Galvin v. Olysav

3 Citing cases

  1. Holton v. Memorial Hospital

    176 Ill. 2d 95 (Ill. 1997)   Cited 143 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he 'better result test' is not a part of plaintiff's burden of proof"

    One line of decisions holds that proximate cause may be established by evidence, to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, that the hospital, doctor, or other health care provider "increased the risk of harm" to plaintiff or "lessened the effectiveness" of plaintiff's treatment by the defendant's negligent conduct. See, e.g., Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital, 273 Ill. App.3d 932, 939 (1st Dist. 1995); Galvin v. Olysav, 212 Ill. App.3d 399, 403 (5th Dist. 1991); Chambers v. Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center, 155 Ill. App.3d 458, 463-65 (1st Dist. 1987); Northern Trust Co. v. Louis A. Weiss Memorial Hospital, 143 Ill. App.3d 479, 487-88 (1st Dist. 1986). The approach taken in these and similar cases has been termed the "loss of chance" or "lost chance" doctrine.

  2. Meck v. Paramedic Services

    296 Ill. App. 3d 720 (Ill. App. Ct. 1998)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Meck v. Paramedic Services, 296 Ill. App.3d 720, 695 N.E.2d 1321 (1998), the allegations of conduct inconsistent with training were characterized in the plaintiff's pleadings as examples of willful and wanton misconduct.

    Hajian, 273 Ill. App.3d at 939. See also Galvin v. Olysav, 212 Ill. App.3d 399, 403, 571 N.E.2d 218 (1991). In contrast, defendants' argument in the trial court relied on cases that rejected the lost chance doctrine.

  3. Hajian v. Holy Family Hospital

    273 Ill. App. 3d 932 (Ill. App. Ct. 1995)   Cited 34 times
    Providing that a trial court has considerable discretion in determining which issues have been raised by the evidence at trial and the form in which a jury instruction shall be given

    ( Hare, 192 Ill. App.3d at 1037-38; see Russell v. Subbiah (1986), 149 Ill. App.3d 268, 500 N.E.2d 138; Curry v. Summer (1985), 136 Ill. App.3d 468, 483 N.E.2d 711; see also Campbell v. United States (7th Cir. 1990), 904 F.2d 1188, 1193.) Essentially, cases such as Northern Trust which adopt the Bashline approach allow the issue of proximate cause to go to a jury upon a showing that the doctor's negligence increased the risk of harm. Hare, 192 Ill. App.3d at 1038, citing Chambers, 155 Ill. App.3d 458, 508 N.E.2d 426; see also Galvin v. Olysav (1991), 212 Ill. App.3d 399, 403, 571 N.E.2d 218. However, the second district in Pumala v. Sipos (1987), 163 Ill. App.3d 1093, 1098, 517 N.E.2d 295, seemingly has blended the legal principles set forth in Borowski and Northern Trust which do not require the plaintiff to prove that a better result would have been obtained absent the alleged malpractice, but still require the plaintiff to show with a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the negligent delay in diagnosis or treatment lessened the effectiveness of the medical services provided to establish proximate cause.