Doctor's Weight Loss Centers, Inc. v. Blackston

487 Md. 476 (2024)

From our private database of 47,100+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Doctor’s Weight Loss Centers, Inc. v. Blackston

Maryland Supreme Court
487 Md. 476 (2024)

Facts

Maryland resident Shelly Blackston (plaintiff) had a liposuction procedure performed by cosmetic surgeon Dr. Alva Roy Heron (defendant) at his office in Alexandria, Virginia. After the surgery, once back home in Maryland, Blackston began suffering symptoms of infection. She was hospitalized, had multiple surgeries, and suffered permanent physical and emotional harm. Blackston sued Heron and Doctor’s Weight Loss Centers, Inc. (Doctor’s Weight Loss) (defendant) in Maryland state court, asserting claims for medical negligence and failure to obtain informed patient consent. She sought economic damages to compensate for financial losses, plus noneconomic damages to compensate for nonmonetary losses, such as pain and suffering and diminution of quality of life. The parties disputed whether Maryland or Virginia law governed the maximum amount of noneconomic damages. Blackston argued that Virginia’s $2,150,000 cap on noneconomic damages applied because the infection occurred during the procedure in Heron’s Virginia office. Two doctors testified on Blackston’s behalf, stating that although her symptoms did not manifest until later, the infection itself occurred during the liposuction procedure. Heron and Doctor’s Weight Loss argued that Maryland’s $1.06 million cap on noneconomic damages applied because, although the relevant bacteria were introduced into Blackston’s body during the procedure, the infection did not develop until later, when Blackston was back in Maryland. The trial-court jury concluded that Virginia’s cap applied and awarded Blackston $300,900 in medical expenses and economic damages and $2 million in noneconomic damages. On a posttrial motion, the trial judge concluded that Maryland’s cap applied and reduced the total damages award to $1,055,900. The Maryland Appellate Court reversed, concluding that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s application of the Virginia cap. Doctor’s Weight Loss appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Eaves, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 907,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 907,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,100 briefs, keyed to 996 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 907,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 47,100 briefs - keyed to 996 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership