Source: https://www.rosenfeldinjurylawyers.com/illinois-medical-negligence-law.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 20:16:41+00:00

Document:
Medical malpractice cases are a mainstay in personal injury litigation. They occur as a result of the misconduct of a healthcare professional such as a doctor or nurse. This article is designed to give you an understanding of the various laws and cases that surround medical malpractice cases so that you can better understand their outcomes.
The Stopwatch: Statute of Limitations.
There are some important takeaways from these laws. First, the general rule is that plaintiffs have two years to file a medical malpractice action. If they did not discern that the malpractice (i.e. the injury), then that date might be pushed back. Second, however long it took to discover that malpractice occurred, plaintiffs only have four years from when it occurred to file an action. Third, special exceptions are made for minors and the disabled. Minors have 8 years to bring an action but must file before they turn 22.
The statute of limitations for the disabled is extended until the disability is removed. Fourth, and finally, if the malpractice was fraudulently concealed, then the plaintiff 5 years after discovering it to file the action. These define the parameters of the Illinois medical malpractice statute of limitations.
They are stopwatch on your case. You need to move quickly to file or time will run out and you will not be able to get recovery. Consult with an Illinois medical malpractice attorney if you believe you have been the victim of medical malpractice today!
Service of process is a gritty procedure. Often times, defendants duck it to waste times, prolong the court process, or otherwise avoid liability. While annoying, it must be done to perfection or your case will be over before it begins.
Medical malpractice cases typically involve a claim of negligence. This means that the healthcare provider did not serve the patient with the care that a similarly situated provider would have. In other words, their care fell below a standard of reasonableness that is customary to the circumstances. Claims of negligence involve four aspects and the plaintiff must prove every one of them.
Duty: The defendant owed a legal duty to the plaintiff. Doctors, hospitals, nurses, and other associated medical parties owe a duty to every patient to provide care and services that are reasonable in the circumstances. This extends to misdiagnosis, selection of medication, selection of medical devices, instructions for care, delay in services, the supervision of care, and other related problems. Establishing duty is a holistic process. Illinois courts allow it to be established by custom, expert testimony, law, and other factors. See Kotvan v. Kirk, 321 Ill. App. 3d 733, 747 (1st Dist. 2001).
Breach: The defendant breached that duty. Unless the procedure is very common or defendant’s conduct was so gross negligent that laypersons can understand its character, plaintiffs must prove breach with expert testimony. Prairie v. University of Chicago Hospitals, 298 Ill. App. 3d 316, 332 (1st Dist. 1998).
Causation: The defendant’s breach was the legal and direct cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. In the civil context of a medical malpractice case, the standard of proof is a preponderance of the evidence. For causation, the analysis is similar because the question is whether or not the defendant’s breach probably caused the plaintiff’s injuries. Pantaleo v. Our Lady of Resurrection Medical Center, 297 Ill. App. 3d 266, 231 (1st Dist. 1998).
Damages: The plaintiff’s injuries produced damages. The bar for demonstrating damages in medical malpractice cases is not hard to clear for plaintiffs. They need not show that a different outcome would have produced a superior result or even that, absent the defendant’s negligence, something different would have happened. They can either 1) prove damages or 2)show that the defendant’s negligence cost the plaintiff the chance of recovery by some percentage. Lambie v. Schneider, 305 Ill. App. 3d 421, 239 (4th Dist. 1999).
In sum, the expert must state that he or she has six years of experience in the relevant medical area, that has knowledge of the issues involved in the cases, has consulted the relevant records, and is qualified by experience to state that there is a meritorious basis for filing the case. Outside of the substance at stake here, the critical thing to remember is that finding an expert, letting them become acquainted with the record, and drafting a certification is a long process. With the statute of limitations in mind, it is best to begin this process early. Also, this is an expensive proposition-expert witnesses charge a lot by the hour. Then, to eventually use an expert witness at trial, he or she must be licensed in the relevant practice area and spend at least 75% of their time working in the relevant medical field.
Analyzing the size and location of your recovery will be one of the foremost determinations in your medical malpractice lawsuits. The first thing to understand is that there are different kinds of damages: economic, non-economic, and punitive.
The first, economic damages, compensate the plaintiff for out-of-pocket losses such as medical bills, lost income, or damaged property. The second, non-economic damages, compensate the plaintiff for more intangible losses such as pain and suffering, disfigurement, and loss of support. The third, punitive damages, punish a defendant and seek to deter similar behavior in the future.
Interestingly, the Court has ruled that a ban on punitive damages is constitutional. See Bernier v. Burris, 113 Ill. 2d 219 (1986).
Outside of the nature of your recovery, the other significant consideration will be its location. Naturally, the hospital and any of its employees may be liable for any of their acts and omissions during your stay there. Also, the doctors, surgeons, or other professionals are responsible in their own right as well because they typically act as independent contractors.
However, on a theory of vicarious liability you may be able to establish that the hospital is liable for the acts of doctors and these professionals. This is a theory of secondary responsibility. Its basic premise is that the person giving care was an agent of the hospital because the hospital controlled him or her, the person assented to the control, and the person was acting for the benefit of the hospital. This is a critical element to establish because it could lasso the hospital into the lawsuit and raise recovery possibilities.
What does this mean? Basically, when hospitals or insurance companies are also responsible for the injuries of the plaintiff, the defendant can request a reduction in the award related to disability and lost wages income. However, the request must be made within 30 days of the verdict and can only be reduced by 50%.
This is important because until recently Illinois maintained a graduated schedule that allowed plaintiffs’ lawyers to keep 33.33% of the first $150,000 in recovery, 25% of the next $850,000 recovered, and 20% of recovery over $1,000,000. Now, the cap is simply one-third of all recovery.
Illinois has a modified comparative fault system. This means that plaintiffs can only recover if there negligence regarding the incident was less than 50% responsible for their injuries, and their recovery will be reduced by the amount of their culpability.
2-Joint and Several Liability. Joint and several liability exists when more than one party is responsible for the injuries of a victim but the victim can collect the entire amount of his or her damages from any of the parties. Illinois maintained this rule for a long time but in 1995 the legislature removed joint liability. This lasted only until 1997 when the Illinois Supreme Court, in Best v. Taylor Machine Works, ruled that this was unconstitutional. Therefore, the traditional system of joint and several liability continues today and applies to medical malpractice cases. This means that if a doctor, hospital, and pharmaceutical company are all liable for your injuries you can go after any one of them for all of your damages.
The real effect of contribution must be seen in the context of joint and several liability, because the latter allows the plaintiff to achieve the total recovery from any defendant, some defendants might wind up paying more than their fair share. Thus, contribution allows them to go back to their co-defendants for payment of their shares. The theory is that the courts will not delay a plaintiff’s recovery and that defendants should fight among themselves only after the victim has recovered. The practical effect of this is that plaintiffs’ lawyers should first go after the defendant where recovery seems the quickest and greatest.
If you think you have been the victim of medical malpractice at an Illinois facility, get in touch with Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers LLC today! We can walk you through the relevant laws and inform you of how they impact your particular facts and circumstances. Do not delay your recovery, call now!

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.