A Cook County jury's verdict in favor of Northwestern Memorial Hospital and Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation has been upheld in a medical negligence case involving the prenatal care of a woman whose daughter was born prematurely. The plaintiffs, Cristina Vyse and David Goodpaster, filed the complaint on behalf of their minor daughter, Hayley Joe Goodpaster, seeking to vacate the defense verdict and remand for a new trial. The appeal was filed on July 15, 2024, in the Appellate Court of Illinois.
The case centers around the prenatal care that Cristina Vyse received while pregnant with her daughter Hayley, who was born prematurely at 26 weeks gestation on April 8, 2006. Vyse’s primary healthcare provider during her pregnancy was Erie Family Health Center (Erie), which had an affiliation agreement with Northwestern Memorial Hospital (NMH) and Northwestern Medical Faculty Foundation (NMFF). This agreement stipulated that NMH and NMFF would provide certain medical services to Erie’s patients. On February 21, 2006, Vyse underwent a 20-week ultrasound at NMH’s Prentice Women’s Hospital. Dr. William Grobman interpreted the ultrasound images but did not diagnose Vyse's bicornuate uterus or short cervix—conditions that placed her at high risk for preterm delivery.
The plaintiffs argued that Dr. Grobman failed to meet the standard of care by not identifying these conditions during the ultrasound or obtaining a thorough medical history from Vyse. They claimed this oversight led to inadequate prenatal care and ultimately resulted in Hayley's premature birth and subsequent medical complications. According to their expert witness, Dr. Michael S. Cardwell, proper identification and monitoring could have prevented Hayley's premature birth through interventions such as cervical cerclage.
During the trial, nurse-midwife Elizabeth McKelvey testified that she did not consider Vyse's bicornuate uterus alone as indicating a high-risk pregnancy when referring her for an ultrasound at Prentice Women’s Hospital. Dr. Grobman maintained that his role was limited to interpreting the ultrasound images and that he complied with the standard of care required for such procedures.
The plaintiffs sought to introduce an affiliation agreement between Erie and NMH/NMFF as evidence to establish that NMH had undertaken broader responsibilities in providing specialized maternal-fetal medicine consultations rather than just conducting ultrasounds. However, they failed to move this document into evidence effectively during the trial or use it in cross-examinations.
Additionally, one significant point of contention was whether Hayley should be allowed to testify about her disabilities resulting from premature birth. The plaintiffs disclosed their intent to call Hayley as a witness only on the eve of opening statements without having previously identified her as a witness under Supreme Court Rule 213(f)(1). The defendants objected due to lack of prior disclosure and deposition opportunities, leading the court to bar her testimony.
In their posttrial motion, which was denied by Judge Janet Adams Brosnahan, the plaintiffs argued errors regarding both the exclusion of the affiliation agreement from evidence and barring Hayley's testimony warranted a new trial. However, Justice Fitzgerald Smith affirmed these decisions citing procedural compliance failures by the plaintiffs.
Representing attorneys included those from law firms involved in presenting arguments for both sides before Justices Lavin and Coghlan concurred with Justice Fitzgerald Smith's judgment affirming the trial court's decisions under Case ID No. 18 L 3144.