Ron Miller is an attorney who focuses on serious injury and wrongful death cases involving motor vehicle collisions, medical malpractice, and products and premises liability. If you are looking for a Maryland personal injury attorney for your case, call him today at 800-553-8082.

This week I was reading through recent appellate decisions from birth injury cases across the country and I came across a unique written decision from the federal court in Chicago in Zhao v. United States 2019 WL 3956412 (S.D. Ill. 2019).

This was a fairly typical birth injury case in which the baby suffered nerve damage due to a failure to diagnose fetal macrosomia and the mishandling of shoulder dystocia during delivery. What makes this case somewhat unique is that unlike most birth injury cases that get tried by juries, this case was resolved with a bench trial in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois (because it was against the United States in this case).

At the end of the trial, the judge awarded the plaintiff $8.2 million in damages, but more importantly he wrote a very detailed Memorandum and Order basically analyzing the entire case.

Juul is facing lawsuits on multiple fronts. Our lawyers are focusing on vaping injury and vaping addition cases in young people who plaintiffs’ lawyers argue were targeted by Juul.

There is a vaping crisis in the country that snuck up on everyone.  There are stories every week about the growing number of vaping-related illnesses and injuries appearing at hospitals. According to a recent Washington Post article, there are now 18 reported deaths related to a mysterious vaping illness, along with over 1,000 other possible cases of vaping-related injuries.  It may well be that many of these specific cases have little to do with Juul.  But this crisis has everyone taking a close look at Juul.

The sharp increase in reports has caused a significant backlash against vaping companies such as Juul, who has been dominating the e-cigarette market for the past two years. Vaping and e-cigarette lawsuits against Juul and other companies are increasing by the day. There has even been a strong push in some states to completely ban the sale of e-cigarette and vaping products. Many experts maintain that recent vaping injury reports are just the tip of the iceberg for the e-cigarette industry.

Our lawyers are now investigating Zantac cancer lawsuits. There is a widespread belief amount mass tort attorneys that these cases could be worth billions of dollars. So many people are using this drug. And it may be that Zantac is causing many different types of cancer.

Zantac is a hugely popular drug that is used by millions of people in the U.S. to treat heartburn, acid reflux and similar conditions. In September 2019 the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announcing that dangerously high levels of a human carcinogen called NDMA have been found in Zantac.

This means that millions of people who have been taking Zantac may have been regularly ingesting a chemical that is notorious for causing cancer. Moreover, drug manufacturers may have known about this risk. And said nothing.

Our injury lawyers are handling combat arms earplug cases around the country.  If you have a claim anywhere in the country, we will evaluate your case at no cost to you.

Our law firm has represented many wonderful people over the years.  As a class, these are the best plaintiffs you could ever find.  These are the people who put their lives on the line to protect us.  Our lawyers think we owe them great thanks. We also think 3M owes them a great deal of money for the injuries they have suffered.

This page provides an October 2019 update to the 3M Combat Arms earplug litigation that already has thousands of lawsuits.  These suits allege that our soldiers were falsely promised the Combat Arms earplugs would protect their ears from dangerous impulse noises. That is bad enough.  But the lawsuits go further. They alleged that internal testing that revealed these promises were simply not true. Yet they buried this information.  As a result, too many of our soldiers suffered significant hearing loss and

My firm handles birth injury malpractice cases.  We have cases all over the country.   Cerebral palsy is one of the most serious types of injuries we see in these cases.  If you are a birth injury lawyer and you do not get emotionally invested in cerebral palsy cases, you do not have a pulse.  Even defense lawyers who would shoot a puppy to get some minuscule evidentiary advantage at trial, usually have great empathy for the child and the family even if we disagree about why the injury occurred.

Cerebral palsy is a permanent physical and often cognitive disability in which the brain cannot control parts of the body. Cerebral palsy is not a disease. It is an injury to the brain that occurs during childbirth or pregnancy. It is a non-progressive motor impairment that does not get worse over time.

This injury to the brain that results in cerebral palsy is because of negligent care in the delivery room cerebral palsy gives rise to a large volume of birth injury malpractice lawsuits which can generate very large verdicts and settlements.

I usually do not write about legal issues that do not relate to personal injury cases.  But Maryland’s red flag law has gotten so much attention and there is SO MUCH incorrect information out there, I feel like writing a post about it. 

Reaction to the seemingly endless stream of mass shootings across the country has generated unprecedented political pressure for gun control laws. Last year, Maryland became one of a handful of states that responded to this pressure by enacting new laws aimed at curbing random gun violence.

Last September the Maryland legislature passed a new type of gun control law which is commonly known as a “red flag” law. Maryland’s red flag law was signed by Governor Hogan took effect on October 1, 2018. Maryland’s red flag law is one of the toughest in the nation and one of the most frequently invoked.

I love minor league baseball games.  I’ve been to a few Delmarva Shorebirds games.  It really is a fun environment.

One thing I really like?  Any kid that really wants a baseball is going to get one at the game one way or another.  The Frederick Keys, Bowie Baysox, and the Aberdeen Iron Birds (I’m told, I have not seen an Iron Birds game but the stadium is awesome).

There is an interesting lawsuit in Wicomico County involving Jared Breen, a little known former minor league prospect of the Baltimore Orioles.  He is suing the Delmarva Shorebirds and Wicomico County after his career was cut short by a collision with an unpadded wall. The Orioles drafted Breen in the 24th round of the 2013 Major League Baseball draft. After being drafted, Breen began his minor league career playing shortstop for the Delmarva Shorebirds.

Monsanto Roundup weed killer lawsuits are the biggest mass tort in the country.  Lawyers everywhere are looking for potential victims.  Our law firm is no exception.  Stunning verdicts and talk of a settlement in excess of $8 have poured even more gasoline on the fire.  What are these cases about and what can we expect moving forward?

The Crux of the Roundup Litigation

A key ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, has been associated with several cancers, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, hairy cell leukemia, and multiple myeloma.

In Stracke v. Butler the Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that a pair of ambulance paramedics from the Baltimore City Fire Department were immune from liability because their actions in transporting a man to the hospital were not “grossly negligent.”

This case involves the scope of immunity provided by the Maryland Fire & Rescue Company Act, Maryland Code, Courts & Judicial Proceedings § 5-604 and its applicability to employees Baltimore City Fire Department employees who treated the patient that ultimately died.

I don’t like the gross negligence law we have in Maryland. I think § 5-604 is well-intended but ultimately foolish.  But I have a hard time arguing that the court did not follow Maryland law.

Last month, Maryland’s Court of Appeals upheld a $7 million verdict to the plaintiff in an asbestos case even though there was no direct evidence that the defendants had installed the asbestos products at issue. In Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Busch, a 6-1 majority held that direct evidence of exposure to a specific defendant’s asbestos products is not necessary. Rather, a defendant’s liability for asbestos exposure can be based on circumstantial evidence and reasonable inferences.

Facts of the Case

police brutality pg countyThe underlying facts are fairly typical of most asbestos cases these days. The plaintiff (70-years-old at the time of trial) worked for 30 years as an HVAC technician. He primarily installed thermostats, sensors, and temperature control systems. The plaintiff himself never directly worked with asbestos, but he was sometimes around other people who were using asbestos.

Contact Information