Nearly two years to the date of her death, a Harford County, Maryland jury returned with a substantial verdict in favor of a woman who died at an assisted living facility on March 26, 2012. The trial lasted six days and the jury deliberated for six hours before handing down its verdict. The $1 million verdict will be reduced to $710,000 due to Maryland’s cap on non-economic damages.
In July 2011 this woman was admitted into the assisted living facility after spending two years living with her son due to advancing dementia. Upon arriving at the facility, her family believed that they would take good care of their mother and keep her safe.
On the morning of March 25, 2012 an aide at the facility noted that the woman was cold, clammy and sweaty. The family’s lawsuit alleges that by that evening, the woman had not been examined by a nurse and no nurse was present during the overnight shift. Morever, her condition continued to deteriorate as she experienced vomiting, episodes of diarrhea and even rectal bleeding. Allegedly there was a debate among the staff members as to whether to send her to the hospital but a supervisor apparently vetoed any thoughts of sending her to the hospital because the woman’s son gave instructions that he not be called after 9:00 p.m. At trial the son denied that he ever gave such an instruction.
By the next morning the woman’s condition had deteriorated to the point where a nurse’s aide noticed that she stopped breathing for about 30 seconds during her shower. The son called the facility around 7:00 a.m. and asked that his mother’s physician be called and updated on her condition. When he arrived at the facility about an hour later, the physician had not been called and his mother’s condition continued to deteriorate. The physician was finally called but by the time the ambulance arrived, the woman had died.
At trial the assisted living facility tried to blame the son for his mother’s death claiming that it was his actions that delayed his mother getting medical attention. The jury ignored that defense and promptly punished the facility for the death of the woman.
Why did the defense try to blame the son for his mother’s death?
Maryland is one of the few remaining states that follows the law of contributory negligence. Contributory negligence simply means that if a jury finds the plaintiff even 1% at fault for the injuries at issue in the lawsuit, then the plaintiff cannot recover anything. So, for example, if the jury in this case believed that the son was 1% at fault and the assisted living facility as 99% at fault and still rendered a verdict of $1 million, the estate would collect zero. A 1% finding of contributory negligence is essentially the same as a defense verdict. Most states states follow the law of comparative fault which means that the plaintiff still collects a verdict even if he is found partially at fault. So, if this case were tried in a comparative fault state and the jury found the plaintiff was 25% at fault and the defense 75% at fault and awarded $1 million, the verdict would be reduced by 25% but the plaintiff would collect the rest.
What is the lesson for plaintiffs against long term care facilities in Maryland?
Be prepared that the nursing home industry (or assisted living industry) will say and do anything to protect itself, even going to great lengths to blame a son for the death of his own mother. While it may seem that going up against the nursing home industry is as daunting as David vs. Goliath, you are right. But remember, David won!
If you have a family member in a nursing home or assisted living facility and believe they have been injured or neglected, you should talk with one of our Maryland nursing home neglect attorneys. Call Nursing Home Justice Associates at 410-825-ABUSE (2287) or visit our website at www.NursingHomeJustice.com.
Nursing Home Justice ….. It’s What We Do!