbs or faces. Often, they are able only to move and blink their eyes. Although sometimes the severity of the stroke itself can cause this type of brain stem damage, often times such serious damage and complication can be avoided if the doctor timely diagnoses and appropriate treats the stroke. If you or a loved one has had a stroke that you think could have, and should have been diagnosed sooner, we encourage you to contact one of our experienced medical malpractice attorneys to discuss your options at (410) 385-2225.

Bookmark and Share

July 16, 2015


Recent reports have alleged that hundreds of unsuspecting patients who underwent spinal fusion surgery at Baltimore Washington Medical Center between 2007 and 2013 may have been implanted with defective spinal hardware, including spinal screws and other hardware. In particular, these reports suggest that patients of Dr. Randy Davis, a surgeon who operates at Baltimore Washington Medical Center, may have received and implanted spinal hardware manufactured by Spinal Solutions, Inc. that was not FDA approved, and therefore, potentially unsafe for patients. If you or a loved one were implanted with defective spinal hardware, and this was known by the doctors and/or hospital that utilized this equipment, you may have a medical malpractice against those persons or entities. The implantation of defective spinal hardware is well known to potentially result in additional harm to a person’s body, the need for subsequent removal and revision surgeries or other significant complications. At STSW, our lawyers have decades of experience in handling similar types of medical negligence or product liability types of cases involving defective medical/surgical equipment. Accordingly, if you or a loved one have had spinal fusion surgery at Baltimore Washington Medical Center between the years 2007 and 2013, you are urged to contact our office for a no cost consultation at 410-385-2225.

Bookmark and Share