APPELLATE VICTORY: COURT UPHOLDS DISMISSAL OF WRONGFUL DEATH ACTION AGAINST DOCTOR

Lowis & Gellen appellate attorney Deborah M. O’Brien successfully defended the dismissal of a medical malpractice action before the First District Appellate Court. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of a complaint alleging that the defendant physician was negligent in diagnosing and treating a fatal heart condition, on grounds that the plaintiff failed to timely satisfy the physician affidavit and report requirements of § 2-622 of the Code. Moreover, the court held that the plaintiff was not entitled to post judgment relief from the dismissal because she failed to prove due diligence in pursuing her action.

Trial attorney Jong-Won Hyun successfully defended the action in the Circuit Court of Cook County before Judge Kathy M. Flanagan.

Appellate Victory: Court Upholds Ruling That Doctor Was Not Qualified As Expert Witness

Lowis & Gellen appellate attorneys Mehreen S. Sherwani and Joan K. Kubalanza (now serving as a judge in the Circuit Court) successfully defended the dismissal of a primary care physician on appeal before the First District Court Appellate Court. In a split decision, the appellate court affirmed the Circuit Court's grant of a motion in limine brought by the co-defendant surgeon, seeking to prevent Plaintiff's expert from testifying that the surgeon violated the standard of care when he chose not to perform a biopsy on Plaintiff's swollen lymph nodes. In affirming the judgment, the appellate court held that Plaintiff's expert was properly barred from testifying that there was a causal connection between the defendants' alleged failure to timely diagnose Plaintiff's lymphoma and her subsequent development of ovarian cancer.

Trial attorneys Mark J. Smith and Scott R. Wolfe successfully defended this case in the Circuit Court of Cook County before Judge Carol Pearce McCarthy. Ms. Sherwani drafted the appellate brief and Mr. Wolfe argued the case before the appellate court. When asked by the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin about the appellate ruling, Mr. Smith stated that it "echoes existing case law." To view the entire Law Bulletin article click here.

Katherine Rowe joins the firm for the month of January from Norton Rose LLP, an international law firm based in London. Katherine trained at Norton Rose and qualified into the Mergers and Acquisitions team two years ago. She regularly acts for both public and private companies (based both in the UK and in Europe) as well as a number of hedge funds on their domestic and cross border M&A transactions. Katherine also provides general corporate advice to various international companies on an ongoing basis, including amongst others, a leading top end European car manufacturer. In addition, she was recently on secondment to BBC Worldwide Limited, the commercial arm of the British Broadcasting Corporation (the principal public sector broadcaster in the UK) assisting with a Competition Commission enquiry. During her time with Lowis & Gellen, Katherine will be looking to further develop the relationship between Lowis & Gellen and Norton Rose to better serve our mutual clients.

Lowis & Gellen featured in Leading Lawyers Network Magazine

Click here to view article

Judge throws out malicious prosecution claim

On December 3, 2008, Lowis & Gellen won the early dismissal of a case filed against a local county prosecutor. The plaintiff had asserted a malicious prosecution claim against the prosecutor, alleging that the prosecutor acted maliciously and beyond his authority in filing trespass charges and in investigating the background of those charges. In throwing out the lawsuit, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois made two rulings. First, the court held that under Illinois law, the prosecutor had absolute immunity from any claim concerning the initiation or prosecution of criminal charges. Second, the court ruled that Illinois law gave the prosecutor sovereign immunity from any claim concerning the pre-charges investigation of the alleged trespass because the prosecutor’s investigatory acts were neither malicious nor beyond the scope of his duties. The published opinion can be found at 2008 WL 5101613 (N.D.Ill Dec. 3, 2008).