In a Maryland informed consent claim, a doctor has no duty to disclose alternative treatment options the doctor has concluded are not needed.
Continue reading ›Mark Kopec Now
In a Maryland informed consent claim, a doctor has no duty to disclose alternative treatment options the doctor has concluded are not needed.
Continue reading ›The court can give additional peremptory challenges to multiple defendants if it finds adversity of interest between them.
Continue reading ›In Maryland, an expert doctor is in a “related specialty” when there is overlap and symmetry in treatment with the defendant doctor.
Continue reading ›Issues were not preserved for appeal when counsel failed to object to questions, after denial of motion in limine.
Continue reading ›Defense counsel’s comments in closing argument on evidence that was not admitted did not prejudice the plaintiff.
Continue reading ›The trial court did not abuse its discretion in the exclusion of evidence of an email that the defendants produced two days before the trial.
Continue reading ›A pro se plaintiff failed to submit evidence of injury causation and breach of contract. Motion for Judgment was correctly granted.
Continue reading ›In the sale of a structured settlement, the court decides the plaintiff’s claim that the arbitration agreement was procured by fraud.
Continue reading ›In MD’s CQE requirements for medical malpractice, the teaching exception to the board certification requirement has no time restriction.
Continue reading ›In Maryland, a medical injury requiring filing in HCADRO involves application of a professional standard of care.
Continue reading ›