Case Summaries

  • Our office and clients’ winning at the Supreme Court.
  • Myomectomy Case- We represented a 36 year old woman who had received a myomectomy by a very well established OB/GYN in the DC area. The woman had had a history of fibroids, and was interested in having children. The doctor who she thought was going to do her surgery did not, two students who had completed a residency with the doctor, actually performed the surgery. After the myomectomy, she never had her menses. After exploratory surgery it was revealed that there was a complete separation between the cervix and the fundus of her uterus, making her completely unable ever become pregnant. After two weeks of trial a jury awarded our client approximately $800,000.
  • Mr. H- We represented Mr. H for wrongful death and medical malpractice arising out of care provided to him in October, 2007. Mr. H developed post operative bleeding into his peritoneal cavity and gastrointestinal tract as a complication of surgery he underwent at a local Medical Center in September, 2007 to remove a benign cyst on his pancreas. He returned to his surgeon, Dr. X and to the emergency department for treatment of this complication on October 23, 2007. Mr. H did not received necessary treatment on his complaints, and ultimately bled to death the next day, while awaiting tests and treatment as an inpatient at the Medical Center. We settled the case shortly before trial for approximately $1,000,000.00.
  • K & B- This was a wrongful birth case which arose out of the failure to identify abnormalities on two separate fetal sonograms and the subsequent failure to report those abnormalities. As a result, K & B never knew their baby was demonstrating any genetic abnormalities at a time when they could have decided the clinical course of the pregnancy. Their baby had Trisomy 13, which is a lethal genetic abnormality. It manifests during pregnancy with abnormalities which are detectable on sonogram and which, when observed correctly, leads to the diagnosis of this condition and the opportunity to decide the best clinical course for the family.
    • K & B lost the opportunity to medically terminate the pregnancy or elect to continue to the pregnancy to term and prepare themselves and their families for the loss of their baby. Instead, they were totally surprised and shocked and had to watch their baby die without any warning or control.
    • The Defendants in the case were two well known radiologists in this area, who read the sonograms and their professional corporation. There is no dispute that identifiable standards exist as to when a radiologist has a duty to inform his patient of the findings on sonogram. We settled this case for an undisclosed amount.
  • Mr. P- Mr. P and his wife were test driving a Nissan Cube at the DARCARS in College Park, Maryland. While on the highway (I-495) the vehicle came to a complete stop. The vehicle was rear ended at high speed and Mr. P suffered severe injuries which eventually caused his death. After complete analysis of the vehicle, it was found that the vehicle had no gas. Further, the gas indicator was difficult to read, and the dealer had provided the test drive vehicle with no gas and no acknowledgement that there was no gas in the vehicle. We filed suit against both DARCARS and the driver of the other vehicle. We settled the case with both Defendants for approximately $930,000.00.
  • Mrs. S- This wrongful death case arises out of the failure to diagnose and treat uterine cancer. Defendants excised a polyp from Plaintiff's uterus in March, 2009, but did not send it for pathological review or tell her that they had removed a polyp. As a result, 20 months elapsed before a second polyp was excised and sent to pathology, where advanced uterine cancer was diagnosed. This delay was the proximate cause of Ms. S's death. We recently settled the case for an undisclosed amount.
  • Ms. D is a forty-two year old woman who has permanent scaring from numerous surgeries and skin grafts, serious gastrointestinal injuries, and emotional harm, all of which are permanent injuries, as a result of the Defendant's negligence. On March 1, 2011, Ms. D underwent exploratory laparotomy to remove bilateral ovarian cysts at the hospital. The Defendant, Dr. X, negligently sewed a portion of Ms. D's intestine into the closure of her abdominal wound. Shortly after being sent home from the hospital, Ms. D returned with abdominal pain and distension. Ms. D was sent for emergency surgery and the intestine enclosure was discovered. After numerous surgeries related to the infection, necrosis of the soft tissue, skin grafts, and fistula repairs, Ms. D has been left with no normal musculature in her abdominal wall, extensive scarring from skin grafts and debridement of necrosed tissue, and severe emotional distress. We settled Ms. D's case for an undisclosed amount.