Articles Posted in Trial Practice

by

On Feb. 19, 2009, Georgene Paz was eastbound on Palatine Road at Arlington Heights Road, Arlington Heights, Illinois, when she was rear-ended by 41-year-old Richard Ahlman. Paz, age 52, drove herself to Central DuPage Hospital right after the crash complaining of lower back and neck pain.

She continued to treat with her primary care physician and received physical therapy for lower back pain radiating into her right leg through mid-April 2009.

Paz argued that her  back pain and radiating symptoms continued and were ongoing when she slipped at work and landed on her rear-end in July 2009, which  resulted in another emergency room visit and more physical therapy.

Continue reading

by

A Cook County jury has determined that Brelinda Walker, age 58 and retired, was traveling northbound on Michigan Avenue in Chicago and while waiting to make a left turn on westbound Adam Street was hit from behind by the defendant, Adam Riley, age 21. Those facts were straightforward.  The jury also had to consider the medical evidence and the parties’ testimony about what each believed had occurred in this car crash.

Walker contended that the impact from the crash caused her cervical and lumbar disc aggravations, requiring emergency room care, MRIs, chiropractic treatment and epidural injections into the cervical and lumbar spine.  She claimed that the crash drastically changed her normal life.

The defendant Riley admitted liability in causing the impact. However, he also maintained that Walker merely sustained neck and back strains, which required only a visit to the emergency room, MRIs and 6-8 weeks of physical therapy. 

Continue reading

by

Jury trials are, by design, the final arbiter of any lawsuit. In all jury trials, the case is presented to the six or twelve jurors, who then determine the facts of the case. In Illinois the decision of the jury must be unanimous. That decision of the jurors is delivered to the court officer, who reads it to the parties and attorneys and then a final judgment or order is entered. The essence of a jury trial is a focus group of the issues of the case. But rather than guess at what might develop and happen at a jury trial, focus groups and trial preparation are vital in determining how best to proceed at the real trial.

Focus groups are actually, if done correctly, simply a trial for practice. Some lawyers do focus groups over and over again before trial to try to flesh out issues, evidence and biases of potential jurors. 

Assembling a group of citizens from different walks of life to sit in judgment of facts is exactly what a trial is. The value of a focus group is to do exactly the same thing, but to do it without a final order. The techniques of focus groups are varied. Many lawyers conduct what is known as concept focus groups. Some lawyers engage in a structured focus group. Others run what are called mock trials. But all in all, focus groups are about listening rather than talking. The goal is to learn what potential trial jurors would think about a case, the facts, the evidence, even photographs. By learning what potential jurors understand about a case, lawyers will begin to understand what typical biases may surface. Everyone has biases and some prejudices. The idea behind a focus group is to very carefully dissect the responses that these practice jurors develop in deliberating a lawyer’s case. 

Continue reading

by

Jurors are pulled into courthouses bringing with each their unmovable principles, attitudes and beliefs. The goal of jury selection is the questioning allowed by the judge, in choosing the fairest possible jury. Given the fact that many prospective jurors do not want to be involved in the process at all, lawyers who handle injury or death cases need to be aware that they have to overcome a prospective juror’s hostility to lawsuits generally, perhaps because of the rise in negative publicity.

Generally, lawyers are thrust into meeting prospective jurors with little or no opportunity for preparation for the venire or the group brought in. Depending on the venue, a lawyer should take whatever opportunities are given to increase the odds of de-selecting and empaneling the best possible and fairest jury. 

It is important to know in advance the law of the venue and the process for jury selection in a particular courtroom.  It’s advisable to file a trial brief on the law in advance of every case to ensure that the lawyer is familiar with the local law and the court’s process. Judges differ in style from court to court. If a lawyer is familiar with the judge, that is an advantage in understanding the judge’s process for questioning motions to strike a juror with or without cause and paneling the jurors. 

Continue reading

by

Sandy Parrish, the administrator of the estate of Karen Parrish, filed a wrongful-death and survival action against physician Michael Jones, D.O., and other medical providers. The suit stemmed from what was alleged to be the negligent care of Karen Parrish, resulting in her death. 

On Dec. 30, 2004, Parrish was admitted to Adena Regional Medical Center and diagnosed with an acute peripheral-nerve disorder. She was then transferred to a rehabilitation center and was under the care of another defendant physician, Christopher Skocik, D.O. 

In the lawsuit, the Parrish family alleged that the medical staff treating Karen had been negligent by choosing not to prescribe the appropriate anti-coagulation therapy. It was further alleged in the complaint that as a direct and proximate result of that negligence, Karen died prematurely suffering a cardiopulmonary arrest and hypoxia due to a pulmonary emboli with saddle embolus and deep-vein thrombosis.

Continue reading

by

John Baugh sustained a severe brain injury when the Cuprum ladder that he was using to clean his gutters buckled and collapsed. Baugh’s wife Sharon filed a lawsuit on his behalf against Cuprum S.A.de C.V. claiming that the defective design and the manufacturer’s negligence was the cause of her husband’s injuries.  John could not testify as to what happened to him because of his injuries.

About three months before the beginning of the trial, the defendant, Cuprum, informed plaintiff’s attorney that it intended to use an exemplar of the actual ladder at the jury trial. The exemplar ladder was new, but had been built to the exact specifications to the ladder that Baugh had used. In a pretrial conference on Feb. 1, 2011, Cuprum’s exemplar ladder was marked as an exhibit “for Demonstrative Purposes.”  The plaintiff’s counsel objected to any use of the new exemplar ladder at trial. Discovery had been closed for two years. The ladder had not been included in Cuprum’s expert disclosures. 

In response to the objection, Cuprum argued that the exemplar ladder was for demonstrative purposes and that it would be used during direct examination of its expert witness. It was not intended to be substantive evidence.  Cuprum also argued that the exemplar ladder would be used to demonstrate and help the jury understand the expert’s testimony. 

Continue reading

by

In a wrongful discharge case brought by Larry Holland, there was evidence against his former employer, Schwan’s Home Service, that included the claim file of Schwan’s insurance carrier. 

The claim adjuster’s file contained notes from Joan Kantor, a specialty risk services third-party administrator for Hartford Insurance Co. The notes contained summaries of conversations with Schwan’s agents and employees. Kantor did not testify at the trial. Schwan’s objected to the conclusion of the notes as evidence arguing that (1) the statements were inadmissible hearsay, (2) the documents were protected by attorney-client privilege and (3) the business records exception to the hearsay rule did not apply because the claim file was prepared in anticipation of litigation.

The jury in Benton, Ill., returned a verdict for Holland for $4,260,400, which included $3.6 million in punitive damages.  Schwan’s Home Service appealed. 

Continue reading