Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

The U.S. Supreme Court is scheduled to hear arguments soon on whether a generic drug maker can be held responsible for a patient’s injuries. The case is considered very important for pharmaceutical companies, federal regulators and patients who take generic drugs. Some experts estimate that generics make up 80 percent of all drugs taken by people in the United States.

The case before the high court will involve Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., which sold a drug called sulindac, an anti-inflammatory. This medication was given by a pharmacist to a patient named Karen Bartlett, who was suffering mild shoulder pain in 2004. Bartlett, who lives in New Hampshire, claims she began taking the drug and, only a few weeks later, suffered an intense reaction to it. Her skin began to peel off, she was forced to live in a burn unit in a nearby hospital and later was in a medically induced coma. She lost her vision and is now legally blind. Also, she alleges that the medication permanently damaged her lungs and esophagus.

Bartlett sued Mutual, saying the company should be liable for her injuries. She took her case to federal district court, where a jury awarded her $21 million. An appeals court upheld that verdict in 2010; now the case is headed for the high court.

Continue reading

by

A 36-year-old nurse was seen by the defendant obstetrician Larry Overcash, M.D. The physician was alleged to be negligent in performing a bilateral removal of both of Ms. Fief’s ovaries. She had consented to removal of only one ovary. However, at the Peoria Day Surgery Center, both of the Fief’s ovaries were removed by Dr. Overcash, who also perforated her colon during the surgery. The perforation of the colon led to several other hospitalizations and medical expenses in excess of $200,000.

The jury’s verdict of $1.2 million against both Dr. Overcash and Woman’s Health Institute, Ltd. was made up of the following damages:

• $1,050,000 on the negligence claim which included $300,000 for past and future pain and suffering;
• $500,000 for past and future loss of normal life;
• $250,000 for medical expenses; and
• $150,000 was for medical battery because of the wrongful surgery in removal of both ovaries plus $150,000 for pain and suffering from the removal of the unnecessary surgery removing the right ovary.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Supreme Court has decided an appeal as to whether or not res judicata in a refiled medical-malpractice complaint barred its refiling. In the underlying case, Brandon and Daphne Wilson claimed that Edward Hospital in Naperville, Ill., was liable for the negligence of doctors under the theory of actual and apparent agency.

The hospital was granted a summary judgment order on the actual-agent allegations and the Wilsons voluntarily dismissed their complaint, but refiled it within one year. Edward Hospital then moved to dismiss the case based on res judicata, which essentially means that the issue has already been finally adjudicated by the court.

Under the Supreme Court decision in Hudson v. City of Chicago, 228 Ill.2d 468 (2008) and Rein v. David A. Noyes & Co., 172 Ill.2d 325 (1996), res judicata bars a refiled lawsuit when:

Continue reading

by

In June 2006, Josh Tunca was a surgeon at Northwest Community Hospital specializing in gynecologic oncology. While in surgery, Dr. Tunca removed an ovarian tumor. Later, the patient lost the pulse in her left leg due to a clog in her femoral artery.

Dr. Thomas Painter, a vascular surgeon, was called in to perform a femoral-bypass surgery to restore blood flow. According to the record, Dr. Painter approached Dr. John McGillan, the hospital’s vice president and medical affairs director, telling him that Dr. Tunca had cut the patient’s iliac artery.

Dr. Painter also told other doctors that Dr. Tunca had negligently severed the patient’s artery. None of these doctors were on a peer review committee for the hospital.

Continue reading

by

William Herring, 59, had a history of severe coronary artery disease. Complaining of chest pain, Herring was seen by his internist, Wayne Blake, M.D. Herring said his chest pain was relieved by belching.

At the doctor’s office, an electrocardiogram was done, which showed that Herring had normal rhythms. Dr. Blake prescribed a heartburn relief medicine and also recommended that Herring undergo a chemical stress test within the next month.

Less than four hours after leaving Dr. Blake’s office, Herring suffered a severe irregular heartbeat episode and then a fatal cardiac arrest. He is survived by his wife and three children.

Continue reading

by

Cook County commissioners voted Feb. 5, 2013, to pay $24 million in hospital malpractice settlements. Of that total, $20 million will be paid to the family of a boy who suffered brain damage after a heart attack following surgery at a Chicago hospital.

A lawsuit was filed against Stroger Hospital by the boy’s mother, Justine Francique. Her son, Keith, underwent surgery for an undescended testicle in 2011. Following the operation, the boy suffered a heart attack, according to hospital records.

Unfortunately, nurses and doctors in attendance did not notice his condition and failed to start cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Five minutes after his heart stopped, they began the necessary lifesaving procedures, according to court documents.

Continue reading

by

Sue Carter brought Joyce Gott to the Odin Nursing Home in 2005. Carter signed an arbitration agreement as Gott’s “legal representative.” Gott also signed an arbitration agreement with Odin after she was admitted to the nursing home facility.

Carter’s lawsuit filed against Odin claimed that the nursing home’s negligence caused Gott to die from gastrointestinal bleeding, anemia and respiratory failure.

Count I of Carter’s complaint was brought for Gott’s personal-injury claim preserved by the Illinois Survival Act. Count II of the complaint was for Gott’s heirs under the Illinois Wrongful Death Act.

Continue reading

by

Tracy Spevak had undergone a LASIK surgery on her right eye once before. However, in January 2007, the defendant ophthalmologist did a LASIK surgery to attempt to enhance vision in Tracy’s right eye. During the surgery, Dr. Mark Golden, the defendant ophthalmologist, chose to re-cut the original LASIK flap, causing complications which necessitated additional surgeries on that eye.

Tracy now has permanent scar tissue in the central portion of her right eye. She has impaired vision, resulting in a kaleidoscope vision of lights at night, nausea, vertigo and migraine headaches. Her past medical bills totaled $8,274.

Tracy now will require a full or partial corneal transplant. At trial, the plaintiff argued that the medical standard of care required Dr. Golden to perform either a re-lifting of the original LASIK flap or a surface treatment.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Good Samaritan Act (745 ILCS 49/25 (West 2010)) states that a medical professional who, in good faith, “provides emergency care without fee to a person” should be immune from civil damages except in the case of willful or wanton misconduct. Immunity from suit was the position taken by Dr. Michael Murphy because his patient, who claimed he was injured by Murphy’s negligence, never got billed for the doctor’s emergency room services at Provena St. Mary’s Hospital. Dr. Murphy argued that he should be immune from liability for negligence after the patient filed a lawsuit against him.

The First District Appellate Court rejected that argument under the Illinois Good Samaritan Act because it found there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether or not the doctor acted in “good faith” and found that since the doctor was compensated the act did not apply.

“Nowhere in the legislative history of the act is it ever stated that the intent of the act was to immunize emergency room physicians who are paid for their time,” Justice Stuart Palmer wrote in the court’s opinion.

Continue reading

by

Lillie Teague, 74, underwent an angiogram, which is an x-ray exam that uses a dye and camera to look at the blood flow in an artery or vein. Many angiograms are used to examine the arteries near the heart, lungs, brain and the aorta. The procedure requires the use of a thin tube called a catheter placed into a blood vessel in the femoral artery at the groin. The purpose for the angiogram is to find a bulge in a blood vessel or the narrowing or blockage in a blood vessel.

In this case, Ms. Teague began bleeding from the place where the catheter was inserted; at the entry site of the femoral artery. Bleeding at the femoral artery is a known complication for an angiogram, which was done here.

The defendant nurse was alleged to have chosen not to properly and appropriately respond to the need to control the bleeding for up to 30 minutes. This caused massive blood loss. It was alleged in the plaintiff’s complaint that because of the loss of blood, Ms. Teague consequently suffered a stroke.

Continue reading