Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

The first case to go to trial in the series of Cook County pharmaceutical negligence lawsuits against Baxter International received a $625,000 verdict against the pharmaceutical manufacturer. The Illinois lawsuit of Estate of Johansen v. Baxter International, Inc., et al., 09 L 11175, was filed after the plaintiff, Steven Johansen, died as a result of receiving contaminated Heparin distributed by the defense.

Hundreds of lawsuits have been filed against Deerfield-based Baxter International, Inc. and Scientific Protein Laboratories, its supplier, after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) discovered that the companies had been selling contaminated Heparin. The tainted Heparin was discovered to contain oversulfated chondroitin sulfate, which is a synthetic chemical created from animal cartilage that is typically distributed as a dietary supplement. According to tests run by the FDA, the false chemical mimics the real drug, Heparin.

However, not only does the oversulfated chondroitin sulfate not have the same blood thinning effects of Heparin, but can actually cause adverse reactions in patients taking it. The synthetic chemical has been found to cause vomiting, difficulty breathing, a drop in blood pressure, and other severe reactions. The plaintiff, Steven Johansen, first received low doses of the contaminated Heparin during dialysis treatment in December 2007, with no obvious reaction. However, Johansen later received a second, much higher dose of the contaminated Heparin, which resulted in his death five days later.

Continue reading

by

Four years ago, Microsoft was sued by a technology company for patent infringement. The Toronto-based company, i4i, won its patent lawsuit against the computer giant and were to receive a payment of $290 million for Microsoft’s wrongdoing. However, the payment by Microsoft had been held up by the appeals process Microsoft was engaged in to try and reverse the large settlement.

The Supreme Court recently issued its decision, affirming the lower court’s ruling in Microsoft Corp v. i4i Limited Partnership, 10-290. The main issue before the Court was the level of proof required. In patent lawsuits, courts assume that the patent, in this case held by i4i, is valid. Therefore, the burden of proof lies with the entity accused of violating that patent, which in this case is Microsoft.

The Canadian company, i4i, accused Microsoft of using technology developed by i4i when creating Word 2003 and Word 2007. Specifically, i4i stated that Microsoft has infringed on its patent setting out a new and improved method for editing documents. In the original jury trial, Microsoft was found guilty of willfully infringing on i4i’s patent and was ordered to pay $290 million to i4i and discontinue versions of Microsoft Word containing i4i’s technology.

Continue reading

by

Under Illinois workers’ compensation laws, an employee cannot file a civil lawsuit against his or her employer for an injury that occurs within one’s work duties. However, workers’ compensation laws do not protect other entities from liability for injuries that occur in the workplace.

In Timothy McDonald and Judith McDonald v. Imperial Zinc Corp., et al., No. 09 L 1581, the plaintiff truck driver sued a manufacturing company after one of its employee’s negligence caused plaintiff’s work place injury. At the time of the personal injury, Timothy McDonald was loading his truck with goods from Imperial Zinc Corporation.

McDonald was standing on the loading dock when a forklift operator employed by Imperial Zinc Corp. backed over McDonald’s right foot. As a result of the work place injury, McDonald sustained a fractured foot, skin was torn off of his right foot, and a tendon in his left knee was ruptured. Despite extensive medical treatment, McDonald was unable to return to his prior job as a truck driver after this work place injury.

Continue reading

by

As Chicago nears summer construction season, it becomes increasingly important for Chicago construction employees to practice good workplace safety. Unlike an office job, working construction provides numerous opportunities for accidents to occur. The Illinois personal injury lawsuit of James Zdanwic v. Gatwood Crane Service, Inc., 07 L 9570, is one such example.

In 2006, the plaintiff, James Zdanwic, was working as a tower technician for MDM construction. At the time of the Illinois construction site injury, Zdanwic was working on a job that involved retrofitting a cell tower in Medinah Illinois. The job required a crane, which was leased through Gatewood Crane Service, Inc.

While the Gatewood crane was being operated by a Gatewood Crane Service employee, Zdanwic was assisting the crane operator in the task of pulling out a 1,000 lb. jib. A jib crane is similar to a sailboat boom in that it swings from one side to the other. This 1,000 lbs. fell directly onto of the plaintiff, resulting in severe injuries. In fact, because of the severity of his injuries, Zdanwic has not been able to return to his position as a tower technician, although his employer was able to find him an alternative position as a construction project manager.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Supreme Court denied the Chicago Housing Authority’s motion to reverse a lower court’s $16.5 million verdict to a tenant who’d lived in a Chicago apartment with lead-based paint for several years in Donald Howell v. Chicago Housing Authority, No. 112321.

The Chicago personal injury lawsuit was brought by Latanya Turks on behalf of her son, Donald Howell, and alleged that the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) had used lead-based paint in the residence she rented. In addition, Turks alleged that as a result of living in an apartment with lead-based paint, her son suffered permanent mental and physical disabilities due to lead poisoning.

Ms. Turks was living in the apartment while she was pregnant with her son, Donald, and they remained in the same apartment for the next several years. During that time, the lead paint was peeling and cracking, making it even more dangerous. A few years after Donald was born he was diagnosed with lead poisoning based on elevated lead levels in his bloodstream.

Prior to the trial, the CHA admitted liability, acknowledging that the relevant apartment did in fact have lead-based paint and that Ms. Turks was unaware of its presence. Therefore, the jury was only required to decide whether there was a relationship between the lead-based paint and Howell’s injuries, and if so, how much money does the CHA owe Howell.

Continue reading

by

An Illinois Appellate Court was asked to evaluate whether a trial judge correctly adjusted a Cook County jury’s verdict in a Federal Employers Liability Act (FELA) lawsuit. The jury had originally reduced the plaintiff’s award by 40% for what it determined was his contributory negligence; however, the trial judge later ruled that contributory negligence did not apply because of the unique circumstances of the lawsuit. The appellate court agreed with the trial judge, backing up his decision to restore the original $500,000 verdict to the plaintiff in Harry Balough v. Northeast Illinois Regional Commuter Railroad Corporation, etc., No. 1-09-3053.

The original FELA lawsuit was brought after Balough, a locomotive driver, became injured in a Chicago rail yard. Balough was boarding an engine to prepare the trains for service when a trapdoor he was standing on gave way, hitting Balough on his head. Prior to stepping onto the trapdoor Balough testified that he had followed the railroad’s rules regarding trapdoor use by first giving the door a horizontal tug prior to boarding. Balough further testified that when he did so the latched seemed firmly latched.

Yet, the trapdoor still failed, causing Balough to require stitches to his head. In addition, shortly after returning to work after the train accident, Balough began suffering from blurred vision and migraine headaches. He continues to experience both of these symptoms on a regular basis and has since been removed from his position as a locomotive driver and placed on permanent disability.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Appellate Court clarified definitions of “next of kin” according to the Illinois Wrongful Death Act in its ruling on Judith Baez, etc. v. Garrett Rosenberg, et al., No. 1-10-0090. The appeal in Baez dealt with the allocation of funds from the settlement resulting from a fatal car crash.

In 2008, Rafael Marquez was killed in a Chicago car crash. He was unmarried and survived by his parents. However, within five months of his death, his girlfriend, Jesenia Laureano, gave birth to a baby girl; DNA tests proved that Marquez was the father.

Both Laureano and Marquez’s parents brought wrongful death claims against the defendant driver, which were consolidated into one claim in a Cook County court. A $100,000 settlement was reached with the driver’s insurance company, which was the amount of the policy’s limits.

The $100,000 was distributed among both Marquez’s parents and his daughter as follows:

-$27,426 went to Marquez’s parents for the loss of their son;
-$27,427 went to Marquez’s daughter for the loss of her father;
-$13,041 went to Marquez’s parents for reimbursement for funeral expenses;
-$22,222 went to the parents’ attorneys’ fees; and
-$9,120 went to the baby’s attorneys’ fees.

Continue reading

by

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) voted to allow Trilipix, a cholesterol lowering medication, to continue to be marketed as a drug that can prevent heart attacks. The approval comes despite government studies showing that there were no substantial changes in incidences of heart attacks in patients taking Trilipix in conjunction with other cholesterol lowering medications.

In addition to allowing Abbott to continue marketing Trilipix as reducing the risk of heart attacks despite evidence to the contrary, the FDA also voted against measures that would have forced the drug manufacturer to change the drug’s label to include disclaimers of the drug’s effectivenss.

The only stipulation the FDA imposed on Abbott was that it must conduct its own study on Trilipix’s effects on reducing heart attacks. Experts have suggested that this study could cost Abbott over $100 million to conduct. While this might seem like a large sum of money, it pales in comparison to the $1.6 billion that Abbott Laboratories made last year off sales of Trilipix and TriCor, another cholesterol lowering drug.

Continue reading

by

As lawyers, we often hear accounts of clients who sustained fairly severe injuries after being involved in a car accident, yet did not have any medical complaints immediately following the crash. This is the case for a pedestrian who suffered a brain injury after being hit by a SUV. Despite her lack of symptoms at the accident scene, a Cook County jury awarded the plaintiff $713,602.

At the time of the Illinois pedestrian-car accident, the plaintiff was walking across a Northbrook intersection when she was struck by a Lexus SUV. There were opposing accounts of what happened. While the defendant driver stated that she was only traveling at one to two miles-per-hour at the time of impact, the plaintiff alleged that the impact was more severe. Also, while the defendant claimed that she merely bumped into the plaintiff, the plaintiff claimed that the impact was so severe that it caused her head to bounce of the defendant’s hood as she was thrown a few feet away.

However, both parties agree that the plaintiff refused medical treatment at the accident scene and did not immediately go to a hospital. Instead, the plaintiff continued on her way, even going out to dinner that night. In fact, it was at dinner that she began to experience some abnormal neurological symptoms.

Continue reading

by

A second jury verdict has been entered in a wrongful death lawsuit arising out of a Chicago construction site injury that occurred in 2006. The decedent, Charles Ingolia, had been assisting with renovations being made at a Chicago Brown Line El station located at 3360 N. Clark St. The 57 year-old was severely burned in an electrical explosion at the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA)’s substation and died of his injuries three days later. He was survived by his wife and four adult children.

A Chicago jury decided that negligence on behalf of Target Electric, Inc., the company overseeing the electrical components of the renovations, had contributed to Mr. Ingolia’s death and entered a jury verdict of $4.1 million in The Estate of Charles Ingolia v. Target Electric, Inc., 06 L 13106. A previous verdict of $6.3 million had been entered in a wrongful death case filed by Mr. Ingolia’s family against the CTA; Estate of Charles R. Ingolia v. CTA, et al., 06 L 013106.

Immediately prior to the electrical explosion, Mr. Ingolia had been cleaning a new switchgear cabinet as part of the modifications to the CTA’s Brown Line rectifier system. According to the Illinois wrongful death complaint, Ingolia believed that the cabinet’s power was off, which influenced his decision to raise his protective shield. When he did so, he essentially exposed himself to 12,600 volts of live electricity, which in turn caused the electrical explosion.

Continue reading