Articles Posted in Illinois Nursing Home Care Act

by

In 2014 the case of Mary Slepicka was contested wherein it was claimed in the lawsuit that Holy Family Villa Nursing Facility incorrectly billed her during her stay. The key issue in the appeal was venue. The court in 2014 ruled that she was wrong to file her case in Springfield, Ill., instead of Chicago. The unanimous opinion of the Illinois Supreme Court, authored by Justice Charles E. Freeman, said the venue mistake was not fatal to earlier administrative and trial court rulings, which determined she was correctly evicted from the nursing home for failing to pay living expenses.

The Supreme Court justices ordered the case back to the Illinois Appellate Court. The Illinois Appellate Court for the 4th District determined there was not enough evidence to reverse the initial decisions.

In the lawsuit, Slepicka claimed she was qualified for a lower Medicaid rate. Her contract with the nursing home in 2011 listed her as paying a higher out-of-pocket expense. In addition, she was given a room that wasn’t certified for Medicaid coverage.

Continue reading

by

A 15-year-old boy, Kevin Barr, who had cerebral palsy and seizure disorder, lived at a residential care facility. Early one morning, staff at the home found Kevin unresponsive. Emergency personnel were called one hour later. However, Kevin died before the paramedics arrived at the scene. Kevin is survived by his parents and a sibling.

Kevin’s parents, individually, and Kevin’s mother on his behalf, filed a lawsuit against the residential care facility. In the lawsuit it was alleged that the care facility had chosen not to administer a critical anti-seizure medication to Kevin and then lied to the family, stating that the facility had “done everything it could” to care for Kevin before his death.

The lawsuit also charged that the defendant residential care facility had failed to promptly call 911, lied to the police by telling them Kevin’s medical file was unavailable and failed to inform the police that Kevin had missed a dose of his critically important anti-seizure medicine.

Continue reading

by

Edward Fiala and his wife were residents of Bickford Senior Living Group. He was confined to a wheelchair and suffered from a disorder that affected his motor control and cognition. The healthcare power of attorney was held by Fiala and his children. The nursing home staff from the beginning of his residency were instructed that Fiala was not to get any medicine without their prior consent and that Paxil specifically was prohibited. These instructions were made apparent in Fiala’s nursing home medical chart.

In spite of that specific instruction, the nursing home staff members, who found Fiala difficult, administered Paxil and other medicines from time to time. There was no prior consent to allow it over the original instructions prohibiting it.

Fiala believed that the staff gave him medication to chemically sedate him to make him easier to work with. Sometimes, the drugs left him in a catatonic state. Other times the medicine caused him to be agitated and behave violently.

Continue reading

by

A new Illinois law related to nursing homes went into effect on Jan. 1, 2016. The law states, “A resident shall be permitted to conduct authorized electronic monitoring of the resident’s room through the use of electronic monitoring devices placed in the room pursuant to this act,” Section 10(a).

This new statute places ownership and control of the electronic monitoring process in the hands of the resident. “A resident choosing to conduct authorized electronic monitoring must do so at his or her expense, including paying purchase, installation, maintenance and removal costs,” Section 25.

Because of the authority of the Illinois Nursing Home Care Act, once a video recording is made in a resident’s room under this legislation, it is not permitted to be destroyed. Under the Nursing Home Care Act, “no person shall: Intentionally prevent or interfere with the preservation of evidence pertaining to any violation of this act or the rules promulgated under this act.” 210 ILCS 45/3-318(a)(4) (2015).

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court for the First District has affirmed in part and vacated in part a decision of the Circuit Court of Cook County. In January 2011, Robert Holman was a resident at a long-term care facility in Chicago called the Renaissance at Midway. On or near Jan. 22, 2011, he was assaulted by another resident of the long-term care facility. His left eye was injured, which severely impaired his vision.

Johnnie Stuckey, Holman’s sister, as well as his attorney, filed a complaint with the Illinois Department of Public Health. On April 13, 2012, the department report showed that Holman had been assaulted by his roommate who had “become physically aggressive toward staff and pushed staff on [a] bed” in early January. The roommate, identified only as John Doe, was described in the report as “severely demented.”

Stuckey sent several discovery requests seeking information about John Doe. The defendant, the Renaissance at Midway, refused to comply, arguing that the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) prevented Renaissance from responding to the discovery requests, which in addition to his name included requests for Doe’s address, criminal background and history in the facility as well as his medical charts.

Continue reading

by

The nursing home real estate trust investment company, Extended Care Real Estate Trust Investments, which operated 146 skilled nursing facilities in 11 states, was found to have over-billed Medicare and Medicaid, provided substandard and essentially worthless nursing care and put in place worthless rehabilitation therapy.

Two private citizens, including the entities’ area director of rehabilitation, brought separate whistleblower lawsuits under the federal False Claims Act on behalf of the United States and themselves. It was alleged that Extended Care bilked Medicare and Medicaid for nursing services that they didn’t provide or failed to meet federal and state standards in 33 of the skilled nursing homes in multiple states. These states included Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Ohio, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Washington.

The lawsuit alleged that Extended Care chose not to provide an adequate number of skilled nurses and sufficient catheter care and failed to prevent pressure ulcers or falls to its many residents.

Continue reading

by

A Kentucky Appellate Court has held that an admission agreement’s arbitration clause signed by the resident’s son at the time of her nursing home admission did not apply to the son’s subsequent wrongful death lawsuit against the nursing home and its operators.

John Cox III signed an agreement to admit his mother Elizabeth Cox to the Kindred Nursing Centers. The agreement included a clause, as do many nursing home agreements, authorizing arbitration of claims against the nursing homes. After Elizabeth died, her son brought a lawsuit against the nursing home and its operators claiming wrongful death and other claims of nursing home abuse and resulting damages.

The nursing home and its operators moved to compel arbitration. The trial judge granted the motion as to all claims except the plaintiff’s wrongful death action.

Continue reading

by

Eleanor Groeller died, allegedly because of the nursing home negligence of Evergreen Healthcare Center where she was a resident. Her son, William M. Groeller Jr., who was administrator of her estate, filed a negligence complaint against Evergreen Healthcare.

The trial was held in the Circuit Court of Cook County wherein Groeller’s counsel requested that the judge give a jury instruction on institutional negligence as to the nursing home. However, based upon testimony from Groeller’s nursing expert about the alleged failings of the nursing home’s nurses, the defendant nursing home requested an instruction to the jury on professional negligence. That instruction was designed to instruct the jury on the negligence of the nurses, not the nursing home as an institution.

The trial judge decided to give both of these jury instructions. The jury returned a verdict for the nursing home and Groeller appealed arguing that the instructions were contradictory.

 

Continue reading

by

In an odd but troubling state of the law, the Illinois Appellate Court uncovered a hole in the Illinois Nursing Home Care Act protecting nursing home residents. In this case, Marvin Gruby was a resident of Manorcare Health and Rehabilitation Services. He was given notice that the nursing home wanted to involuntarily transfer him or discharge him from its Highland Park, Ill., facility. The move to discharge him was based on the allegations that he endangered the safety and health of other residents.

He filed a lawsuit claiming that the Illinois Department of Public Health deprived him of his right to a hearing under the Illinois Nursing Home Care Act and the federal Nursing Home Reform Amendments (NHRA) and appealed from a circuit court order that dismissed his complaint for administrative review.

The Illinois Department of Public Health started a hearing on Gruby’s objections to his discharge from Manorcare. During the continuance, Gruby was briefly hospitalized for a minor surgical procedure. While he was in Northwestern Memorial Hospital, Manorcare declared it would not permit him to return to its nursing home. Then it withdrew the notice of involuntary discharge or transferring and asked the department to “close this file.”

Continue reading

by

Cynthia Jaurdon-Simmons underwent neck surgery and was referred to Southern Nursing Home Health for her home-based daily wound care and weekly assessments of her viral infection.

About two months into her care, Southern Nursing Home Health stopped providing services to Jaurdon-Simmons, but the staff did not advise her of this or provide the necessary self-care equipment.

As a result of the lack of care, Jaurdon-Simmons did not receive the wound care that she needed. She suffered continued medical problems; her infection worsened. She sued the home health care agency claiming damages related to her pain and suffering. Before trial, the case was settled for a total of $99,000.

Continue reading