Maryland Lawsuits AgainstArthur L Vaught, M.D.

Baltimore, MD 21287

This website does not represent the outcome of these lawsuits against Arthur L. Vaught, M.D., nor does it judge the veracity of the accusations therein.  In Maryland, however, all medical malpractice lawsuits require a certificate from an actively practicing doctor vouching for the merit of the lawsuit.

Arthur Vaught, M.D. is an obstetrician-gynecologist affiliated with Johns Hopkins Hospital. He is a board-certified physician in both standard OB-GYN care and maternal-fetal medicine, which is a sub-specialty focused on the management of high risk pregnancies and acute fetal conditions. Dr. Vaught is also board certified in surgical critical care. In addition to serving as a team member of Johns Hopkins maternal-fetal medicine division, he is an assistant professor in its gynecology-obstetrics and surgery departments. Prior to joining the medical staff at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Vaught was associated with Mercy Medical Center. His specific areas of research include interventions in high blood pressure and cardiovascular conditions during pregnancy. Although this page is solely focused on Dr. Vaught, you can find other information relating to lawsuits for medical malpractice against Johns Hopkins Hospital here, and Mercy Medical Center here.

Based on publicly available records and data, Dr. Vaught has been cited as a co-defendant in a Maryland medical malpractice claim two times. While one of the two Maryland circuit court complaints is available in a PDF below, here is an excerpt of the allegations:

The first available complaint against Dr. Vaught listed the following allegations:

  • Failing to properly perform a medical procedure. During a cesarean section performed by the defendant doctor, the plaintiff alleged that several sutures were administered to close her abdominal incisions. She soon developed severe back pain and had difficulty urinating. Imaging revealed blockage of the left ureter, which is the tube that delivers urine from the kidney to the bladder. The plaintiff underwent surgery to remove the obstruction. During the procedure, it was discovered that the defendant doctor had erroneously placed a stich across her left ureter, which created the blockage.
  • Failing to prevent patient injury. The plaintiff contended that due to the defendant doctor’s medical error, she suffered from severe complications including infection, pain, and dizziness. Several inpatient hospital stays were necessary to treat these conditions. As a result of the multiple surgeries and medications required to correct her ureter blockage and the related medical issues, she alleged permanent medical injury and emotional distress.

Last updated August 16, 2021

Arthur L Vaught, M.D. Lawsuit Statistics