Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

H.D. was admitted to a hospital in labor. The nurses and midwife observed H.D. throughout the night without any notable changes. However, early the next morning, the fetal monitor showed non-reassuring signs of the unborn child. No one consulted an obstetrician or warned a doctor about the non-reassuring signs.

About six hours later, H.D. delivered her son; he was born with the umbilical cord wrapped around his neck three times. The hospital’s resuscitation team was attending to another patient, which resulted in an 8-minute delay in having the child intubated.

As a consequence, the baby suffered severe brain damage. He is now 6 years old and has cerebral palsy, developmental delays and a seizure disorder.

Continue reading

by

In a confidential settlement, the parties agreed to $1,250,000 for the unfortunate death of a newborn infant. In this case, before the mother’s scheduled Caesarean section, the mother underwent three transplacental amniocenteses to assess her baby’s lung maturity. The purpose of a transplacental amniocentesis is to compare transplacental with non-placental amniocentesis because of possible complications.

Amniocentesis is a frequently used invasive procedure during a woman’s pregnancy guided by ultrasound to remove a sample of amniotic fluid for testing. The procedure requires specialized medical or assistant training. Amniocentesis is a technique for withdrawing amniotic fluid from the uterine cavity using a needle.

The fluid is then tested in a laboratory to determine the health of the unborn fetus. The fluid is composed mostly of fetal substances including urine and secretions. Many times amniocentesis is done to determine whether there are genetic difficulties or to study the maturity of the unborn fetus’s lung maturity. There are risks involved with the transplacental amniocentesis, which occurred here. There was fetal bleeding from an alleged placental abruption that may have been caused by the amniocentesis procedure.

Continue reading

by

In 2008 a study was published that focused on uncomplicated pregnancies. The question was whether to induce labor in women whose gestation had reached 41 to 42 weeks. It was revealed that inducing labor in women who have reached 41 weeks of pregnancy and who were otherwise low-risk showed the condition of the baby at birth to be favorable. The goal of obstetricians was to ensure the successful delivery of the baby before 42 weeks of gestation — for the benefit of the baby and mother.

The study suggested that there was an improvement in prenatal outcomes as a result of a more proactive post-term (more than 39 weeks) labor induction practice.

This guideline has shown that there was a significant reduction in the number of stillborn infants at term, 39 weeks of gestation. In addition to this conclusion, it was found or suggested that maternal deaths were also improved with proactive labor induction.

Continue reading

by

On March 1, 2011, Jamie Rae was in induced for labor at 39 weeks gestation due to the large size of her baby. The defendant obstetrician, Dr. James Riva, did a vaginal delivery of the baby, Bailei Rae, at a hospital in Maryville, Ill.

During the course of the delivery of Bailei, a shoulder dystocia occurred involving the anterior presenting shoulder. That means that the baby’s shoulder was stuck on the pelvic bone of her mother, Jamie Rae. While performing maneuvers to relieve the shoulder dystocia, Dr. Riva allegedly exerted excessive traction on the baby’s head, causing a 5-level cervical nerve root injury including a complete avulsion at C-8.

As a result, the 9 lbs 2 oz newborn baby, Bailei Rae, sustained a brachial plexus injury to the posterior shoulder with permanent nerve root damage and Erb’s palsy in the left arm.

Continue reading

by

In most cases of medical malpractice that occur at private institutions, the hospital, its physicians and medical providers could be held liable for injuries caused by choosing not to take an order for proper tests, by not making the correct diagnosis and by not rendering the appropriate medical treatment. But in a hospital such as Cook County Hospital (John Stroger Hospital) or any other public hospital or medical provider, the outcome could be much different. Under the Illinois Tort Immunity Act, a public institution like the John Stroger Hospital/Cook County Hospital could be responsible for injuring a patient only if it were found that it was negligent in treating the patient. However, the hospital would not be held liable if injury or death came upon a patient for the omission of not ordering tests or improperly or incorrectly diagnosing a patient.

Under the Illinois Tort Immunity Act, public entities and their employees are “immunized” from liability in the event of hospital or medical negligence for an act or omission by an employee, physician or other hospital-employed medical provider when the claim is for a misdiagnosis or in choosing not to correctly diagnose an illness or condition that causes injury to a patient.

In one stark example of how this immunization arises is the case of Michigan Avenue National Bank v. Cook County, 191 Ill.2d 493 (2000), where the Illinois Supreme Court weighed in on the case of a young woman who made a number of visits to Cook County Hospital indicating that she had a mass that had developed in her left breast. She returned to the hospital a number of times, but it was not until two years later that the lump was diagnosed as breast cancer.

Continue reading

by

The baby, Zoey Stavrou, was delivered by Cesarean section at Edward Hospital in DuPage County, Ill., at 12:25 a.m. on May 14, 2006. She had Apgar scores at 0 at 1, 5 and 10 minutes. At the time of the delivery, a 9-centimeter umbilical cord hematoma was discovered, which had occurred as a result of a ruptured umbilical vein.

Zoey is now 8 years old and has severe cerebral palsy. She is non-verbal and has no functional mobility. She has the cognitive level of a 6-9 month infant and is dependent for all activities of daily living.

Zoey’s family contended that the defendant delivering physician and labor and delivery nurses chose not to properly interpret and act upon non-reassuring fetal monitor strips throughout the evening of May 13. They also contended that the emergency C-section should have been ordered around 9 p.m., but the defendant obstetrician, Dr. Chen, negligently waited until midnight to order the C-section. It was also claimed that Dr. Chen did not perform the incision for the C-section until 12:19 a.m. and the child would have been born neurologically intact if she had been delivered before 12:08 a.m.

Continue reading

by

Dr. Sonya L. Thomas was named as a defendant in a birth injury case that was claimed to have been caused by her negligence in the delivery of a baby, Regina Pilero, at St. Anthony Hospital on Jan.  6, 2007. Dr. Thomas is an obstetrician. It was alleged in the lawsuit that was filed on behalf of the minor child that Dr. Thomas chose not to correctly manage shoulder dystocia during Regina’s delivery and used excessive force to extract the baby.

Plaintiffs alleged this caused nerve root avulsion at C-7 with damage to the adjacent nerve trunks at C5-6 to the newborn.  A nerve root avulsion injury causes weakness to the nearby muscles and may be severe.

As a result of the brachial plexus injury, Regina required cable grafting and muscle surgery. Regina has permanent weakness and dysfunction in her left arm that represents $272,026 in past medical expenses along with a future life care plan for therapy and expenses that range from $481,647 to $698,217. In addition, it was presented at trial that Regina would have lost income ranging from $315,000 to $627,648 over the course of her expected life.

Continue reading

by

During Ms. Doe’s 32nd week of pregnancy, she experienced contractions. Doe went to a nearby hospital where vaginal bleeding, elevated blood pressure and pre-term labor were all noted in her hospital chart. She was under observation for about 36 hours at the hospital before she was discharged to go home.

About 14 hours after discharge, Doe’s water broke. She returned to the hospital where she delivered her daughter by way of an emergency Caesarean section. The child’s Apgar scores were 1 at one minute and 4 at five minutes.

The child was diagnosed as having suffered an asphyxia and spent a number of weeks in the hospital’s intensive care unit. The baby died one year later from pneumonia and complications of severe brain damage suffered at birth.

Continue reading

by

Kaleb Avalos-Lanteros was born with what amounted to a fractured skull. The injury caused brain damage and was first recognized while Kaleb was in the neonatal intensive care unit at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Chicago.

The cause of Kaleb’s skull fracture was not acknowledged by anyone but was alleged to have happened when Kaleb was being cared for in the NICU. No one took responsibility, so Kaleb’s parents relied on the claim of res ipsa loquitur in suing lots of defendants, which included the hospital, EPC Healthcare Staffing and another group of companies affiliated with Sodexo Inc.

The lawsuit and its complaint included claims for what the lawyers called “specific negligence” in addition to the claim of res ipsa loquitur, which literally means, in Latin, the thing speaks for itself. In other words, the law allows this theory to be applied for a claim in which the event alleged could not have happened in the absence of negligence. That presumption is rebuttable and can be defeated, but would be a question of fact to be decided by a jury as the finder of facts.

Continue reading

by

A settlement was reached in a case where a newborn, known as “Doe,” was born with a congenital condition in which part of her internal organs developed outside of her body.Right after her birth, Doe underwent a series of surgeries to place those organs inside her body.  After one of the surgeries, Doe began having difficulty breathing.  Her treating doctors placed her on a mechanical ventilator and cardiac machine and also gave her medications, all of which were not successful in returning her oxygen saturations to normal.

Doe then suffered cardiopulmonary arrest, which resulted in permanent brain damage.  Doe died two years later.

Doe’s family sued the hospital and Doe’s treating physicians claiming that the defendants chose not to provide extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and also failed to timely transfer the child to another hospital. Use of ECMO, a heart and lung machine for babies that circulates blood outside the body, would have permitted Doe’s body to rest and recover, the lawsuit claimed.

Continue reading