Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

Cook County appealed an order entered by the Circuit Court judge that struck, dismissed and extinguished a hospital lien arising under the Healthcare Services and Lien Act (Act) (770 ILCS 23/1 et seq.) for services rendered to the plaintiff, minor child Akeem Manago, by Stroger Cook County Hospital.

On appeal, the county argued that the Circuit Court judge’s decision was wrong in extinguishing the lien, arguing (1) it was not required to intervene in plaintiff’s personal injury action against defendants Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) and H.J. Russell & Company, (2) a hospital lien may be enforced against a minor, and (3) the hospital lien may attach to a judgment but does not include an award of damages for medical expenses. The appeals panel’s decision relied in part on the fact that Akeem’s parent, April Pritchett, did not assign her cause of action for medical expenses to the injured minor plaintiff and thus the county does not have a lien under the act.

The underlying case arose out of injuries that Akeem sustained on Aug. 5, 2005 while he was a minor. The hospital (Stroger Cook County Hospital) provided care and treatment to Akeem for these injuries on various dates from August 2005 through September 2010. The hospital filed a notice of lien against the plaintiff for unpaid hospital bills on Aug. 10, 2009. The notice of lien was forwarded to the attorney for the plaintiff by certified mail. The enforceability of the lien against a judgment entered by the Circuit Court in the plaintiff’s underlying personal injury lawsuit is the subject of the appeal.

Continue reading

by

A Champaign County, Ill., jury entered a $9.87 million verdict for severe injuries suffered by Patricia Marxmiller.  Marxmiller, 59, worked for a medical clinic in downtown Champaign. After returning to work at the end of her lunch hour, she parked her car in a lot at the corner of an intersection. She walked to the corner and began crossing in the marked crosswalk. At about the same time, the Champaign-Urban Mass Transit District (MTD) bus began entering the intersection from the cross street. When she had walked about halfway through the intersection, the bus turned right and hit her.

Marxmiller suffered severe injuries to both legs. She was admitted to a nearby hospital in critical condition and underwent surgery to amputate her left leg above the knee. She spent a month and a half in the hospital and endured extreme physical and psychological pain. When the doctors advised her that in order to save her right leg, she would likely face serious complications and no guarantee that the multiple surgeries would be successful, instead, Marxmiller opted to have the left leg amputated below the knee. Her past medical expenses totaled $666,600.

Before this horrendous incident, Marxmiller enjoyed her job, walking on a daily basis for exercise and playing with her grandchildren. She is now only able to walk short distances with the use of prosthetics and a walker and often uses a wheelchair. She has left her job with the clinic where she was working. Marxmiller often has periods of deep depression because of the physical and psychological limitations she now endures.

Continue reading

by

Kathleen Waldeck was driving a car that was alleged to have rear-ended the car of the plaintiff, Andice Peacock, causing her injuries. Peacock had alleged that her car was rear-ended by Waldeck while waiting for a stoplight to turn green.

The lawsuit alleged that Peacock’s vehicle was stopped at a red light when the collision occurred, and “there were no visual obstructions to block defendant’s view of plaintiff’s vehicle.”  In the Waldeck answer, she admitted her car rear-ended Peacock’s vehicle and that her view was not obstructed.  In the meantime, before bringing this summary judgment motion, Waldeck passed away.  Her representative of the estate, Barton Waldeck, argued that the Dead-Man’s Act barred Peacock from testifying about this car crash.

A DuPage County, Ill., circuit court judge granted the motion for summary judgment in favor of the Estate of Kathleen Waldeck. Peacock appealed.

Continue reading

by

Across the country there have been many lawsuits filed against the makers and distributors of talc. Most of these suits have been filed against Johnson & Johnson as the maker of the baby powder used by many. In some courts, there have been very large jury verdicts for individuals who have been able to prove that the use of the baby powder caused ovarian cancer.

In this New Jersey consolidated case, two plaintiffs alleged that the talc-based product manufactured by the defendant had caused each of them to develop ovarian cancer. The issue for the court to decide here was whether the plaintiffs had shown that their experts’ theories of causation were “sufficiently reliable as being based on a sound, adequately founded scientific methodology, to wit, that they [were] based upon methods which experts in their field would reasonably rely in forming their own . . . opinions about the cause(s) of each of plaintiffs’ ovarian cancers.”

The court was ruling on the defendants’ motion to bar testimony of each of the plaintiff’s several expert witnesses. Along with the motions to bar, the defendants also filed motions for summary judgment anticipating his successful motion to bar the experts’ testimony. The motions were received by the court at a plenary hearing conducted pursuant to the standards articulated in a New Jersey case. Continue reading

by

The Illinois Supreme Court has ruled that the Union Pacific Railroad Co. did not maintain control over a bridge demolition project after selling the bridge to a scrap contractor. During work on the demolition, a bridge wall severed Patrick Joseph Carney’s legs below the knee. The accident occurred more than ten years ago.

In a 6-1 decision, the high court ruled the railroad was not negligent in selecting the contractor, Happ Inc., in Chicago Heights, Ill. The court also ruled that the railroad did not definitively know about the location of a steel plate that was part of what caused the injuries to Carney because the bridge was built in the early 20th century, and it was not in use when the company bought it.

This Illinois Supreme Court’s decision affirmed the ruling by a Cook County circuit court judge who initially granted summary judgment for the railroad before reversing the decision twice after each party moved for reconsideration. The Supreme Court’s decision reinstated summary judgment for the railroad.

Continue reading

by

By July 1, 2017, e-filing of civil cases in Illinois will be mandatory for the Illinois Supreme Court and Illinois Appellate Courts. Beginning Jan. 1, 2018, e-filing of civil cases will be mandated for all Illinois courts.

The Illinois Supreme Court entered an order this year, M.R.18368, which set the timeline for mandatory e-filings statewide. A unified e-filing system is designed to increase court efficiency and streamline the litigation process for lawyers and pro se litigants.

The Administrative Office of the Illinois Courts (AOIC) has hired Texas-based Tyler Technologies to roll out a centralized, statewide e-filing system. The Tyler Technologies’ platform is currently being used in 19 states.

Continue reading

by

In this case, the quarrel was over setoffs for settlements that totaled $395,000 paid by two under-insured motorists who were claimed to have caused a crash that seriously injured Erin Tufano. Tufano was insured under an Illinois Emcasco Insurance Co. policy that provided $500,000 in under-insured motorist coverage (UIM).  A Cook County judge agreed with the insurance company’s argument that it owed only $105,000 based on the policy’s plain language.

The two insurance companies that insured the tortfeasors offered their policy limits ($100,000 and $295,000).  The Emcasco policy said the limit of liability for the UIM coverage “shall be reduced by all sums paid because of the ‘bodily injury’ by or on behalf of persons or organizations who may be legally responsible.”

By arguing that “all sums paid” provision of the insurance policy, Emcasco persuaded the trial judge that Tufano was entitled to receive only $105,000 in UIM benefits (a single $500,000 – $395,000).

Continue reading

by

Richard Black worked for a hospital’s housekeeping staff.  He went to the loading dock to throw away trash into a dumpster.  Richard Cea, an employee of Royal Carting Service Co., had just delivered the dumpster.  It was still attached to the back of his truck.

As Black was throwing trash in the dumpster while standing with one foot on the loading dock and the other on the edge of the dumpster, Cea suddenly moved his truck. The dumpster moved away from the dock and Black fell. Cea then reversed the truck, causing the dumpster to hit Black’s left knee.

Black, 55, suffered a fractured distal femur. The femur bone is the largest bone in the human body. It is also known as the thigh bone. Black underwent open reduction and internal fixation followed by extensive physical therapy. The non-union of the femur necessitated revision surgery and the application of a bone graft. Black underwent additional physical therapy but later developed arthritis in his knee, and that required a total knee replacement.

Continue reading

by

On Sunday, Aug. 21, 2011, at 4:45 a.m., 22-year-old Patrycja Wysckowska fell 30 feet to her death after trying to navigate an outside ladder on the third-floor rear porch of an apartment building at 4310 N. Sheridan Road in Chicago.

The apartment complex is known as Park Shores and was owned and managed by the defendants, American Heritage Investment II and Group Fox Inc. The woman had reportedly had been attending a party at the building and was trying to climb up to the roof. She was survived by her parents and two siblings.

Her family filed this wrongful death lawsuit against these defendants contending that the ladder was unsafe and one of the rungs snapped while she was on the ladder causing her to fall.

Continue reading

by

Vanity Mack was injured in 2010 and submitted an under-insured motorist claim to Allstate Insurance Co. In addition to the claim, Mack filed a demand for arbitration under the rules of the Federal Arbitration Act.

In December 2010, Allstate informed Mack that she was required to execute the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) authorizations as well as appear for an oral examination under oath.

These requirements were covered under Allstate’s insurance policy. Mack did not complete the HIPAA authorizations, and she did not appear for her oral examination despite multiple requests for her to do so. Continue reading