Quantcast

IL Supreme Court: Jury instructions don't trigger new medmal trial for family of woman who died at Mercy Hospital

COOK COUNTY RECORD

Sunday, December 22, 2024

IL Supreme Court: Jury instructions don't trigger new medmal trial for family of woman who died at Mercy Hospital

State Court
Mercy hospital chicago 1280

Mercy Hospital & Medical Center, Chicago | Zol87 from Chicago, Illinois, USA, CC BY-SA 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

The Illinois Supreme Court has ruled the family of a woman who died after receiving care at Mercy Hospital in Chicago cannot get a new trial for her medical malpractice claims against the hospital and the doctors who treated the woman, because a Cook County judge did not need to give a jury special instructions about how the doctors' actions may have affected her chance of recovery or survival.

The November opinion was written by Justice Robert Carter, with concurrence from Chief Justice Anne Burke and Justices Rita Garman, Mary Jane Theis, David Overstreet, Michael Burke and P. Scott Neville Jr. The decision favored Emergency Medicine Physicians of Chicago, and doctors Brett M. Jones, Scott A. Heinrich, Helene Connolly and Amit Arwindekar. A suit had been filed in 2013 in Cook County Circuit Court against them by Jill M. Bailey, administrator of the estate of Jill Milton-Hampton.

The 42-year-old Milton-Hampton sought treatment March 16, 2012 in the emergency room at Mercy Hospital and Medical Center in Chicago. She was suffering from nausea, vomiting and other abdominal-related ailments. One of the doctors recommended Milton-Hampton be admitted to the hospital, but she declined and left, according to court papers. She later returned to the hospital with worsening conditions. She was admitted, but died March 18.  


Illinois Supreme Court Justice Robert Carter | Illinoiscourts.gov

The Cook County Medical Examiner's autopsy indicated she died from heart inflammation brought on by sepsis. A private autopsy, done at the behest of Milton-Hampton's family, suggested she died from acute chronic congestive heart failure due to heart muscle disease.

At trial, plaintiff contended Milton-Hampton died from toxic shock syndrome and sepsis, caused by a tampon, which was present while she was under defendants' care. Plaintiff alleged Milton-Hampton could have been treated if she had been properly diagnosed. Defendants countered there was no evidence of infection and no tampon was found during a CT scan or later at autopsy. Rather, defendants claimed she died from heart inflammation.

A jury found for defendants. Plaintiff appealed, arguing the trial judge, Thomas V. Lyons II, refused to give certain instructions to jurors.

The first proposed instruction was, if jurors determined negligent delay in diagnosing and treating the sepsis, which in turn lessened the treatment Milton-Hampton received, then such delay could be considered a cause of her death.

The second instruction centered on the question of whether Milton-Hampton would have checked out of the hospital if it was determined one of the physicians failed to tell her of risks associated with pulmonary embolism, sepsis and other medical problems, before she left the hospital the first time.

Illinois First District Appellate Court agreed with plaintiff, reversing the verdict in September 2020. Defendants then went to the state high court.

Justice Carter concluded the appeals panel was wrong on both counts, saying the proposed instructions were covered by other instructions that were given the jury.

Carter pointed out the trial judge instructed jurors that plaintiff claimed Dr. Jones did not inform Milton-Hampton of the "risks of leaving the hospital." According to Carter, "This instruction accurately informed the jury of plaintiff’s allegations regarding Dr. Jones’s alleged failure to adequately warn Jill [Milton-Hampton.] No additional instruction on informed consent was warranted because, as explained above, plaintiff did not allege or present evidence supporting a claim of lack of informed consent."

Carter noted the informed consent theory may only apply when a patient agrees to treatment without being told of risks. In Milton-Hampton's  case, no evidence was put forth that Milton-Hampton consented to treatment without being informed of risks, and that the resulting treatment injured her, Carter said.

Carter further said the jury was instructed on proximate cause, according to Illinois pattern instructions, so a separate instruction on "loss of chance," as requested by plaintiff, was not needed. Loss of chance refers to the principal that a plaintiff can show a doctor's negligence may not have directly caused injury, but did diminish plaintiff's chance of recovery or survival.

Plaintiff was represented before the high court by Vivian Tarver-Varnado, of AMB Law Group of Chicago.

Defendants were represented by Michael T. Walsh, of Kitch Law Firm of Chicago.

The Illinois Trial Lawyers Association filed a friend-of-the-court argument for plaintiff.

The Illinois State Medical Society and the American Medical Association filed friend-of-the-court arguments for defendants.

More News