Dehn v. Edgecombe
Decision Date | 14 January 2005 |
Docket Number | No. 117,117 |
Citation | 384 Md. 606,865 A.2d 603 |
Parties | James W. DEHN et ux. v. Glenn R. EDGECOMBE et al. |
Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Larry N. Burch (Burch & Burch-Rates, LLC, Greenbelt, on brief), for petitioners.
Michelle R. Callender (Robert J. Farley, Wharton, Levin Ehrmantraut & Klein, P.A., Annapolis, on brief), for respondent.
Argued before BELL, C.J., RAKER, WILNER, CATHELL, HARRELL, BATTAGLIA and JOHN C. ELDRIDGE (Retired, specially assigned), JJ.
The principal question before this Court is whether Maryland recognizes an independent cause of action in a patient's wife against a doctor who acted negligently while treating her husband but who had no relationship or direct interaction with the wife. We shall hold that petitioners do not have an independent cause of action against respondents based upon respondents' alleged medical malpractice.
On May 11, 2000, Corinne Dehn and James Dehn filed in the Circuit Court for Prince George's County a medical malpractice action against Glenn Edgecombe, M.D., et al., alleging that Dr. Edgecombe was negligent in providing post-operative care following Mr. Dehn's vasectomy.
The case proceeded to trial before a jury. The court dismissed all of Mrs. Dehn's claims at the close of the plaintiffs' case. The jury returned a verdict in favor of Mr. Dehn on the issue of negligence, but in favor of Dr. Edgecombe on the issue of contributory negligence. The court entered judgment in favor of Dr. Edgecombe and the Dehns noted a timely appeal to the Court of Special Appeals. That court affirmed, 152 Md.App. 657, 834 A.2d 146 (2003), and we granted the Dehns's Petition for Writ of Certiorari. 379 Md. 224, 841 A.2d 339 (2004).
We recount the facts as set out in the opinion of the Court of Special Appeals.
Prior to trial, Dr. Edgecombe moved in limine, seeking to exclude any reference to Mr. Dehn's pre-existing medical condition as it related to his reasons for seeking a vasectomy. The defendants also sought to exclude any reference to any purported conversation by Dr. Edgecombe suggesting that Mrs. Dehn had been impregnated by a man other than her husband. Counsel argued that the probative value of this information was outweighed by the prejudicial effect it would have on the jury. In addition, defendants argued that there was no medical testimony that Mr. Dehn's life would be shortened for any reason. The trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fusco v. Shannon
...based on the medical community's standard of care. McQuitty v. Spangler, 410 Md. 1, 18, 976 A.2d 1020 (2009) (citing Dehn v. Edgecombe, 384 Md. 606, 618, 865 A.2d 603 (2005)) (“Medical malpractice is predicated upon the failure to exercise requisite medical skill and, being tortious in natu......
-
Green v. Obsu
... ... v. Hetrick, 309 Md. 536, 553, 525 A.2d 643, 651 (1987) ... (citation omitted); see Dehn v. Edgecombe , 384 Md ... 606, 610, 865 A.2d 603, 618 (2005) (“Medical ... malpractice ‘is predicated upon the failure to exercise ... ...
-
Georgia–Pacific, LLC v. Farrar
...Gourdine v. Crews, 405 Md. 722, 955 A.2d 769 (2008), Doe v. Pharmacia & Upjohn Co., 388 Md. 407, 879 A.2d 1088 (2005), Dehn v. Edgecombe, 384 Md. 606, 865 A.2d 603 (2005) and Adams v. Owens–Illinois, Inc., 119 Md.App. 395, 705 A.2d 58 (1998). We will address each of Georgia–Pacific's conten......
-
Gilbert v. Miodovnik
...one depending on the physician's acceptance of the patient and the latter's assent to the medical services.");10 Dehn v. Edgecombe, 384 Md. 606, 865 A.2d 603, 611 (2005) ("What is important ... is that the relationship is a consensual one, and when no prior relationship exists, the physicia......