Trial Results

Our team of highly-skilled litigators and support staff knows what it takes to prepare, strategize, and execute the best possible defense in the toughest of cases, especially those that involve highly complex medical facts. With our firm on your side, your odds of success immediately increase. Below is a small sampling of trials that the firm has successfully litigated for our valued clients.

CLIENT: GENERAL SURGEON
TRIAL ATTORNEYS: MARY M. CUNNINGHAM / MELISSA Y. GHANDI
RESULT: VERDICT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDANT

In February of 2023, KBHG attorneys Mary Cunningham and Melissa Y. Ghandi obtained a defense verdict in Cook County. The plaintiff alleged that the firm's general surgeon client failed to diagnose Compartment Syndrome in the patient's upper extremity after a contrast extravasation. The plaintiff also alleged that the failure to diagnose the Compartment Syndrome caused chronic pain and Complex Regional Pain Syndrome. The defense presented evidence that the surgeon complied with the standard of care, that compartment syndrome did not exist at the time that he evaluated the patient, and that the cause of the CRPS was multifactorial. The jury returned its unanimous verdict in just under an hour.

CLIENT: OBSTETRICIAN/GYNECOLOGIST
TRIAL ATTORNEYS: MARY M. CUNNINGHAM / KATHERINE M. KELLEHER
RESULT: VERDICT IN FAVOR OF DEFENDAN

In July 2022, KBHG attorneys Mary Cunningham and Katherine Kelleher obtained a defense verdict in a medical malpractice case on behalf of their OB/GYN client in DuPage County, Illinois. Plaintiffs argued that the doctor failed to properly diagnose a fourth degree perineal laceration upon childbirth, failed to timely and adequately repair it, and failed to order antibiotics upon completion of the repair. The defense presented evidence that the repair was appropriately diagnosed as a third degree perineal laceration, that the doctor's repair was within the standard of care, and that antibiotics were not recommended for this patient. The defense also presented evidence that the doctor's repair did not cause any of Plaintiff's alleged damages, but that the alleged damages were a normal consequence of the natural rigors of childbirth. Plaintiffs asked for over $23 million, which included a loss of consortium claim. The jury deliberated for less than two hours before finding in favor of the doctor.

Client: Infectious Disease Physician
Trial Attorneys: Amy L. Garland / Laura J. Young
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: Plaintiff was a female who had made various complaints, including redness and pain, relating to her right eye for a number of years to various doctors throughout Chicago. After about 10 years of symptoms, an ophthalmologist performed a PPD, which is a blood test for tuberculosis. In light of the fact that it came back positive, and that she had a history which included exposure to tuberculosis, her primary care physician referred Plaintiff to our Defendant, an infectious disease physician. Plaintiff presented on a Friday afternoon. After spending two (2) hours with her, Defendant instructed her to return on Tuesday so that he could discuss her case with her treating physicians who were familiar with her eye conditions and history and who specialized in ocular TB. Defendant was also very interested in obtaining a culture so that he could guide the TB therapy, which is quite toxic. Plaintiff, in fact, did not return for 32 days. All witnesses agreed that by the time she returned, it was too late to salvage her eye. In the meantime, Plaintiff sought out the care of another ID physician at UIC, who also did not start treatment and who set forth a treatment plan identical to Defendant. Plaintiff’s right eye was enucleated about 5 months later. Plaintiff’s witnesses argued that Defendant should have called in the prescription when Plaintiff did not return and that the 10 years of symptoms Plaintiff sustained before treating with our doctor were other rare conditions, unrelated to her ocular TB. Defendant’s witnesses argued that these medications could not be called in and that Plaintiff had an obligation to come in to seek treatment. Defendants further argued that all of her eye complaints were because of her ocular TB. The jury deliberated for one (1) hour and 45 minutes before returning with a verdict of Not Guilty.

Client: obstetrician/gynecologist
trial attorneys: mary m. cunningham / Lisa m. Green
Result: Not guilty

Synopsis: The plaintiffs, husband and wife, sought the defendant obstetrician/gynecologist consultation for painful and heavy periods and painful intercourse. Ultrasounds revealed large uterine fibroids and minimally invasive surgery was decided, after significant informed consent. Notably, the patient, 45 years of age, had four previous caesarean sections, tubal ligation, a tubal ligation reversal, and an abdominoplasty. The couple was concerned about the potential for a large incision, but the couple acknowledged the potential for an open procedure. A minimally invasive robotic surgery was planned. However, after trocar placement approximately four centimeters above the umbilicus to accommodate for the patient’s anatomy and tummy tuck, adhesed multiple dense adhesions were found in the pelvis. As a result, the procedure was converted to an open with a Pfannenstiel incision, and a tedious hysterectomy was performed. Postoperatively the patient did well until postoperative day two at which time she complained of significant abdominal pain and demonstrated distention. General surgery was contacted and a bowel perforation was found in a single isolated loop of bowel adhesed to the upper anterior wall at the site of the trocar incision at the umbilicus. A bowel resection was performed, but because of the nature of edema of the bowel, it was left in discontinuity until a third surgery occurred to reattach the bowel. The surgeon was unable to close the abdomen based on the patient’s previous tummy tuck and used mesh for closure. She has since been diagnosed with a hernia. The plaintiff claimed that the obstetrician/gynecologist should have used the Hassan approach which would have avoided the through and through bowel perforation. While the plaintiff did not allege that it was a deviation to create the perforation, it was a deviation to fail to recognize it intraoperatively. The defense contended that the Hassan approach was not standard of care, and in gynecological surgeries, up to 40 percent of bowel perforations go unrecognized. This particular surgery it was unique in that only a single and isolated loop of bowel was adhesed to the abdominal wall which would not have been detectable with the optical trocar used at the time. Failing to detect an intraoperative injury is not a deviation from the standard of care. After a week and half on trial the verdict was Not Guilty. The plaintiffs’ Post Trial Motion seeking a new trial was denied, and the plaintiffs did not file an appeal.

Client: Emergency Medicine Physician
Trial Attorneys: Mary M. Cunningham / Lisa M. Green
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: Patient was a 73 year old male who had tied his 20 foot ladder to a tree and was on the ladder 10 feet using a pole to trim trees when he fell. He was taken to the emergency room with a primary complaint of right hip pain. His abdomen was soft and without detectable tenderness. He had a history of previous CABG and hypertension. Hip and pelvis x-rays and pain medication were ordered. On re-assessment, patient’s pain was more posterior right hip, radiating to his leg. A lumbar spine series was ordered and revealed compression fractures at L2 and L4. Based on the patient’s pain level, as well as his fractures he was admitted to the hospital and an orthopaedic consult was requested. At the same time, the Department of Radiology suggested a CT of the right hip for further evaluation of whether there was a hip fracture. The CT noted soft tissue infiltration of the fat within the visualized retroperitoneum. A non-urgent CT of the abdomen and pelvis was recommended. On admission, the patient was seen by two orthopaedic surgeons and a primary care physician over two days. On the third day, the patient had a sudden change of vitals and coded and died. On autopsy, the coroner found 1800 milliliters of liquid and clotted dark red blood. The plaintiff claimed that the emergency medicine physician failed to detect an abdominal bleed clinically, failed to order a stat CT of the abdomen and pelvis, and failed to classify the patient as a trauma patient. The radiologist was accused of failing to detect bleeding in the abdomen on the CT of the hip, and failed to recommend a stat CT of the abdomen and pelvis. The defendants contended that at no time did the patient ever manifest any clinical signs or symptoms in the ED, or at any time, of an abdominal bleed, given normal abdominal exams as well as normal vital signs throughout. Rather, the patient likely had an acute bleed, possibly caused by CPR necessitated by a fatal arrythemia. After closing statements, the plaintiff entered into a high/low on behalf of both defendants.

Client: Internal Medicine Physician
Trial Attorneys: Thomas M. Harvick / Michael R. Webber
Result: Verdict in Favor of Defendant

Synopsis: The patient was a 53 year old male with an extensive medical history, including recurrent cerebral vascular accident with right hemiparesis, AV fistula placement, end stage renal disease on hemodialysis, and placement of a ventricular shunt. The Defendant had been his Primary Care Physician since 2004. The patient was admitted to the hospital under Defendant’s care on January 11, 2006, following an apparent seizure at home. Upon admission, Dilantin was administered for seizure control. Plaintiff claimed that the patient had a known history of allergy to Dilantin, supported solely by testimony of the patient’s mother. Plaintiff contended that the Defendant failed to take a history from the patient’s mother, which would have revealed a history of rash with the administration of Dilantin. On January 15, 2006 the patient developed a rash on his right forearm. Plaintiff contended that Defendant failed to immediately discontinue Dilantin once the rash was noted, allowing one additional dose of Dilantin to be administered, increasing the likelihood of an allergic reaction. Plaintiff contended that the rash was the initial presentation of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome (SJS), which was suppressed/masked by the administration of steroids, which were utilized to control any possible inflammatory response. The patient’s rash appeared to improve through the remainder of his hospitalization; however, on January 19, his neurological condition rapidly deteriorated and he was transferred that day to Cook County Hospital (CCH) for neurologic care which could not be provided at the admitting hospital. The transfer admission note at CCH documented no issues related to skin integrity. On January 25, skin disruptions were first noted at CCH. This was ultimately diagnosed as Toxic Epidural Necrolysis (TEN), a condition which caused over 50% of the patient’s skin to slough off. The patient remained obtunded until he died on February 1, 2006. The defense contended that there was no documented prior adverse reaction to Dilantin and an appropriate history was obtained; that the patient had received Dilantin without adverse reaction on prior occasions; that the administration of Dilantin was appropriate under the circumstances; that Dilantin was appropriately discontinued on a timely basis upon appearance of a characteristic drug rash, and steroids were administered to reduce inflammation. The defense further contended that the patient’s SJS/TEN was caused by medications administered at CCH, including medications which were the documented cause of prior adverse reactions.

Client: Internal Medicine Physician
Trial Attorneys: Thomas M. Harvick / Michael R. Webber
Result: Verdict in Favor of Defendant

Client: Internal Medicine Physician / Internal Bleeding
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Amy L. Garland
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: Patient was admitted to the hospital on 12/10/2009 in respiratory distress. After several days in ICU, she as transferred to stepdown and started on Lovenox for A-fib. On 12/18/2006, Coumadin bridging started. On 12/19/2009, patient became hypotensive with a 3-4 gm drop in hemoglobin. The patient was seen by several physicians before the attending arrived. On his arrival, he ordered a repeat hemoglobin, CT scan, and other studies. After the repeat hemoglobin showed continued anemia, the attending ordered transfusion and subsequently FFP and Vitamin K to reverse the anticoagulation. Once the CT scan was completed, later that afternoon, showing a rectus sheath hematoma and possible hemoperitoneum, the attending ordered a surgical consultation, who denied being contacted. Despite aggressive resuscitation, the patient died on 12/20/2009. Plaintiff claimed that the attending should have commenced resuscitation with FFP sooner and in greater amounts and called for a surgical consultation earlier. Plaintiff also claimed that if the surgeon had been contacted, he should have come to the hospital to evaluate the patient for surgery. The attending contended that upon his arrival it was appropriate to repeat the hemoglobin, and after the results were available, he entered orders for transfusion and shortly thereafter entered further orders to give FFP and Vitamin K to reverse the anticoagulation of the Coumadin and Lovenox. The defense contended that a surgical consultation was not necessary until the CT results were available. While the surgeon contended he was not called, he testified that even had he been notified, he would have advised continued medical management as the patient was hemodynamically unstable without clear evidence of the source of bleeding. Both defendants claimed that the patient died from complications of her anticoagulation (which was necessary) due to her A-fib.

Client: Lithotripsy Facility
Trial Attorneys: Thomas M. Harvick / Erin Davis
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: The patient was a 72 year-old-male presenting for the second session of lithotripsy for treatment of his kidney stones. His first session, performed several weeks earlier, had gone smoothly. He had an AICD/pacemaker implanted which, according to the recommendations of the manufacturer of the device, was to be disabled during the procedure and then turned back on once the procedure was completed. The device manufacturer sent a representative to the facility to disable and re-enable the device before and after the procedure. The patient’s device was deactivated and the procedure was started. Nearing the end of the procedure, the defendant Anesthesiologist (an alleged apparent agent of the defendant lithotripsy facility) noticed that the patient was becoming bradycardic and hypotensive. The procedure was halted and ACLS protocol was initiated. The patient was successfully resuscitated and sent to the adjacent hospital. The patient remained hospitalized for approximately 2 months, after which he expired due to pneumonia. Plaintiff contended that the AICD/pacemaker should have not been deactivated by programming, but rather by placement of a magnet over the top of it so that the magnet could have been removed and the AICD device could have immediately defibrillated the patient. Plaintiff further contended that the “code blue” was not properly conducted by the defendant Anesthesiologist. Plaintiff was barred from presenting any evidence of direct negligence by the defendant lithotripsy facility after pre-trial motions. The defendant contended that deactivating the device was the standard of care and that the “code blue” was conducted in an appropriate manner. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty after less than two hours of deliberation.

Client: Family Practitioner
Trial Attorneys: Thomas M. Harvick / Erin Davis
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: The patient was an adolescent male with cognitive defects who presented to his regular Family Practitioner’s office following a laceration to the palm of his hand. The patient’s hand had been treated by an Emergency Medicine physician on the date of the laceration, and then evaluated in follow up three days later by the defendant physician’s partner, neither of whom were defendants in the case. The defendant was accused of failing to diagnose a transection of the ulnar nerve and/or failing to refer the patient to a hand surgeon. The patient presented to the defendant’s offices again about four weeks later, with obvious signs of injury to the ulnar nerve. He was immediately referred out to an appropriate surgeon, who did not perform surgery for six more weeks. The surgery that was ultimately performed was a neuroma removal from the ulnar nerve. The treating hand surgeon could not say whether the nerve had, in fact, been transected at the time of the original laceration, or whether it had merely been injured resulting in the growth of a neuroma on the nerve which had caused the deficits. Plaintiff contented that the defendant did not properly examine the patient’s hand, did not properly document his examination, and did not diagnose the injury. The defendants’ responded that the proper examination was performed, that this type of injury is subtle under the best of circumstances, and that the nerve was at least partially functioning until the growth of the neuroma. The jury returned a not guilty verdict after less than half a day of deliberation.

Client: Boat Owner/Captain
Trial Attorneys: Thomas M. Harvick / Erin Davis
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: Defendant boat owner/captain took three friends on a water tube which was designed and intended for three riders. In going over a wake, two of the riders were thrown from the tube, at least one of which made contact with the third rider, who remained on the tube. The plaintiff, the third rider, sustained a broken neck, which was repaired with surgery with no lasting injury. The plaintiff contented that the boat operator was driving too fast, turning too sharply, and that the tube was underinflated at the time of the injury. The defendant contended that he was operating the boat in a safe manner, that the plaintiff chose to engage in a dangerous recreational activity, that the tube was owned by a third party who was responsible for inflation, and that it was in fact properly inflated. The jury returned a not guilty verdict after 90 minutes of deliberation

Client: Surgeon
Trial Attorneys: Thomas M. Harvick / Laura J. Young
Result: Verdict in favor of Defendant

Synopsis: On November 19, 2002, Plaintiff underwent a gastric bypass procedure (roux-en-y) performed by Defendant. At the time of the surgery, Plaintiff was morbidly obese (over 400 pounds), diabetic, and had a permanent tracheostomy due to profound sleep apnea. Initially after the procedure, Plaintiff did well, but shortly thereafter began experiencing respiratory distress. A subsequent procedure was performed on November 22, 2002. The performance of these surgeries is not at issue. Plaintiff had a long, difficult recovery, complicated by renal failure (requiring dialysis), cardiac, and respiratory issues. During this recovery, Plaintiff developed a Stage IV ulcer on his sacrum. He died two years later of unrelated causes. He had been placed on a low pressure loss mattress from the beginning of his hospitalization and a rotating bed since November 22, 2002. Plaintiff alleged the rotating bed should have been ordered earlier and the nurses should have turned Plaintiff on a more frequent basis. Defendants denied all negligence. Defendant testified that pressure ulcers form from within the body, that this orders were appropriate and timely, and that he treated the ulcer appropriately with enzymatic, then sharp, debridement. Nurses testified that they complied with all orders and that he was being turned appropriately.

Client: General Surgeon
Trial Attorneys: Thomas M. Harvick / Lisa M. Green
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: Plaintiff, surviving adult daughter of 60 year old black female, claimed a failure to diagnose and repair a duodenal injury which apparently occurred during a urologic procedure in which Defendant General Surgeon served as an assistant. The hole or enterotomy was discovered 6 days after the initial surgery when the patient became septic. She was re-operated 4 more times by another surgeon who washed out the abdomen and repaired the intestinal damage before she passed away 7 weeks later from multi-organ failure and sepsis. She was survived by 5 adult children in the Wrongful Death claim. The urologic surgeon and the hospital had settled out of the case prior to trial. The settlement prompted a Motion for Summary Judgment asserting res judicata because the defendant was the agent of the urologic surgeon and a settlement with a principal bars an action against the agent. The trial judge concluded that the question of agency was a factual one for the jury and allowed a special interrogatory which the jury answered in the negative. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty as to our client, the only defendant at trial.

Client: Pain Management Anesthesiologist
Trial Attorneys: Lisa M. Green / Laura J. Young
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: Plaintiff was a 53 year-old-woman with a long history of chronic back pain and opioid dependency who sought treatment from defendant after having been dismissed by another local pain management practice. Defendant prescribed OxyContin and Norco as well as interventional pain procedures for purposes of pain relief. The patient immediately began taking more medication than prescribed by defendant while refusing to undergo any of the interventional procedures proposed by Defendant. Within 8 months, plaintiff was taking 280 milligrams of OxyContin and 10 Norco every day prescribed by the defendant. The defendant dismissed her from his practice with instructions to seek treatment with other pain management physicians. Instead, plaintiff experienced withdrawal symptoms which resulted in a 4 day inpatient stay in detox. Plaintiff claimed that the defendant had overprescribed and mismanaged her medications in a way that caused her to become addicted and then abandoned her to suffer withdrawal. She claimed ongoing depression. The defense was able to show that the plaintiff had failed consistently to follow her doctors’ advice on using narcotics for years by testimony of the defendant and five pain management doctors who had treated the patient before and after the defendant. The defense was able to cast doubt as to whether her depression could be attributed to her specific treatment with the defendant as opposed to other physicians who had dismissed her from their practices for misuse of narcotics or her long time chronic pain. The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty as to our client, the only defendant, after 11 hours of deliberation.

Client: Surgeon
Trial Attorneys: Mary M. Cunningham / Lisa Green
Result: Not Guilty

Synopsis: The patient was a 46 year old ICU Unit Secretary at a local hospital who had a history of laparoscopic duodenal switch/gastric bypass, complicated by dense adhesions. Three years later, she approached Defendant Surgeon, seeking a laparoscopic incisional hernia repair. Defendant Surgeon examined the patient on May 14, 2008 finding a palpable incisional hernia, which he described as small but symptomatic. He advised her of the risks, complications and alternatives to the procedure. She presented for surgery on June 12th at the hospital and Defendant Surgeon performed a laparoscopic adhesiolysis with a mesh hernia repair. During the procedure, he found two areas of injury to the serosa of the bowel and repaired them laparoscopically. The patient did well until June 13th in the evening when she complained of increased pain and on the morning of June 14th, she complained about significant chest pain. She was seen by cardiologists the next morning and the on-call surgeon for further work-up. The on-call surgeon took the patient back to the OR in the afternoon of June 14th, where he noted at least two enterotomies. He felt that he may have created one of the enterotomies himself, and noted that the bowel was thin and attenuated. The patient continued to do poorly with septic shock, metabolic acidosis, and cardiac failure and died on June 16th. On autopsy, the exam of the bowel noted that the repairs made by both surgeons were intact, but the patient had two additional perforations of the bowel. The plaintiff’s expert testified that Defendant Surgeon was negligent in failing to adequately inform the patient of the risks and complications associated with the procedure, which included bowel injury. He also alleged that Defendant Surgeon was negligent in failing to inspect the areas of repair prior to closure, thus missing an enterotomy. The defense argued that Defendant Surgeon complied with the standard of care in his informed consent and in his surgery. Specifically, they argued that he inspected his area of repair as outlined by his operative report. He further defended his case by presenting evidence that missed enterotomy is a known complication of a laparoscopic hernia repair. He further used his expert to provide testimony that the nature of the previous abdominal surgery, the duodenal switch, is notorious for creating malabsorption of the bowel and therefore a level of malnutrition which prevented the patient from mounting a defense to the trauma of enterotomy. Finally, both the plaintiff’s expert and defense expert agreed that two additional enterotomies found on autopsy spontaneously occurred after the second procedure, and the defense argued that these additional enterotomies caused and contributed to the patient’s death. Post Trial Motion is pending.

Client: Neurosurgeon
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Erin Davis
Result: Hung Jury

Synopsis: Plaintiff a 45 year old male presented to the hospital in August 2003 with uncontrolled diabetes. He also had some visual disturbances. He was treated for his diabetes and released. Over several days he noticed gradual visual loss in his left eye. The visual loss progressed to the point where he could only count fingers. This was associated with severe headaches. He re-presented to the hospital and upon admission he was functionally blind in his left eye. Radiology studies confirmed a massive pituitary tumor (prolactinoma) at the optic chiasm eroding the sella and suprasellar bone with extension of the tumor into the cavernous sinus. Neurosurgery (our client) saw him the evening of admission, appreciated the radiological studies and ordered an MRI. He elected not to perform surgery since the optic nerve was likely permanently damaged and medical treatment (bromocriptine) could be used to shrink the tumor. The MRI was ordered to appreciate the extent of the tumor and define whether there was extension affecting the right eye. Other consults were ordered and medical therapy was commenced. Thirty six hours later, the patient began to experience visual loss in the right eye. Surgery was recommended, but refused as the patient desired transfer to another institution where trans-sphenoidal surgery was performed removing most of the tumor (saving the right eye vision). His left eye remained without vision. Plaintiff claimed that surgery should have been performed within 24 hours of admission which would have saved vision in the left eye. Defendant(s) contended that the vision in the left eye was not salvageable upon admission; that medical therapy was appropriate and that surgery was indicated only when vision in the right eye became affected. The jury was deadlocked almost immediately. After several “shotgun” instructions the jury was dismissed and a mistrial declared.

Client: Pulmonologist
Trial Attorneys: Thomas Harvick / Erin Davis
Result: Verdict for Defendant Pulomonologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff, a 52 year old morbidly obese, diabetic male with a history of hypertension and high cholesterol, presented to hospital on April 9, 2005 with complaints of chest pain radiating towards the back. Over the next three days, the patient complained of varying levels of pain throughout his body, including shoulder, arm, leg, back, and chest. He was also experiencing fever. The patient was diagnosed with rhabdomyolysis based on his severe muscle aches and significantly elevated CPK levels. On April 12, 2005, Defendant Pulmonologist was consulted in response to a chest x-ray showing pulmonary infiltrates and pleural effusions. The patient was diagnosed with atypical community acquired pneumonia. Levaquin, initiated the day before by the attending family practitioner, was continued as an empiric antibiotic. The patient’s fever resolved, as did all pains, and on April 15, 2005, he was discharged with no complaints. The Plaintiff continued to follow with his family practitioner on an outpatient basis, though did not follow up with Defendant Pulmonologist, and began to complain of back pain and a new lack of bowel movements on or about April 21, 2005. On April 27, 2005, he was readmitted the hospital via ambulance after losing sensation from the nipples down. He was ultimately diagnosed with epidural and paraspinal abscesses and is a paraplegic. Plaintiff contended that Defendant Pulmonologist should have investigated the pleural effusions visible on the April 11, 2005 x-ray with a spinal film. Plaintiff unsuccessfully attempted to introduce medical literature case studies standing for the proposition that pleural effusions can be the result of a spinal infection. Plaintiff contended that Defendant Pulmonologist should have considered the patient’s complaints of back pain along with the pleural effusions and ordered back radiographs. Defendant Pulmonologist testified that the patient had never made any complaints of back pain to him and that if the patient was experiencing back pain, investigating its causes and treating it would not be the responsibility of a Pulmonologist. He also contended through expert testimony that the patient was not suffering from a spinal abscess during the April 9, 2005 admission and that the patient’s community acquired pneumonia was appropriately diagnosed and successfully treated with antibiotic therapy. Plaintiff asked the jury to award $11.6 -11.9 million against the four Defendants. The jury found against two of the four defendants and awarded a verdict of $4.76 million, while finding in favor of the Defendant Pulmonologist.

Client: Physician/Internist
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Laura Young
Result: Verdict in favor of Defendants

Synopsis: Plaintiff’s decedent was a 69 year old male who had been hospitalized following a syncopal episode at his home. Upon his admission to the hospital, there was evidence that the patient potentially was suffering from pneumonia, a urinary tract infection, and C. difficile. The patient was stabilized in the Emergency Department and he was subsequently admitted to the general floor under the care of the Defendant attending physician. During the early morning hours the following day, the patient had episodes of low blood pressure. Subsequently, he was evaluated by the Co-Defendant, a first year resident intern. At 8:00 a.m., the Co-Defendant ordered a fluid bolus for the patient. At approximately 10:00 a.m., the Defendant evaluated the patient. He then ordered other tests and continued the fluid bolus suspecting that the patient’s septic syndrome was secondary to either C. difficile colitis, pneumonia, or a urinary tract infection. He also ordered additional antibiotics, that the patient be closely monitored, and suggested possibly transferring him to the ICU. Sometime after 11:30 a.m., the patient became hypotensive. Aggressive fluid resuscitation was started and the patient was transferred to the ICU. Despite continued aggressive management, he died from septic shock. Plaintiff alleged that Defendants should have been more aggressive with fluid resuscitation, ordered additional tests, and had the patient transferred to the ICU, the failure of which caused him to develop septic shock and death from C. difficile. The defense contended that the fluid resuscitation and monitoring were appropriate and transfer to ICU was not necessary until the patient became hemodynamically unstable. Defendants further contended that Plaintiff suffered from a hypervirulent form of C. difficile sepsis, which was refractory to treatment.

Client: Obstetrician/Gynecologist
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry M. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for defendant Obstetrician/Gynecologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff was 35 weeks pregnant and while visiting her son who was in the hospital went into labor. She was admitted to the obstetrics floor. Defendant was the on-call physician for the OB group which delivered patients at two different hospitals. Defendant was at another hospital delivering a patient. Around 6:30 p.m., Defendant was paged about the plaintiff’s admission. She was advised that the plaintiff was in preterm labor and had some variable deceleration that resolved with nursing intervention. She was informed that the patient was stable. She gave admitting instructions and informed the nurse (at the other hospital) that she was finishing with her patient and would be leaving shortly thereafter to attend to the plaintiff. Defendant left one hospital about 7:00 – 7:05 p.m. At about 7:10 p.m. the patient began to experience decelerations in the fetal heart rate to the 90s (bpm). A nurse paged Defendant to inform her of change in the patient. Defendant testified that she returned this page and learned that it was an old page and the patient was stable. The nurse, however, testified that she informed defendant of the decelerations and the condition of the patient. Defendant arrived at 7:25 p.m., evaluated the patient, and ordered a C-section delivery for a presumed placental abruption at 7:30 p.m. Delivery of the infant occurred at 7:57 p.m. The infant was severely compromised and transferred to Children’s Memorial Hospital. The child suffered from cerebral palsy, with a feeding tube and tracheostomy and died 13 months later. Plaintiff contended that Defendant failed to timely and properly respond to the information provided to her by the nurses and failed to ensure that another obstetrician attend to the patient because she was high risk and had had decelerations in the fetal heart rate. Plaintiff further claimed that had either defendant or another obstetrician (the in-house OB on-call) been present when the placental abruption became severe at 7:10 p.m. an emergency C-section could have been performed within 20 minutes, and the infant would have been delivered without injury. Defendant contended that when she was first notified of plaintiff’s admission appropriate orders were given and that the patient was stable (despite the earlier decelerations in the fetal heart rate). When she called again the patient was in the early stages of preterm labor and was stable. Defense contended that it was not necessary to call another OB to evaluate the patient. Defendant further argued that even had she been present at 7:10 p.m. an emergency C-section would not have prevented the injuries due to the severity of the abruption. Further even had the defendant requested the nurse to summon the on-call OB to evaluate the patient, that on-call OB would have arrived at bedside at the same time as defendant. The child was delivered with poor APGARS and sustained cerebral palsy, required a tracheostomy and feeding tube and died 13 months later. Plaintiff asked for damages of $6,782,572.41 ($2.0 million for pain and suffering; $1.5 million for loss of a normal life; $2.5 million for loss of society and $783,572.41 medical).

Client: Otolaryngologist
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Amy L. Garland
Result: Verdict for defendant Otolaryngologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff’s decedent, a 69 year old male, with a history of COPD, hypertension, A-Fib (with pacemaker) and newly diagnosed myasthenia gravis was admitted to the hospital on April 24, 2005 in respiratory arrest, which required a tracheostomy, performed on April 30, 2005. Due to his A-fib he was also on anticoagulation medications. On May 2, 2005 about 9:00 p.m. he began to ooze blood from the tracheostomy. Conservative measures to stop the oozing were attempted unsuccessfully. Defendant was called by the intensivist caring for the patient and defendant came to the hospital to inspect the tracheostomy site. He arrived about 12:30 a.m. on May 3, 2005, pulled the tracheostomy tube, noticed only slight bleeding and decided to take the patient to the operating room to surgically correct the bleeding. He left the bedside about 1:20 a.m. After he left, the intensivist attempted unsuccessfully to place a central line via a femoral approach. About 2:15 a.m. the patient coded and resuscitation efforts were unsuccessful. He died at 2:42 a.m. on May 3, 2011. Plaintiff contended that defendant failed to order or recommend a blood transfusion while at bedside given that the bleeding started about 9:00 p.m. on May 2, 2005 and that the patient was on anticoagulation (which had been discontinued at 10:30 p.m. on May 2, 2005). During the resuscitation a hemoglobin level (2:00 a.m.) was drawn and later (after the patient died) was reported at 5.6. Plaintiff contended that the drop in hemoglobin from 9.8 at 10:00 p.m. represented a substantial blood loss which caused the patient to develop hypotensive shock and death. Defendant contended that he was responsible for the management of the tracheostomy during the time he was at bedside and that his duty was to stop the bleeding, not manage the hemodynamic stautus of the patient. The 5.6 hemoglobin was spurious either from hemodilution, incorrect sampling, or lab error as the amount of bleeding noted in the records could not account for liters of blood which would have been necessary to drop the hemoglobin by 4.2 grams. Defense also contented that the fatal cardiac arrythmia was not consistent with hypovolemic shock. Plaintiff asked the jury to award $650,000 – $900,000.

Client: Vascular Surgeon
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Laura J. Young
Result: Verdict in favor of Defendant

Synopsis: Plaintiff’s decedent, a 48 year old male, admitted to Gottlieb Hospital in end stage renal failure by PCP. Defendant, general and vascular surgeon, consulted for placement of central venous catheter for immediate dialysis. During the procedure the superior vena cava was punctured by the instrumentation used for placement of the catheter. The patient remained stable throughout the procedure and underwent 5 hours of dialysis without complication. Thereafter, the patient was stable for another 10 hours. During the second round of dialysis almost 24 hours after the procedure, the patient became hypotensive, exhibited seizure activity, and a Code was called. He was resuscitated but died shortly thereafter. An autopsy revealed a puncture of the superior vena cava and about 600 cc of blood/fluid in the mediastinum. Plaintiff contended that defendant’s placement of the catheter was inappropriate (outside of the vena cava) and that the defendant should have recognized the puncture of the superior vena cava due to mediastinal widening on a post operative chest x-ray, and that the plaintiff continued to bleed causing either hypovolemic shock or compression of the vena cava causing restricted blood flow to the heart which alone or in combination caused the patient’s arrest. Defense contended that the catheter was properly placed evidenced by (1) surgeon’s own wet read of the post operative chest x-ray; (2) the formal interpretation of the chest x-ray by the radiologist; and, (3) the fact that the patient underwent 5 hours of dialysis without complication. Further, a small puncture of the superior vena cava is a known complication and that it did not cause bleeding sufficient to produce hypovolemic shock or reduced cardiac preload. The amount of blood and fluid found on autopsy was probably due to the 25 minutes of cardiac compressions during the code.

Client: Radiologist
Trial Attorneys: Glenn D. Furth / Laura J. Young
Result: Verdict for defendant Neuroradiologist

Synopsis: This case involved allegations of negligent interpretations of a spine MRI by a Neuroradiologist which were then followed by wrong level decompression surgery by a Neurosurgeon. Plaintiff, in June 2002, was a thirty-one year old married man with a medical history which included a herniated disc at L4-L5 that was related to a high school football injury from 1988. Plaintiff received an injection for the injury and was pain free until 1998. In 1998, Plaintiff began experiencing numbness in his legs and pain in his back. He was treated and remained pain-free until mid-2002. By the summer of 2002, Plaintiff again began experiencing weakness, numbness, tingling in his legs, and urinary frequency, in addition to back pain. Conservative treatment was recommended and unsuccessful. After further complaints, Plaintiff underwent a series of MRIs in June and July 2002. Defendant is a Board Certified Neuroradiologist who interpreted the MRI studies at issue for the Plaintiff. The first was a lumbar MRI and the second and third were thoracic MRIs. Defendant never actually met or examined Plaintiff. Rather, the images obtained from the MRI studies were taken by technologists under the direction and supervision of Defendant. Defendant read several of the plaintiff’s MRIs before and after thoracic spine surgery performed by Co-Defendant Neuroradiologist. Plaintiff alleged medical negligence against Defendant arising from the following: (1) his interpretation of the MRI films of Plaintiff’s thoracic spine; (2) his reporting of the level of Plaintiff’s disc herniation and spinal cord compression; (3) his failure to report his diagnostic radiology findings in a complete and thorough manner; and (4) in failing to properly and adequately communicate the location of the disk herniation. It is alleged that as a result of this and other negligence, Plaintiff underwent spine surgery at the wrong thoracic disc level, requiring an additional fusion surgery to be later performed. Defendant, in reviewing the separate thoracic and lumbar MRIs, noted a moderate sized broad based extension of disk signal material into the ventral epidural space centrally and towards the right of the T10-T11 levels. The previous lumbar MRI did not show lower thoracic abnormality, but the lumbar study did not include images of T9 or T10. There was severe compression of the spinal cord, but no discrete abnormal signal is present within the cord. Defendant testified that the “T10-T11” reference “represents the interspace in between the 10th and 11th thoracic vertebral bodies.” Defendant explained that he determined this location by counting down the vertebral levels from the first cervical vertebra. Defendant also testified that T1 has a rib emanating from it, whereas C1 usually does not. In addition, ribs do not emanate from any of the lumbar vertebrae: The last rib should emanate from T12. Counting “down” from C1 to identify thoracic spine pathology is appropriate, and the Defendant correctly identified T10-11 as the interspace where the symptomatic pathology existed. Plaintiff presented to Co-Defendant on July 30, 2002 for a thoracic diskectomy to treat his herniated disc. Co-Defendant’s operative report reflects a pre-operative and post-operative diagnosis of “T10/11 herniated disc.” Co-Defendant describes the operation as a “Right T9, T10 and T11 hemilaminectomy with T11 right-sided transpedicular resection of T10/11 disk somatosensory evoked potentials.” The Neurosurgeon had a difficult time identifying the T10-11 disc space because the plaintiff was a very large and obese man in whom intraoperative fluoroscopy could not adequately penetrate. The neurosurgeon located T10-11 by counting “up” from L4-5 (and S1) to arrive at the T10-11 level at which he performed his surgical decompression. Unfortunately, it was later learned that the plaintiff is an extremely rare individual who has 13 thoracic vertebrae in his spine, instead of the normal 12. As a result of this anatomic variant, surgery was carried out on the wrong level. Co-Defendant assessed Plaintiff’s spinal column posteriorly and made an incision extending from the T9 through the T12 spine. During his surgical procedure, Co-Defendant asserts that the “right T10 and T11 hemilaminae were drilled off,” and that the inferior aspect of the T9 hemilamina was also removed.” The disc was incised and all of the soft tissue was removed. Following the procedure, Plaintiff was still suffering from the previously noted symptoms. He underwent another MRI on August 8, 2002. This study demonstrated severely compressed cord and disk herniation at T10-T11. Defendant’s review included the level where Co-Defendant had recently performed his procedure. Defendant noted that, with the exception of very minor degenerative changes at that level, Co-Defendant’s decompressive laminectomy had been performed at a level which was essentially normal. Co-Defendant justified his decision to operate on the level that he did by explaining: “We operated on that level because we counted from the sacrum up which is traditional in surgery, and he is a most unusual patient who has six lumbar vertebrae as well as a normal sacrum. When counted from C2 all the way down, the level is T10-11.” When counted from the sacrum and up, as we do in surgery, it really appears to be T9-10. Ultimately, Plaintiff underwent a second procedure involving a fusion of multiple levels on August 16, 2002. During that time between surgeries, his pain and symptoms were continuous. Plaintiff alleged that as a result of having two surgeries instead of one, he continued to have back pain, incision pain, limitation of motion and other residual symptoms. Defendant contended that he complied with the standard of care in his care and treatment of Plaintiff. Defendant maintains that he had no duty to obtain, investigate, and compare previous MRIs, which may have shown the extra thoracic vertebrae, if all studies had been compared together. With respect to Plaintiff’s second major allegation as to the visualization of the extra rib on the July 24, 2002 film, Defendant contended that the standard of care did not require him to identify this anomaly and that no reasonably well qualified radiologist would look for this or have any expectation that this may be present. The case proceeded to trial and the jury returned their verdict in favor of the Defendants.

Client: Orthopedic Surgeon
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict in favor of Defendant

Synopsis: Plaintiff, 87 year old female underwent a knee replacement, during which she suffered from a vascular injury (lacerated popliteal artery). The injury was immediately identified, and repaired by vascular surgeon. Graft failed and the patient developed compartment syndrome for which a fasciotomy was performed. Patient then developed a MRSA infection resulting in a septic knee and died almost 2 years later. Plaintiff claimed that laceration was from an oscillating saw blade, while defendant claimed that laceration was from normal manipulation and diseased artery.

Client: Internist
Trial Attorneys: Randall J. Gudmundson / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict in favor of Defendant

Synopsis: Plaintiff age 72 was admitted to the hospital in respiratory crisis and placed on a ventilator for 6 days. After being weaned from the ventilator, the patient developed blood stools. Defendant internist was notified and requested evaluation by gastroenterologist, who ordered fluid and blood products to stabilize patient for performing an EGD. Patient suffered a respiratory arrest prior to EGD. The EGD showed a bleeding ulcer which was treated. However, another ulcer in the third portion of the duodenum continued to bleed ultimately causing his death. Plaintiff claimed that Defendant internist should have also requested consultation with a general surgeon.

Client: General Surgeon
Trial Attorneys: Martin B. Bresler / Thomas M. Harvick / Laura J. Young
Result: $731,563 ($108,257 medical expenses; $23,306 LT; $125,000 pain & suffering; $400,000 past and future loss of normal life; $75,000 disfigurement); Defendant Hospital settled out midway through trial for $150,000; Net verdict $581,563

Synopsis: Plaintiff underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy at Hospital in Chicago on Feb. 23, 2004. During the surgery, her common bile duct and right hepatic artery were damaged, requiring the surgery to be converted to an open procedure to remove the gallbladder and attempt to stop the bile leakage. Plaintiff continued to suffer from bile leakage following the surgery, resulting in a Roux-en-Y anastomosis surgery with a larger surgical incision in April 2004. She developed neuromas along the surgical site and also developed abdominal wall pain syndrome which was not properly treated until 2008. The defense contended common bile duct injury is a known risk of the procedure, this risk was disclosed to the plaintiff before the surgery, and the bile duct injury was detected during the surgery and immediately repaired. The defense disputed the injury to the right hepatic artery, although the surgeon who performed the subsequent Roux-en-Y testified he found a surgical clip on the hepatic artery which appeared to be an unintentional and unexpected placement during the initial surgery. Plaintiff’s last pretrial demand was $1,400,000.

Client: Anesthesiologist
Trial Attorneys: Mary M. Cunningham / Laura J. Young
Result: Verdict in favor of defendant Anesthesiologist

Synopsis: On September 27, 2004, Plaintiff, F-49 underwent a left shoulder arthroscopy following an injury to her rotator cuff which occurred when Plaintiff slipped and fell at work. Plaintiff alleged that she sustained a brachial plexopathy as a result of negligent administration of an interscalene block by the Defendant Anesthesiologist immediately before the surgery. Plaintiff also maintained that she was unconscious during the administration of the interscalene block and would not have been able to feel the needle hitting her nerve. Defendant Anesthesiologist maintained that her performance of an interscalene block complied with the standard of care. Plaintiff was awake during the administration of the block, and did not experience the severe pain which she would have encountered had Defendant Anesthesiologist struck a nerve, as Plaintiff maintained. Defendant Anesthesiologist also maintained that the cause of the brachial plexus injury was the traction applied during the orthopaedic surgery. The orthopaedic surgeon who performed the surgery, was dismissed prior to trial after prevailing on a Motion for Summary Judgment.

Client: Physicians/Gynecologists
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict in favor of Gynecologist & two Defendants – directed verdict

Synopsis: Plaintiff’s decedent, age 49, wife and mother of 3 daughters, was diagnosed with an ovarian cyst in April, 2001. A diagnostic laparoscopy was performed by defendant on May 24, 2001; it was noted that the ovaries were normal, but incidentally the doctor found endometriosis and adhesions. He did not biopsy the tissue as endometriosis is a benign condition. Plaintiff did not complain of any symptoms until October 26, 2001. Plaintiff was admitted to the ER at Christ Hospital on 12/15/01 and surgery performed on 12/16/01 revealed extensive cancer in her pelvis and abdomen (Stage IIIC) – originally diagnosed as metastatic ovarian but later determined to be primary papillary serous carcinoma of the peritoneum (PPSC). She was started on chemotherapy in early February, 2002 but her cancer progressed causing her death in September 2003. Plaintiffs contended that defendant was negligent in failing to perform a biopsy of tissue during the laparoscopy. Photographs taken during the procedure and in evidence revealed multiple white spots which plaintiff contended were tumor implants. Plaintiff contended that both endometriosis and these white areas should have been biopsied and if so would have revealed a Stage II or early Stage III cancer. Defense contended that the standard of care did not require a biopsy of suspected endometriosis and that the “white spots” on the laparoscopy photographs were simply light reflections. Plaintiff asked for $15,000,000 in damages.

Client: Internist
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict in favor of the defendants

Synopsis: Plaintiff was a 22 year old post partum patient admitted for unexplained fever. Attending OB called internist to initiate and monitor Heparin therapy for presumed septic pelvic thrombophlebitis. Other consultants in rheumatology, neurology, infectious disease and hematology also called in to investigate the possibility for a Lupus flare and other potential diagnoses. After 2 days of heparin therapy, the patients temperature was dramatically reduced. Blood laboratory work for Lupus was equivocal and still pending when the patient was released from the hospital to attend a funeral of her grandfather with whom she lived, and to be with her newborn infant. Follow-up instructions were given for her to see the OB/GYNE and the internist. She failed to keep those appointments. Home health nursing was present for several days after her discharge and documented that she was stable and afebrile. Seventeen days after discharge she appeared without an appointment to the internist with vague complaints of feeling tired. Laboratory workup was initiated. Two days later, she awoke unable to move her legs and was admitted to the hospital. A diagnosis of transverse myelitis was made, resulting in permanent paraplegia. Plaintiff asked for 15 million in damages. After a month long trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of all defendants within one hour.

Client: Surgeon
Trial Attorney: Mary M. Cunningham / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict for Surgeon

Synopsis: After Plaintiff was diagnosed with breast cancer, she underwent a lumpectomy and left axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy on June 21, 2002, performed by Defendant surgeon. The lumpectomy surgical wound opened postoperatively, and Defendant instructed the Plaintiff to return before beginning radiation therapy. However, Plaintiff did not return to Defendant’s office. After Plaintiff underwent radiation therapy the surgical wound was open and draining. The Defendant monitored the wound as it continued to heal. Defendant performed a re-excision of the wound on Feb. 18, 2003, at which time she found a defect in the chest wall and referred Plaintiff to a plastic surgeon. Plaintiff instead consulted another breast surgeon who continued to monitor the non-healing wound for several months. Eventually, after nine months, a CT scan was performed which revealed the chest wall abnormality. Plaintiff was referred to thoracic surgeons who diagnosed radionecrosis, and performed a chest wall resection with implantation of a Gore-tex patch on Oct. 15, 2003. Plaintiff claims continuing problems with raising her arm due to the flap procedure. Plaintiff contended defendant failed to adequately monitor, diagnose and treat an infected breast wound. The defense asserted the patient had a slow-healing wound which was caused in part by radiation effect and continued smoking, and failing to adequately self-clean her wound.

Client: Primary Care Physician
Trial Attorney: Glenn D. Furth / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Administering Physician

Synopsis: Plaintiff, 70 year old male, required a surgical procedure at the time of the alleged negligence. Plaintiff had previously received a pneumococcal vaccination almost four years prior, and alleged the defendant acted outside the standard of care in deciding to revaccinate the plaintiff. Following repeat vaccination, plaintiff developed seronegative rheumatoid arthritis, as well as symptoms of neuropathy in his bilateral hands and feet. Plaintiff claimed these developments were a result of the repeat vaccination. Defendant asserted that patient was at high risk for pneumococcal infection because of his age, history of cardiovascular disease, planned surgery, and history of splenectomy. Defendant also asserted that while the Physician’s Desk Reference does recommend a 5 year interval between repeat vaccination, published patient studies, literature, and standards or practice in the community indicated that repeat vaccination was permissible and even advisable.

Client: Attending Physician
Trial Attorney: C. Thomas Hendrix
Result: Dismissal with prejudice after Defendant’s Motions in Limine barring Plaintiff’s experts from testifying were granted by the court

Synopsis: Plaintiff alleged that Defendant Attending Physician improperly consulted a general surgeon to place a central venous line in the groin, rather than consulting a vascular surgeon, and failed to diagnose and treat an infection of a groin hematoma which developed after the attempted placement of the central venous line causing death of the patient. Plaintiff’s case against the Defendant Attending Physician was dismissed with prejudice after Defendant’s Motion in Limine barring Plaintiff’s pulmonary/internal medicine expert from testifying because there was no proximate cause, and barring Plaintiff’s infectious disease expert from testifying against the defendant because there was not a sufficient basis under the evidence to allow the expert to render standard of care opinions against the attending physician. The case went to trial against the remaining defendants, and a jury returned a verdict in favor of all defendants.

Client: Internist
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Lisa M. Green
Result: Voluntarily Dismissed

Synopsis: Plaintiff, a 72 year old male, suffered from multiple medical conditions, including but not limited to: end-stage renal failure, diabetes, congestive heart failure, an ejection fraction of 25% or less, hypertension, coronary artery disease, and cardiac arrhythmia. He had previously had a stroke. Due to the end stage renal failure, an AV fistula was established for dialysis access. During dialysis, the vein was punctured and the patient bled from the fistula into subcutaneous tissue. Plaintiff then went to the hospital, where he came under the care of the defendants. Plaintiff was hypovolemic and had questionable myocardial infarction. He was resuscitated, stabilized over the next week, dialyzed several times, and then discharged. Defendant had Plaintiff consult with a cardiologist, who recommended angiography, but the plaintiff refused. He was discharged, placed on dialysis at the previous dialysis center, and shortly thereafter sustained an arrest and died. Plaintiff claimed Defendant negligently discharged the patient. Defense counsel filed Motions to Bar Plaintiff’s expert from testifying concerning issues of causation. Judge Simmons was prepared to bar any such testimony, when Plaintiff moved to voluntarily dismiss the matter. Has not been re-filed.

Client: Pathologist and OB/GYN, Fertility
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Erin S. Davis
Result: Verdict for Plaintiff $650,000

Synopsis: On November 27, 2003, Plaintiff had significant vaginal bleeding three weeks post partum and was instructed to go to the emergency room. She presented to the ER with complaints of significant bleeding, using two pads per hour, lightheadedness and dizziness. The ER exam showed large vaginal blood clots and an ultrasound demonstrated probable retained tissue (products of conception) and/or blood clots. Defendant diagnosed retained placenta causing secondary (delayed) postpartum bleeding, and performed a D & C to remove the retained tissue. Plaintiff was discharged that same morning without further complication. The D & C tissue pathology report came back with no evidence of retained tissue. Plaintiffs contended Defendants were negligent in misdiagnosing retained placental tissue, failing to provide conservative medical care (uterotonic medication therapy) for an adequate length of time to stop the bleeding, and performing an unnecessary D & C. As a result, Plaintiff developed intrauterine scarring called Asherman’s Syndrome, a known risk of D & C. Several surgeries and hormonal treatments were unsuccessful in repairing the uterus and uterine lining, leaving her permanently unable to have a fertilized egg implant in her uterus and unable to successfully carry any fetus to term.

Client: Hospital
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for all Defendants

Synopsis: Plaintiff, a 61 year old male, welder presented to defendant thoracic surgeon with a history of intractable hiccups which had persisted for eight years. Defendant surgeon performed a thoracotomy with repair of a small asymptomatic hiatal hernia and repair of a small asymptomatic esophageal diverticulum and attempted repair fundoplication, which was unsuccessful, leaving the patient with free reflux of his stomach contents into his esophagus. Plaintiff required additional surgery to re-repair the hernia, performed by another surgeon in 2001, which was also unsuccessful in relieving the reflux and the hiccups. Plaintiff eventually required an esophagectomy to remove the distal 16 centimeters of his esophagus. Plaintiff contended surgeon was negligent in performing major surgery without adequate workup; performing unnecessary surgery; failing to consult plaintiff’s treating gastroenterologist before doing surgery; failing to have an esophageal manometry performed prior to surgery to test for esophageal achalasia (an esophageal motility disorder) which would contraindicate this type of surgery; and improperly performing a reflux procedure to tighten the esophageal sphincter when the sphincter was already too tight. The defense argued the plaintiff had a long history of severe reflux that had caused esophageal erosions and ulcers in 1994 and which eventually caused Barrett’s esophagus, a precursor to cancer.

Client: Orthopedist and Chiropractor
Trial Attorney: Martin B. Bresler / Amy L. Garland
Result: Verdict for all Defendants

Synopsis: Plaintiff, a 70 year old female, retiree had suffered back pain for 30 years and undergone treatment with a number of physicians including physical therapy, epidural injections and chiropractic adjustments. She presented to defendant for treatment of her back pain using an IDD (Intervertebral Differential Dynamics) machine. The IDD machine is a computerized physio-therapeutic device which is used to reduce pressure on injured or degenerated discs. On Nov. 18, 2003, during one of her treatments, plaintiff claimed the IDD machine pulled her downward and caused her to sustain a rotator cuff tear, requiring rotator cuff repair surgery in Oct. 2004. Plaintiff contended defendant failed to adequately supervise the proper use of the machine and failed to provide plaintiff control of the machine’s kill switch; the allegations were tried under ordinary negligence (as opposed to medical malpractice). The defense asserted the IDD machine did not cause plaintiff’s rotator cuff tear, the facility’s technicians were properly supervised and adequately trained, plaintiff was given the kill switch at the beginning of her treatment, the machine is equipped with a sensor that shuts down the machine if the patient moves more than two inches, and the machine also has an emergency button that the patient can push to turn off the machine.

Client: Pediatric Cardiovascular Hospital
Trial Attorney: Michael C. Kominiarek
Result: Verdict for all Defendants

Synopsis: Plaintiff was born with congenital heart defect. Damage to the mitral valve during interventional cardiology resulted in emergency surgery on June 24, 1999 with replacement of the mitral valve and aortic valve. Plaintiff asked for damages in the range of $4.2 million to 6.5 million. No settlement offer was made by Defendants. Hospital settled years before trial for $300,000.

Client: Anesthesia/Pain Management Specialist
Trial Attorney: Martin B. Bresler / Amy L. Garland
Result: Verdict for Anesthesiologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff, 60 year old female, was referred to Defendant Anesthesia/Pain Management Specialist for pain management. Defendant Anesthesia/Pain Management Specialist treated her for seven months which included pain medications, caudal epidural injections and trigger point injections. Plaintiff (17 months later) was scheduled for total knee replacement surgery but it was cancelled because she had a urinary tract infection. Plaintiff took the post-op prescribed Oxycontin for three days and was allegedly in a “stupor-like or semi-conscious state” for three days, lying on an outstretched arm and developed a wrist drop. Defense contended no signs or symptoms of opioid intoxication and Plaintiff misused drugs despite surgery cancellation.

Client: Vascular Surgeon
Trial Attorney: Thomas M. Harvick / Erin S. Davis
Result: Verdict for Vascular Surgeon

Synopsis: Plaintiff alleged failure to timely diagnose and treat a puncture of the superior vena cava during routine perma-catheter placement for dialysis against Defendant Vascular Surgeon, and failure to properly monitor patient prior to discharge against hospital. Defense argued vena cava could not have been punctured at the time of discharge because decedent underwent successful dialysis with new catheter for over one hour with no symptoms of a bleed.

Client: Anesthesiologist
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Erin S. Davis
Result: Verdict for Anesthesiologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff alleged that Defendant Anesthesiologist failed to properly assess patient strength at conclusion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and wrongfully prematurely extubated patient. Plaintiff claims that patient suffered upper airway collapse. Defendant Anesthesiologist reintubated patient and Plaintiff claimed that reintubation was traumatic due to failure to administer muscle relaxants prior to reintubation. Patient suffered an arrest, sustained encephalopathy and died three days later. Defense contended that patient was strong enough to extubate, was not prematurely extubated and that reintubation was not traumatic. Defense contended patient suffered from a lower airway obstruction (blood clot) which formed during surgery secondary to a coagulopathy, and that the clot was undiagnosable and untreatable.

Client: Internal Medicine/Internist
Trial Attorney: Glenn D. Furth / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Internist

Synopsis: Plaintiff claimed defendant Internist and his service corporation allegedly failed to diagnose a Group A Strep peritonitis which allegedly ascended up from Plaintiff’s vagina and ultimately caused a severe hypoxic ischemic encephelopathy in a 38 year old mother of twin 8 year old girls. Other Defendants included the hospital, nurses, intensive care specialists and surgeon. Plaintiff asked the jury for $31,000,000 in damages to Plaintiff and $7,000,000 in damages to husband. The trial lasted one month. The jury returned its verdict of not guilty as to our clients but awarded $7,000,000 in damages against the intensive care Defendants.

Client: Orthopedic Surgeon
Trial Attorney: Glenn D. Furth / Amy L. Garland
Result: Summary Judgment

Synopsis: Plaintiff alleged that Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon was negligent during a spine surgery because he developed intraoperative pressure sores. The court, after the jury was sworn and empanelled, granted our motion in limine which barred certain testimony of Plaintiff’s sole standard of care expert. In effect, Plaintiff did not have anyone other than the one expert to offer standard of care opinions against Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon. The court found that in light of its ruling, summary judgment was appropriate and judgment was entered in Defendant’s favor.

Client: General Surgeons/Hospital
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Defendant – Resident Surgeon; Verdict against Attending Surgeon; Hospital Settled during jury deliberations; $900,000 subject to set off of $100,000 settlement by Hospital

Synopsis: Attempted placement of PermaCath central line caused perforation of innominate vein and superior vena cava in 42 year old, morbidly obese male with renal failure. Plaintiff contended patient high risk due to morbid obesity and Defendants introduced catheter introducer too far causing perforations. Defendants contended that perforations are a known risk/complication and procedure performed under fluoroscopy complied with the standards of care. Plaintiff also contended that Defendants failed to monitor patient for 19 minutes during transfer from or to PACU. Defendants contended that hemodynamically stable at conclusion of procedure and standard of care permitted transfer without monitoring equipment, but accompanied by RN and physician, and patient awake and communicating during transfer, patient taken back to OR for sternotomy/repair within 15 minutes from arrest in PACU. Plaintiff asked jury for $5,000,000.

Client: Orthopedic Surgeon
Trial Attorney: Michael C. Kominiarek
Result: Verdict for Orthopedic Surgeon

Synopsis: Plaintiff, a 35 year old who enjoyed sports especially hockey, football developed a painful knee and was evaluated by Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon in 1/99. He had an allograft procedure for arthritic knee performed by Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon and Dr. L. on 5/22/99 and was discharged. He returned on 5/25/99 with swollen, painful knee and was diagnosed with a DVT and was started on heparin and admitted. He developed a retroperitoneal bleed and an IVC filter was inserted. His WBC and temperature remained elevated during entire hospitalization and physicians attributed it to the DVT. He was discharged on 7/3/99, seen by Orthopedic Surgeon on 7/8/99 who did not think there were any signs of infection. He was seen by Dr. B. on 7/12/99 who reviewed blood tests that had been performed on 7/7/99 and ordered more blood tests. Plaintiff was readmitted on 7/13/99. The knee was aspirated by Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon and a culture showed the graft was infected. Plaintiff was seen by an infectious disease specialist and started on IV antibiotics. The grafts did not have to be removed. Plaintiff claimed that elevated temperatures, some above 102 and elevated WBC with shift to left, were signs and symptoms of an infection and that the knee should have been aspirated on 6/26/99 when temperature spiked to 102.7. Defense contended the fevers and elevated WBC were due to DVT. There were no signs or symptoms of infection on clinical examination. The risk of tapping a knee which had just been operated on, outweighed the benefit. Injuries/Damage: A knee that is still painful and with limited mobility. The graft surgery was a salvage procedure to give him more time before he would need a knee replacement.

Client: Cardiologist
Trial Attorney: Thomas M. Harvick / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict for Cardiologist

Synopsis: Decedent underwent nasal surgery in April 2001 during which she coded. She was resuscitated and directed to cardiologist for work-up. Defendant Cardiologist determined cause of event related to surgical anesthetic and persistent low potassium levels brought on by lifelong bulimia. Patient went on to die 3 months later. Cook County Medical Examiner identified coronary atherosclerosis as the cause of death. Defense contended that Plaintiff did not have clogged arteries and that her low potassium levels caused the arrhythmia which caused her death.

Client: Neurology/Psychiatry
Trial Attorney: Michael R. Webber / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Psychiatrist

Synopsis: Plaintiff’s decedent had been under the psychiatric care of Defendant for over ten years and required significant medical management to treat depression and psychotic behavior. Following one of patient’s multiple inpatient admissions to enforce compliance with medication, the patient’s family contacted Defendant indicating that the patient was off her medication and engaging in bizarre behavior. Based upon a telephone conversation with the patient, which was not disclosed to the jury because of the Dead Mans Act, Defendant determined that hospitalization was not required at that time and that a resumption of medication would control the symptoms. The patient committed suicide by stepping in front of an express train traveling 70 miles an hour three hours after the conversation with Defendant. The patient did not have a history of suicidal ideation or suicide attempts.

Client: Pediatrician/University Hospital
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Michael R. Webber
Result: Verdict for Pediatrician/University Hospital

Synopsis: Plaintiff had received his third kidney transplant in 1997 at the out-of-state Defendant University Hospital. Defendant Pediatrician employed by hospital drew blood to monitor creatinine levels. Results were faxed to the out-of-state hospital transplant coordinators. In 2000, a laboratory study reported a slightly elevated creatinine level, which per protocol was faxed to the transplant coordinators. Another follow-up blood test was ordered by transplant nephrologists which reported a severely elevated creatinine level. Again Defendant Pediatrician faxed report to the transplant nephrologists. Neither the Plaintiff nor the transplant coordinators acted on this information. Plaintiff’s creatinine levels continued to rise ultimately causing the loss of the third kidney transplant. Two years later Plaintiff had fourth kidney transplant. Plaintiff contended Defendant Pediatrician should have directly contacted the transplant coordinator and notified the patient of the results. Defense contended the transplant coordinators were managing the care of the transplanted kidney and that the system of transmitting information had been successful for three years. Defense further asserted Plaintiff’s contributory negligence because he self-tapered and stopped taking his anti-rejection medication without notifying any physician.

Client: Obstetrician Gynecologist
Trial Attorney: Michael C. Kominiarek / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict for Family Practitioner

Synopsis: Family practitioner delivered child with brachial plexus injury. Verdict was in the amount of $3,000,000 against Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist with a set-off of $190,000.

Client: Internal Medicine/Internist
Trial Attorney: Michael R. Webber / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: No Payment for Internist

Synopsis: Plaintiff’s decedent presented to a community hospital emergency department on New Year’s Eve, 1999. Patient had flu like symptoms and difficulty breathing. The on call Defendant Internist/Attending was contacted by the emergency department physician and gave orders for admission and treatment without coming to the hospital to see the patient. The Defendant Internist/Attending was contacted again in the early hours of January 1 by a nurse who reported the patient was restless but otherwise stable. Ativan was ordered to assist the patient in sleeping. The patient coded and died in the early hours of January 1. Laboratory results, which were completed but not sent to the floor prior to death, indicated the patient had sepsis and septicemia secondary to pneumonia. $700,000 was awarded against Defendant Internist/Attending but completely set off by previous $2,500,000 settlement with Community Hospital.

Client: Radiologist
Trial Attorney: Mary M. Cunningham
Result: Verdict in favor of all Defendants

Synopsis: Patient, 68 year old female, underwent a carotid angiogram at the community hospital on Feb. 2, 1998, ordered by the vascular surgeon and performed by Defendant Radiologist. Following the angiogram, patient developed a cholesterol emboli shower which caused her to suffer a stroke and irreversible brain damage, allegedly resulting in her death three years later. ($1,121,448 medical bills). Defense asserted cholesterol emboli shower is a known but rare risk of the procedure, and the carotid angiogram was a necessary precursor to the planned carotid endarterectomy. Jury reportedly deliberated less than an hour.

Client: Corporation for Defendant Pulmonologist
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Pulmonologist/Corporation

Synopsis: Plaintiff alleged failure to order STAT CT scan, surgical consult and diagnose and treatment of bowel perforation in timely fashion. Plaintiff’s estate contended that the surgeon caused bowel perforation which went undiagnosed. Patient transferred to ICU and cared for by attending pulmonologist. Patient shortly developed ARDS and died before diagnosis of bowel perforation could have been made. Defense contended that ICU care appropriate and surgical consultation not warranted since surgeon was also co-managing patient in ICU.

Client: Internist / Gastroenterologist
Trial Attorney: Michael R. Webber
Result: Verdict for Gastroenterologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff’s decedent was referred to Defendant Gastroenterologist after the patient’s urologist identified a lobulated mass in the patient’s rectum. Without personally examining or speaking with the patient, Defendant Gastroenterologist scheduled the patient for colonoscopy five days later, and advised the patient to drink one gallon of bowel cleaning regimen the evening before the scheduled colonoscopy. Because of a bowel obstruction, the cleaning regimen caused a rupture of decedent’s bowel resulting in peritonitis and death. Defendant Physician had no notes regarding any patient contact and no independent recollection of any discussions with the referring physician, the patient or the patient’s family.

Client: Internal Medicine/Internist
Trial Attorney: C. Thomas Hendrix / Heather J. Tompach
Result: Verdict for Internist

Synopsis: Plaintiff admitted to emergency room with upper respiratory infection, shortness of breath, and possible pneumonia, diagnosed with bronchitis and hypoxia, overlaying chronic obstructive sleep apnea and morbid obesity. Plaintiff was treated with oxygen, antibiotics, placement in telemetry unit with continuous cardiac monitoring and respiratory therapy, and was seen by a pulmonary consultant. Several days later she was found unresponsive and died shortly thereafter from cardiopulmonary arrest. Plaintiff claimed Defendant Internist should have ordered daily ABG monitoring which would have diagnosed cardiopulmonary condition earlier. Defense asserted patient’s condition was properly diagnosed, and appropriate monitoring was performed and appropriate treatment administered and that her death was due to a sudden cardiac event that occurred without warning signs.

Client: Urologist
Trial Attorney: Thomas M. Harvick / Amy L. Garland
Result: Verdict for Urologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff had prostatectomy and subsequently had a penile prosthesis placed, which worked on an intermittent basis. Defendant Urologist recommended a three-piece penile prosthesis to replace the existing prosthetic device. During the surgical procedure, Plaintiff claimed that the small bowel became perforated or lacerated causing an infection, extended the hospitalization of Plaintiff and that Defendant Urologist was negligent in failing to recognize and repair damage to bowel and in placing the three-piece penile prosthesis in the penis while it was infected. Defendant Urologist claimed that bowel perforation was a known complication and that age of Plaintiff caused failure of new prosthesis.

Client: Internal Medicine/Internist
Trial Attorney: Mary M. Cunningham
Result: 2004 Mistrial – Hung Jury; August 2005 – Not Guilty

Synopsis: Plaintiff admitted to hospital for urinary tract infection and pneumonia, end-stage Parkinson’s disease, heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus and blindness. Patient alleged antibiotics caused C. difficile colitis. After changing antibiotics and transfer to nursing home and then back to hospital, Plaintiff’s condition deteriorated, she developed multi-system organ failure and died. Defense asserted patient did have a serious urinary tract infection, failure to treat it would have been deadly given her condition on admission, ciprofloxacin (Cipro) was the appropriate antibiotic and the antibiotic of choice for urinary tract infection, and it did not in any way aggravate or contribute to the C. difficile. Defense also contended that the patient died of liver failure due to a Herpes Simplex virus which in the liver is rare, virulent and fatal without transplant. Case was previously tried in 2004 against internist and two surgeons, ending in a deadlocked jury. The two surgeons were dismissed at the start of this trial.

Client: Orthopedic Surgeon
Trial Attorney: Michael C. Kominiarek / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Orthopedic Surgeon

Synopsis: Plaintiff had a total hip replacement and was discharged. While at home Plaintiff noticed right leg swelling and went to the emergency room, diagnosed with blood clot and started on heparin. Plaintiff subsequently developed hematoma, losing function in his toes and foot. The hematoma was surgically removed, but Plaintiff developed a foot drop. Plaintiff alleged orthopedic surgeon mismanaged the heparin. Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon contended that the hematoma was a life threatening condition and that anticoagulation was necessary to prevent possible pulmonary embolus. Surgery was warranted under the standard of care.

Client: Obstetrician Gynecologist
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Obstetrician Gynecologist

Synopsis: Plaintiff, a G2P1, 32 year old married female was diagnosed with a breach presentation for her second pregnancy. Her first child was born via a NSVD. Ultrasound confirmed the breach presentation 1 1?2 weeks before admission for an elective c-section. At operative delivery infant was found to be vertex. Plaintiff claimed that Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist failed to perform a Leopold maneuver to confirm presentation before c-section, resulting in an unnecessary c-section, disfigurement, pain and suffering and increased risk of uterine rupture for planned VBAC 3rd pregnancy (Plaintiff not pregnant). Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist confirmed presentation prior to c-section but fetus turned between examination and c-section. Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist contested degree and extent of damage including risk of future harm.

Client: Orthopedic Surgeon
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Orthopedic Surgeon

Synopsis: Plaintiff alleged that Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon’s second operative procedure of recurrent disc fragment was improper resulting in post operative infection. Plaintiff further alleged that the orthopedic surgeon failed to diagnose post operative infection requiring further surgery and extend IV antibiotic treatment. Defendant Orthopedic Surgeon claimed that appropriate cultures were taken from wound, and consultation with interventional radiologist for investigation, drainage and further cultures, together with multiple antibiotics complied with standards of care. Ultimately, Plaintiff was diagnosed with entirely different infectious organism.

Client: Obstetrician Gynecologist
Trial Attorney: Thomas M. Harvick / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict for Obstetrician Gynecologist

Synopsis: Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist accused of failing to order cesarean section in response to purported fetal intolerance in a twin labor. Twin B suffered severe cerebral palsy.

Client: Internal Medicine/Internist
Trial Attorney: Martin B. Bresler / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict for Internist

Synopsis: Plaintiff alleged Defendant Internist failed to diagnose “marble-sized” lump in right breast. Plaintiff had strong history of breast cancer and prior benign biopsy two years before. A mammogram three weeks later was abnormal but reported as normal to Plaintiff. Four months later, Plaintiff was diagnosed with an eight centimeter carcinoma. Plaintiff underwent four months of chemotherapy which eradicated tumor. Lumpectomy performed in August, 1997 followed by more chemotherapy and radiation. Plaintiff contended that delay in diagnosis caused carcinoma to progress from Stage I to Stage III with a 50% chance of recurrence. Defense contended that mammogram was unremarkable and that subsequent mass was a new growth and that original lump was actually a hardening of scar tissue from a prior breast biopsy.

Client: Obstetrician Gynecologist
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Obstetrician Gynecologist

Synopsis: Patient contended that Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist misdiagnosed HELLP syndrome. Patient’s laboratory data entirely consistent with hemolysis, significantly elevated liver enzymes and dangerously low platelets. Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist properly elected to manage patient toward induction and vaginal delivery. Post delivery laboratory data continued to evidence HELLP syndrome. Child delivered at 36 weeks and suffered from ischemia to bowel requiring subsequent surgical procedures. Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist contended that delay in intervention would have caused maternal and fetal death. Jury deliberated one hour.

Client: Obstetrician Gynecologist
Trial Attorney: Randall J. Gudmundson / Sherry A. Mundorff
Result: Verdict for Obstetrician Gynecologist

Synopsis: Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist allegedly failed to recognize fetal intolerance to labor and not acting upon variable and late decelerations on fetal monitor. Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist present in delivery room during prolonged and deep deceleration and delivered infant within 10 minutes using forceps blade to rotate infant to facilitate fetal outlet descent and vaginal delivery. Infant required resuscitation and one week inpatient admission to the hospital without neurologic or respiratory sequelae. Patient claimed alleged failure to intervene sooner caused Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder.

Client: Vascular Surgeon
Trial Attorney: Thomas M. Harvick
Result: Verdict for Vascular Surgeon

Synopsis: Defendant suffering from abdominal aortic aneurysm was operated on by Surgeon. Surgery was complicated by massive scar tissue and aorta nicked during procedure causing demise of patient. Scar tissue unknown before surgery and no negligence demonstrated during procedure.

Client: Anesthesiologist
Trial Attorney: Martin B. Bresler / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict for Anesthesiologist

Synopsis: Defendant Anesthesiologist allegedly permitted the patient to become hypotensive during a radical hysterectomy causing anterior spinal artery syndrome causing paraplegia. Defense contended that surgeon (not a party Defendant) unknowingly compressed spinal artery during surgery.

Client: Obstetrician Gynecologist
Trial Attorney: Thomas M. Harvick / Lisa M. Green
Result: Verdict for Obstetrician Gynecologist

Synopsis: Defendant Obstetrician Gynecologist allegedly failed to recognize signs and symptoms of uterine rupture during labor and delivery, resulting in post partum hysterectomy.

Client: General Surgeon
Trial Attorney: C. Thomas Hendrix
Result: Verdict for General Surgeon

Synopsis: Defendant General Surgeon performed laparotomy and adhesiolysis of extensive abdominal adhesions. Post operatively Plaintiff developed ileus and partial small bowel obstruction and was taken back to surgery by the general surgeon to relieve small bowel obstruction and performed an ileo/colostomy bypass and drainage of pelvic abscess. Plaintiff was thereafter diagnosed with ARDS and sepsis and subsequently developed bradycardia and died. Asked jury $2,750,000. Not guilty versus both Defendants

YOUR CART

Trial Results

Kominiarek Bresler Harvick & Gudmundson, LLC