Barnes v. Greater Baltimore Medical Center, Inc.
63 A.3d 620
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2013Background
- Barneses filed a medical malpractice claim under the Health Care Malpractice Claims Act with a certificate of qualified expert and an expert report signed by Dr. Larsen.
- The first trial occurred in 2010 and ended in an administrative mistrial due to a snowstorm.
- Before the second trial, GBMC moved to dismiss for failure to file a legally sufficient report; the circuit court denied the motion as untimely.
- During the first trial, Larsen testified; after mistrial, Larsen’s testimony and findings became the basis for evaluating the claim before the second trial.
- In the second trial, the jury awarded Barneses $1,123,000 against GBMC, Dr. Rustía, and CEP; GBMC moved for JNOV arguing insufficient causation and the court granted it directed to GBMC.
- The Court of Appeals held that Larsen’s testimony from the first trial cured any deficiencies in the report, denied the dismissal, reinstated the jury verdict, and remanded for reinstatement of the award.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did denial of dismissal for certificate defects survive review? | Barneses contend cure by testimony suffices. | GBMC argues report flaws justify dismissal. | Yes; cure permitted. |
| Was there sufficient causation evidence to submit to the jury? | Lamonte testimony showed breach caused stroke prevention if admitted. | No direct proof of admission would have prevented stroke. | Yes; the jury could find causation. |
| Did the evidence support denial of GBMC’s post-trial judgment motion? | Evidence supports breach and causation. | Evidence insufficient to prove causation. | No; JNOV reversed; verdict reinstated. |
Key Cases Cited
- Walzer v. Osborne, 395 Md. 563, 911 A.2d 427 (2006) (certificate and report part of the requirement; dismissal for insufficiency)
- D’Angelo v. St. Agnes Healthcare, Inc., 157 Md.App. 631, 853 A.2d 813 (2004) (discusses cure and sufficiency of certificate/report)
- Carroll v. Konits, 400 Md. 167, 929 A.2d 19 (2007) (certificate/report must explain standard of care and violations)
- Breslin v. Powell, 421 Md. 266, 26 A.3d 878 (2011) (expert qualifications and related constraints)
- Kearney v. Berger, 416 Md. 628, 7 A.3d 593 (2010) (waiver and cure considerations for certificate requirement)
- Mayor of Oakland v. Mayor of Mountain Lake Park, 392 Md. 301, 896 A.2d 1036 (2006) (legislative purpose and statutory interpretation guidance)