When Maryland Pulls a Medical License: Six Recent Board Actions and What Patients Should Know

The six cases range widely. Two involve patients who died after cosmetic procedures done in a doctor's office. One involves a physician convicted of sex offenses against his own patients. One involves a surgeon who surrendered his license rather than answer sexual harassment charges. Two involve providers whose Maryland trouble started with discipline in Virginia or with a rehabilitation program they stopped following, and one involves a doctor who never answered the Board at all.

A word on fairness before the details. An allegation in a charging document is not the same as a proven fact. Where a case rests on a criminal conviction, we say so. Where it rests on a surrender or a default, in which the provider never contested the claims in a full hearing, we say that too, because the difference matters for anyone trying to understand what a board order does and does not establish. For the general background on when a poor medical result may rise to negligence, see our article on understanding medical malpractice and your rights as a patient.

This is the most serious order on the list. According to the Board's consent order, Dr. Leila Kump performed elective cosmetic procedures in her office. On March 21, 2025, a 73-year-old woman came in for eyelid surgery. On April 12, 2025, a 48-year-old woman came in for laser resurfacing of her face and neck. Both women died.

The order describes the same pattern in each case. Dr. Kump had each patient bring prescribed oxycodone and diazepam to the office, then gave those drugs on top of the local anesthetic lidocaine, without documenting any medical reason to add an opioid. She owned a pulse oximeter and a blood pressure cuff. The order says neither was used to monitor the patient during the procedure, and that an unlicensed surgical assistant helped with the work. The Office of the Chief Medical Examiner ruled that each death was caused by acute intoxication from the combined effects of oxycodone, diazepam, and lidocaine.

Virginia investigators, whose findings the Maryland order adopts, concluded that Dr. Kump gave inconsistent accounts of the drugs she had administered and misrepresented or left out details of what happened. The order also describes a disciplinary history that includes submitting forged documentation, practicing with a suspended license, and concealing unlicensed practice. The Virginia Board of Medicine revoked her license on March 19, 2026. On July 22, 2026, the Maryland Board revoked her Maryland license through a consent order she signed, giving up her right to a hearing.

For a family, an order like this is a map, not a verdict on their own case. It names the medications, the missing monitoring, the medical examiner's cause of death, and the people who were in the room. Those are the threads a wrongful death lawyer pulls. A board revocation does not pay for a funeral or replace a lost parent. Only a civil claim does that, and the deadline for bringing one runs on its own schedule, described near the end of this article.

Dr. Syed Haque practiced in Frederick County. According to the Board's final order, he was charged across three separate cases with offenses against three patients during office visits. On October 16, 2025, he entered an Alford plea in the Circuit Court for Frederick County to two counts of fourth-degree sex offense involving one patient and three counts of second-degree assault involving two others. An Alford plea is a guilty plea in which the defendant does not admit the conduct but concedes the state has enough evidence to convict. The court found him guilty on each count.

The order summarizes what the prosecutor put on the record: that during examinations Dr. Haque touched patients' breasts and genitals in ways that had no medical purpose. He was sentenced to incarceration followed by five years of supervised probation, ordered to register as a Tier 1 sex offender, and prohibited by the court from practicing medicine.

What the Board did next is worth noting. Dr. Haque asked the Board to let him surrender his license. On July 1, 2026, the Board declined. Under Maryland law, a conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude requires the Board to revoke, and on September 21, 2026, it did. A surrender lets a provider step away without a finding. A revocation is the finding. The Board chose the finding.

Dr. Scott Steinmetz is a board-certified general surgeon who practiced in Bel Air. According to the Board's charges, a hospital in the Baltimore area suspended his privileges in January 2025 and then ended his employment. In April 2026 the Board charged him with unprofessional conduct and sexual misconduct, alleging that he sexually harassed female clinical staff at a medical facility. He surrendered his license rather than contest the charges, and the Board accepted the surrender on August 6, 2026. Under the terms of a surrender, the charges are treated as proven for Maryland licensing purposes, though he did not admit them.

These charges were not his first time before the Board, and the prior record is what makes the case useful to patients. The order recounts a 2004 reprimand for failing to meet the standard of care, a 2008 consent order in which he admitted sexual misconduct with two female staff members and paid a $10,000 fine, and a 2012 advisory letter after further complaints. A pattern like that raises a separate question that has nothing to do with the doctor: what did the hospitals and practices that kept granting him privileges know, and when. Maryland law can allow an injured patient to pursue a claim against an institution for negligent credentialing, meaning giving or renewing privileges to a provider whose record should have raised concern.

The Board revoked three other licenses in this stretch, and all three show the same quiet mechanism. When a provider ignores the process, the Board can adopt the allegations against them as findings of fact and revoke by default. The provider loses the chance to contest the claims, and the charges become the official record. None of what follows was tested in a contested hearing.

Joanna Myers, a physician assistant, was first disciplined in Virginia. According to the Maryland order, the Virginia Board of Medicine found in a March 2025 consent order that she prescribed medications, including a benzodiazepine and later oxycodone, to a male coworker with whom she had no proper provider-patient relationship, without checking the state prescription monitoring database or obtaining his prior records, and that she reported she had begun living with him during that period. Maryland opened its own investigation. Ms. Myers let her Maryland license expire and did not appear. The Board revoked it by default on August 20, 2026.

George Gatewood, a physician assistant licensed in Maryland since 1999, entered a non-public agreement with the Board in 2024 that required him to take part in the Maryland Professional Rehabilitation Program. The order says he did not comply, missed appointments, and signed an agreement to stop practicing. The Board summarily suspended his license in April 2025, he did not appear at his hearings, and on July 13, 2026, the Board revoked the license, finding he was not safe to practice.

Dr. Andrew Moultrie worked in correctional health care. The complaint against him alleged delays in evaluating and following up with a patient who then suffered a hypertensive emergency and had to be transferred to an outside hospital. The Board never reached the merits of that complaint. According to the order, Dr. Moultrie did not respond to the Board's letters, emails, phone calls, or a subpoena, and did not appear before the administrative law judge. On September 28, 2026, the Board revoked his license for failing to cooperate with a lawful investigation. The question about his patient's care was never decided. For a patient, that distinction matters: a revocation for silence is not a ruling that the care was negligent, only that the Board could not get answers.

Discipline follows a provider across state lines. Two of these six cases began in Virginia, and Maryland disciplined the providers for conduct that was punished elsewhere. A provider who holds licenses in several states cannot outrun a bad record by moving. For anyone checking on a doctor, or on a loved one's care, the lesson is to look in every state where the provider has been licensed, not only the state where the injury happened. Our article on how to check a surgeon's disciplinary record before surgery walks through the free state lookups and what the public orders do and do not tell you.

Silence is costly, and a default can be a roadmap. Three of these providers lost their licenses by default, and when that happens the charges become findings of fact. Whether those findings can be used as evidence in a civil case is a separate question with its own rules, but they still point to the witnesses, records, and timeline worth pursuing.

Prior warnings matter. Dr. Steinmetz had a disciplinary history stretching back two decades, and Dr. Kump's order describes forged records and practice under a suspended license. A record like that can put the conduct of the hospital or practice that credentialed the provider at issue, not only the provider.

Most important, a revocation is not compensation. This is the point families miss most often. The Board acts to protect the public going forward. It does not pay medical bills, replace lost income, or compensate a family for a death. Only a civil claim does that, and it runs on a deadline the Board's order does nothing to pause.

Maryland sets hard limits on when a malpractice claim can be filed, and waiting is the expensive mistake. In general a claim must be filed within five years of the injury or three years from the date it was discovered, whichever comes first, with separate rules for children. Those are outer walls, not goals. Evidence fades, witnesses move, and records are archived long before the last day on the calendar. The clock is already running, and it does not wait for a board investigation or news coverage to finish. The time to ask is now, while the answer can still help. Our article on the statute of limitations for medical malpractice explains how the start date is set and why it decides so many cases.

Maryland also runs most malpractice claims through an administrative step first. Before a case goes to court, it usually must be filed with the Health Care Alternative Dispute Resolution Office and supported by a certificate from a qualified medical expert who has reviewed the records. That requirement is one reason an early, honest records review matters so much. Our article on choosing a medical malpractice attorney covers what that review involves and what to look for.

Maryland also limits noneconomic damages, the award for pain, suffering, and loss. For injuries in 2026 the cap is $920,000, and in a wrongful death case with two or more eligible beneficiaries it is $1,150,000. Economic damages, such as medical bills and lost earnings, are not capped. A lawyer can tell you how those limits apply to a particular loss.

Where the care happened can change everything. A Maryland-licensed provider who treated you in Virginia or the District of Columbia may be governed by a different state's deadlines, procedures, and damage limits. Several of the providers above held or lost licenses in more than one state. If you traveled for care, or were treated near a state line, do not assume you know which clock applies.

You can look up any Maryland provider's license status and public orders through the Board's online Practitioner Profile system, and it is worth doing before your next procedure as much as after something goes wrong. A board order will tell you what a provider did. It will not tell you whether you have a case or what it is worth. That takes a review of your own records.

A records review costs nothing and commits you to nothing. Bring what you have: operative and office notes, medication lists, discharge paperwork, billing records, and any messages with the practice. Whether the answer is a claim worth pursuing or a clear explanation of why it is not, you will know where you stand. We read board orders the way a defense lawyer reads them, looking for the prior complaints, the credentialing file, and the paper trail that connects one provider's conduct to the institution that allowed it to continue.

We review medical malpractice and wrongful death matters nationwide, with a particular footprint across Virginia, D.C., and Maryland, and our consultations are free and confidential. If you or a loved one was treated by a provider who has been disciplined, or you believe a provider's care caused harm, the time to ask is now, while the deadline can still be met.