Chicago Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Northern District of Illinois Federal Judge Ruben Castillo dismissed the whistle-blower lawsuit brought by Robert S. Goldberg, M.D. against Rush University Medical Center, Midwest Orthopaedics at Rush, LLC and other named orthopedic surgeons under the provisions of the False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §3727 et seq. The lawsuit,Robert S. Goldberg, M.D. and June Beecham v. Rush University Medical Center, et al., 04-CV-04584, was brought in the federal court by Dr. Goldberg claiming that Rush University Medical Center, along with the orthopedic surgeons and their physicians group, had been overbilling Medicare.

Chicago medical malpractice attorney Robert Kreisman was interviewed by The Chicago Tribune's Melissa Harris in an attempt to shed some light on the judge's decision in Goldberg. While Illinois lawsuits involving doctors and hospitals typically are regarding medical negligence that has occurred, in the case of Goldberg, the Illinois lawsuit involved accusations made by one of Rush's orthopedic surgeons of fraudulent activities committed against the government. These types of case, where a plaintiff brings forth an action because he or she believes that the government has been defrauded, are called whistleblower cases.

The fraud at issue in Goldberg was that a group of orthopedic surgeons at Rush University Medical Center were violating Medicare billing requirements when they overbooked surgeries and through their heavy reliance on residents to perform parts or all of the surgeries. Rush is a teaching hospital and is compensated for training its residents, not for allowing its residents to perform unsupervised surgical procedures.

Continue reading "Chicago Attorney Robert Kreisman Explains Reasons for Chicago Judge's Dismissal of Whistleblower Lawsuit - Goldberg v. Rush University Medical Center and Midwest Orthopaedics at Rush, LLC" »

Failing to yield the right of way at an intersection can often lead to auto accidents. In the best case scenario, these types of car crashes lead to minor injuries and are simple fender benders. However, there is also the chance that these types of car accidents can lead to severe and permanent injuries. The Illinois personal injury lawsuit of Burke v. Weller d/b/a Plainfield Limousine, et al., 08 L 361, is an example of an Illinois car accident that resulted in permanent injuries for one of the drivers involved.

The Illinois auto accident occurred when Casey Stryganek, a limousine driver, was turning left at the intersection of Route 52 and Interstate 55 in Shorewood, Illinois. Stryganek had a green light, not a green turn arrow, and elected to make his left turn despite the approach of a car driven by the plaintiff, Donald Burke. Unfortunately, this decision by Stryganek led to the collision with Burke's vehicle.

The Illinois car crash left Burke with a fractured left radius and ulna. The severity of the fractures necessitated an internal fixation surgery to repair the fracture. An internal fixation surgery is a fairly extensive surgery that requires the surgeon to insert metal rods and screws into the bones in order to repair the fracture.

Continue reading "Illinois Intersection Car Accident Driver Receives Over $600,000 Verdict - Burke v. Plainfield Limousine" »

Oftentimes lawyers employ expert witnesses to help prove their theory of liability, whether in a medical malpractice lawsuit, a personal injury lawsuit, or a product liability lawsuit. These expert witness can range from a general surgeon who might testify as to how the defendant doctor violated the standard of care, to a life care planner who could calculate the plaintiff's lost future earnings following a construction site injury, or an engineer testifying regarding a product's design defects. Whatever the type of expert witness, one thing remains constant: an expert witness's testimony is often key in proving one's case.

Given the valuable nature of expert witness testimony, it is essential that the expert is qualified to provide the opinions that are the subject of his or her testimony. It is common for both plaintiff and defense lawyers to challenge the qualifications of the opposing side's expert witnesses. Because of the important nature of expert witness qualification issues, the United States Supreme Court has often spoken on the subject the acceptability of expert witnesses to testify, but most widely examined and cited is the product liability case of Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals.

In Daubert, the Court considered the admissibility of the testimony of the plaintiff's expert witness, who was interpreting the epidemiology studies of other doctors. The expert's testimony was rejected by the trial court in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit under the Frye standard, taken from Frye v United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) .

Continue reading "Applying Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals to Filter Expert Testimony Qualifications" »

An Illinois jury recently returned a $4.5 million verdict for a Chicago truck accident lawsuit that resulted in severe spine and back injuries to the plaintiff in Dorman v. Sysco Food Services – Chicago, Inc., et al., No. 07 L 10296. The verdict followed a two-week trial held in the Circuit Court of Cook County.

The Illinois truck accident occurred when the plaintiff, David Dorman, was stopped at a red light in Chicago. While he was sitting at the light, Dorman's vehicle was rear-ended by a truck owned by Sysco Food Services – Chicago, Inc. The defendant truck driver claimed that his breaks failed as he approached the plaintiff's car. The high speeds at which the impact occurred were due to the fact that the defendant was exiting the Kennedy Expressway immediately prior to the truck accident.

The impact caused the truck to land on top of the plaintiff's car and crush his roof, leaving the 31 year-old Dorman with severe neck and back injuries. Dorman required a two-level spinal fusion, two-disc replacement surgery, and a lumbar discectomy to repair the four bulging cervical discs and herniated disc he sustained during the Illinois auto crash.

Continue reading "Chicago Rear-End Truck Crash Ends With a $4.5 Million Jury Verdict – Dorman v. Sysco Food Services – Chicago, Inc." »

A former railroad worker found not able to pursue his Illinois railroad litigation case because his testifying medical experts were unable to identify the specific cause of the his injuries. The Illinois railroad litigation case was dismissed by the district court, a decision that was then affirmed at the appellate level in the case of Myers v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., d/b/a Canadian National/Illinois Central Railroad Co., No. 10-1279.

Timothy Myers, the 50 year-old plaintiff, had worked for the Illinois Central Railroad for 30 years as a brakeman, switchman, and conductor before retiring. He brought the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) lawsuit to recover damages for injuries he suffered from cumulative trauma sustained by his elbow, knee, neck and back.

Myers based his FELA lawsuit on reports from three doctors and an ergonomist that opined that his injuries were caused by the railroad's negligence. However, the court did not consider any of this expert testimony when ruling on the railroad's motion to dismiss the case. As a result, the court granted a summary judgment in favor of the Illinois Central Railroad, a decision which Myers sought to have appealed by the U.S. Court of Appeals.

Continue reading "Illinois Railroad Worker's Medical Experts Unable To Connect Cumulative Trauma Injury - Myers v. Illinois Central Railroad Co." »

Chicago construction site accidents are fairly common considering the heightened risk of working at a construction site versus at a desk job. And while some of these construction accidents can be considered part of the every day routine of doing construction work, when an Illinois construction accident is the result of negligence on the part of a company or fellow employee, then an Illinois personal injury claim can be brought.

The case of Aguilera v. FHP Techtonics Corporation is an example of a situation where the Chicago construction site accident was the result of a company's negligence, in this case the general contractor of the job. Thirty-seven year-old David Aguilera was severely injured when he fell through an elevator shaft during the demolition of a building during the Chicago Transit Authority's expansion project for the system's Brown Line project.

Aguilera had opened the door of a freight elevator while working on the project, which opened despite there not being an elevator waiting. Aguilera fell some twenty feet through the open elevator shaft, and sustained a torn meniscus and anterior cruciate ligament tears in his knee, along with a concussion and lower back strain.

Continue reading "Chicago Construction Site Injury Involving Elevator Shaft Fall Leads to Verdict Against General Contractor - Aguilera v. FHP Techtonics Corporation" »

An Illinois personal injury lawsuit recently received a jury verdict of $4 million; the case involved an Illinois highway accident that left both the defendant truck driver and a little girl dead. The verdict was against a truck driver, Wayne Garfoot, and his trucking company, Garfoot Trucking, Inc. in The Estate of Santos v. Garfoot Trucking, Inc..

In January, 2005, Richard Santos was driving on Interstate 90 with his two-year old daughter, Amanda, in the passenger seat. The Santos' vehicle was approaching an Illinois toll plaza when it was rear-ended by the defendant, Wayne Garfoot, who was driving a tractor-trailer truck. The truck drove over the car, crushing and killing two-year old Amanda. Garfoot also died as a result of the Illinois truck accident.

Amanda's estate alleged that the defendant truck driver was driving too fast for conditions and did not maintain a safe speed as he was approaching the Illinois toll plaza. Because the defendant truck driver had died in the Illinois truck accident, an Illinois state trooper was called to testify as an accident reconstruction expert at the trial.

Continue reading "Tractor-Trailer Truck Accident Leads to Death of Two-Year Old Girl - $4 Million Verdict in Estate of Santos v. Garfoot Trucking, Inc." »

A recent Illinois wrongful death lawsuit was awarded $1 million by an Illinois jury that found the defendant, William Barham, guilty of the negligence that led to his friend's death in Estate of Isom v. Barham, 00 L 63. The case arose out of an Illinois car crash involving the defendant and the decedent, Jerry Isom. Barham was allegedly driving when the car ran off of the road and collided with a tree, killing Isom on impact.

Barham and Isom were the only two people in the vehicle and subsequently the only two injured as a result of the Illinois car accident. Both men were employed at the Shawnee Correctional Center, and were in fact driving an Illinois Department of Corrections vehicle at the time of the Illinois car crash. There was evidence that Barham had been drinking prior to the car accident.

The Illinois wrongful death lawsuit was brought by the estate of the decedent, Jerry Isom; he was survived by a wife and four children. The estate claimed that as the driver of the vehicle that Barham should be held responsible for Isom's death. However, Barham claimed that he was not the driver, but that Isom had in fact been driving at the time of the Illinois car crash.

Continue reading "Illinois Wrongful Death Case After Single-Vehicle Car Crash Gets $1 Million Jury Award – Estate of Isom v. Barham" »