Illinois Medical Malpractice Blog

A family of a medical malpractice victim has sued the surgeon they believe is responsible for the error. According to NewsOn6.com the fire broke out during the victim’s surgery. She was undergoing breast reconstruction surgery when the fire sparked. Two years prior to the medical malpractice she had a double mastectomy as a result of breast cancer. She was hoping the breast reconstruction would be a final step towards healing but was set backwards.

After the woman woke up from the surgery her face was covered in bandages. The medical malpractice lawsuit claims that the doctor used alcohol to swab the victim during the procedure, set the cauterizing tool aflame. This sparked a fire that caught both the victim and the drapes on fire. The fire then proceeded to melt the oxygen tube inside of her mouth, causing her mouth and tongue to burn. She was unable to eat or drink for a period of time and still has trouble four months later. The devoted teacher is unable to go back to work because the pain has been so terrible. Unfortunately, her face and lips have been deformed and it appears that she will need future surgeries.

Medical errors cause approximately 98,000 deaths per year. The victims of medical malpractice are hopefully sending a message to those negligent healthcare providers by filing medical malpractice lawsuits. In the end, the goal is to ensure that medical providers deliver quality care to avoid such litigation. To read more about this specific medical malpractice lawsuit, please click the link.

The family of a medical malpractice victim who died at a hospital has filed a wrongful death lawsuit against the doctors. The family states that the victim underwent surgery to remove a noncancerous mass and later died from peritonitis that was improperly diagnosed after the surgery. Peritonitis is caused by a spread of an infection from the blood and lymph nodes to the peritoneum. It is a very serious disease that becomes life threatening if not quickly treated. The Puget Business Journal has reported that the victim was complaining of thirst and pain for three days after the surgery. He later died what they referred to as an “agonizing” death. Their attorney stated that all patients undergoing invasive abdominal surgery are at risk for infection. The medical malpractice lawsuit claims that the doctor’s failure “to diagnose and treat the basic signs of a horrendous onset of peritonitis is astonishing.”

One of the legal issues in this case is whether or not the hospital can be held responsible for the doctor’s actions. Hospital officials claim that although the doctors have the credentials to practice at the hospital, they are not actual employees. This oftentimes occurs at hospitals that treat doctors as independent contractors.

This victim is one of the 98,000 people that die annually as a result of medical error. Doctors must properly diagnose post surgery infections in order to avoid wrongful deaths. It is important to closely monitor patients after any surgical procedure. To read more about the medical malpractice lawsuit, please click the link.

In a unanimous decision, the Georgia Supreme Court declared the cap on non-economic damages in verdicts in medical malpractice cases unconstitutional. The $350,000 cap on awards was the heart of the 2005 attempt at tort reform by the Georgia legislature. Such a cap, according to the Court, violates the right to a jury trial as guaranteed under the Georgia Constitution. The 2005 law's cap on damage awards "clearly nullifies the jury's findings of fact regarding damages and thereby undermines the jury's basic function," Chief Justice Carol Hunstein wrote for the court. Moreover, "[t]he very existence of the caps, in any amount, is violative of the right to trial by jury."

The Chicago medical malpractice attorneys at Levin & Perconti support this decision as it protects their clients and patients everywhere. Fortunately, last month, the Illinois Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a $500,000 cap against doctors and a $1 million cap against hospitals. The medical malpractice attorneys at Levin & Perconti constantly work to protect their clients’ constitutional rights to a jury trial and their clients’ rights to achieve medical malpractice verdicts that will fairly compensate them for the loss they suffered.

The New York Times has reported that an Arena Football League player filed a medical malpractice lawsuit claiming that a team doctor has misdiagnosed his concussion two years ago. This medical error has resulted in a permanent injury for the football player. This is the first medical malpractice lawsuit filed that speaks to the malpractice associated with concussion care in football. The player was a kicker for the A.F.L. in 2008 when he sustained a series of hits to the head over several games. The medical malpractice lawsuit claims that the team physician treated him only for a headache and “failed to properly evaluate and observe” his condition before clearing him to play.

This lawsuit is not the first in a series of brain injury lawsuits filed by football players. In November of last year, La Salle University settled a lawsuit in the amount of $7.5 million filed by a player severely injured by a concussion that he claimed had been mistreated by university medical staff. Also in 2000, Chicago Bear player Merril Hoge received a $1.55 million jury verdict in a brain injury case against the team’s physician Dr. John Munsell. Once again, it was alleged that the team’s physician medical error led to a more serious brain injury. Brain injuries in sports have been a closely watched topic. Professional sports doctors must be extremely cautious when clearing players to participate in any type of physical activity. To read more about the current medical malpractice lawsuit, please click the link.

Uldrych v. VHS of Illinois, No. 1-08-3278 (3-2-10) affirmed that actions for implied indemnity are subject to four-year period of repose in Section 13-212(a) of Code of Civil Procedure. Thus, Hospital's implied indemnity claim against physicians, which was filed 1 1/2 years after expiration of period of repose, was properly dismissed as untimely. This Illinois case will affect medical malpractice law.

The Washington Post is reporting that a jury has awarded the family of a medical malpractice victim nearly $3 million. The victim was a man who died after his esophagus tore while he was swallowing a piece of steak. The medical malpractice jury found that the radiologist was liable for misdiagnosing the man’s condition as a hiatal hernia. The state’s medical malpractice cap will require the jury’s award of $2,933,500 to be cut by more than half. This puts the ending jury verdict at $1.25 million. The anesthesiology group also agreed to pay a settlement of $600,000.

The victim had entered the hospital complaining of chest pains and trouble swallowing after he had eaten the steak. When he entered the hospital he stated that the piece of meat went down the wrong way. In reality, the piece of meat had gotten stuck in this throat. At the hospital he was given a number of tests which included an EKG, an X-Ray and a CT scan. The computer stated that the victim had a “large hiatal hernia” and doctors treated him with oral medicine. However, his pain did not decrease. Doctors continued to try to diagnose his chest pain. Finally, after a day of searching a surgeon found the victim’s perforated esophagus. He was immediately prepared for surgery and an epidural catheter was inserted. Court documents show that after the catheter was inserted the victim went into cardiac arrest. He had been severely weakened by the perforated esophagus which caused his cardiac arrest. The man died less than two weeks after his surgery.

This case highlights two aspects of medical malpractice law. First, it is yet another example of the 98,000 people who die annually as a result of medical malpractice. Second, it shows that medical malpractice caps are quite misleading. The jury was never told about the state legislation and hoped that the victim’s family would be justly awarded nearly $3 million in compensatory damages. However, the family was impacted by an unconstitutional state malpractice law. To read more about this specific case, please click the link.

House Democrats achieved a great feat last night by reshaping the American health care system to extend insurance coverage to almost 32 million people. The 219-212 vote secures a historic win for President Obama. The president stated that this isn’t radical reform but major reform. The president is likely going to sign the bill Tuesday and will try to sell the idea to a skeptical public.

The Chicago medical malpractice attorneys of Levin & Perconti are greatly pleased to report that the bill is free of any provision that would limit a patient’s rights. Many republicans were looking to limit the rights of those who had become victims of medical malpractice. The alternatives to litigation program contained in the current health care bill will provide an absolute opt-out for plaintiffs. President Obama should sign the bill on Tuesday. After he signs it the Senate will begin to debate passing a “reconciliation patch” designed by the House as a condition of passing the health care legislation. During the House debate, there may be amendments introduced demanding tort reform. The GOP once again may attempt to limit the rights of patients. Hopefully, the message of the American Association of Justice is getting through to the members of Congress. The important message they are expressing is that limiting the rights of patients will do little to reduce healthcare costs. More importantly, the government must focus on the 98,000 deaths per year is due to medical errors. The Senate needs to remember this number when they vote on the “reconciliation patch.” To read more about this historic legislation, please click the link.

The family of a medical negligence victim is blaming nurses at an Illinois hospital for the victim’s death. They believe that these nurses were guilty of a number of negligent acts. The woman was first admitted to the Illinois hospital with signs and symptoms of respiratory infection. The victim had told nurses that she was just getting over an upper respiratory infection. Nurses found that her oxygen level had steadily decreased from 97 percent when she was admitted to 92 percent four days later. The medical malpractice lawsuit then states that the woman began coughing up blood and was too fatigued to perform physical therapy. She constantly complained of feeling ill and developed a temperature. Her husband was repeating her need for aide to the nurses.

However, despite all the indications of lung failure the nursing staff negligently failed to test her blood oxygen saturation and did not report her symptoms to her treating physicians. The Record reported that the nurses were ignoring the symptoms of her Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome and additionally failed to treat such disease. It is the duty of the medical personnel to adequately assess all problems. Nurses should be in constant contact with doctors concerning a patient’s health. The victim wrongfully died at Memorial Hospital 18 days after being admitted. The man has filed a medical malpractice lawsuit claiming a loss of love, affection companionship, services and support. He has named specific nurses in the compliant and is seeking compensatory damages. If you believe you have been a victim of medical negligence, please contact a Chicago medical malpractice lawyer. To read more about the medical malpractice lawsuit, please click the link.

Wilbourn v. Cavelenes, No. 1-08-3609 (2-10-10) affirmed a decision involving a medical malpractice case jury trial with a verdict for the Defendants. The trial court was within its discretion in striking one basis for the Plaintiff's expert's opinion as to why Defendant surgeon used certain compression plate for fracture, and in instructing the jury to disregard expert's statement that he had never seen or heard of other type of plate failing or breaking within one month. The trial court was within its discretion in denying motion for new trial as to defense counsel's closing argument that Defendants had to wait 3 1/2 years for Plaintiff to develop her theory of case, as court's instruction that closing arguments were not evidence sufficient to occur error; and isolated reference to Plaintiff's counsel as "slick lawyer" would not have affected outcome. This case will impact Illinois medical malpractice law.

According to the Washington Post, Democrats in Congress released the final version of the proposed healthcare legislation that the House is set to vote on this Sunday. President Obama is now working to secure enough votes to pass this legislation in Congress. Our Illinois medical malpractice lawyers were pleased to see that increased funding for medical malpractice reform initiatives was not included in the final version of the bill. Republicans have long pushed for medical malpractice reform, and the idea of increased spending on these initiatives was brought up again at the healthcare summit that took place last month.

Despite research that clearly shows that medical malpractice litigation does not drive up the cost of healthcare, proponents of tort reform still fight to limit the rights of patients who are injured or killed as a result of medical negligence. Healthcare reform should focus on ensuring that everyone has access to quality and affordable care, not on limiting patients' rights. We must also focus on decreasing the number of medical mistakes from happening in the first place.

Until a final bill is passed, it is important to remain vocal about this issue. We encourage readers to contact their representatives to let them know that medical malpractice reform is not the answer, and that you do not support any measures to limit patients rights. Click on the link to contact your U.S. representative regarding medical malpractice reform.

Many of those opposing President Obama’s health care plan are maintaining that the solution to the health care lies in the inaction of tort reform. Recently, at a health care summit, Representative John Boehner, proclaimed that the costs of malpractice insurance have become the country’s biggest cost driver. Presidents of the American Medical Association have written into newspapers claiming that medical malpractice reform was the “surest and quickest way to slow down the rising cost of health care.”

Yet all of these accusations are false. According to StatesmanJournal.com, the Congressional Budge Office has estimated that malpractice costs account for less than 2 percent of health care spending. They have determined that tort reform would only lower health care costs by 0.5 percent. The Republican leadership is exaggerating the significance that medical malpractice costs have on health care. Also, the frequency of medical malpractice lawsuits has diminished recently. In the mid-1990s there were 15 medical malpractice lawsuits filed to every 100 physicians. In 2008 that number dropped to 8 percent. In the 30 states that have capped medical malpractice damages, there is no empirical evidence that health care costs have decreased. It is obvious that Republicans are overstating their facts.

Most importantly, Republicans are ignoring the many victims of medical negligence who will be unable to be justly compromised if tort reform is imposed. Since tort reform does not equal health care reform, it would be wrong to limit the rights of patients for very little reward. To read more statistics about tort reform, please click the link.

The National Practitioner Data Bank has determined that fewer medical malpractice payments were made on behalf of doctors in 2009 than any year on record. This statistic contradicts the GOP claims that medical malpractice litigation is to blame for rising healthcare costs that the elimination would help save health care. This level of malpractice payments was the lowest since 1999 and the payments were at their lowest since 1992. While healthcare spending rose 83 percent, medical malpractice payments have fallen 8 percent. The figures of medical malpractice payments only equals .14 of 1 percent of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ in the overall of U.S. healthcare spending.

Healthcare Finance News claims that this is the fifth consecutive year that the number of medical malpractice payments has fallen and the sixth straight year in which the value of payments have fallen. This contrasts with healthcare costs that have increased every year since 1965. However, an even more alarming comparison comes when you measure the amount of medical malpractice payments to that of deaths from medical err. The Institute of Medicine found that 44,000 to 98,000 die every year due to avoidable errors. The director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division, David Arkush, calls the recent attacks on medical malpractice ridiculous. He stated that some members of Congress are continuing to obsess and exaggerate one problem. He hopes that they focus on fixing the real problem of diminishing the large numbers of medical errs. To read more about the medical malpractice report, please click the link.

Anthony Tarricone, President of the American Association for Justice, published a piece in the Huffington Post reminding the public to remember those who have fallen victim to medical error. This week is Patient Safety Awareness Week, which is an annual national education and awareness campaign. This year it is especially important because it falls in the midst of the recent health care debate. As those in Congress debate medical malpractice they must remember the 98,000 patients that die annually as a result of preventable medical error. Put a different way, if the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention classified medical errors as a category it would be the sixth leading cause of death in America.

Many Republicans have focused on the idea of tort reform as one of the major solutions to America’s health care problems. However, there has been a great deal of evidence that shows changing tort law would do nothing to lower costs or cover the uninsured. It should also be noted that the 98,000 people figure only includes those who died, and not those who were seriously injured by medical error. These extra numbers include a woman who had to have four amputations after a routine kidney stone surgery. The doctors had sent her home with no treatment and her kidney blockage caused a full body infection. This is just one of the many victims of medical error. While health reform is needed, it cannot be at the expense of victims. Contact your local Congressman and voice your support for patient awareness. To read more from the AAJ’s President’s post, please click the link.

Last month this blog discussed the large number of people that have become victims to medical negligence at long-term health care facilities. This issue had gained national attention due to the increased presence of long-term care facilities nation-wide. The New York Times has reported that the Senate Finance Committee has opened an investigation into the wrongful deaths and allegations of abuse at long-term care hospitals. The Senate investigation will focus on the Select Medical Corporation. This is a for-profit corporation that runs a total of 89-long-term care hospitals throughout the states.

The Senate committee has the power to launch an investigation because it oversees Medicare funds. They decided to investigate the many stories of poor treatment and patient deaths at the long-term care hospitals. These facilities will treat approximately 200,000 seriously ill patients a year nationwide, yet they rarely have full-time physicians on staff. The facility in question allowed a dying patient’s heart alarm to sound for 77 minutes before any nurses responded. While Select stated that they terminated a clinical involved in the incident, others have subsequently ensued.

Long-term hospitals are unique because they do not treat specific types of patients or offer services unavailable in regular medical centers. They have to transfer a patient back to a hospital if they suffer any medical emergencies. One large long-term care conglomerate is Kindred Healthcare. Kindred operates three long-term hospitals in Illinois, including one in Chicago. If you believe that a loved one has fallen victim to poor patient care at a long-term hospital, please consult a Chicago medical malpractice lawyer. To read more about the Senate investigation, please check out the link.

The Republicans have come up with many ways to damage health care debate. They include letting families and business buy health insurance across state lines which would bring extra problems to the health care industry. However the GOP’s worst idea, and yet the one that might actually be implemented, is limiting a victim’s ability to file a medical malpractice lawsuit. This idea, known as “tort reform,” has gained momentum with both President Obama and other Democrats.

The American Prospect reported that Republicans argue that by capping medical malpractice damages, doctors will practice less defensive medicine thus driving down health insurance costs. Yet if you examine states that do cap non-economic damages, you will see that there has not been a decrease in health care spending. In fact, per-patient health-care spending in the state of Texas has actually increased at a rate that is twice the national average. This happened after Texas decided to cap non-economic damages at $250,000.

Another argument posed by Republicans is that tort reform will decrease the amount of frivolous lawsuits. Yet the key question is whether there are that many frivolous lawsuits to begin with. Last year the CBO determined that 181,000 severe injuries or deaths were caused by medical error. Yet only 17 percent of those victims actually filed a medical malpractice lawsuit. That means that only one out of every six patients who are victims of medical malpractice actually files a lawsuit. Maybe health care reform should focus more on diminishing the number of victims injured by medical malpractice instead of looking to diminish the number of lawsuits. To learn more about tort reform, please click the link.

Long v. Elborno, No. 1-08-1733 (1-21-10) answered the question of whether the refilling of an action against physician was not continuation of previous action, but created entirely new action, thus law of the case doctrine inapplicable. Court had previously found Plaintiff failed to exercise reasonable diligence in serving Hospital; thus, collateral estoppel applies to prevent Plaintiff from asserting that she was reasonably diligent in serving physician, when her actions were identical for both parties during this time, and physician was not served for an additional four months after service on Hospital. Plaintiff cannot be given credit for time it took her to obtain Section 2-622 reviewing physician's report in considering her reasonable diligence of service. This case will impact Illinois medical malpractice law.

While we all watch the U.S. Congress debate whether or not medical malpractice law needs to be reformed it is important to know the facts when it comes to the insurance industry. For example, do you know that Illinois’ largest malpractice insurer’s payouts have remained flat for over a decade? This has occurred despite the fact that premiums and profits have skyrocketed. Additionally, medical malpractice insurance rate increases between 2000 and 2005 has resulted in insurance company profits that have broken records and left executives with large compensation packages. This all leads to the ultimate fact that medical malpractice claims are not to blame for the increase in insurance rates. Instead we should all be looking to the business conditions and diminished returns on the insurance companies’ financial investments.

The Illinois Trial Lawyers Association’s White Paper has highlighted all of the myths and facts associated with medical malpractice in Illinois. In reality, court records have shown that medical malpractice lawsuits in Illinois were actually decreasing before the enactment of the damages caps in 2005. Claims, lawsuits and payouts all have been stable or declining. They are not to blame for the increases in doctors’ malpractice insurance rates. Also, claims and lawsuits have not caused an increase in the costs of health care. We need to start focusing on the facts rather than the propaganda. There needs to be true insurance reform that will focus on patient safety. This will be the best and most practical way to decrease insurance costs by reducing medical error.

The American Association for Justice has spoken out about the constant struggle for health care reform. Currently the House of Representatives is debating whether or not to vote on the Senate passed health care bill. This means that if the House has a majority vote the Senate bill will become a law. The current version of the Senate bill allows for demonstration projects, but provides an absolute opt out clause for plaintiffs at any time. The AAJ finds demonstration objectionable but believes that the opt-out provision for all plaintiffs minimizes their concern.

In a recent letter to Congress, the President signaled openness to appropriating $50 million for additional medical malpractice projects, which would include health courts. This blog recently spoke to the dangers of implementing health courts. Most importantly these courts would take away a patient’s right to a jury trial, which is in direct opposition to the constitution. The AAJ believes that health courts open up the possibility of biased, one-sided proceedings, deny people their right to trial by jury, and serve as another expensive insurance company bureaucracy. Fortunately, the Senate language contains an opt-out provision which would allow victims to have the option of a civil jury trial. Please contact your Congressmen and voice your opposition for health courts.

Many people who support patient’s rights have been using twitter to voice their thoughts on the recent health care debate. This has become a great forum for those to voice their opinions. Many are discussing the 98,000 people who die every year from medical error. We need to ensure that Congress takes this number into account.

The Florida Appeals Court upheld an almost 26 million dollar verdict against a Walgreens Pharmacy after a teenage pharmacy technician improperly filled a prescription and killed a mother of three. The pharmacy technician typed in “ten milligrams” on the mother’s prescription when she should have typed one milligram. This case draws attention to the very troubling fact that there is no national standard for the training of pharmacy technicians. ABC news points out that in many states pharmacy technicians are not even required to have high school diplomas. Shockingly “a lot of the people working in the pharmacy have about the same level of training as someone that would be working in fast food," commented a lawyer who handles cases involving prescription errors. In addition, pharmacy technicians are overworked and are not closely supervised by licensed pharmacists.

Recently, Susan Novosad, a medical malpractice attorney at Levin and Perconti, settled a case against a Chicago-area pharmacy. This medical malpractice and negligence case was brought by the son of an 86-year-old man who died as a result of poor direction and instructions with regard to writing, filling and refilling his medication prescription. The mistakes made by the pharmacy were inexcusable and caused Susan’s client to lose his father. Susan hopes to warn others against the dangers of dosing errors in medication administration. If pharmacies do not change their ways, they will continue to kill victims because of negligence.

In the ever continuing medical malpractice and health care debate a new proposal has emerged. This involves what are being referred to as “health courts” which would force all medical malpractice cases out of the court system. While these courts promise faster, more reliable system of resolving medical malpractice claims, they do not paint all sides of the story.

The Pop Tort explained that health courts are a terrible, anti-patient and highly-controversial concept that has both consumer groups and victims of medical negligence strongly opposed to them. They force all medical malpractice cases into an administrative system based on the failing worker's compensation model. However, this system would be even worse because patients would still have to prove a form of negligence and the decision-makers would come from the medical community. Immediately, the right to jury trial has become eliminated. Also, the courts would have few accountability mechanisms, few procedural safeguards and no meaningful appeals process. There may be a schedule of benefits and a severe cap on non-economic damages. Most importantly, these courts are unconstitutional. By taking away the right to a jury, these courts are in direct opposition to the constitution.

Ray De Lorenzi, a spokesman for the American Association for Justice, stated that health courts would involve a new expensive bureaucracy. Health courts would do nothing to eliminate the 98,000 people who die every year from preventable medical error. He told TheHill.com that fixing preventable medical errors, not creating new bureaucracies, is the right solution. To read more about health courts, please click the link.

All too often the public does not hear about the detrimental effects tort reform has on the hundreds of thousands of victims whom are injured by medical malpractice each year. Tort reform puts a cap on compensation for victims of medical negligence. The Huffington Post points out the specific case of Lisa Gurley. A court found that the severe brain injury suffered at birth by Lisa’s son, Colin, was caused by a doctor’s negligence. Despite this finding, Nebraska tort reform prevented Lisa and her son from being adequately compensated for his injuries. In fact, they were compensated for just a tiny fraction of what it will cost to care for Colin for the remainder of his life. Now, Medicaid and the Nebraska Medically Handicap Children's program pay for all of Colin’s care. It is grossly unfair that the taxpayers and Colin’s family are paying the astronomical cost of caring for a severely handicapped child while the doctor and the insurance company paid minimally for the medical negligence. The Chicago medical malpractice attorneys at Levin and Perconti are working to protect the rights of catastrophically injured children like Colin and to ensure that there continue to be adequate remedies for injured victims of medical negligence.