Contact me at markploftus@aol.com

Got some encouraging news Friday on a medical malpractice case I am litigating. In this case I represent a seven year old boy who was undergoing elective surgery for an large umbilical hernia. During the surgery, on at least two occasions, there are indications that the bowel may have been perforated, or pierced. Perforating the bowel can have lethal complications because bowel content, i.e. stool, is allowed to ooze out into the abdomen and may cause peritionitis. When that happens, the standard of care requires that the entire bowel be removed and checked for injury. Removal is necessary because it is imperative any injury be found and repaired. If you don't find the hole, and bowel content is allowed to spill out unchecked, the patient will likely die from the resulting infection.

Well, the defendant surgeons acknowledge that there may have been damage to the bowel. But they don't remove the entirety of the bowel to inspect. They take 10 seconds, literally, according to their testimony, where they look around and then sew the kid back up and send him on his way. Well, guess what? That's right, there was a hole in the bowel and they just didn't find it. So a day and a half later, he is in the ER having emergency surgery for peritonitis. And nearly dies. And spends 30 days in a coma for pain reduction purposes. The poor kids undergoes numerous additional procedures and incurs choking medical bills.

I called a very prominent local pediatric surgeon and asked him to be my expert. He tells me to send me the material and he will take a look. In the same breath, he tells me not to get my hopes up -- he only testifies for injured parties(i.e. plaintiffs) if he sees "gross malpractice". Friday he calls me and very bluntly tells me he sees "gross malpractice". And to make matters better, he says the version of events supplied by the defense is probably untrue. I've still got a long way to go on this case - I am nowhere near the end zone. But now at least I've got a local hot shot backing me up - which may shake up the defendants....

Also, got by a Motion to Dismiss one of my Retaliatory Discharge cases. In that case my client, an elderly African American, is a custodian for a nursing home. He gets hurt at work and pursues his rights under the Workers' Comp laws. Right before he is to return to work, he gets fired. I file the Retaliatory case and the defense moves to dismiss it, arguing the claim wasn't on file when he was fired, so it couldn't have been retaliatory. The employer's law firm simply ignores clear Illinois law saying the Comp claim doesn't have to be on file at the time of the firing. The judge agrees with me, denies the Motion and enters an order where we can finally get some discovery. Again, lots of work to do on the case, but I've got one more hurdle behind me.

Finally, saw that the Chicago Tribune had an editorial today strongly advocating for Tort Reform measures, notably a cap on damages in med mal cases. The drum beat goes on...