Chicago Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog

Late last month, the First District Appellate Court decided Caburnay v. Norwegian American Hospital, 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 1297 (1st Dist. 2011), involving a plaintiff doctor who tripped and fell at Norwegian American Hospital, while waiting for an elevator in the hospital's lobby. The plaintiff doctor struck the back of his neck on a nearby couch when he fell, rendering him a quadriplegic. The plaintiff doctor sued the hospital as well as the elevator repair company, Phoenix Elevator Concepts, who was servicing an adjacent elevator at the time plaintiff was injured. As Illinois spinal cord injury attorneys, we are interested in the outcome of cases like Caburnay because they could potentially affect the outcome in cases of our current and future spinal cord injury clients.

In Caburnay, plaintiff doctor claimed he fell as a result of a negligently placed and secured mat, which was in front of the elevator at the time of the accident. He eventually settled with the elevator repair company; however, the hospital moved for summary judgment and prevailed. Plaintiff doctor appealed.

The First District Appellate Court reversed and remanded the case back to the trial court, finding that the evidence that plaintiff doctor presented regarding tripping on a fold or buckle in the mat in front of the elvator, coupled with testimony from plaintiff doctor's expert and an elevator repair man that the mat was negligently utlilized, created a question of fact that should have resulted in a denial of the hospital's motion for summary judgment.

At his deposition, when plaintiff doctor testified that he

"felt his foot catch in the mat in front of the elevator, he was not describing an emotion, but a sensory perception, in the same way that a blind person would describe something he or she was able to touch but not see. He never testified that it "felt as if" he tripped on a fold or that it "seemed like" his foot caught a buckle in the carpet, but instead unequivocally testified as to his sensory perceptions, describing the tangible, physical sensation of his foot catching on a fold in the mat."

Id. at *16.

Under a general theory of negligence, which plaintiff doctor alleged, he did not need to provide evidence that the hospital had prior notice of the fold in the mat. Instead, plaintiff doctor only needed to prove that the hospital negligently created a dangerous condition on its premise by placing a mat prone to buckling in front of the elevators. To that end, an elevator mechanic testified that the mat in question had in fact repeatedly buckled and "would 'bunch up' and become 'disheveled' as a result of the work being done on the adjacent elevator." Id. at *27. Moreover, plaintiff doctor's expert witness opined "that the mat was unsafe because it was not secured to the floor with tape, despite being prone to buckling. Id. at **27-28. As a result, the First District Appellate Court found that the testimony of plaintiff doctor, the elevator mechanic and plaintiff doctor's expert was sufficient to create an issue of fact as to whether there was a breach of the hospital's duty of care to plaintiff doctor to properly use a safe and secure mat, by placing a mat that was prone to buckling in front of the elevator without securing it, thus causing him to fall.

The Illinois spinal cord injury attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll have experience representing victims who have suffered spinal cord injuries from the negligent conduct of another individual or corporate defendant. Each year, approximately 10,000 to 12,000 people suffer from spinal cord injuries in the United States. Spinal cord injuries can occur in a variety of situations, including, athletic injuries, birth injuries, trucking crashes, work place injuries, playground accidents, car crashes or motorcycle crashes.

Our personal injury attorneys have secured multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements in spinal cord injury matters. For example, in 2005, Jeff Kroll represented a Rolling Meadows High School football player who was rendered a quadriplegic after he was tackled by a teammate and came into contact with an unpadded, 25-foot-high steel post that was located 11' 5" from the sideline of the Rolling Meadows’s football practice field. In 2011, our team of spinal cord injury attorneys also obtained a $5 million settlement for a young man who was injured at a local school pool.

Continue reading "SUMMARY JUDGMENT REVERSED IN CASE WHERE DOCTOR RENDERED QUADRIPLEGIC" »

As Chicago brain injury attorneys, we are interested in learning about new studies charting the path of recovery for brain-injured individuals. A recent article in the New York Times, When injuries to the brain tug at hearts, explores the hardships that brain injuries bring to relationships and marriages. Specifically, the article discusses how couples may rebuild a marriage after one partner suffers a life-changing brain injury.

In the piece, the New York Times reported "[u]ntil recently, there had been little evidence-based research on how to rebuild marriages after such a tragedy. Indeed, doctors frequently warn uninjured spouses that the marriage may well be over, that the personality changes that can result from brain injury may do irreparable harm to the relationship." Now, research has shown that divorce rates are "well below the national average among these couples." However, that does not always mean that their marriages are happy ones; in fact, in most cases, "the quality of the relationship has been seriously diminished."

Doctors treating individuals who suffered traumatic brain injuries are developing new marriage counseling techniques to help these patients and their partners deal with the loss and change to a relationship that often occur following a brain injury. While the New York Times recognizes that the research is still at the beginning stages, some traditional marriage counseling techniques can be helpful when dealing with a couple dealing with a traumatic brain injury, including focusing on better communication, "positive developments and things they like about each other, and to set aside time to inject a little romance and fun into a life that can be consumed by doctors’ appointments and paperwork." Researchers have also found that other traditional therapeutic techniques may not be helpful, such as "encouraging partners to remember what sparked their love in the first place [which] can mean 'highlighting the things that have probably been lost.'"

As Chicago brain injury attorneys, it is our role to understand the sequelae of traumatic brain injuries and assist clients in their recovery. Our brain injury attorneys also seek to maximize monetary recovery to provide long-term care for the brain-injured individual.

Continue reading "DEALING WITH A LOVED ONE'S TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY" »

The Center for Justice and Democracy at New York Law School just released an interesting fact sheet entitled "The Truth About Medical Malpractice Litigation," which dispels many of the myths associated with medical malpractice lawsuits and tort reform. As Chicago medical malpractice attorneys, we believe that individuals injured or killed as a result of a healthcare provider's negligence should be fully compensated for their losses. We also believe that healthcare providers must be held accountable for their actions.

According to the fact sheet, "each year, hundreds of thousands of Americans are killed or injured by avoidable medical errors." In fact, according to a November 2010 study by the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services," about 1 in 7 Medicare patients in hospitals experience a serious medical error, 44 percent of which are preventable." Despite the great amount of medical negligence, research into 2008 medical malpractice case filings showed that “well under 2 percent of all incoming civil cases, and less than 8 percent of incoming tort cases” represented medical malpractice matters. That fact is quite different than the picture that tort reform proponents paint on a daily basis. Those trying to limit victim’s rights to recovery would have the public believe that medical malpractice filings are numerous and frivolous.

Other interesting facts contained within the fact sheet involve statistics related to malpractice leading to wrongful death, paralysis, amputation, brain and head injury and burns, lacerations, skin infections and other skin injuries. The fact sheet notes:

"[D]eath was by far the most frequent type of injury among successful medical malpractice plaintiffs, accounting for 22 percent of med mal victims who prevailed at trial. '[I]n the paralysis /amputation category, 100 percent of medical malpractice cases in which the plaintiff received an award involved paralysis caused by injury to the spine or brain. In the brain/head injury category, all injuries alleged by successful medical malpractice claimants were permanent…For burns, lacerations, skin infections, and other skin injuries, all winning medical malpractice patients suffered permanent injuries….'”

This shows that medical malpractice lawsuits often involve serious, life-threatening and life-changing injuries, and not minor injuries. More information about "The Truth About Medical Malpractice Litigation" can be found at The Center for Justice and Democracy's website. Their blog, "The Pop Tort," also published a quiz aimed at answering questions about the medical malpractice system in this country. The Illinois medical malpractice attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll encourage you to take the medical malpractice quiz and learn the truth about medical malpractice litigation.

The news of the death of 32-year-old Shantel McCoy, who died in a deadly high-rise fire in Chicago's Lakeview neighborhood, has saddened many in the Chicagoland area and beyond. Investigating officials have reported that a door left open by another couple fleeing the fire may have caused the fire to further spread. They also found that an elevator malfunction thwarted fire fighters' ability to contain the fire initially. However, one of the most upsetting findings, as reported by CBS Chicago, was that "fire safety requirements that might have saved McCoy’s life were recently pushed back three years."

Investigators have stated that after the fire was already well underway, McCoy rode the building's elevator to the 12th floor, where she was exposed to 1,500-degree heat and poisonous gas, and subsequently died. In 2004, Chicago's City Council passed an ordinance requiring owners of Chicago residential high-rise buildings to make "life safety" improvements by January 1, 2012. According to the Chapters 13-78 of the City of Chicago High Rise Building - Emergency Procedure Overview, those improvements included an elevator emergency recall system

"programmed into the elevator to send it non-stop to the main floor so the fire department can take control of the elevator in a fire situation or emergency. This control of the elevator is called fireman service mode. When elevators are in the fireman service mode, they cannot be used by anyone but firefighters."

City Council recently granted property owners an extension until 2015 to comply with the ordinance due to complaints about costs associated with implementing the improvements. The 2004 ordinance was instituted as a result of the deadly 69 W. Washington fire, which resulted in the death of six people. CBS Chicago reported that the elevator emergency recall system at the Lakeview building was not working properly at the time of the fire.

Each year, 450,000 Americans sustain burn injuries, which require treatment from a healthcare provider. According to the American Burn Association, each year, 3,500 people suffer fire and burn deaths, 3000 of which occur in residential fires. Individuals who suffer serious injuries in fires will often require lifelong care and treatment, including physical and psychological care. Many burn victims will sustain permanent scarring, disfigurement and emotional trauma. Common causes of burn injuries include: negligence, work place accidents, defective appliances, electrical shock, propane gas tanks, trucking collisions and car accidents.

Continue reading "CHICAGO WRONGFUL DEATH AND FIRE INJURY ATTORNEYS ON THE LAKEVIEW HIGH-RISE FIRE DEATH" »

Bicycle helmets are just one of those things that are always on my radar. As the father of two young children, I think that bicycle helmets are essential for preventing injuries, especially serious brain injuries. As bicycle injury attorneys, we are always on the lookout for information that could enhance the safety of the biking community. We just recently learned that the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced a voluntary recall of Triple Eight bicycle helmets for children and youth. CPSC recommends that all consumers stop using the helmets immediately and contact Triple Eight toll free at (888) 548-8518 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. ET Monday through Friday or visit www.triple8.com for a refund.

According to CPSC, about 30,400 helmets have been sold at bicycle, sports and other retailers throughout the U.S., as well as online, from August 2006 until November 2011. The helmets retailed for about $40.00, and were manufactured in China. The recall came about due to product testing that "demonstrated that these helmets do not comply with CPSC safety standards for impact resistance. Consumers could suffer impact head injuries in a fall." So far, no injuries have been reported.

The helmets have been marketed as multi-purpose helmets. Those affected by the recall are called Little Tricky, Triple Eight S/M EPS Liner helmets, Sector 9 S/M EPS Liner helmets. CPSC has photos on its website.

The bicycle accident attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll believe it is imperative for children to wear helmets while riding bicycles. At this point, a number of Illinois towns like Barrington, Illinois, mandate that children under 17 wear helmets while riding bicycles. The City of Chicago requires that bike messengers wear helmets. There is no state-wide rule at this point. Required helmet use can be controversial. Some say advocates would be wise to focus their attention on proper bicycle use over mandated helmet use, especially in an urban setting. Supporters of bike helmet laws believe that helmet use can help prevent serious brain injury in the event of a collision or fall.

The Illinois Secretary of State reports that a bicycle helmet can reduce the risk of head injury by up to 85 percent in the event of a crash. When it comes to children, however, the effectiveness of the bike helmet in preventing injury depends on whether or not the helmet fits properly and complies with CPSC standards.

To prevent devastating injuries, drivers must keep their eyes on the lookout for bicyclists and pedestrians. Illinois requires that drivers exercise due care to avoid colliding with anyone operating a bicycle, with a pedestrian, or with any other device propelled by human power. See 625 ILCS 5/11-1003.1.

Continue reading "BICYCLE HELMETS RECALLED BY TRIPLE EIGHT DUE TO RISK OF HEAD INJURY" »

Sunday, January 8, 2012, marked the one-year anniversary of the tragic shooting of Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords at an Arizona supermarket. The gunman killed six and injured many others in the terrifying incident. Rep. Giffords was shot in the head, and her recovery has become a matter of national interest and attention, especially in the area of traumatic brain injuries and recovery. Rep. Giffords and her doctors have revealed that she has been diagnosed with a condition called aphasia, or an inability to talk or write in well-formulated sentences. Many individuals who suffer from traumatic brain injury also suffer from aphasia.

The Chicago brain injury attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll read an interesting interview that Cynthia Thompson of Northwestern University gave to the Chicago Tribune last week, entitled "After injury, brain can keep on healing." Thompson is one of the leading experts in aphasia, which the Tribune reported affects "1 million Americans and by 2020, the numbers are expected to double." Despite this prediction, the Thompson interview revealed some encouraging news. Particularly, her following statement:

"We used to think that patients with a brain injury like Gabby Giffords' did not get better after a certain length of time — that there was a window of time to improve, called spontaneous recovery. But we now know that the brain is an organ of plasticity and it continues to change and improve throughout life."

Thompson works with a team of researchers who study individuals suffering from aphasia at many different levels. She has learned that "the brain can recover and respond even 10 years after the original injury. But too often, medical insurance will pay only for a few weeks or months of speech-language therapy. Once a patient stabilizes, they are likely to be discharged before reaching maximum gains. The insurance hasn't really caught up with the research."

Individuals suffering from traumatic brain injuries, and particularly aphasia, must obtain the appropriate medical care if they are going to recover brain function, speech and language abilities, and improve their overall quality of life. Often, a team of neurologists, neuropsychologists, speech pathologists, occupational therapists and as well as other cognitive rehabilitation specialists must be involved in the individual's care.

As Chicago brain injury attorneys, it is our role to understand the sequelae of traumatic brain injuries and assist clients in their recovery. Our brain injury attorneys also seek to maximize monetary recovery to provide long-term care for the brain-injured individual. Since, the short- and long-term disabilities resulting from a traumatic brain injury depend upon the severity of the injury, many factors will influence the outcome of a lawsuit, including the location of the injury on the brain, the age of the person and the general health of the individual.

Continue reading "TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY AND SPEECH RECOVERY" »

The Chicago burn injury attorneys at that Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll were saddened to hear the news of a high-rise apartment fire in Chicago's Lakeview neighborhood this weekend.The Chicago Tribune reported that a 32-year-old woman, who was stuck in an elevator, died in the fire and nine other were injured, including two fire fighters. According to the Chicago Tribune, the "fire originated in a 12th-floor apartment." The fire produced intense heat and smoke that lead to the woman's death and other individual's injuries. The conditions of those injured ranged from fair to serious.

Another issue being looked at is the apartment building's apparent lack of a sprinkler system. Chicago Fire Department will be further investigating the cause of the fire.

Burn injuries can lead to serious injuries and death. Each year, 450,000 Americans sustain burn injuries which require treatment from a healthcare provider. According to the American Burn Association, each year, 3,500 people suffer fire and burn deaths, 3000 of which occur in residential fires. Individuals who suffer serious injuries in fires will often require lifelong care and treatment, including physical and psychological care. Many burn victims will sustain permanent scarring, disfigurement and emotional trauma. Common causes of burn injuries include: negligence, work place accidents, defective appliances, electrical shock, propane gas tanks, trucking collisions and car accidents.

Continue reading "DEADLY LAKE SHORE DRIVE APARTMENT FIRE" »

I don't think that any of us anticipated such a mild winter this year, especially with Accuweather's prediction late last year that Chicago would see 50 to 60 inches of snow this winter. Instead, we've seen nary a bit. I must admit, I am fine with the lack of snow.

Of course, that does not mean that our roads are not riddled with potholes. It is typically the freezing and then reheating of pavement that causes potholes to form. They may become larger and more severe as roads are over-used and subject to severe wear and tear. According to a recent article in the Chicago Tribune: "Potholes represent part of a growing problem with crumbling roads across Illinois." The article further states that "[s]tate roads are wearing out 33 percent faster than they are being repaired, according to a new study by the Transportation for Illinois Coalition." Furthermore, the Coalition found that "[o]n average, motorists pay an additional $340 per year in the Chicago area in vehicle costs from poor road conditions."

Potholes that go unrepaired are hazards that can cause car crashes and property damage. The suspension and shock systems in vehicles suffer greatly, and unsuspecting drivers could face potentially serious injuries, especially if the driver loses control of the vehicle and crashes into another vehicle. Motorcyclists and bicyclists are particularly vulnerable to injury if they hit a pothole. The Chicago car crash attorneys recognize that motorcyclists or bicyclists that hit a pothole may easily fall and suffer severe injuries or death.

The Illinois motorcycle accident attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll are presently working on a number of serious motorcycle accident matters and actively pursuing justice for those who were wrongly injured. A few of the motorcycle accident cases we are pursuing include: a Naperville man who was seriously injured when the driver of a vehicle lost control, drove in the opposite lane of traffic and collided with the motorcyclist who was patiently waiting at a red light on his stopped Harley Davidson; a Tinley Park woman who was involved in a serious accident in Joliet while she was riding on the back of a Harley Davidson; and a matter involving a St. Charles resident, who nearly required a leg amputation, after a vehicle hit him.

Continue reading "BEWARE OF POTHOLES " »

During the last few weeks of December, the First District Illinois Appellate Court decided what one trial judge called a "tragically bizarre case." As experienced Illinois personal injury attorneys, we read new court rulings on a regular basis. The "tragically bizarre case" was Zokhrabov v. Park, 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 1298 (1st Dist. 2011). There, eighteen year-old Hiroyuki Joho was killed when an Amtrak train struck him while he was in a crosswalk at a Chicago Metra Station. A large portion of Joho's body "was propelled about 100 feet onto the southbound platform where it struck 58-year-old Gayane Zokhrabov from behind, knocking her to the ground. She sustained a shoulder injury, a leg fracture, and a wrist fracture." 2011 Ill. App. LEXIS 1298, *2. Zokhrabov sued Joho's estate for her injuries. The parties filed cross motions for summary judgment as to the proximate cause of the incident. Zokhrabov claimed Joho owed her a duty while walking in and around the Metra station and that he breached that duty when he: "(a) carelessly and negligently failed to keep a proper lookout for approaching trains; (b) carelessly and negligently ran in the path of an approaching [Amtrak] train; or (c) carelessly and negligently failed to yield the right-of-way to approaching trains." Id. Park, on behalf of Joho's estate, argued Joho did not owe Zokhrabov a duty of care. The trial court ruled in favor of Park. Zokhrabov appealed.

The First District Illinois Appellate Court, applying a traditional analysis of duty, reversed and remanded, finding Zokhrabov was a foreseeable plaintiff and that as a result, Joho owed her a duty. What does that mean? When determining whether a duty of care exists in a particular set of circumstances, Illinois courts will consider, among other factors, the reasonable foreseeability that the defendant's conduct may injure another. Other factors that courts consider are the reasonable likelihood of an injury, the magnitude of the burden imposed by guarding against the harm, and the consequences of placing the burden on the defendant. Id. at *10.

In the Zokhrabov case, the First District Appellate Court decided that it was reasonably foreseeable that a train would strike, kill and fling Joho's body onto the passenger platform where Zokhrabov was waiting for her train to arrive. The Court further found that Joho acted negligently by crossing the tracks when he did and that his negligence could cause someone else's injury. The reasonable likelihood of causing an injury was great given the speed and force of the oncoming Amtrak train. The magnitude of the burden imposed by guarding against the harm was insignificant; Joho only needed to take a moment to pause, look at the tracks and cross when it was safe. Finally, placing this burden on Joho would have been minimal. Id. at 22.

What about the fact that the trial judge called the accident "tragically bizarre"? That doesn't sound like something that can be considered "foreseeable," does it? The First District Appellate court had an answer: There is a general proposition that there is no duty to anticipate and prevent injuries that occur due to unusual and extraordinary circumstances. See, Cunis v. Brennan, 56 Ill. 2d 372 (1974). However, the Appellate Court did not find that proposition persuasive in this case. Since there are no Illinois cases factually similar to the Zokhrabov case, the Court relied on traditional duty analysis and found that the injury was foreseeable, thereby creating a duty of care.

Continue reading "FIRST DISTRICT APPELLATE COURT DECIDED WHAT TRIAL JUDGE CALLED A "TRAGICALLY BIZARRE CASE"" »

The Illinois auto and truck accident attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll are pleased that it is now official: interstate truck and bus drivers are prohibited from using handheld cell phones while driving. The rule was a joint action promulgated by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). The law also marks another step in the right direction for the U.S. Department of Transportation in its fight to end distracted driving.

Under the law, interstate truck or bus drivers that violate the rule may be fined up to $2,750 for each offense. Additionally, states have the authority to suspend a driver's commercial license after a driver accumulates two or more serious traffic violations. What about truck and bus companies? They may also face fines up to $11,000 for permitting their drivers to use handheld cell phones while driving.

In a FMCSA press release, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood recently said, "When drivers of large trucks, buses and hazardous materials take their eyes off the road for even a few seconds, the outcome can be deadly…. I hope that this rule will save lives by helping commercial drivers stay laser-focused on safety at all times while behind the wheel." The bus and truck accident attorneys at the Law Offices of Jeffrey J. Kroll continue to applaud the efforts of the FMCSA in this area.

According to the FMCSA, "[c]ommercial drivers reaching for an object, such as a cell phone, are three times more likely to be involved in a crash or other safety-critical event. Dialing a hand-held cell phone makes it six times more likely that commercial drivers will be involved in a crash or other safety-critical event." The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reports that close "5474 people died and half a million were injured in crashes involving a distracted driver in 2009." FMCSA rules already prohibit commercial truck and bus drivers from sending text messages while driving. PHMSA also banned texting by drivers carrying hazard materials intrastate.

What is the difference between the terms interstate and intrastate? The term "interstate" commerce means trade, traffic, or transportation in the United States: (1) between a place in a State and a place outside of such State (including a place outside of the United States); (2) between two places in a State through another State or a place outside of the United States; or (3) between two places in a State as part of trade, traffic, or transportation originating or terminating outside the State or the United States. See 49 CFR 390.5. The term "intrastate," on the other hand, means any trade, traffic, or transportation in any State which does not fall under the definition of "interstate commerce."

Continue reading "FEDERAL CELL PHONE RESTRICTIONS FOR INTERSTATE TRUCK AND BUS DRIVERS IN FULL EFFECT " »

As Illinois personal injury attorneys, we must stay up to date on new laws at all times. Effective January 2012, Illinois legislatures have added over 200 new laws affecting Illinois citizens. WSILTV.com published a list of the new laws. Here are a few that could impact the rights of personal injury victims:

Motorcycle Red Lights (HB 2860/PA 97-0627): This new law permits motorcyclists, who are stopped at a red light, "to proceed through the light if, after waiting a reasonable length of time, the red light fails to change to green."

Seat Belts (HB 219/PA 97-0016): The Chicago Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog reported on this one in July of 2011. Illinois's new seatbelt law requires even adult passengers sitting in the back seat of a moving vehicle to wear a seat belt. The law also requires individuals 18 and younger, who happen to be riding in a taxi cab for school-related purposes, to wear a seat belt.

Smoke Detectors (HB 1398/PA 97-0447): This law requires "hotels to be equipped with at least one smoke detector within 15 feet of every room that is used for sleeping purposes." Hopefully, this law will help prevent fires that cause serious burn injuries and wrongful death.

Uninsured Driving (HB 2267/PA 97-0407): This law fixes a $2,500 fine, plus any applicable jail time, for individuals "convicted of driving an uninsured vehicle that results in bodily harm to another person," if the individual has "two or more convictions for driving an uninsured vehicle." A person convicted of third violation will be required to pay a $1000 fine, if the person has not caused bodily harm to another person.

Vehicle Occupancy Restrictions (HB 1315/PA 97-0017): The Chicago Accident and Injury Lawyer Blog also commented on this law back in July of 2011. The Vehicle Occupancy Restrictions law makes it illegal for passengers to ride in trailers, wagons and other vehicles while they are being towed on highways, with the exemption of farm-related activities and parades.

Medical Malpractice (HB 1476/PA 97-0449): This law permits the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR) to provide information to the public concerning complaints against doctors or medical professionals. The law will help patients more thoroughly research the doctors and medical professionals who treat them.

Continue reading "OVER 200 NEW LAWS ADDED TO ILLINOIS'S BOOKS" »

Have you ever wondered what duty landowners have to keep their property safe, especially property that contains large trees? As Chicago premise liability attorneys, we know that many people are unaware of their legal rights when they are injured on another person's property; yet, this is a concerning topic. Earlier this year, a fifteen-year-old girl from Lake Forest, Illinois, was killed during a Wyoming camping trip when a tree fell on top of her while she was backpacking.

In Illinois, the First District Illinois Appellate Court provided guidance on this issue when it decided the case Ortiz v. Jesus People, 405 Ill. App. 3d 967 (1st Dist. 2010), in November of 2010. There, plaintiff was injured when a tree limb, extending over a public sidewalk from defendant's property, fell on top of her while she and her daughter were riding bicycles one windy Spring day in Chicago. The tree limb knocked plaintiff unconscious. Plaintiff eventually regained consciousness, but required numerous painful surgeries, including mouth and nose surgeries.

Plaintiff filed premise liability and negligence suits against defendant, Jesus People, and the City of Chicago. The trial court granted the City of Chicago's motion to dismiss. At trial, a jury awarded plaintiff $686,831.17. The defendant's motion for a new trial was denied. Defendant appealed.

The First District Appellate Court affirmed the jury verdict in favor the plaintiff. The general rule followed by Illinois courts considers Section 363 of the Restatement (Second) of Torts, which provides that "a possessor of land *** is [not] liable for physical harm caused to others outside of the land by a natural condition of the land." The "natural condition of the land" includes "the natural growth of trees *** and other vegetation upon land not artificially made receptive to them." However, there is an exception to the general rule of non-liability that pertains to a possessor of land "in an urban area" where such possessor is "subject to liability to persons using a public highway for physical harm resulting from his failure to exercise reasonable care to prevent an unreasonable risk of harm arising from the condition of trees on the land near the highway." Furthermore, Illinois law states that an urban landowner owes a duty of reasonable care that includes taking reasonable steps to prevent injury. 405 Ill. App. 3d at 973. In the Ortiz case, defendant's property was located in Chicago, an urban area, and the tree was adjacent to a public sidewalk on a busy public street and a very large limb extended over that sidewalk. The defendant failed to exercise reasonable care, which would involve inspection of and maintenance of the tree to prevent an injury to travelers on the public sidewalk.

Owners of property in urban areas are not the only ones with this responsibility. In Mahurin v. Lockhart, 71 Ill. App. 3d 691, 693 (5th Dist. 1979), the court expanded the duty established in Section 363(2) of the Restatement (Second), holding: "a landowner in a residential or urban area has a duty to others outside of his land to exercise reasonable care to prevent an unreasonable risk of harm arising from defective or unsound trees on the premises, including trees of purely natural origin."

Continue reading "CHICAGO PREMISE LIABILITY ATTORNEY: LANDOWNERS DUTY TO KEEP THEIR PROPERTY SAFE" »