Infinite Menus, Copyright 2006, OpenCube Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 

Judicial Determination of Joint Tortfeasor Status is Impermissible

Shoaib Hashmi v. Troy Bennett, No. 15 (Md. November 3, 2010 | View pdf

In this medical malpractice action, the Court of Appeals held that the trial Court of Appeals may not "judicially determine" the status of non-parties as joint tortfeasors. The Court affirmed the judgments of the Court of Special Appeals and the trial court.

Plaintiffs filed a survival and wrongful death action in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City against Dr. Hashmi, Dr. Hashmi's professional association, and Good Samaritan Hospital of Maryland, in connection with the death of Adrian Tyree Bennett from alleged septic shock. Plaintiffs claimed that the Defendants failed to diagnose and treat timely the decedent's infection.

Prior to trial, Plaintiffs settled with all of the Defendants, except Dr. Hashmi. Relevant to the instant appeal, Plaintiffs executed a settlement agreement and release with Good Samaritan Hospital pre-trial. Dr. Hashmi did not settle and did not file any third-party claims against any of the other co-defendants. Specifically, he did not sue any Good Samaritan Hospital employee or doctor.

At trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Plaintiffs finding Dr. Hashmi was negligent in the course of his care of Adrian Bennett, and the trial court entered judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs in an amount of $2,295,000. Thereafter, Dr. Hashmi filed a Motion for Remittitur or to Reduce the Verdict in accordance with the statutory cap on non-economic damages. Additionally, Dr. Hashmi filed a Supplemental Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Reduce Verdict claiming that he was entitled to an additional reduction pursuant to Maryland's Contribution Among Joint Tortfeasors Act. Under this argument, Dr. Hashmi asserted that not only was he entitled to contribution from the settling Defendants, but also from three other distinct actors employed by Good Samaritan Hospital including Dr. Hina Sahi, Nurse Kathleen Bosse, and another unidentified nurse in the emergency room. The Plaintiffs resisted the reduction by these three additional shares and argued that those three parties were never named as defendants, never admitted liability, and never were adjudged liable by the trial court or the jury, i.e., they were never on the verdict sheet completed by the jury. Moreover, the Plaintiffs argued that the clear and unambiguous language of the Good Samaritan release contemplated only one joint tortfeasor.

Judge Kaye A. Allison, presiding over the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, reduced the judgment against Dr. Hashmi to $1,795,000 pursuant to the statutory cap on non-economic damages as codified in Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc., § 11-108. She additionally determined that the verdict would be divided among the settling Defendants. However, Judge Allison declined to follow Dr. Hashmi's arguments that the judgment should be further allocated to the three non-parties. Accordingly, judgment was entered against Dr. Hashmi in the amount of $598,333.33.

The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the trial court, finding that the Good Samaritan release clearly and unambiguously identified only Good Samaritan Hospital as a joint tortfeasor and that Dr. Sahi, Nurse Bosse, and the unidentified nurse, cannot attain joint tortfeasor status as they are non-parties to a settlement agreement.

Dr. Hashmi appealed to the Court of Appeals. Relying upon basic principles of contract law, the Court determined that the Good Samaritan release is plain and unambiguous. The Good Samaritan release identified only Good Samaritan Hospital as the sole joint tortfeasor. However, the Court noted that even if the Good Samaritan release were ambiguous, the Court would not consider separate post-trial proceedings in which Dr. Hashmi would be allowed to offer evidence as to the negligence of three non-parties. Those three additional parties were not joined in the action and thus, could not be considered joint tortfeasors.

To attain joint tortfeasor status, Dr. Hashmi would have had to join those three parties pursuant to Md. Rule 2-332(a). Maryland courts do not permit judicial termination of a joint tortfeasor status without the parties having been joined as defendants or third parties. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals affirmed the intermediate appellate court, and the trial court. Dr. Hashmi cannot seek further reduction of the judgment entered against him based on the alleged joint tortfeasor status of the non-joined parties.


 Powered By SLEEPER Technologies, Inc Professional Web Design

An STI Site  | Web Design By SLEEPER Technologiesimage
Copyright © 5/17/2012 Semmes, Bowen & Semmes | All Rights Reserved | Reproduction in whole or in part
in any form or medium without the express written permission of Semmes Bowen & Semmes is prohibited.
Disclaimer and link information regarding this web site