254 A.3d 66
Md. Ct. Spec. App.2021Background
- Decedent Stephanie Wadsworth had prior breast cancer; an April 1, 2013 PET/CT showed a focal abnormality. Dr. Poornima Sharma reviewed but did not inform the patient or order follow‑up.
- At the time of the 2013 misdiagnosis the disease was stage IV metastatic (incurable) but, according to plaintiffs’ experts, timely treatment would have extended life expectancy by ~24–30 months (median survival ~80 months if treated in 2013).
- The metastasis was diagnosed by another provider in February 2016; the patient received the same aggressive treatment but died June 10, 2017.
- Plaintiffs: the decedent’s husband/family sued under Maryland’s Wrongful Death Act (relatives) claiming loss of ~30 “precious months,” and the personal representative sued under the survival statute for pre‑death injuries (pain and suffering, medical expenses, lost wages).
- Trial court granted summary judgment for defendants on both counts, reasoning plaintiffs could not prove the defendants’ negligence caused the death (and that Maryland does not recognize loss‑of‑chance in wrongful death). Appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Wrongful death: May relatives recover for shortened life expectancy when negligence did not cause death? | Relatives argue they can recover for the 30 months taken from decedent’s life ("precious time" / "lost years"). | Defendants: wrongful death requires proof that the defendant’s wrongful act caused the death (preponderance); loss‑of‑chance is not available. | Held: No. Relatives must show defendant more likely than not caused the death; shortened life expectancy alone is not compensable under Maryland wrongful death law. |
| 2) Availability of loss‑of‑chance in Maryland wrongful death | Plaintiffs urged adopting loss‑of‑chance or otherwise allowing recovery for reduced survival probability. | Defendants relied on Maryland precedent (Weimer, Fennell) rejecting loss‑of‑chance for wrongful death. | Held: Court declined to recognize loss‑of‑chance for wrongful death; Weimer controls. |
| 3) Survival action: Can personal representative recover pre‑death damages though negligence didn’t cause death? | PR sought survivorship damages (conscious pain & suffering, medical expenses, lost wages, mental anguish tied to knowledge of shortened life). | Defendants argued no survivorship recovery if negligence did not cause death; PR cannot recover lost years or funeral expenses. | Held: Partial. Survival claim reversed (summary judgment vacated) and remanded: PR cannot recover for shortening of life or funeral expenses, but may recover (if proven) conscious pain & suffering, medical expenses, and pre‑death lost wages (limited to period from inception of lost earnings until death); mental anguish may be recoverable if decedent knew negligence shortened life and suffered fear/anguish. |
| 4) Procedural/timeliness issue | Plaintiffs appealed before final docket entry but relied on Md. Rule 8‑602(f) saving provision. | Defendants moved to dismiss appeal as premature. | Held: Appeal timely under Rule 8‑602(f); motion to dismiss denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Weimer v. Hetrick, 309 Md. 536 (Md. 1987) (Maryland wrongful‑death plaintiff must prove by preponderance that defendant’s negligence caused the decedent’s death; rejects loss‑of‑chance in wrongful death)
- Fennell v. Southern Md. Hosp. Ctr., Inc., 320 Md. 776 (Md. 1990) (discusses limits of loss‑of‑chance and survival‑action damages; funeral expenses restricted where death not caused by defendant)
- Stewart v. United Elec. L. & P. Co., 104 Md. 332 (Md. 1906) (distinguishes wrongful death and survival actions; historical statutory background)
- Rhone v. Fisher, 224 Md. 223 (Md. 1961) (damages cannot include monetary compensation for shortening of life; mental anguish for knowledge of shortened life may be recoverable)
- Monias v. Endal, 330 Md. 274 (Md. 1993) (lost future earnings in personal‑injury context must be measured by life expectancy absent the tort; court rejects recovery for services lost due to shortened life expectancy)
- Jones v. Flood, 351 Md. 120 (Md. 1998) (in survivorship, lost earnings are measured from onset of loss to death; no post‑death future earnings in survival action)
- Murray v. United States, 215 F.3d 460 (4th Cir. 2000) (interpreting Virginia law; frames “substantial possibility” as equivalent to more‑likely‑than‑not standard)
- Blondel v. Hays, 403 S.E.2d 340 (Va. 1991) (Virginia case discussing proximate cause and rejecting broad loss‑of‑chance instruction; "time and manner of death" language cited but dicta)