Mr. Robert Smith and Mr. Patrick McHale successfully defended an Infectious Disease Physician and his group in a Cook County medical malpractice case involving the death of a 64-year-old male from sepsis.  The plaintiff alleged the defendant physician negligently failed to diagnose and treat sepsis, and should have prescribed antibiotics and antiviral therapy even though there was no evidence of a known infection on the date in question.  The jury deliberated for one hour before returning a not guilty verdict in favor of both defendants. 

Christopher Cahill, a member of Lowis & Gellen’s Corporate Practice Group, has been named to the Board of Directors of Baroque Band, Chicago’s period-instrument orchestra.  For the Baroque Band’s concert schedule and other information, please see http://www.baroqueband.org/.

Congratulations!

Lowis & Gellen has been named "Banking & Finance Litigation Law Firm of 2013 - North America" by InterContinental Finance Magazine
For more information contact Jerry Haberkorn @ jhaberkorn@lowis-gellen.com

TRIAL VICTORY IN SEXUAL HARASSMENT/HOSTILE WORK ENVIRONMENT CLAIM

Lowis & Gellen partners Pamela L. Gellen and Patrick R. Moran obtained a not guilty verdict in federal court on behalf of the Will County Sheriff's Office, Sheriff Paul J. Kaupas and a retired lieutenant after a two-week jury trial.  The plaintiff, a former correctional officer at the Will County Jail, sued the Will County Sheriff’s Office, Sheriff Paul Kaupas and a retired lieutenant under Title VII alleging that eight coworkers had sexually harassed her over a 15-month period while she worked at the jail.  She also alleged that she had to leave her job due to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) she developed as a result of the harassment, and is now no longer employable in any capacity because she has a difficult time leaving her home and caring for herself as a result of the PTSD.  At trial, Ms. Gellen and Mr. Moran established that the plaintiff was not sexually harassed, that she did not complain to anyone about sexual harassment while she was working and that the reason she left her job had nothing to do with sexual harassment.  They were able to show that the plaintiff had friendships with several coworkers she had accused of sexual harassment, including one with whom she had started a romantic relationship after the alleged harassment began.  Although the plaintiff said she complained to numerous supervisors about sexual harassment while she was working, the supervisors, many of whom are women, testified that the plaintiff made no such complaints.  The plaintiff's fiancé, who was also one of the plaintiff’s coworkers at the jail, testified that he did not know of any sexual harassment while the plaintiff was working.  Finally, the defense showed that the plaintiff stopped working after she was caught falsifying an official incident report regarding an inmate fight.  Throughout the trial and especially during her testimony, the plaintiff had several emotional outbursts and moments of uncontrolled sobbing, but the defense played audio recordings from an interview the plaintiff had given to an internal affairs investigator in which she calmly described the same instances of alleged harassment without any emotion.  The defense also played a surveillance video recording that showed the plaintiff doing activities outside of her home she said she could no longer do.  As for the plaintiff's alleged inability to work, the defense contended that she did not have PTSD and had no functional limitations that prevented her from working.  Notably, the trial judge struck the plaintiff’s treating psychiatrist’s opinion that the plaintiff had PTSD as a result of what occurred at the jail because the psychiatrist recanted her opinions under questioning by Ms. Gellen.

Congratulations to 2013's Super Lawyers:

Pamela L. Gellen

Gerald Haberkorn

Andrea H. Kott

Robert H. Smeltzer

Rising Star for 2013 is:

Elizabeth M. Smith

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.

Early Investigations Lead to Favorable Outcomes

Lowis & Gellen, LLP partner Scott Wolfe secured dismissals of his clients from two claims illustrating the importance of early investigation and preserving evidence. In both cases the clients immediately contacted Mr. Wolfe and Lowis & Gellen was on the scene of the incidents preserving evidence and interviewing witnesses. In the first case, a heating pad used in an out-patient therapy session malfunctioned causing severe burns on a young woman. The pad was secured and the manufacturer contacted that day. Joint testing was done within a week, which determined the fault was that of the manufacturer and the operator employed by the hospital committed no error. The hospital arranged for the injured patient to meet with multiple honest and capable attorneys to represent her interests. A settlement was achieved with the equipment manufacturer. The hospital was exonerated and did not have to contribute to the settlement. In the second case, a paramedic claimed he was injured when an emergency department’s automatic doors snapped shut on him allegedly causing a back injury. Within a week of the claimed incident he made a claim to the medical center’s legal affairs office. Lowis & Gellen worked with in-house counsel to secure security videos and had diagnostic testing performed on the doors. Tests showed the doors were working properly and videos showed the plaintiff did not appear to have suffered any injury at the medical center. Over the next two years the allegedly injured paramedic engaged nearly a dozen attorneys who threatened lawsuits against the medical center. Each time, Mr. Wolfe met with the attorneys, showed them the evidence amassed and the attorney dropped the claims. The paramedic then filed a pro se lawsuit representing himself. A judge threw out the case within weeks of its filing. For more information on the cases or for general information regarding Lowis & Gellen’s litigation and risk management practice please contact Scott R. Wolfe at (312) 456-2709 or swolfe@lowis-gellen.com.

Messrs. Robert H. Smith and Vito M. Masciopinto, with the assistance of Mark Baginskis and Deborah O’Brien, successfully defended an university hospital-based neurosurgeon, in a case involving a 62 year old woman who had undergone a femoral popliteal bypass, but suffered spinal anesthesia complications, including a loss of sensation and movement in her legs. The patient subsequently was paralyzed from the waist down, underwent a tracheostomy, and subsequent amputations of both legs. Medical expenses amounted to over 4 million dollars. The plaintiff alleged the neurosurgeon, who was not on staff at the hospital where the bypass procedure took place, provided a neurosurgical consultation, by accepting a call from a first year resident, without coming in to see, evaluate the patient or review her chart and MRI images. Defendant neurosurgeon denied a consultation took place; and the defense argued the phone call was only advice, not intended to be relied upon by the hospital. The plaintiff asked the jury for $21 million. After deliberating for 2 days, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant.

Christopher Cahill’s article, “Some Cautions On Selling Your Claim Against a US Bankruptcy Debtor” has been published in the Canada-US Business Council Bulletin, Fall 2012 issue. The article discusses negotiating strategy and potential pitfalls for the claims seller, and relates these to differing judicial interpretations of the implications of claims sales as distinct from claims assignments. View Article

L&G featured in Leading Lawyers Magazine

Click here to view article featuring Pam Gellen and the firm in Leading Lawyers Magazine.

August Law Advisory

Click here to view Law Advisory

ILLINOIS APPELLATE COURT AFFIRMS JURY VERDICT IN FAVOR OF INTERNIST

In an Order issued today, the Illinois Appellate Court for the First Judicial District affirmed a jury verdict in favor of an internist represented by Lowis & Gellen. At trial, the jury rejected the plaintiffs’ claim that their decedent succumbed to bladder cancer as a result of the physician’s failure to timely refer the patient to a urologist for more specialized care. Plaintiffs appealed from the jury verdict obtained by trial attorneys Michael Code and Jamie Leavitt. The appeal was successfully defended by Deborah O’Brien. The appellate court rejected plaintiffs’ arguments that co-defendant’s counsel discriminated in jury selection, and that the trial court allowed evidence in violation of the Dead Man’s Act and the hearsay rule.

Jim Bream presented Practice Today: Perils, Pearls and Takeaways of Nursing Practice in the E-Era to the staff at Elmhurst Memorial Hospital on June 13, 2012. Jim Bream has been invited to be a presenter for Willis at its annual Managed Care Roundtable in September of 2012

Gerald Haberkorn has been invited to be featured by Corporate International and can now be found within the Corporate International Online Expert Guide. View Gerald’s profile here

Pam Gellen and Scott Wolfe successfully defended a birth injury brachial plexus case. Jonathan Loiterman and Bryan Larsen assisted. The plaintiff asked the jury for $16.3 million.

Jim Bream to present to CBA’s Health Law Committee

Jim Bream will be presenting to the CBA’s Health Law Committee on Medical Tourism, discussing the background and concept of medical tourism and the liability exposure generated by this emerging trend in seeking medical care off shore. He will be presenting at noon on May 4, 2012.

Jim Bream and Jamie Waynee present at CHRMS Annual Meeting

Jim Bream and Jamie Waynee recently presented “Multi-Faceted Relationships of the Guardian” at the Annual Meeting of the Chicagoland Healthcare Risk Management Society on April 27, 2012. Jim began the day-long meeting with his report as President of CHRMS, completing his term as President at the meeting. He was able to report on the continued success of this organization which now has over 300 members from the risk management, claims, and legal counsel communities. Jim and Jamie later presented to a captivated audience on the subject of when and how to proceed to with guardianship of hospitalized patients. Jim discussed the options available to health care providers prior to moving for the appointment of a guardian. Jamie provided a very informative and thorough discussion of the propriety and mechanisms of guardianship, drawing on her expertise in this area. The presentation was very well-received and highlighted the expanded services Lowis & Gellen is able to provide to its health care facility clients.

Congratulations to the following Lowis & Gellen partners, recognized as 2011 Leading Lawyers "Chicago Area Top Lawyers" by Chicago Lawyer Magazine.
Robert Smith, Jennifer Lowis, Pam Gellen, Mark Smith, Gerald Haberkorn, and Andrea Kott.

Christopher Cahill will be the sole speaker at a Lorman Education CLE presentation on August 7, 2012 entitled, "Adding New Avoidance Defendants After the Expiration of the Limitations Period." Mr. Cahill will discuss the proof required under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 -- which governs the amendment and relation back of complaints to add new defendants -- in light of clarifications made by the Supreme Court in Krupski v. Costa Crociere S.p.A., 130 S.Ct. 2485 (2010). While he will focus on adding defendants to adversary complaints in bankruptcy litigation, Mr. Cahill's presentation will apply also to other federal civil litigation and to state litiigation under analogous rules.

Dismissal of Emergency Department in Arm Amputation

Lowis & Gellen, LLP has obtained a directed verdict for a Chicago community hospital and its emergency medicine department. A 52-year old woman got her hand and wrist caught in her overhead garage door, causing what was diagnosed as a minor fracture and cuts. The emergency department represented by Lowis & Gellen bandaged the cuts and referred her to an orthopedic surgeon for further care. No antibiotics or other medications were administered. Over the next several days the wound became infected, spreading to the bones of the wrist. After weeks of treatment, an amputation of the arm slightly below the elbow was necessary to save her life. Attorney Scott R. Wolfe aggressively filed counterclaims alleging the patient’s own delay in seeking follow up treatment recommended was the cause of her amputation. After allowing years of litigation and giving the plaintiff every opportunity to counter the defense, the presiding Judge was so overwhelmingly convinced by the defense, she refused to allow the case against Mr. Wolfe’s client go before a jury. She dismissed the case. The case will proceed to trial against an orthopedic surgeon, not represented by Lowis & Gellen, who saw the plaintiff after her brief hospital contact. For more information on the case or for general information regarding Lowis & Gellen’s professional malpractice group or general liability practice please contact Scott R. Wolfe at (312) 456-2709 or swolfe@lowis-gellen.com.