Trial victory for Defendant Physicians

Lowis & Gellen partners Scott R. Wolfe and Mark J. Smith obtained a “not guilty” for Joliet, Illinois cardiologists in a multi-week trial ending on January 16, 2013. The plaintiff, a 63 year-old male, was evaluated for bilateral knee pain. He was a complex patient with a prior history of myocardial infarction, coronary artery disease, multiple vessel bypass surgery, arrhythmia, atrial fibrillation, pacemaker implantation, defibrillator implantation, insulin-dependent diabetes, obesity and diminished lung capacity. An orthopedic surgeon asked Lowis & Gellen’s client, a large cardiology group, to clear the patient to undergo surgery. The cardiologists OK'ed surgery, which took place May 12, 2004. In the first few days following surgery plaintiff had a myriad of complications including blood clots, pulmonary embolism and bowel ileus. Eventually the patient’s bowel perforated and was emptying contents into plaintiff's abdomen, causing a massive infection, sepsis. The patient spent a month in the ICU of a Joliet, Illinois area hospital and underwent two major abdominal surgeries. He was then transferred to a Chicago referral center and underwent 2 more emergency surgeries to attempt to save his life but these also failed and he died due to multi-system organ failure, nearly $1,000,000 in bills, leaving a wife, adult children and several grandchildren. Plaintiff alleged the patient should never have been cleared for an elective surgery given his severe chronic medical conditions. Scott and Mark successfully argued although the patient had severe conditions, they had been relatively stable for several years and it prospectively appeared the patient would survive the operation. Therefore, clearance was appropriate and the standard of care was met. Scott and Mark also argued that the post-operative complications that arose were non-cardiac. However, the jury never reached those arguments in their deliberations, telling Scott and Mark that their defense on the prospective standard of care was so persuasive, they found for the cardiologists on standard of care issues alone.