Donohue Brown Smyth LLC

DBS Obtains a Defense Verdict in Cook County On February 27, 2025, Michael J. Borree and Mason Kienzle obtained a defense verdict for their client, an internal medicine physician.??The case was tried in the Circuit Court of Cook County before Hon. Preston Jones over February 5 – 27, 2025.??Plaintiff claimed that DBS’ client, along with an emergency medicine physician and neurologist, were medically negligent in the treatment of an acute stroke patient.??The plaintiff arrived in the emergency room of Bolingbrook Hospital on Easter Sunday (April 21, 2019) at approximately 4 pm, and was admitted into the service of the firm’s client at approximately 6 pm.??The emergency room physician called a Stroke Code due to the patient’s lack of sensation on the left side of her body.??A CT scan ruled out a hemorrhagic stroke.?Plaintiff claimed that the three defendant physicians were required to rule out an ischemic stroke and that they were negligent in failing to do so.?An MRI obtained on the following day demonstrated an ischemic stroke.??Plaintiff contended that if an MRI was obtained on the evening of the patient’s presentation, the stroke would have been diagnosed, and tissue plasminogen activator (‘tPA’) would have been given, avoiding the patient’s permanent neurologic deficits.?The firm’s attorneys presented evidence from experts and their client which demonstrated that an MRI was not required to be ordered that evening.?Further, even if the stroke was diagnosed by MRI on the evening in question, it was speculative as to whether tPA would have resulted in resolution of symptoms.??After plaintiff’s attorneys requested $1.2 million during closing arguments, the jury returned a verdict for all defendants in less than 3 hours. Michael Borree Mason Kienzle

DBS Appellate Team Successfully Defends Hospital on Appeal of False Imprisonment Claim While Also Upholding Discovery Misconduct Sanctions The DBS appellate team of Karen Kies DeGrand and Connor Whitting successfully defended a trial judge’s dismissal of a false imprisonment claim against a local university hospital and upheld sanctions against the plaintiffs’ attorney for discovery misconduct. A minor hospitalized for an eating disorder was recommended for transfer to a Texas inpatient facility. Her parents opposed the plan, and caregivers noted in the patient’s records that noncompliance could lead to DCFS reports and custody removal. The plaintiffs sued the hospital for false imprisonment, alleging the patient was unlawfully restrained based on threats to them noted in the records. Ruling on pretrial motions, the trial court excluded statements made to the parents, ruling they couldn’t be used by their daughter to support her claim. Plaintiffs’ counsel argued these statements were critical, and without them, couldn’t proceed to trial. The case was dismissed with prejudice. Prior to trial, the court sanctioned plaintiffs' counsel for misconduct. After a hearing where the plaintiff’s investigator admitted misleading hospital employees to improperly obtain documents post-discovery, the court ordered attorney fees as a remedy. On appeal, the hospital argued the appellate court lacked jurisdiction because no substitution was made after the patient reached adulthood before the dispositive order. Additionally, the appeal was moot as her false imprisonment claim abated upon her death. On the merits, the hospital argued the excluded statements were irrelevant since the patient herself wasn’t aware of the supposed threats. The First District appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, as no motion to substitute an estate or representative was filed after the patient’s death. The court also found the false imprisonment claim abated upon her death and upheld the trial court’s sanctions. Karen DeGrand Connor Whitting

DBS Appellate Team Secures Affirmance of Directed Verdict for Neurologist in Medical Malpractice Case The DBS appellate team of Karen Kies DeGrand and Connor Whitting recently defeated a medical malpractice plaintiff’s attempt to reverse a judgment entered on a directed verdict for a neurologist and his medical group. The plaintiff’s decedent visited the ER with symptoms of headache, fatigue, and olfactory hallucinations.?The co-defendant ER physicians twice called DBS’ client, a neurologist, for an informal curbside consult. The neurologist first recommended the patient undergo testifying that could assist in determining the existence of inflammation and later recommended an MRI.?The neurologist did not examine the patient, review his medical records, or provide a diagnosis.?Further, the neurologist was not on-call, nor did he charge for the consulting conversations. The patient was later diagnosed with herpes simplex encephalitis, which the plaintiff alleged caused serious cognitive impairment. The plaintiff sued the ER physicians who treated the patient and the neurologist and his group, claiming negligence for failing to diagnose the condition promptly.?The matter proceeded through discovery and a jury trial. The neurologist and his group sought a directed verdict after the plaintiff rested her case-in-chief, arguing they owed no duty to the patient because no physician-patient relationship existed.?The trial court agreed and directed a verdict for the neurologist and his group. The case proceeded to a defense verdict for the ER physicians. On appeal, the neurology defendants argued that the trial court correctly directed the verdict, as the neurologist’s role was limited to informally answering colleagues’ inquiries, which, under?Reynolds v. Decatur Memorial Hospital, 277 Ill. App. 3d 80 (4th Dist. 1996), and subsequent case law, did not establish a physician-patient relationship.?The defendants also distinguished precedent plaintiff cited in her briefing. The appellate court, Second District, upheld the judgment entered on the directed verdict for the neurology defendants (as well as for the ER physicians).?The appellate court held that a consulting physician does not owe a legal duty to a patient when providing informal advice to the patient’s treating physicians without directly participating in the patient’s care, diagnosis, or treatment.?Finding no “special physician-patient relationship,” the appellate court cited the informal nature of the consultation, lack of compensation, absence of test orders or reviews and no involvement in the patient’s treatment.?The appellate court warned that finding a special relationship under these circumstances could discourage informal physician consultations, potentially harming patient care. Karen DeGrand Connor Whitting

DBS Successfully Challenges $40 Million Jury Verdict and Obtains a New Trial for Product Manufacturer Karen Kies DeGrand and Scott Howie successfully obtained an order granting defendant’s post-trial motion, dispensed with the $40,750,000 jury verdict in plaintiff’s favor and awarding defendant a new trial. In a wrongful death action plaintiff filed on behalf of her deceased father, plaintiff asserted negligent failure to warn and failure to test claims related to asbestos-containing products manufactured by defendant. Plaintiff alleged that her father developed mesothelioma from working with defendant’s asbestos-containing gaskets and packing materials. After a two-and-a-half-week trial, the jury returned a verdict in plaintiff’s favor. DBS attorneys filed a post-trial motion that challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the jury’s verdict and argued for a new trial based on trial error. Granting defendant’s request for a new trial, the trial court determined that plaintiff’s counsel’s misconduct during closing argument deprived defendant of a fair trial. The trial court agreed with the defense that, during her closing argument, plaintiff misstated the law, improperly appealed to the jury’s passions and sense of social justice, violated pretrial orders, and used undisclosed demonstrative exhibits that underscored her improper arguments. The trial court held that plaintiff’s overwhelmingly prejudicial closing argument warranted a new trial.

Donohue Brown Smyth LLC Attorneys Recognized Among 2025 Illinois Super Lawyers and Rising Stars Donohue Brown Smyth LLC is proud to announce that eleven of our attorneys have been honored as 2025 Illinois Super Lawyers or Rising Stars. This prestigious recognition is reserved for no more than five percent of attorneys in the state, underscoring their exceptional expertise and dedication to excellence. The following attorneys have been recognized by their peers for outstanding work in their respective practice areas: ? Sherri M. Arrigo, Stetson F. Atwood, Mark M. Burden, Richard H. Donohue, and Justin T. Evans – Medical Malpractice Defense ? Donald J. Brown, Jr. and Robert W. Smyth, Jr. – Professional Liability Defense ? Karen K. DeGrand – Appellate Law One partner and two associates named to the Rising Stars list include: ? Ashley E. Dus and Katie B. Trucco – Medical Malpractice Defense ? Mason W. Kienzle – Civil Litigation Super Lawyers, a division of Thomson Reuters, evaluates attorneys through a rigorous, patented multiphase selection process, incorporating peer nominations, independent research, and peer reviews. This ensures a credible and comprehensive listing of top legal talent across more than 70 practice areas. We extend our sincere congratulations to all the honorees. Your hard work and dedication continue to set the standard of excellence at Donohue Brown Smyth LLC.

Donohue Brown Mathewson & Smyth is pleased to announce the election of David K. Duffey as an equity partner in the firm. Mr. Duffey focuses his practice on professional negligence defense, representing medical providers, groups, and hospitals from pre-suit investigations through trial and appeal. He also handles general tort and premises liability matters and has extensive experience defending clients at all stages of litigation. Since joining the firm in 2015, Mr. Duffey has been recognized as a Best Lawyers?: Ones to Watch, an Illinois Rising Star, and an Emerging Lawyer, honors earned through excellence and peer recognition. Earlier this year, he was named one of the 40 Under Forty Illinois Attorneys to Watch by the Law Bulletin Publishing Company.

DBMS Obtains a Defense Verdict in Lake County On November 20, 2024, a Lake County jury returned a defense verdict in favor of a surgeon and his surgical practice represented by David Duffey and Connor Whitting.?The patient was involved in a motor vehicle accident and presented to the emergency department with complaints of chest pain and shortness of breath.?Imaging revealed that the patient sustained a non-displaced sternal fracture as a result of the motor vehicle collision.?The defendant surgeon was consulted and admitted overnight for observation and to rule out a cardiac contusion.?During the overnight period, the patient experienced a reduction in oxygen saturations and was placed on supplemental oxygen.?The patient was assessed by the surgeon and the internal medicine service the following day and was deemed stable for discharge after an echocardiogram confirmed the absence of a cardiac contusion.?The patient was discharged in the early evening but died 36 hours later.??Plaintiff alleged that the patient’s oxygen saturations were not properly assessed prior to discharge and the patient was prescribed medications that could depress her respiratory system and potentially cause respiratory arrest.?Plaintiff claimed that the standard of care required further assessment and observation of the patient in the hospital given the patient’s oxygen saturations and her co-morbidities, which included chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.??The defense demonstrated that the patient was appropriately discharged after she was assessed by the defendant surgeon and multiple other medical providers, which showed that the patient’s respiratory status was stable.?The defense also demonstrated that, more likely than not, the patient did not experience any deterioration of her respiratory status following discharge.?Rather, the patient likely passed away as the result of a sudden cardiac arrhythmia stemming from her underlying coronary artery disease, which was identified on autopsy.?Plaintiff requested $1.7 million in damages.?The jury deliberated for a little over one hour. David Duffey Connor Whitting

DBMS is #hiring. Know someone who might be interested in joining our team??

DBMS Obtains a Defense Verdict in DuPage County A DuPage County jury returned a defense verdict in favor of an internist and his medical group represented by Mark Burden and Justin Evans.?The patient complained of a headache and chest tightness with warmth that spread from the chest up his neck while at home.?Two days later, the patient saw the defendant internist and complained of a chest sensation that was only present when he took a deep breath.?The next day, the patient died as a result of an aortic dissection and rupture.?Plaintiff alleged that the patient’s headache and chest symptoms were indicative of an aortic dissection, the patient was at high risk of aortic dissection, and that the aortic dissection occurred at onset of the headache and chest symptoms.?Plaintiff claimed that the standard of care required the internist to send the patient to a higher level of care – either to the emergency department or a cardiologist.?The defense demonstrated that the standard of care did not require the internist to refer the patient to a higher level of care as the patient was hemodynamically stable and did not have any typical signs or symptoms indicative of an aortic dissection or any emergent condition warranting referral to a higher level of care.?The defense also demonstrated that, more likely than not, the dissection did not occur until after the patient saw the internist.?Plaintiff requested $25 million in damages.?The jury deliberated for under one hour. Mark Burden Justin Evans

DBMS Recognized Again as Tier 1 in 2025 U.S. News – Best Lawyers “Best Law Firms” Rankings U.S. News & World Report and Best Lawyers have released the 15th edition of their annual “Best Law Firms” rankings, naming Donohue Brown Mathewson & Smyth LLC as a Tier 1 firm in the Chicago metropolitan area for Appellate Practice, Legal Malpractice Law - Defendants, Medical Malpractice Law - Defendants, and Product Liability Litigation - Defendants. Additionally, DBMS has achieved a national Tier 1 ranking for Appellate Practice. Thank you to our clients and peers for the feedback that resulted in these recognitions!