Wrongful Act: Spangler v. McQuitty 1
The Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog explores legal principles related to medical malpractice in Maryland. In this post, I discuss the independence of wrongful death claims from the underlying personal injury claim. Specifically, I focus on the definition of wrongful act in the wrongful death act and use the Maryland Supreme Court case of Spangler v. McQuitty, 449 Md. 33 (2016).
Factual Background
The plaintiffs had previously brought a birth injury case on behalf of their son against the mother’s OB/GYN and practice group for failure to obtain informed consent for treatment during pregnancy. As a result, the mother had a placental abruption, which caused their son to have cerebral palsy. (Op. at 2). The plaintiffs then obtained a judgment against the defendants for over $5 million, which the defendants paid. (Id. at 2-4).
After the trial, the minor died. The decedent’s parents then filed wrongful death claims in a new lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Baltimore County. The defense moved to dismiss the case, and the circuit court granted the motion. (Id. at 4-5). The Court of Special Appeals then reversed. The defense appealed. (Id. at 7-9).
Court of Appeals on Wrongful Act in Wrongful Death Claims
Maryland’s wrongful death statute allows the maintenance of an action “against a person whose wrongful act causes the death of another.” Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3–902(a). “Wrongful act” is defined as “an act, neglect, or default including a felonious act which would have entitled the party injured to maintain an action and recover damages if death had not ensued.” Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3–901(e). The primary beneficiaries of a wrongful death action are the spouse, parent, and child of the decedent. Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3 904(a)(1). However, relatives by blood or marriage who substantially relied upon the decedent are also eligible claimants. Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3-904(b).
Where the decedent is a spouse, minor child, parent of a minor child, or an unmarried child that is not a minor, the wrongful death statute provides damages for “pecuniary losses,” if any, in addition to damages for “mental anguish, emotional pain and suffering, loss of society, companionship, comfort, protection, marital care, parental care, filial care, attention, advice, counsel, training, guidance, or education where applicable. . . .” Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 3–904(c)-(d). (Op. at 10-11).
Independent Cause of Action
The question on appeal was whether the wrongful death claims were derivative or independent of the decedent’s prior personal injury claim, which was based on the same facts and resulted in a judgment. (Id. at 11). The CA found that the phrase “if death had not ensued” in the definition of wrongful act was ambiguous. (Id. at 14). Legislative history did not answer the issue that was on appeal. (Id. at 17).
Maryland has historically adhered to the minority view that the wrongful death statute created a new and independent cause of action, distinguishable from a decedent’s personal injury action during their lifetime, or a survival action. (Id. at 18). The CA held that the phrase “if death had not ensued” pertains only to the character of the injury and was not intended to be a procedural or jurisdictional prerequisite to a subsequent wrongful death action. (Id. at 29).
Next, the court rejected res judicata as a bar to the action. (Id. at 29-32). It also rejected the defense’s argument that allowing the wrongful death claims would provide for duplicative damages. The CA observed that the damages recovered in a wrongful death action compensate for losses incurred by a decedent’s beneficiaries only after death ensued, and are distinguishable from damages recovered by a decedent in a personal injury action. (Id. at 33-35).
Commentary by Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Mark Kopec on Wrongful Act in Wrongful Death Claims
This opinion is a significant one, confirming the independence of wrongful death claims. I do not believe that the phrase “if death had not ensued” is ambiguous. I think the definition of wrongful act merely establishes that the act was a tortious act against the person before they passed away.
It’s important to note that the core damages in a wrongful death case are distinct from those in a personal injury/survival claim. The damages in the personal injury claim focus on the harm to the person directly injured. In contrast, the damages in the wrongful death claims focus on the loss of the person by certain relatives.
As a practical matter, lawyers on both sides of medical malpractice claims involving injury must consider whether the malpractice could ultimately lead to death. This possibility has potential ramifications, and being aware of these can help lawyers prepare their cases more effectively.
Mark Kopec is a top-rated Baltimore medical malpractice lawyer. Contact us at 800-604-0704 to speak directly with Attorney Kopec in a free consultation. The Kopec Law Firm is in Baltimore and helps clients throughout Maryland and Washington, D.C. Thank you for reading the Baltimore Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog.