Edwin L. Keating, III, named partner at Anderson, Coe & King

Anderson, Coe & King, LLP,  is pleased to announce that Edwin L. Keating, III, has been elected as a partner of the firm.  Mr. Keating represents clients in the state and federal courts of Maryland and the District of Columbia on a variety of matters. His practice is focused on the defense of medical and dental malpractice cases, as well as the defense of claims involving manufacturing defects, construction disputes and other tort claims.  Mr. Keating also represents health care providers before licensing boards.  Prior to joining Anderson, Coe & King, Mr. Keating clerked for the Honorable Robert H. Heller in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland.  Mr. Keating graduated from the Pace University Law School, where he served on the Moot Court Board and was an Articles Editor for the Pace Environmental Law Review.  He later received a Master of Laws degree from the Georgetown University Law Center, graduating with distinction.  Mr. Keating earned his B.A. from the University of Connecticut in 1993.

     

Cullen B. Casey joins Anderson, Coe & King as Associate  

Anderson, Coe & King is pleased to welcome Cullen B. Casey as an Associate of the firm. Prior to joining Anderson, Coe & King, Mr. Casey was a staff attorney for the National School Boards Association in Alexandria, Virginia and an Associate with the Thrun Law Firm in East Lansing,  Michigan where he represented public schools and community colleges. Mr. Casey will continue to focus his practice in the areas of school law, employment/labor law and general civil litigation.  Mr. Casey holds a B.A. from Albion College and received his J.D. from George Mason University.  He is admitted to practice in both Maryland and Michigan as well as the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, and the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan.

 

Partners James A. Rothschild, E. Phillip Franke, and Gregory VanGeison listed in 2008 Super Lawyers 

  Partners James A. Rothschild, E. Phillip Franke, and Gregory VanGeison were listed in the 2008 issue of Maryland Super Lawyers ® magazine. Super Lawyers magazine identifies the top 5% of attorneys in each state, as chosen by their peers and through the independent research of Law & Politics magazine. The list of Super Lawyers , which is also published in regional magazines nationwide, designates the best lawyers in each of 60 different practice areas. Mr. Rothschild was recognized in the practice of Civil Litigation-Defense, Mr. Franke in the category of Medical Malpractice Defense, and Mr. VanGeison in the field of Insurance Coverage. With one third of its partnership among those listed, Anderson, Coe & King continues its tradition of leadership, innovation and skill at the bar. Click here to download a pdf of this article.

Lynne B. Malone and M. Bradley Hallwig win defense verdict on behalf of client hospital in Marx v. Nagel, M.D. et al  

  Following a two week jury trial, Lynne B. Malone and M. Bradley Hallwig won a defense verdict in the Circuit Court for Frederick County, Maryland, for their client hospital in Marx v. Nagel, M.D. et al. The jury concluded there had been no negligence by any hospital personnel.

  The case arose following the death in the hospital of a 59 year old surgical patient some five days after a successful emergency appendectomy and bowel resection. The patient died from a massive pulmonary embolism. Plaintiff alleged that the death could have been prevented had the surgeon and hospital personnel communicated properly and instituted and maintained proper prophylaxis against deep vein thrombosis. The plaintiff asked the jury for nearly two million dollars in damages.

  Although plaintiff called four expert witnesses to attack the defendants, the case was unique in that the co-defendant had also attacked the hospital personnel in his deposition given two years before trial, claiming that hospital personnel had failed to follow his standard pre-operative practices. The co-defendant, however, was forced to recant his testimony when Ms. Malone and Mr. Hallwig convinced the court to let them use copies of 28 de-identified hospital charts of co-defendant's other, similar patients to show that hospital personnel had at all times followed the surgeon's standard pre-operative practices in those cases, as well as the one at issue in the trial. Confronted with this evidence, the co-defendant changed his prior sworn testimony one week before trial and agreed that hospital personnel had acted properly throughout the relevant time period. After four hours of deliberation, the jury agreed that the hospital personnel acted within the standard of care and that the hospital was not liable.

 

Anderson, Coe & King Wins Summary Judgment on Behalf of Hospital Against Insurer.

   Partner, Gregory L. VanGeison, obtained the entry of summary judgment on behalf of a regional hospital against its insurer on the issue of whether a “known loss” exclusion should be applied under a subjective or an objective standard. The exclusion applied:

to any liability for a written demand for damages , money or services or service of suit, or a specific circumstance involving a particular person or organization regarding a medical incident, occurrence or offense whose circumstances were known to the insured or any insurer prior to the first date of continuous coverage provided by the Company for such insured ;

The insurer argued that the exclusion should apply where a reasonable insured with the hospital's knowledge would or should have known that the plaintiff's claim existed or was forthcoming at the time that the hospital obtained the insurance. The hospital argued that the exclusion applied only where the hospital actually knew about the plaintiff's claim or its likelihood at the time that it took out the policy of insurance.

  In Freestate Healthcare Insurance Company, Ltd. v. Chester River Health System, Inc. , the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, Civil No. CCB-06-2951, agreed with the hospital, and entered summary judgment in its favor. On September 14, 2004, the plaintiff in the underlying claim, Charlotte Smith, was admitted to the hospital complaining of a severe headache and trouble swallowing. At approximately 6:30 a.m. on the next morning, she was provided with Dilaudid. She was discovered at 7:30 a.m. in respiratory arrest. Despite resuscitation efforts, she remained in a coma. She was discharged from the hospital to a nursing facility on October 19, 2004, where she remained on a ventilator in a comatose state until her death on November 3, 2006. The hospital obtained its first policy of insurance from Freestate July 1, 2005. A lawsuit was filed on behalf of Ms. Smith May 9, 2006. There was no evidence that the hospital had actual knowledge of Ms. Smith's claim or that such a claim was likely before Freestate issued its policy to the hospital.

 

Anderson, Coe & King Obtains Landmark Decision Shielding Schools and Youth Programs From Suit
Partner J. Michael Sloneker and Associate Jason P. Beaulieu recently obtained a landmark decision from Maryland's highest court shielding schools and youth programs from suits arising out of personal injuries.

In American Power Lifting Ass'n. v. Cotillo , 401 Md. 658, 934 A.2d 27 (Filed Oct. 16, 2007), the Maryland Court of Appeals held that a voluntary participant in an athletic event assumes all risks that are incidental to the sport, including the risk that someone else may be negligent. For the first time in any reported Maryland decision, the Court addressed the applicability of assumption of risk to conduct of coaches or other participants that poses an enhanced risk to participants. Mere negligence by a coach or other participants will never overcome the defense of assumption of risk. The exception are those rare cases where the coach or other participant has acted intentionally or recklessly to harm the participant.

The case, brought in the Circuit Court for Calvert County, involved a 40-year old weightlifter who was injured during a weekend powerlifting competition in a high school gym. The competition was sponsored by the American Powerlifting Association (APA). The lifter, Christopher Cotillo, was an experienced competitor and held numerous local and national bench press records. During his third and final bench press attempt, in which he was attempting to lift a Maryland record 530 lbs., the bar quickly fell backwards, striking his face, just before the spotters grabbed the weight and racked it. Cotillo suffered a broken jaw and lost four teeth.

Cotillo sued the APA, the Board of Education, and the individual who secured and trained the spotters for the meet. Eventually, all defendants filed motions for summary judgment on several grounds, including assumption of risk. The trial court agreed with the defendants and granted the dispositive motions, holding that Cotillo assumed the risk as a matter of law.

Cotillo appealed the trial court's ruling to the Court of Special Appeals, which held that the trial court erred in entering summary judgment. The Court of Special Appeals concluded that Cotillo had not assumed the risk that the spotters would be negligently instructed or trained, holding that allegedly negligent instructions provided to the spotters created an enhanced risk to Cotillo that that he did not voluntarily assume. See Cotillo v. Duncan , et al., 172 Md.App. 29, 912 A.2d 72 (2006); cert. granted , 398 Md. 313, 920 A.2d 1058 (Apr 11, 2007).

Mr. Sloneker and Mr. Beaulieu asked the Court of Appeals to review the case, arguing that the decision in the Court of Special Appeals greatly undermined the defense of assumption of risk in the context of voluntary athletic events and would jeopardize school and recreation league programs throughout the state. The Court of Appeals agreed to take the case, reversed the Court of Special Appeals, and reinstated the summary judgments entered in favor of the defendants.

Philip Franke, III, and Emily J. Hamman win jury verdict in Britt v. H., M.D.
Anderson, Coe & King Partner E. Philip Franke and Associate Emily J. Hammann obtained a defense verdict in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, Maryland, in the medical malpractice case of Britt v. H., M.D. Plaintiff Bonita Britt alleged that Dr. H., a surgeon, committed medical malpractice based on a failure to personally read and confirm the results of a sonogram. Plaintiff claimed that the sonogram revealed stones in her common bile duct that required surgical attention prior to removal of her infected gallbladder. As a result of Dr. H.’s alleged failure, Plaintiff asserted that she was required to undergo a second surgery to correct a bile leak caused by the retained stones, resulting in significant additional expense and pain and suffering. At the close of the trial, Plaintiff requested more than $500,000 in damages, while her husband, Stephen Britt, claimed an additional amount of $150,000 in loss of consortium damages.

After a four-day trial, the jury took less than one-half hour to reject the Plaintiff’s contention that Dr. H. committed malpractice. Experts for the defense explained that Dr. H. properly relied on the Emergency Room physician’s verbal report of the sonogram and, further, that any delay in removal of Plaintiff’s infected gallbladder to address asymptomatic common bile duct stones--the course of treatment proposed by the Plaintiff—would have exposed her to additional and potentially life-threatening risks. The jury concluded that Dr. H. properly performed surgery to remove Plaintiff’s necrotic gallbladder, and the standard of care did not require him to confirm sonogram findings. This is the second consecutive medical malpractice victory for Anderson, Coe & King in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County in seven months.

l

Edwin L. Keating, III, Presents Risk Management Seminar at University of Maryland Dental School

 On October 26, 2007, Edwin L. Keating, III presented a risk management seminar to faculty and third year dental students at the University of Maryland Dental School. Approximately 200 persons attended the seminar, which was also televised to remote locations. Mr. Keating covered topics pertaining to dental malpractice, informed consent, and licensing investigations by the State Dental Board. Drawing from his experience in defending dentists in numerous cases, Mr. Keating also provided attendees with practical information on managing risk and minimizing the likelihood of dental malpractice lawsuits.

 

James A. Rothschild named as one of Maryland's Legal Elite
James A. Rothschild, a partner in the firm, was selected as one of Maryland's “Legal Elite” by Baltimore SmartCEO Magazine. Baltimore SmartCEO Magazine limited its selection of Maryland's “Legal Elite" to 60 attorneys nominated by CEOs, business and industry leaders, and legal professionals.

E. Philip Franke, III, selected as one of "The Best Lawyers in America"
E. Philip Franke, III, a partner in the firm, was selected to appear in the 2007 edition of “The Best Lawyers in America” in the specialty of Medical Malpractice. Inclusion in Best Lawyers is based on an exhaustive and rigorous peer-review followed by a balloting process. Best Lawyers represents one of the most distinguished groups of attorneys in the profession.