Maryland Lawsuits AgainstJulie M Jacobstein, M.D.
Baltimore, MD 21215
This website does not represent the outcome of these lawsuits against Julie M. Jacobstein, 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.
Julie M. Jacobstein, M.D. is a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist who has been a physician team member of Sinai Hospital for over ten years. She specializes in pediatric and adolescent gynecology. While this page is focused solely on Dr. Jacobstein, you can find other information relating to medical malpractice lawsuits filed against Sinai Hospital here.
Based on publicly available records and data, Dr. Jacobstein has been named as a co-defendant in one Maryland medical malpractice case. While the Maryland circuit court complaint is found in a PDF below, here is an excerpt of the allegations:
The first available complaint against Dr. Jacobstein listed the following allegations:
- Failing to properly perform a surgical procedure. According to the complaint, the defendant doctor was performing a total abdominal hysterectomy on the plaintiff when she erroneously pierced her right ureter, which is a duct that carries urine from the kidneys. While the defendant surgeon allegedly became aware of her error during the procedure, her only treatment measure for the injury was the placement of a small tube known as a stent to stabilize the ureter. As contended by the complaint, an appropriate standard of care would have been immediate surgical repair of the wound.
- Failing to properly repair a surgical error. Per the complaint, the plaintiff began to suffer from severe complications shortly after the hysterectomy surgery. She eventually presented to the defendant hospital with complaints of pain, incontinence, and excessive vaginal discharge. It was determined that her right kidney was swollen due to a build-up of urine, a condition known as hydronephrosis. The plaintiff contended that a procedure to relieve the swelling had to be aborted because the surgical stent placed by the defendant doctor was completely obstructing the ureter and preventing her kidney from properly draining.
- Failing to prevent patient injury. As alleged in the complaint, the plaintiff was forced to endure several more painful and invasive procedures to repair the kidney blockage caused by the defendant doctor. She purportedly developed acute and permanent medical difficulties as a result of her ureter injury, including pain, anxiety, and recurring infections. Had the defendant doctor followed an appropriate standard of care in addressing the ureter injury with immediate surgical repair instead of merely placing a stent, the plaintiff contended her kidney blockage and ensuing complications would have been avoided.
Last updated August 16, 2021