Category Archives: Health Law

Undisclosed Bankruptcy can be fatal to Plaintiff’s Medical Malpractice case

On June 6, 2022, Crystal Deese and Sarah Godfrey appeared in the Circuit Court for Fairfax County, Virginia, for Day 1 of what was supposed to be a 5-day jury trial.  Plaintiff had filed a suit against our client, a medical practice, claiming $2.3 million in past and future damages after a routine cataract surgery allegedly rendered her ... Read More

California Governor Signs Legislation Raising Non-Economic Damages Cap on Medical Malpractice Awards

On May 22, 2022, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Assembly Bill 35 (“A.B. 35”) resulting in major changes to the state’s Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act (“MICRA” or “the Act”). These changes include among other changes, an increase to the cap of noneconomic damages awarded to plaintiffs in medical malpractice lawsuits. Originally enacted in 1975, MICRA established a ... Read More

Summary judgment granted in premises case. Res ipsa loquitur inapplicable where mode of claimed injury required expert support.

Edward Sedlacek & Crystal Deese obtained summary judgment for their hospital client against a Plaintiff suing for premises liability and res ipsa loquitur.  Plaintiff claimed to have received an electrical shock forceful enough to fracture two different bones.  None of the medical experts agreed that electricity caused these twisting type fractures. The court rejected Plaintiff’s argument that a lay jury ... Read More

No Jurisdiction in Medical Malpractice Plaintiff’s Home State

The Health Law Practice Group recently secured dismissal for a local hospital sued in Plaintiff’s home state on jurisdictional grounds. The patient sued a facility with offices located in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia. Plaintiff filed suit in his home state of Pennsylvania claiming his injury manifested there.  However, the care at issue was rendered in Maryland weeks before any injury manifested.  ... Read More

The COVID-19 Vaccination – Testing Mandate Is Not Completely Dead

  On January 13, 2022, the Supreme Court prohibited OSHA’s enforcement of its nationwide emergency vaccination and testing standard declaring the scope of the regulation beyond OSHA’s statutory authority. On January 25, OSHA conceded the point and withdrew the standard. But even as OSHA withdrew the standard, OSHA made clear that employers are not relieved of their obligation to protect employees from the risks of ... Read More

Court Blocks OSHA Rule Requiring COVID-19 Vaccinations For Workers

The Occupational Health and Safety Administration, to combat the spread of COVID-19, issued a rule mandating that all employers who have at least 100 employees require that those workers be vaccinated—affecting some 84 million workers nationwide. The rule was enacted under an “emergency temporary standard” process which avoided the typical notice-and-comment procedures for rules. States and private parties challenged the ... Read More

Court Allows Vaccination Mandate For Health Care Workers To Go Into Effect

The Secretary of Health and Human Services issued a rule in November of 2021 requiring all health care workers be vaccinated or have a valid exemption in order for the health care facility to receive Medicare or Medicaid funding. Certain states sued to block the mandate, and the lower courts enjoined enforcement of the rule pending a determination on the ... Read More

Now is the Time to Prepare for OSHA’s Enforcement of the Emergency Temporary Standard on COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing

On January 7, 2022, the Supreme Court heard argument on requests to stay enforcement of OSHA’s Vaccination, Testing and Face Coverings Standard, a workplace safety standard adopted to deter the spread of COVID-19. OSHA previously announced that enforcement of the non-testing requirements would begin as soon as January 10, 2022, with enforcement of the testing requirements delayed until February 9, 2022. Unless ... Read More

Sixth Circuit Dissolves Stay on OSHA’s Vaccine Mandate for Large Employers – UPDATE

On November 5, 2021, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (“OSHA”) issued an Emergency Temporary Standard (“ETS”) requiring employers with 100 or more employees to take certain actions to minimize the spread of COVID-19 in their workplaces.  Enforcement of the ETS was initially set to begin on January 4, 2022.  Although often referred to as a “vaccine mandate,” the ETS ... Read More

SCOTUS Opinion: Court Permits Pre-Enforcement Challenge to Texas Abortion Law By Clinics, Not The Federal Government

The Court today resolved both challenges to Texas’ new abortion law, S.B. 8, which empowered private citizens to sue those who provided an abortion when a fetal heartbeat is detectable. In Whole Women’s Health v. Jackson, an abortion clinic sued a variety of defendants, seeking to enjoin enforcement of S.B. 8. The last time that case was before the Court, ... Read More

Health Law Practice Group Update: Attorneys secure dismissal of a conversion case styled as patent infringement

Attorneys Crystal Deese and Sarah Godfrey recently secured dismissal a conversion case styled as patent infringement in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. The plaintiff, a biomedical research tech, sued the head of his former research laboratory for allegedly “stealing” his intellectual property. Plaintiff claimed the theft occurred when the lab director permitted one of plaintiff’s colleagues to ... Read More

Health Law Practice Group Update: Summary Judgment in Premises Liability Case

The Health Law Practice Group obtained summary judgment in a premises liability case. Plaintiff claimed she slipped and fell on liquid an employee allegedly deposited and left on a hospital floor. She claimed a permanent wrist injury following a surgical procedure negatively impacted nearly all activities of daily living. Judge Shana Frost Matini in the Superior Court of the District ... Read More

Health Law Practice Group Update: Attorneys Win Motion to Limit Plaintiffs’ Economic Damages

Attorneys Crystal Deese and Pam Diedrich recently won a Motion to Limit Plaintiffs’ Economic Damages. Plaintiffs sought to recover the entire amounts of their medical bills rather than the far lower figure the hospital received in payment. Judge José M. López in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia ruled that Plaintiffs can only claim the amounts actually paid ... Read More

Health Law Practice Group Update: Attorneys Successfully Asserts Claim-Splitting Doctrine

This month, Edward Sedlacek and Crystal Deese secured dismissal of an individual physician from a malpractice suit despite Plaintiff's two-pronged attempt to add her into the litigation. Plaintiff sued a hospital in 2019 claiming permanent injuries due to inappropriate postoperative management. In 2021, Plaintiff filed a separate suit making the same allegations against his surgeon. We moved to dismiss the ... Read More

Year in Review: Outcomes of Professional Licensing Board Matters in 2020

Jackson & Campbell’s Health Law Practice Group regularly represents doctors, dentists, nurses, and other healthcare providers in investigations before state licensing boards. Despite the decrease in visits to outpatient practices this year due to the pandemic, complaints against healthcare providers continued unabated. During 2020, Jackson & Campbell’s attorneys defended more than a dozen healthcare providers against complaints filed with ... Read More

Update from our Health Law Practice Group:

In a medical malpractice case, a Plaintiff alleged that while she was being treated in the Emergency Room, a catheter tip broke off and became lodged in her arm. Crystal S. Deese of Jackson & Campbell represented a surgeon who advised against removing the broken tip. At trial, Plaintiff offered an emergency room physician to testify on the standard ... Read More

Admissibility of Expert Witness Testimony in Maryland, District of Columbia, and Virginia

In light of the Maryland Court of Appeals recent decision in Rochkind v. Stevenson, this article assesses the current state of law with regard to the admissibility of expert testimony in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. See 2020 WL 5085877 (Md. Aug. 28, 2020), reconsideration denied (Sept. 25, 2020). Effective immediately, Rochkind affirmatively adopted the nonexclusive list of Daubert reliability factors ... Read More

No Visitors Allowed: Potential Legal Ramifications of Restricted Visitors Policies In the Midst of COVID-19

The novel Coronavirus, COVID-19, has wreaked havoc on the nation and has had far-reaching effects across the globe. The trail of destruction left in its wake will no doubt have lasting implications on multiple industries for the foreseeable future and none has felt the impact more than the healthcare industry. Doctors, nurses, healthcare professionals, and non-medical related staff remain on ... Read More

National Survey of COVID-19 Medical Malpractice Immunity Legislation (as of April 15, 2020)

The below survey of federal and state legislation, guidance, and executive action provides information regarding enacted and proposed legislation and executive orders issued to provide immunity protections for liability, in certain respects, to health care professionals, facilities, and volunteers in the course of their treatment of individuals during the course of the COVID-19 pandemic and the declared national and state ... Read More

Health Law Practice Group Privileged to Serve MedStar Washington Hospital Center

Earlier this month, Jackson & Campbell, P.C.'s Health Law Practice Group obtained a defense verdict in a malpractice case alleging that a patient suffered permanent nerve damage during a lower left wisdom tooth extraction. She alleged the surgical technique and procedure choice were improper and denied giving her informed consent to the procedure. After a six day trial, the ... Read More

Changes in Legal Landscape That Could Impact Medical Malpractice Risks | August 2019

In researching and reviewing recent legal developments in the medical malpractice field, Jackson & Campbell, P.C. has identified recent changes in the law and the legal landscape that could impact medical malpractice claims and the risk associated with such cases. Below highlights some of these issues. Impact of Increase in Successful Challenges to Caps on Non-Economic Damages Louisiana (October 2016): Supreme ... Read More

SCOTUS Opinion: Medicare Act Requires Notice And Comment Before Any Changes To “Medicare Fraction”

Under the Medicare Act, the enforcing agency is required to go through a public notice and comment period before changing any “substantive legal standard” affecting Medicare benefits. 42 U.S.C. sec. 1395hh(a)(2). Under Medicare Part A, the federal government paid hospitals who served low-income patients through a “Medicare fraction,” which was calculated by dividing the time spent by a hospital ... Read More

SCOTUS Opinion: Court Clarifies “Clear Evidence” Standard For Failure-To-Warn Claims

Merck manufactured the drug Fosamax to combat osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. Merck’s scientists theorized that use of Fosamax might cause atypical femoral fractures, but the drug label approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 1995 did not include a warning for those fractures. After 1995, evidence of such fractures started to develop. In 2008, Merck applied to the FDA ... Read More

Congratulations to our Attorneys and Practice Groups

Jackson & Campbell, P.C. is proud to announce our 2019 Super Lawyers. Please join us in celebrating Nathan J. Bresee, Richard W. Bryan, Arthur D. Burger, David H. Cox, William E. Davis, Christopher P. Ferragamo, Robert N. Kelly, James N. Markels, Nicholas S. McConnell, and Brian W. Thompson; and ... Read More

What’s in a Name? Well-Known Insurance Coverage Case Concepts That All Claims Handlers and Insurance Coverage Professionals Should Know

By Christopher P. Ferragamo and Susan Knell Bumbalo “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say or do can and will be used against you in a court of law. You have the right to an attorney, if you cannot afford one, one will be provided to you …” Anyone that has ever watched a crime drama ... Read More

Decisions, March 2019, Volume 5, Issue 2

Christopher P. Ferragamo, a Director in Jackson & Campbell, P.C.'s Insurance Coverage Practice Group, prepares a bi-monthly newsletter that addresses healthcare issues and healthcare coverage issues called Decisions. Read the latest issue here. Please see below for prior issues of Decisions: January 2019 - Volume 5, Issue 1 November 2018 - Volume 4, Issue 6 September 2018 - Volume ... Read More

Health Law Practice Group Precludes Untimely Lawsuit

The Health Law Practice Group had a pro se plaintiff’s lawsuit dismissed in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (Rigsby, J.) for lack of pre-suit notice and a limitations bar. The plaintiff noted a timely appeal, which Jackson & Campbell, P.C. successfully defended. In Waugh v. MedStar Georgetown Univ. Hosp., No. CAM-7381-17 (D.C. Mar. 14, 2019), ... Read More

Common HIPAA Pitfalls in Health Care Mergers and Acquisitions (and How to Identify Them)

Managing all the moving parts in a health care merger or acquisition is challenging in any transaction. For a small health care provider that does not have multiple attorneys at its beck and call, it can seem downright impossible. In the chaos of a massive exchange of due diligence materials, it is easy to overlook the additional agreements that must ... Read More

Nurses Qualify to Testify about Causation

In Frausto v. Yakima HMA, LLC, 393 P.3d 776 (Wash. 2017) the court held that an Advanced Registered Nurse Practitioner (ARNP) could qualify to provide causation testimony in a pressure ulcer case. The court based its holding, at least in part, on the Washington state statute empowering ARNPs to diagnose illnesses. The court noted that a majority of ... Read More