Navigating Medical Malpractice Across State Lines: The Lex Loci Delicti Doctrine

When a healthcare provider acts negligently and causes harm, the victim can file a medical malpractice claim and seek compensation. But most people don’t realize that, under Maryland’s choice of law rule, in a medical malpractice case, the place where the final element of the cause of action occurs dictates which state’s law applies to the case, and that decision can significantly impact the outcome. This legal principle is referred to as lex loci delicti.

Understanding Lex Loci Delicti

Lex loci delicti is a rule that determines which state’s substantive law applies in a case. According to this law, the substantive law of the state where the wrong happens applies in the case. For tort cases, this is basically the place where the last element of the cause of action happens. In cases involving negligence, such as medical malpractice cases, this is generally where the first injury or harm occurs. Maryland is one of the states that applies the lex loci delicti doctrine, meaning that courts apply the law of the state where the injury happened and not necessarily where the lawsuit is filed or where the parties reside.

Why Does the Lex Loci Delicti Principle Matter?

The lex loci delicti doctrine is important because tort laws vary significantly between states. For example, some states have strict caps on damages, while others allow juries to give out larger awards. Also, statutes of limitations, evidence rules, and procedures can vary from state to state. In a medical malpractice case where a person sought treatment in a different state than where they live, this principle can determine what they need to prove, how much compensation they can recover, or if they even have a valid case.

Real Case Example

A recent ruling from the Maryland Supreme Court shows how the lex loci delicti principle can affect the outcome of a medical malpractice case. In this case, a Maryland resident underwent cosmetic surgery in Virginia. The procedure was supposed to be “minimally invasive,” but the patient returned home with an infection that significantly affected her life. She filed a medical malpractice lawsuit in Maryland, alleging that the procedure was done negligently, resulting in hospitalization and long-term physical and emotional injuries.

Initially, a Maryland jury awarded the patient $2.3 million, including $2 million in non-economic damages. However, because of Maryland’s statutory cap on non-economic damages in medical malpractice cases, which the trial court applied, the non-economic damages were reduced to $755,000. The plaintiff appealed that decision, arguing that Virginia law should apply since the negligent act (the surgery) happened in Virginia. The Appellate Court of Maryland and subsequently the Supreme Court sided with the claimant. The courts held that since the tort occurred in Virginia, Virginia law governed the damages. This decision reinstated the plaintiff’s full non-economic damages award, showing how the choice of law can significantly impact the outcome of a case.

It’s vital to note that while the court’s decision in the above case was favorable to the plaintiff, as a plaintiff in Maryland, you cannot expect the same outcome unless the facts of your case are similarly cross-jurisdictional.

Contact Us for Legal Help

If you suffered harm due to medical negligence, it’s crucial to understand how jurisdictional differences may impact your case, especially if your treatment happened out of state. Our skilled medical malpractice lawyers at Hardball Law, serving Towson, Baltimore, and throughout Maryland, can assess your case and help you pursue compensation. Contact us today to schedule a consultation.

Source:

mdcourts.gov/data/opinions/coa/2024/17a23.pdf