Illinois Medical Malpractice Blog

In a rare blog post, here we are giving advice on how to avoid germs and avoid hospitals while traveling over the upcoming holiday season. Illnesses and trips to hospitals sometimes follow after flights. For example, in 1994, a woman transmitted tuberculosis to at least six of her fellow passengers. Here are tips to avoid that hospital trip:

1. Sit near the front of the airplane. There is better airflow in the front of the aircraft.
2. Do not drink coffee or tea on the airplane. The EPA shows that water in airplanes’ water tanks isn’t always clean and coffee and tea are made from that water, not bottled water.
3. Sanitize your hands after leaving an airplane bathroom.
4. Wash or sanitize your hands after getting off an escalator.
5. Wash or sanitize your hands after using an ATM.

For the full article.

The family of a 35-year-old who died after getting a heart pacemaker was awarded a $4.6 million medical malpractice verdict against the three doctors who performed the surgery at the hospital. The jury found that the victim developed lung problems that should have delayed the surgery. Instead, the procedure was done as scheduled and he died 17 days later of respiratory failure. The medical malpractice award will go the man’s wife and 12-year-old daughter. The medical malpractice verdict was against the two anesthesiologists and the cardiologist. The cardiologist had already settled with the family earlier for an undisclosed amount. To read the full story, click here.

A Chicago jury recently awarded an Illinois family $16.5 million in a medical malpractice verdict against two subsidiaries of Johnson & Johnson. The wrongful death lawsuit alleged that the companies negligently continued to market a Duragesic patch that the woman used. The patch had problems, which were known, and the defendants continued to allow the victim to use the patch.

For the full article.

Performing hand surgery is risky because there are so many structures and small, compact areas. In hand surgery, surgeons can commit medical malpractice and victims can experience surgical errors. Individuals are often uncertain whether poor surgical results are the results of complications or medical negligence.

For the full article.

The number of bariatric surgery operations have grown to more than 150,000 procedures per year in the U.S. alone. Since these procedures are complex and involve serious risk, the number of medical malpractice incidents are significant. Several issues require analysis. First, individuals need to decide whether they are a suitable patient for the surgery. Next, they have to examine the hospital and doctor.

For the full article.

The family of a 47 year-old man who died as a result of a misdiagnosed skin cancer that spread to his brain has been awarded $5.8 million by a jury in a medical malpractice lawsuit. A tort reform damages cap however reduces the verdict to $3.6 million.

The medical malpractice lawsuit alleged that the doctors failed to properly diagnose and remove a mole on his back following examinations in both 1998 and 2004. By the time it was discovered that the mole was cancerous in 2006, the cancer spread to his brain and other parts of the body.

For the full article.

In Matarese v. Buka, No. 1-06-2276 (10-31-08) the fifth division appellate court found that because the 2006 version of IPI 150.01, defining professional standard of care, could cause jury confusion by leading jury to believe that it can disregard expert testimony and substitute its own definition of reasonable care, the trial court properly gave instruction to the jury based on 2005 version of IPI in plaintiff's trial for medical malpractice against ophthalmologist for alleged negligent cataract surgery. This case will have an impact on jury instructions in medical malpractice cases.

More than ten years ago, a woman was given Dilantin because her doctor misdiagnosed her, wrongfully thinking that she suffered a stroke. She had not suffered a stroke. The drug made the woman develop Stevens-Johnson Sydrome. The woman died a horrific and painful death after this medical malpractice.

For the full article.

Illinois’ Supreme Court is examining the constitutionality of caps lawmakers placed on lawsuit awards. State legislators passed a law that capped non-economic damages, such as pain and suffering, in medical malpractice suits to $500,000 for doctors and $1 million for hospitals in 2005. The three-year-old law does not limit actual damages which include medical expenses and lost wages. Last year, Cook County Circuit Court Judge Joan Larsen ruled in the case of LeBron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital that the caps are unconstitutional. Six of the seven state Illinois Supreme Court judges heard the case that centers on a 3-year-old girl who is severely disabled. The attorney for her parents said the girl’s medical problems, which include cerebral palsy, were the result of medical mistakes during her mother’s pregnancy. To read the full story, click here.

A jury has returned a $5.8 million medical-malpractice verdict in the wrongful death of a 47-year lawyer whose untreated mole turned into a skin cancer that spread to his brain. The award will be reduced to $3.6 million due to the state’s cap on non-economic damages in medical-malpractice cases. The jury found that the lawyer’s death was caused by the negligence of a doctor who was employed with a physician’s association. Although the jury found that the doctor was not personally liable, they determined that the medical practice was responsible for the damage award. The medical malpractice suit alleged that the medical practice had negligently left untreated a mole that doctors had examined in 1998 and again in 2004 that turned out to be cancerous. The victim had gone to a dermatology practice for a checkup in 1998 and the doctor recommended that another physician remove it. Each doctor then mistakenly assumed that the other had taken care of it. The man then returned 6 years later for a full-body skin check because he had painful boils and his upper back. Upon returning the doctors concluded that although the mole had more than doubled in size it was still not cancerous. The doctor was unaware of the mole’s growth because he did not have access to the victim’s 1998 record. Soon the patient was diagnosed with skin cancer which had spread to his lymph nodes in his groin and lower abdomen. Although he received many treatments, the cancer remained and he died. To read the full story, click here.

A jury awarded $20 million medical malpractice settlement finding that a boy’s lasting medical problems caused by mistakes made at his birth. Jurors deliberated for about four hours before deciding that both the doctor and the hospital were negligent in their treatment of the mother who was giving birth to the baby boy. The jury assigned 60 percent of the negligence to the doctor and 40 percent to the hospital. The day the baby was born, the mother called her doctor because she believed there may be something wrong with her unborn child. The doctor, who was not her primary obstetrician, told her to go to the medical center. After the mother arrived, she was hooked up to a fetal monitoring system, which indicated the baby was in distress. The nurses called the obstetrician who gave the mother advice, but he did not arrive for two hours. In that time, the baby got very little oxygen. The doctor’s decision to attempt to induce labor worsened the situation. By the time the baby was delivered by Cesarean-section about four hours after the mother arrived at the medical center, irreparable damage had been done. The child has cerebral palsy, no use of his hands, is almost completely blind and is mentally retarded. The child is now 7 years old and functions at the level of a 6-to-9 month old. His parents will receive $2 million of the award for health care expenses and related costs. He was additionally given $18.5 million for lost earning capacity, pain and suffering and medical expenses. The family stated that the majority of the money will be used for the 24-hour care he needs for the rest of his life. To read the full story, click here.

A 33 year old woman recently filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the University of Chicago Medical Center alleging she contracted HIV and Hepatitis C after receiving a kidney transplant. According to the lawsuit, the woman claims U of C failed to warn her that her donor was a gay man with multiple sexual partners. Lawyers for the transplant patient claim the hospital was negligent, because it knew the donor engaged in homosexual activity, which the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention label “high risk behavior.” Had she been informed of the high risks associated with a gay donor, the patient states she would not have received the transplant. Since the negligent transplant, the woman has rejected the new kidney and has stopped working because of her illness. Three other patients who received organs from the same donor have also tested positive for HIV. To read the full story, click here.

An elderly woman had been taking the Digitek heart drug in belief that it would protect her against future heart attacks. She then died while taking the drug just 5 days before the drug maker, Actavis Totowa, issued a Class I Digitek recall. The elderly woman’s caretaker noticed that after she started taking the medication she was becoming weak, having breathing problems and shortness of breath. The woman would go to the emergency room and stay overnight, but nobody ever told them what the problem was. The elderly woman would complain of nausea and began to suffer incontinence. She was also retaining fluid and getting weaker and weaker. The woman died of a heart attack on April 20th, 2008 and Actavis Totowa issued their recall on April 25, 2008. The company issued a nationwide recall for oral use because some tablets were double their normal strength, a manufacturing error, and a potentially life-threatening one. Now the woman’s family is looking into her medical records because they feel certain that Digitek had something to do with her untimely death. To read the full story, click here.

All five state Supreme Court justices reversed an order granting summary judgment for a woman who sued a hospital as a parent her 13-year-od. They remanded the suit to the trial court seeking to hold the hospital liable for spinal injury that paralyzed her daughter. The girl’s mother took her to the emergency room in October of 1999 after the girl’s legs kept growing weaker and she had turned incontinent. The doctor sent the girl home and examined her 23 days later. After an MRI revealed a bloody mass compressing her spinal cord she underwent surgery. However, her paralysis and incontinence continued. Her mother filed a medical malpractice suit against the doctor and hospital, but the hospital moved for summary judgment. The justice overlooked the state law allowing a medical malpractice suit for a child less than 10 years. To read the full story, click here.

The eye doctor has been sued for medical malpractice at least 17 times during his career. He is now the subject of a class-action medical malpractice lawsuit filed by individuals who claim that the eye doctor falsely advertised laser vision corrective. Currently, he is not licensed to practice medicine.

For the full article.

Lawyers argued that a 2005 law limiting the amount of money juries may award in medical malpractice cases unfairly targets those most seriously injured who deserve the most compensation in the Illinois Supreme Court. Proponents of the law asked the court not to limit what they called lawmakers’ attempt to stem a health care crisis. The current law restricts awards on non-economic damages such as pain and suffering to $500,000 against doctors and $1 million against hospitals. It was aimed at lowering medical insurance rates blamed for driving physicians out of the state. A trial court last year ruled that the law violates the Constitution’s separation of powers clause by allowing the General Assembly to restrict deliberations by judges and juries. The law not only limits damages, it gives state regulators more power to review and change malpractice insurance rates and tougher oversight to doctors to punish mistakes. Law professor stated that laws cannot differentiate between levels of injury, which Illinois’ does. He argues that the law must be nullified because caps affect severely injured patients. To read the full story, click here.

A report shows that a germ that wreaks havoc in people’s guts is infecting hospital patients at a much higher rate than had been previously estimated. The study found that slightly more than 1 in every 100 hospital patients are struck by Clostridium difficle which is commonly referred to as C. diff. The bacterium can cause severe diarrhea nausea and abdominal pain and sometimes can lead to colon failure or even death. Experts suggest that we need programs to improve cleanliness and hand-washing by hospital staff. Additionally there should be better control over antibiotics that can increase susceptibility to infections. The study was conducted by the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology and was done in 648 hospitals in 47 states. It found that 13 out of every 1,000 patients in the hospital either had C. diff infections or carried the bug on their bodies. This figure is 6.5 times higher than previous estimates. C diff. spores can live on heard surfaces for weeks or month and resists every-contaminant except bleach. A problem is that the alcohol-based hand gels now omnipresent in hospitals aren’t effective against C. diff spores. Additionally, hospitals are failing to identify patients hit by C. diff. One patient lost 55 pounds in four moths as antibiotics failed to control her diarrhea from C. diff. To read the full story, click here.

A medical malpractice lawsuit filed as a result of unsafe medical malpractice practices that caused over 100 people to develop Hepatitis C, has denied a request to certify a class action lawsuit for thousands of former patients. The patients are claiming emotional distress stemming from the testing they underwent after discovering the problems at the clinic.

For the full article.

A woman lost three limbs after she contracted a flesh eating bacteria while receiving hospital care after the birth of her baby. She then claimed negligence by the hospital doctors and staff at the hospital caused the necrotizing fasciitis. The lawsuit brought by the woman and her attorneys asked for damages and compensation for a lifetime of care stemming from permanent and disabling injuries due to medical malpractice. The hospital and the university have agreed to pay the injured woman in a medical malpractice settlement. To read the full story, click here.

A woman received a $16 million medical malpractice lawsuit against a hospital and other entities for what the woman termed “catastrophic” injuries cased by severe infections associated with a Caesarean section. The woman filed the medical malpractice lawsuit in 2006 that described infections she said began in the hospital that ultimately required the amputation of both legs, her right arm and one of her fingers. She also stated in the suit that the infections required surgical removal of several organs, including a hysterectomy, removal of her ovaries, nearly all of her large intestine and gall bladder. All parties had denied any wrongdoing. To read the full story, click here.

A state’s supreme court has struck down a piece of a 2003 medical malpractice lawsuit reform effort, calling it an unconstitutional special law. The measure required parties filing medical malpractices lawsuits to give notice to the defendant within 18 days or else they will have their case dismissed. In other types of lawsuits, filers who fail to notify the defendant within 180 days have an opportunity for a hearing before a case is dismissed. A ruling this week stated the law singled out medical negligence plaintiffs for different procedural treatment. The law denies such plaintiffs prior notice of dismissal proceedings while the ordinary plaintiff receives notice and an opportunity to be heard prior to any dismissal. In 2006, the state’s Supreme Court overturned a law requiring malpractice lawsuits to be accompanied by an affifdavit from an expert witness attesting to the case’s merits. The court said the requirement violated the state’s ban on special laws because it puts medical negligence cases in a separate class from other negligence claims. To read the full story, click here.

Thede v. Kapas, No. 3-07-0757 (10/21/08) concluded that there is no issue of material fact; and that defendant, physician, is entitled to summary judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint based on the one year statute of limitations then in existence for physicians employed by municipal corporations. Physician has unambiguous employment agreement with hospital, wherein hospital had the right to direct defendant, physician, notwithstanding release, which hospital had plaintiff sign, stating that physician was independent contractor. Further, release is not sufficient reason for refusal to apply limitations period based on equitable principles. This medical malpractice decision will have a great affect on statute of limitations for employees.

A man has been told by lawyers that it’s economically unfeasible to litigate his complicated case because of a state’s medical malpractice reforms. The man is almost blind in any eye after a botched retina reattachment operation in August 2007. Additionally he has trouble with depth perception and peripheral vision. He cannot walk around an office or a restaurant without bumping into something. However, with the new medical malpractice law, he can’t even get a lawyer to go after who’s responsible for the sight loss. The resident claims that there is no protection for the consumer. The legislation caps damages for pain and suffering in all medical malpractice cases at $350,000. This sum may not take into consideration the pain and suffering to grieving parents or to an individual whose quality of life has changed. While doctors praise the legislation, it is those who suffer that are most affected. Lawyers are unwilling to take medical malpractice for fear that it is not economically feasible. They are currently looking for a case that will allow the legislation to be deemed unconstitutional. To read the full story, click here.