Analysis of Illinois appellate court decision reversing longstanding precedent on pattern jury instructions on proximate cause/loss of chance doctrine
Analyzes benefits and drawbacks to implementing exceptions to NPDB reporting requirements for individual health care practitioners
An Illinois Appellate Court ruled a demonstration/exhibit must be considerably similar to original, especially if being demonstrated by expert in front of a jury
“Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!” –Michael Corleone, The Godfather Part III
Al Pacino probably doesn’t know it, but his iconic line from The Godfather Part III encapsulates the plight of hospitals pulled into medical malpractice suits due to negligent credentialing claims. That’s because plaintiffs sometimes assert this claim when they cannot prove a deviation from the standard of care on the part of any hospital employee or agent—so even if a hospital thinks that it’s out of the suit, plaintiffs can sometimes pull it back in by alleging that it ...
In general, Illinois law requires that a lawsuit be commenced “(1) in the county of residence of any defendant who is joined in good faith and with probable cause for the purpose of obtaining a judgment against him or her and not solely for the purpose of fixing venue in that county, or (2) in the county in which the transaction or some part thereof occurred out of which the cause of action arose.” 735 ILCS 5/2-101. For venue purposes, the residence of a corporation, such as a hospital, is in the county where it has any office or is doing business. 735 ILCS 5/2-102. Because hospitals ...
While overall trends show that more and more litigants are appearing in court without an attorney, in the medical malpractice context, defending a case against a pro se plaintiff is not as common. This is particularly true in courts where the amount in controversy must be in the tens of thousands before a court can even hear the case (e.g., in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, where the Law Division only hears civil suits for recovery of monetary damages in excess of $30,000). Nonetheless, we have all had one. You probably still have one now – and every pro se case brings its own ...
The question of what constitutes “apparent agency” in the context of alleged medical malpractice continues to be analyzed by the Illinois appellate courts. The issue was first addressed by the Illinois Supreme Court in the case of Gilbert v. Sycamore Municipal Hospital. 156 Ill.2d 511 (1993). In Gilbert, the Court set forth a multi-factor test to determine whether a hospital could be held vicariously liable for the alleged acts of its independent contractor physicians. Id. at 525. Specifically, in order to hold a hospital liable under the theory of “apparent agency,” a ...
Practitioners usually face cases where they reasonably expect the health of a party to remain the same throughout the pendency of a lawsuit. An important, and sometimes overlooked, aspect of a litigation strategy is the long-term health of a party, or a key witness, which is a significant factor when considering both discovery and trial strategies.
The first strategic aspect to consider is the type of claim filed and how it may change moving forward, as it may affect the applicable statute of limitations or the damages available. A cause of action that begins as a claim for medical ...
Are you considering retaining an expert, in a medical malpractice case, who has a history of medical malpractice suits being filed against him or her? Have you just deposed an expert in a medical malpractice case and learned that they have been previously sued for medical malpractice? In either situation, you will likely have to determine whether the expert’s prior lawsuits will be admissible at trial. A recent Illinois appellate court ruling, Swift v. Schleicher, suggests that circuit courts should bar any evidence of medical malpractice lawsuits filed against the expert.
The ...
Illinois hospitals and the lawyers that represent them breathed a collective sigh of relief recently after the Illinois Supreme Court reversed the First District’s decision in Yarbrough v. Northwestern Memorial Hospital. 2017 IL 121367. Under traditional laws of agency, a principal can be held liable for the negligent acts of its agent under the doctrine of respondeat superior. This is most commonly seen in the employer/employee context, in which the employer controls and supervises the work of its employees and can therefore be held liable for such work. However, in certain ...
