On Jan. 25, 2024, the First District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a genuine issue of material fact exists as to apparent agency when a hospital patient does not know their physician is an independent contractor.
On July 14, 2023, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a statute allowing for prejudgment interest does not violate the Illinois Constitution.
On Oct. 6, 2022, the Fourth District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that an attending physician owed a duty of care to a patient when the doctor was a member of the patient’s care team and exercised medical judgment regarding the patient.
On March 22, 2021, the Illinois Supreme Court found that a clinic’s failure to schedule a timely follow-up appointment for a patient was not the proximate cause of the patient’s death from a highly extraordinary disease arising outside of the recommended appointment’s timeframe.
On Sept. 21, 2020, the Third District of the Illinois Appellate Court held that a trial court has discretion to dismiss a medical malpractice case without prejudice for untimely filing an affidavit required under 735 ILCS 5/2-622 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
When bringing a healing-arts malpractice claim in Illinois, who should bring the suit, what statutes are helpful, and what damages can be sought? What does section 2-622 require?
On December 19, 2014, the Department of Insurance amended the Part titled Medical Liability Insurance Rules and Rate Filings to comply with a 2010 Illinois Supreme Court ruling. 50 Ill. Adm. Code 929 (eff. Dec. 19, 2014).
New quality assurance and oversight standards for computed tomography ("CT"), radiation therapy, electronic brachytherapy, and digital imaging went into effect on May 29, 2014. 32 Ill. Adm. Code 360.
On March 20, 2014, the Illinois Supreme Court, as a matter of first impression, held that the term "fee" in the Good Samaritan Act includes a doctor's hourly compensation, including instances where the doctor is paid but the patient is not directly billed for the services provided.
A lawyer who was disciplined for posting a YouTube video of police buying drugs from his client has filed a federal lawsuit challenging his suspension.
Properly performed peer review is not subject to discovery in med-mal litigation. But health care providers sometimes learn the hard way how the privilege can be lost.
An Illinois Pattern Jury Instruction doesn't state the correct standard for determining whether a physician's conduct was reasonable in a med-mal case, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled.
On December 2, 2008, the Illinois Appellate Court, Second District, reversed and remanded the judgment of the Circuit Court of Lake County granting the defendants' motions to dismiss and dismissing the plaintiff's medical malpractice complaint.
The supreme court holds that a med-mal plaintiff is entitled to a 90-day extension to file her certificate of merit - and that a 2004 law didn't reenact the version of 2-622 invalidated in Best v Taylor.
On December 28, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, reversed the holding of the Circuit Court of Cook County denying the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of in personam jurisdiction.
On December 13, 2007, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the appellate court and the Circuit Court of Knox County, holding the passage of time between a plaintiff's voluntary dismissal and refiling is not included in considering the plaintiff's diligence under Supreme Court Rule 103(b).
On April 9, 2007, the Illinois Appellate Court, Fifth District, affirmed the Circuit Court of Washington County's denial of the intervener's request that the court unseal the names of certain medical patients contained in a previous court order.
The appellate court reversed the trial court's rejection of a plaintiff's firm's argument that its extraordinary effort justified fees that exceeded the statutory med-mal limit.
The suit, filed in Cook County, argues that the statute violates the separation of powers, is impermissible special legislation, and suffers from other constitutional infirmities.
Should a defendant-doctor's medical records be available to a plaintiff who alleges that the doctor's poor health caused him to deliver substandard care?
