Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

Akimbee Burns, who was in her late 30s, underwent a pap smear at a federally operated health care center. The health center’s pap smear showed atypical squamous cells. Unfortunately, Burns’s treating physician did not tell her of the results. When Burns returned to the same health center to follow up on an unrelated issue, the doctor allegedly told her that her pap smear result was normal.

Approximately eight months later, Burns was diagnosed as having Stage IIB cervical cancer, which had spread to her lymph nodes.

Although Burns underwent radiation, chemotherapy and other treatments, she died within two years.
Continue reading

by

Julius D’Amico, 73, was admitted to Bryn Mawr Hospital for surgery to treat what was believed to be an infection in her arm AV graft used for hemodialysis. During the surgery, she lost blood and fluid volume, which led to a postoperative decrease in her blood pressure, blood volume and hemoglobin.

In addition, that night she suffered prolonged periods of hypotension and decreased tissue profusion. After undergoing hemodialysis the next day, she became unstable, lost consciousness and suffered a fatal heart attack.

D’Amico was survived by her husband and two adult daughters.
Continue reading

by

In this medical malpractice lawsuit, the plaintiff claimed the judge’s questioning of “Juror 3” coerced a verdict. The judge gave a Prim instruction (Illinois Pattern Jury Instruction, Civil No. 1.05; People v. Prim, 53 Ill.2d 62 (1973)) on the second day of deliberation after receiving two jury notes.

The first note said: “We are gridlocked at 11 to 1. We have tried persuading said person, but there is a refusal to listen to the law.”

In the second note, Juror 3 asked: “If I’ve reached my decision and the 11 won’t rest it, yet continue to try and sway my decision, at what point can this end?” A day later, when Juror 3 said that she was “experiencing elevated blood sugars and chest pain due to the stress of this deliberation,” the judge followed up with the second Prim instruction (I.P.I. Civil No. 1.06).
Continue reading

by

Lois K. Ries, a public aid recipient, was paralyzed by what was alleged to be medical malpractice. This took place in 2011. Her medical malpractice lawsuit was pending when she died. After settling the case for $415,000, her two sons, who were the co-executors of her estate and her sole heirs, received an unpleasant surprise.

During the negotiations, the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (the holder of the Illinois public aid lien) reduced its lien under Section 11-22 of the Illinois Public Aid Code to $20,000. It had paid $124,679 for her medical expenses after she was paralyzed. The sons expected to receive the next proceeds of the settlement: $80,819. However, the department insisted that it was entitled to all of the money based on Section 5-13 because it had provided $87,929 in medical benefits to Rise before her injury.

The co-executors objected, insisting that they never would have settled the medical malpractice lawsuit if they knew they would receive nothing. They would have instead pressed on, taking the case to trial with the hope that they would obtain a verdict more than the settlement and thus have some money for themselves after satisfying the public aid lien.
Continue reading

by

Carolyn Parris, a 76-year-old woman suffering from dementia, was taken by ambulance to the Mary Black Health Systems Gaffney Emergency Room. She was admitted for pneumonia and identified as a moderate fall risk.

Early one morning, her bed alarm sounded, prompting the staff to come to her room where they found her in the doorway of her bathroom on the floor. An x-ray revealed that she had suffered a fractured ankle.

As a result of that injury, Parris required open reduction and internal fixation surgery and was transferred to a nursing home.
Continue reading

by

Laurence Seng was seen at a hospital emergency room where he complained of a persistent cough, chest heaviness and burning following an outpatient urological procedure.

Seng, who vomited in the ER, was administered a gastrointestinal cocktail in an effort to relieve his chest symptoms. However, his pain level increased. An osteopath, Dr. Joseph Robinson, diagnosed Seng as having a persistent cough and discharged him to home the same evening.

At home, Seng continued to experience chest heaviness and developed a racing heart. The next morning, his wife discovered that he was unresponsive. Seng, 66, died of a myocardial infarction. He was survived by his wife and four adult children. Seng’s wife, individually and on behalf of his estate, sued Dr. Robinson, alleging that he chose not evaluate Seng for a potential cardiac cause of his symptoms. Plaintiff alleged that he should have ordered an EKG and a blood test.
Continue reading

by

Ms. Doe, 63, underwent a hysterectomy performed by Dr. Roe. Almost three weeks after the procedure, she was admitted to a hospital where testing showed that she had a gangrenous cecum.

Ms. Doe underwent two colectomy surgeries, was hospitalized for three weeks and required a month of inpatient rehabilitation.

Ms. Doe now suffers from chronic abdominal pain but is not a candidate for reversal of her colostomy. In addition, she requires daily in-home assistance.
Continue reading

by

Mr. Doe, a diabetic who suffered from peripheral vascular disease, underwent a partial leg amputation. While undergoing inpatient rehabilitation, Mr. Doe developed symptoms of a gastrointestinal bleed and was readmitted to the hospital.

During Mr. Doe’s 5-day stay, his attending medical providers did not assess his surgical stump and nurses did not change his dressing.

Mr. Doe developed an infection of the incision site, resulting in gangrene. Consequently, Mr. Doe required a revision of the surgical stump. He sued the hospital alleging improper wound treatment.
Continue reading

by

Daniel Scavetta, who had a history of intravenous drug abuse, began seeing internist Dr. James Agresti. Dr. Agresti prescribed Suboxone. After a colonoscopy revealed multiple polyps, including one that was too large to remove, Scavetta was referred to a colorectal surgeon, Dr. Joel Nizen.

A CT scan showed a 1.9 cm lesion in Scavetta’s liver and an enlarged spleen. This prompted the interpreting radiologist to recommend that Scavetta undergo an MRI of his abdomen. Although Dr. Nizen performed surgery approximately two weeks later, he did not investigate the lesion.

Approximately 13 months later, Scavetta saw blood in his urine. The CT scan and MRI revealed a 4.2 cm liver mass. Scavetta was subsequently diagnosed with having Stage IV hepatocellular carcinoma.
Continue reading

by

Doe, age 35, was hospitalized for treatment of pneumonia. Doe’s pneumonia cleared, but follow-up X-rays taken one month later and seven months after that showed a suspicious lesion on her lung. The radiologist interpreting the X-rays chose not to note or record the lesion.

Almost three years later, Ms. Doe underwent a CT scan, which formed the basis of a diagnosis of Stage IV inoperable non-small cell lung cancer.

The lawsuit alleged that the delayed diagnosis of lung cancer reduced Ms. Doe’s chances of survival from 85% to 10% in that the lesion measured 1 cm when first seen but had grown to 3.5 cm by the time she received the diagnosis.
Continue reading