Close

Example Medical Malpractice Lawsuit

This is a example of a medical malpractice misdiagnosis case filed in Maryland. The claim alleges that a doctor not only failed to diagnose a C-diff infection but he give the patient immodum which caused her permanent injury.

We put up sample complaints for education purposes only. We like see complaints and other legal documents filed by other attorneys, too. But, a word of advice: if you are looking at malpractice complaints because you are going to file your first malpractice case, the chances of you committing malpractice is remarkably high. These are just not cases you can bluff your way though. Get some help from us or someone.

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR HOWARD COUNTY

AMANDA PETERSON
8787 DAVIS DRIVE
ELLICOTT CITY, MD 21042

Plaintiff,
v.

DANIEL GENSON, M.D. D/B/A
HOWARD CARDIAC CARE
10792 GATEWAY DRIVE
ANDERSON MD 21044

CASE NO.:13-C-12-91128

COMPLAINT

Amanda Peterson, by her attorneys Miller & Zois, LLC, files this Amended Complaint against the above named Defendants and in support thereof states as follows:

FACTS

  1. That the Plaintiff Constance Peterson resides in Howard County, Maryland.
  2. That this action is being brought under the Maryland Statutes pertaining to actions involving medical malpractice and negligence.
  3. That at all relevant times, Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D. was a physician licensed to practice medicine in the State of Maryland and was practicing medicine/doing business as Anderson Cardiac Care, in Howard County, MD.
  4. That at all relevant times, Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D. was doing business as Anderson Cardiac Care, a lawful legal entity, and was/is providing medical services to the citizens of Maryland, including Constance Peterson, with its principal place of business located at 10792 Gateway Drive in Anderson, MD.
  5. That at all times relevant herein, the Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D. owned and operated Anderson Cardiac Care, a lawful legal entity.
  6. That at all relevant times, Constance Peterson was receiving medical care from Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D. who was employed by Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D., doing business as Anderson Cardiac Care and Anderson Cardiac Care, and was acting within the scope of his employment when the negligent acts resulting in physical injury and harm to Constance Peterson occurred.
  7. That at all times relevant, the Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D., doing business as Anderson Cardiac Care and Anderson Cardiac Care employed various medical providers and medical staff at its place of business to include Daniel Genson M.D.
  8. Defendant Daniel Genson M.D. was acting within the scope of his employment with Defendant Anderson Cardiac Care and/or Defendant Daniel Genson M.D. doing business as Anderson Cardiac Care, when he rendered medical care to Constance Peterson on April 7, 2013, and he failed to follow the applicable standard of medical care during his care and treatment of Constance Peterson which proximately resulted in a physical injury to Constance Peterson on or about April 7, 2013, and thereafter.
  9. That the amount of this claim exceeds the jurisdictional limit of the District Court of Maryland and the appropriate venue for this claim is Howard County, Maryland because the medical care provided to Constance Peterson by the Defendants occurred in Howard County, Maryland.
  10. That the acts of medical malpractice/negligence by the Defendants occurred on or about April 7, 2013, and thereafter, in Maryland.
  11. That under the applicable standard of medical care and principles of negligence, the Defendants were required to provide the proper medical care for Constance Peterson, which includes but is not limited to: (1) referring Constance Peterson to a primary care physician in a timely fashion; (2) not prescribing Imodium for Constance Peterson; and (3) advising the Plaintiff of the risks and dangers of taking Imodium.
  12. That as a direct and proximate result of Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D. and Daniel Genson, M.D. doing business as Anderson Cardiac Care, by and through their employees/servants, breaching the applicable standard of medical care owed to Constance Peterson, and by negligence, by failing to refer Constance Peterson to a primary care physician in a timely fashion, and by prescribing Imodium for Constance Peterson, and by failing to advise the Plaintiff of the risks and dangers of taking Imodium, that Constance Peterson sustained a physical injury to her body, and required additional medical care and treatment.
  13. That as a direct and proximate result of the breaches of the applicable standard of medical care and negligence by the Defendants, Constance Peterson suffered conscious pain and suffering, physical injuries, and other damages.
  14. That all of the injuries and damages sustained by Constance Peterson were the direct and proximate result of the negligent actions and breaches of the applicable standards of medical care by the Defendants, by and through their employees/servants, without any act or omission on the part of Constance Peterson directly thereunto contributing.
  15. That Constance Peterson did not assume the risk of her injuries.
  16. That attached to Plaintiff’s original complaint is a Certificate of Qualified Expert and Expert Report from Michael Silverman, M.D. which is incorporated by reference herein.
  17. That the Plaintiff has complied with all statutory and other conditions precedent to file this Amended Complaint in the Circuit Court for Howard County.

COUNT I: Negligence – Medical Malpractice

  1. The Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference herein all of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-17 above.
  2. That on or about April 7, 2013, Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D. breached the applicable standard of medical care owed to Constance Peterson, which proximately caused a physical injury to Constance Peterson, along with conscious pain and suffering and other damages.

WHEREFORE: The Plaintiff Constance Peterson, claims monetary damages against Defendant Daniel Genson, M.D. in an amount to be determined at trial, plus costs, and for any further relief that this Honorable Court determines necessary and appropriate. That the damages exceed the sum of $75,000.00.

COUNT II: Medical Malpractice / Respondeat Superior/Agency

  1. The Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference herein all of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-19 above.
  2. That the Defendants, Daniel Genson, M.D., doing business as Anderson Cardiac Care and Anderson Cardiac Care, by and through its employee/servant/agent Daniel Genson, M.D. deviated from the applicable standard of medical care during the care and treatment of the Constance Peterson, and that this deviation from the applicable standard of medical care was the direct and proximate cause of physical injuries, medical expenses, conscious pain and suffering and other damages to Constance Peterson.

WHEREFORE: The Plaintiff claims monetary damages against Defendants Daniel Genson, M.D., d/b/a Anderson Cardiac Care, and Anderson Cardiac Care, at trial, plus costs, and for any further relief that this Honorable Court determines necessary and appropriate. That the damages exceed the sum of $75,000.00.

COUNT III: Negligence / Breach of
Informed Consent

  1. The Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference herein all of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-21 above and the exhibits to her original Complaint filed with this court.
  2. That on or about April 7, 2013, Defendant Daniel Genson had the duty to inform the Plaintiff of the risks and dangers of taking the drug Imodium when he instructed the Plaintiff to take Imodium. That the Plaintiff followed Dr. Genson’s medical advice and took the drug Imodium, and as a result, was physically injured.
  3. That a reasonable person, including the Plaintiff, who had been informed of the risks and dangers of taking Imodium would have elected not to take the drug Imodium.
  4. That the failure of the Defendant to advise the Plaintiff of the risk and dangers of taking Imodium amounted to negligence and this negligence was a proximate cause of the injuries, conscious pain and suffering and damages suffered by Plaintiff which include but are not limited to subsequent hospitalization and surgery, and the loss of her colon.
  5. That the Plaintiff was not contributorily negligent and did not assume the risk of her injuries and damages.

WHEREFORE: The Plaintiff claims monetary damages against Defendants Daniel Genson, M.D., individually and d/b/a Anderson Cardiac Care, and Anderson Cardiac Care, at trial, plus costs, and for any further relief that this Honorable Court determines necessary and appropriate. That the damages exceed the sum of $75,000.00.

REQUEST FOR A JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff requests a trial by jury.

Respectfully submitted,
Miller & Zois, LLC

Ronald V. Miller, Jr.
1 South St, #2450
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410) 779-4600
(410) 760-8922 (facsimile)
Attorneys for Plaintiff

More Malpractice Lawsuits

Contact Us