Illinois Malpractice Settlements

This page is about Illinois medical malpractice lawsuits, how they work, and the settlement amounts and jury payouts victims see.

Sample settlements and verdicts are useful tools, alongside other resources, to help victims understand the range of values in a medical malpractice case. Clearly, no two cases are the same, and you cannot summarize a case in a paragraph.

Sometimes, I have tried or settled cases where there was no way to summarize the case in a way that would explain why the plaintiff won or why the verdict was as high or low as it was. Said differently, reading these is important and educational in understanding the value of medical malpractice claims in Illinois, but you can only learn so much from these.

If you have what appears to be an identical case, the results could be very different. Illinois is a big state, and many cases go to trial here.

If you have a potential claim, call our malpractice lawyers today for a free consultation. Call us today at 800-553-8082 or contact us online.

For the latest news and events in Illinois medical malpractice, jump to our Illinois Malpractice News Feed.

Illinois Malpractice Settlements and Verdicts

If you are researching medical malpractice cases in Illinois, you are likely trying to understand how these lawsuits are valued and what outcomes other victims have received. The examples below highlight medical malpractice cases, including settlements and jury verdicts across various injury types and allegations. These case results can help provide context, but they are not a guarantee of what your own case is worth. No two claims are the same. The settlement amount or jury payout depends on the severity of the injury, the clarity of the negligence, and the strength of the causation evidence. While these examples are helpful, your case’s settlement amount or jury payout will depend on its specific facts.

Birth Injury & Pregnancy Malpractice

$23,500,000 Verdict (Illinois 2026): A child suffered asphyxia and hypoxic-ischemic brain damage during his birth at Mercy Hospital and Medical Center. The lawsuit alleged that fetal monitoring showed the baby was not getting enough oxygen and that hospital doctors and nurses waited too long to perform an emergency C-section. The plaintiff also alleged that the hospital negligently credentialed the attending obstetrician. The child survived but was left with neurological disabilities, including cerebral palsy, and will require significant future care. A Cook County jury awarded more than $23.5 million.

$18,000,000 Settlement (Illinois 2025): After a three-week trial, the night before closing arguments, the parties reached an $18 million settlement in a birth injury case against a Chicago-area hospital. The lawsuit involved a first-time mother who presented at 40 weeks pregnant. Due to the hospital’s failure to timely call for and perform a cesarean section, her baby suffered hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) and was later diagnosed with cerebral palsy. The settlement covers past and future medical care, including therapy, home care, and specialized education, relieving the family of financial stress and providing long-term support for the child’s needs.

$23,070,000 Verdict (Illinois 2024): A seven-year-old girl suffered brain damage and cerebral palsy following her birth at Advocate Trinity Hospital. Her mother came to the hospital complaining of decreased fetal movement. The lawsuit alleged that the nurses and obstetricians failed to timely respond to fetal distress and should have delivered the baby by C-section sooner. A Cook County jury awarded $23.07 million.

$17,100,000 Verdict (Illinois 2023): During labor, fetal monitoring reportedly showed signs of distress, but the physician did not change the treatment plan or intervene. After birth, the infant required prolonged resuscitation and was later diagnosed with hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy, a catastrophic brain injury caused by a lack of oxygen during delivery. The child suffered seizures, feeding difficulties, and severe neurological impairment before dying nine months later while receiving hospice care. The lawsuit alleged that doctors failed to properly manage the mother’s gestational hypertension and later preeclampsia and did not deliver the baby sooner despite repeated warning signs. The jury found the physician and medical practice responsible and awarded damages that included compensation for the child’s suffering and medical care as well as the parents’ grief and loss.

$7,250,000 Verdict (Illinois 2023): Following a car crash, a 35-week pregnant woman sought medical attention at a local county hospital, alarmed by her baby’s lack of movement post-accident. She later filed a lawsuit accusing the hospital staff of negligence, chiefly regarding their insufficient fetal health monitoring. By the time proper monitoring procedures were initiated, the situation necessitated an emergency C-section, which sadly resulted in the baby’s death. Evidence from a doctor’s testimony in the lawsuit indicated that if the hospital had maintained the standard care level, the child could have potentially survived without any neurological issues.

$48,195,000 Settlement (Illinois 2018): A woman came to the hospital at 37 weeks pregnant after her water broke. Fetal heart strips showed warning signs, but her OB/GYN sent her home after only talking to her on the phone. Four days later she was rushed back for an emergency C-section. Her son suffered oxygen deprivation and was diagnosed with severe cerebral palsy.

Stroke & Brain Injury Malpractice

$51,015,445 Verdict (Illinois 2026): A man went to OSF Heart of Mary Medical Center, complaining of a severe headache unlike anything he had experienced before. His attorneys said doctors did not test his blood sugar despite clear risk factors for diabetes, including obesity and a history of gout. He was diagnosed with a tension headache, given medication, and sent home. Days later, he was found unresponsive after suffering a cardiac arrest caused by a severe diabetic crisis. He now has a permanent brain injury and requires round-the-clock care, unable to walk, talk, or eat on his own.

This is the kind of case that should haunt emergency rooms. A simple blood sugar test. That is what this verdict was about. When a patient walks into an ER with what the plaintiff’s lawyers called the worst headache of his life and risk factors that are sitting right there in his chart, ordering a glucose test is not complicated medicine. It is basic medicine and it is so easy to do. Of course, the hospital and physician denied wrongdoing. The jury disagreed to the tune of more than $51 million.

$41,000,000 Verdict (Illinois 2024): A lawyer suffered a catastrophic stroke due to alleged mismanagement of his blood-thinning medication, Coumadin, by four healthcare providers, including OSF HealthCare. After being hospitalized for pneumonia and diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, he was prescribed Coumadin and short-term dialysis at Fresenius Medical Care in Macomb. It was contended that his Coumadin dosage should have been increased based on blood tests, which were not done. The stroke resulted in left-side paralysis and severe cognitive deficits, rendering him unable to practice law or function independently, requiring 24-hour care by family at home. The jury awarded $35.1 million to him and $6 million to his wife.

$39,900,000 Verdict (Illinois 2024): This is another stroke misdiagnosis lawsuit. A professional landscaper and designer consulted his doctors through his insurance for a persistent cough and elevated blood pressure. He was diagnosed with bronchitis, being overweight, high blood pressure, and tachycardia. Serious stuff. But the doctor only prescribed antibiotics, neglecting to treat the hypertension or conduct any cardiac assessments. As a result, he suffered a debilitating stroke, leaving him unable to work, walk long distances, drive, or eat without help.

His medical malpractice lawyers argued the obvious: the doctor failed to properly manage the man’s high blood pressure, leading to a severe stroke that resulted in permanent disability. Advocate Physician Partners responded by denying responsibility, stating that the treatment was administered by an independent physician at a private office, not at one of their facilities. A jury in Cook County saw it differently. It awarded almost $40 million to a man from Hoffman Estates following a medical negligence lawsuit against Advocate Physician Partners.

$3,022,921 Verdict (Illinois 2024): The patient presented at Advocate Sherman Hospital’s emergency department with symptoms including right-sided headaches, dizziness, and tremors. The attending emergency physician diagnosed the patient with a migraine and discharged him. Two days later, the patient was found to have suffered a stroke, leading to permanent brain damage. The plaintiff alleged that the physician’s misdiagnosis and failure to order appropriate tests or consult a neurologist constituted negligence. The jury awarded the plaintiff a $3 million payout.

$3,599,000 Verdict (Illinois 2024): This is yet another stroke malpractice lawsuit in a different context. A 53-year-old chiropractic patient suffered a stroke and vertebral artery dissection following a high-velocity cervical manipulation performed by a chiropractor at Chiro One Wellness Center. The plaintiff argued that the chiropractor failed to recognize symptoms of a vertebral artery dissection, did not refer the patient for immediate medical treatment, and did not call 911 when symptoms appeared. It was also contended that the chiropractor did not properly inform the patient of the risks associated with the procedure or provide alternative treatment options.

Surgical Error & Post-Op Negligence

$56,000,000 Verdict (Illinois 2024): A 39-year-old woman underwent elective liposuction at an outpatient surgical center in Chicago. During the procedure, she suffered internal bleeding that was not recognized or treated for several hours. It was alleged that the physician failed to provide appropriate postoperative monitoring and did not identify signs of internal hemorrhage. The patient was left unattended in the recovery room and ultimately died from untreated internal bleeding. A Cook County jury awarded $56 million in damages. With post-judgment interest, the total judgment rose to over $66 million. It ranks among the largest medical malpractice verdicts in Illinois history.

$49,250,000 Verdict (Illinois 2022): A 42-year-old man suffered flank pain. He was admitted for acute cholecystitis. The man underwent a cholecystectomy. He suffered multiple post-operative complications, including an intra-abdominal infection and sepsis. The man alleged negligence against the hospital and surgeon. He claimed the defendants failed to recognize signs of a serious intra-abdominal infection, obtain appropriate diagnostic testing, and timely perform surgery. The man received a $49.25 million verdict. The verdict was later affirmed on appeal.

$5,000,921 Verdict (Illinois 2016): A 36-year-old woman died of cardiac arrest after a surgeon negligently cut an artery during a hysterectomy procedure. Warning signs of internal bleeding were not discovered until it was too late.

$2,747,768 Verdict (Illinois 2014): A patient suffered a fatal pulmonary embolism shortly after undergoing a hysterectomy procedure. Her family sued for wrongful death, alleging the doctors failed to recognize the symptoms of the blood clot and take preventive measures. The defense argued that the decedent made the blood clot more likely by refusing a blood transfusion on religious grounds.

$3,000,000 Settlement (Illinois 2014): A 35-year-old woman was recovering from a tracheostomy procedure. A nurse dislodged her tracheostomy tube while giving her a bath, causing acidosis, brain damage, and cardiac arrest. The patient later died as a result of the botched bed bath.

Cardiac & Vascular Malpractice

$6,350,000 Verdict (Illinois 2024): A 56-year-old underwent medical tests that indicated the need for further investigation into possible coronary ischemia. His doctor did not diagnose the condition, leading to a medical emergency seven months later when the patient was hospitalized in cardiac shock. This critical delay in diagnosis necessitated a heart transplant, significantly shortening his life expectancy. A jury awarded $6.35 million, finding both the physician and the associated medical group liable. The man received $3.85 million for his suffering, while his wife was awarded $2.5 million for loss of society and companionship.

$14,000,000 Verdict (Illinois 2023): A 19-year-old in Illinois, suffering from a cough and fatigue for nearly two weeks, initially sought treatment at a clinic under Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation. His condition, however, deteriorated, including the development of edema in his legs. Despite worsening symptoms, the clinic’s response was limited, and no escalation of care or hospitalization was provided. Later, he was examined by two doctors at the same clinic, but still, no immediate necessary treatment was administered. The young man tragically passed away due to myocarditis, a condition that, if diagnosed and treated properly, could have been managed. This led to a lawsuit against Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation, culminating in a Chicago-area jury awarding the patient’s family $14 million for the hospital’s failure to provide adequate care.

$6,000,000 Verdict (Illinois 2023): Despite the well-known dangers of opioids, a doctor continuously increased a woman’s prescription levels without monitoring the effects. The woman died due to acute hydrocodone toxicity. The doctor and her pain clinic were ordered to pay $6 million by a Chicago jury over allegations of over-prescribing opioids that resulted in a patient’s death.

Emergency Room & Diagnostic Errors

$25,000,000 Verdict (Illinois 2023, Affirmed 2026): A woman died just hours after presenting to the emergency department with multiple syncopal episodes, hypoxia, and evolving symptoms. She ultimately suffered a massive pulmonary embolism. The plaintiff’s theory was that the treating physician failed to timely consider pulmonary embolism, failed to use available diagnostic tools such as bedside ultrasound, and failed to initiate life-saving treatment in time. A Cook County jury awarded $25 million. The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the verdict in 2026.

$32,700,000 Verdict (Illinois 2023): A man visited an emergency room with complaints of unexplained foot pain. Despite his high-risk medical profile, which made him especially vulnerable to blood clots, the attending emergency and family medicine physicians, along with their affiliated practice groups, failed to diagnose his condition promptly. This oversight led to severe complications, culminating in the amputation of the man’s foot. After an intense two-and-a-half-week trial in Cook County Circuit Court and six hours of jury deliberation, the jury awarded the patient $32.7 million.

$8,050,000 Verdict (Illinois 2021): A 59-year-old woman suffered a productive cough, chills, nausea, and a low-grade fever. She presented to the ER. The woman received a diagnosis of upper respiratory infection. She was discharged. The woman’s condition worsened. She returned to the ER. The woman was diagnosed with MRSA. She developed sepsis, bacteremia, and multi-organ failure. The woman died from her injuries. Her family alleged negligence against the hospital. They claimed the hospital failed to rule out an MRSA infection and appreciate her frequent exposure to the infection. The jury awarded $8,050,000.

$2,375,000 Settlement (Illinois 2020): A 30-year-old woman presented to the hospital with chest pain. She was diagnosed with microscopic hematuria based on a urine test and sent home with medication. Five days later, the chest pain and tachycardia came back, and she was given a different medication without further testing. Nineteen days later, she died of a rare blood-clotting disorder, thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura. Her estate alleged that both medical providers failed to order several tests that would have diagnosed her condition early enough to prevent her death.

$12,000,000 Verdict (Illinois 2019): A woman in her early 70s went to the ER with symptoms of pneumonia. The radiologist noted a potentially cancerous abnormality on the chest X-ray, but no evidence of pneumonia, so she was sent home. A year later, she was diagnosed with lung cancer, but by then it was already terminal, and she died soon after. Her estate sued the doctors for failing to diagnose her cancer at the ER visit.

Medication Error & Pharmacy Malpractice

$600,906 Verdict (Illinois 2020): Plaintiff suffered rhabdomyolysis, a rare condition that causes muscle breakdown, from the interaction between two different cholesterol drugs. She sued the doctor for negligent prescribing and Walgreens for negligently dispensing.

$1,365,000 Verdict (Illinois 2022): A 100-year-old woman took three-milligram Warfarin tablets instead of one-milligram ones. She developed respiratory distress and supratherapeutic anticoagulation. Her family filed a medication error lawsuit against the doctor who prescribed Warfarin. They claimed he prescribed a high dose and failed to manage and monitor the deceased’s intake. The Cook County jury awarded $1,365,000.

$734,000 Verdict (Illinois 2020): A pain management doctor was accused of negligently administering a steroid injection in a patient’s neck. The injection punctured the dura and ultimately caused the patient’s death. The defense argued that there was no evidence of causation.

Radiology & Cancer Misdiagnosis

$6,528,000 Verdict (Illinois 2021): A woman underwent a mammogram. The radiologist interpreted the results as normal. One year later, the woman received a Stage III breast cancer diagnosis. She underwent bilateral mastectomies, radiation, and chemotherapy. The woman’s life expectancy was reduced. She alleged negligence against the radiologist. The woman claimed he failed to properly interpret her mammogram, examine her breast lump, perform an ultrasound, and provide accurate medical advice.

The verdicts above are not drawn from a scientific sampling or controlled dataset. No consistent methodology is used to gather them, and most are selected because they are either recent, large, or notable. So take the instructive value of these cases with a few buckets of salt. Still, these examples are useful for plaintiffs trying to understand the range of possible outcomes in Illinois medical malpractice cases.

How Much Can You Sue a Hospital or Doctor for Malpractice in Illinois?

Hospital and physician malpractice payouts in Illinois can vary significantly depending on the facts of the case. Some verdicts and settlements can reach $50 million or more. But some cases fall well below a million. It really just depends on the case, but several key factors determine compensation payouts. They include the severity of the injury, the strength of the evidence of negligence, causation, and who can legally be held responsible.

Hospital Liability and Settlement Amounts

Hospitals in Illinois have faced some of the largest malpractice verdicts and settlements in the country, especially in cases where patients were seriously harmed or killed due to preventable medical errors. These cases often involve failures that go beyond one bad decision, like when nurses fail to monitor a patient after surgery, when warning signs of an infection are ignored, or when a delayed C-section leads to a devastating birth injury.

Hospitals can also face direct claims involving their own systems, staffing, credentialing, communication, policies, and safety procedures. That is different from simply holding the hospital responsible for what a particular doctor did.

Physician Malpractice Settlement Amounts

Doctors can be held liable when their conduct falls below the accepted standard of care. Claims against individual physicians often arise from surgical errors, diagnostic mistakes, prescription mishandling, or failure to follow up. Settlements and verdicts in Illinois physician malpractice cases range widely, often between several hundred thousand dollars and tens of millions of dollars. Higher awards usually reflect permanent injury or death.

When a malpractice case involves both a hospital and one or more physicians, liability and damages may be divided between them depending on agency relationships and comparative fault.

Does Illinois Have a Medical Malpractice Damages Cap?

No. Illinois does not currently have a general statutory cap on noneconomic damages in medical malpractice cases.

The Illinois legislature has tried to impose caps before. The Illinois Supreme Court struck down the most recent medical malpractice cap in Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital.

This matters when you look at the verdicts above. In some states, a jury can award millions of dollars for pain, suffering, disability, disfigurement, or loss of normal life and a statute will automatically slash that part of the verdict. Illinois does not currently have that kind of across-the-board medical malpractice cap.

Prejudgment Interest in Illinois Medical Malpractice Cases

Illinois also allows prejudgment interest in qualifying personal injury and wrongful death cases, including medical malpractice cases.

The current statute generally provides for interest at 6% per year beginning when the lawsuit is filed. There are important rules involving written settlement offers, and prejudgment interest cannot accrue for more than five years.

Six percent on a large malpractice verdict is real money. So this is another issue that can affect settlement negotiations in a serious Illinois medical malpractice case.

Illinois Medical Malpractice Law

Let’s look at some of the key things you need to know if you are interested in filing a medical malpractice lawsuit in Illinois.

What You Need to Prove

Medical malpractice, also known as medical negligence, occurs when a healthcare professional provides treatment that deviates from established standards in the medical community, causing injury to a patient. This can involve errors in diagnosis, treatment, aftercare, or health management.

In Illinois, a plaintiff alleging medical malpractice must demonstrate that:

A doctor-patient relationship existed, establishing a duty of care.
The healthcare professional breached this duty by failing to conform to the standard of care expected of a reasonable healthcare provider.
The breach directly caused injury or harm to the patient. So you can have unconnected negligence and harm.
The patient suffered actual damages, such as physical pain, mental anguish, additional medical costs, or lost earning capacity.

Expert Affidavit Requirement

As part of bringing a medical malpractice lawsuit in Illinois, plaintiffs must clear an early procedural hurdle that is designed to weed out frivolous claims. Under Illinois law, 735 ILCS 5/2-622, anyone filing a malpractice complaint must also submit an affidavit concerning a medical review of the case.

The plaintiff’s medical malpractice attorney must consult with a qualified healthcare professional who is knowledgeable about the issues involved in the case and has practiced or taught in the same area of medicine or health care at issue within the period required by the statute.

But it does not stop there. The consultation must result in a written report from that medical expert, laying out the opinion that there is a reasonable and meritorious basis for the lawsuit.

This is not just a box to check. If the affidavit or report is missing, or if it does not meet the statutory requirements, the defense can seek dismissal of the case. Plaintiffs typically have to file the affidavit and report with the complaint, although the statute provides additional time in certain circumstances.

It is a demanding process, but one that sets the tone early: if you are going to bring a malpractice claim in Illinois, you had better come prepared, and you better have the best Illinois malpractice lawyer you can find.

Informed Consent

Healthcare providers must obtain informed consent from patients before proceeding with treatment, barring emergencies. Failure to obtain informed consent may be grounds for a malpractice claim if the patient suffers harm that they were not adequately warned about.

Vicarious Liability

A hospital can sometimes be held vicariously liable for the actions of a physician providing care at the hospital, even if the physician is technically classified as an independent contractor.

To establish a hospital’s liability under the doctrine of apparent authority, a plaintiff generally must demonstrate:

The hospital, or its agent, acted in a way that would lead a reasonable person to conclude that the allegedly negligent individual was an employee or agent of the hospital.
The hospital had knowledge of and acquiesced in acts that created the appearance of authority when the appearance was created by the alleged agent.
The plaintiff relied on the hospital or its apparent agent when seeking medical care.

Holding Out as Agent

The “holding out” part of the apparent agency doctrine is critical in determining whether a hospital can be held liable for the actions of a physician who is not their actual employee but appears to be so. This concept is based on how the hospital represents, or “holds out,” the doctor’s relationship with the hospital to the public, especially the patients.

Here are the key aspects of the “holding out” factor:

Perception of the Physician’s Role: It’s about whether the hospital’s actions lead a reasonable person to conclude that the physician is an employee or agent of the hospital.
Objective Assessment: The evaluation focuses on whether the hospital created the appearance of an agency relationship from the perspective of a reasonable patient.
Hospital’s Conduct and Communication: The focus is on the hospital’s conduct, how it presents its medical staff in its advertising, signage, website, and other forms of public communication.
Clarity and Notices: If the hospital clearly communicates that its physicians are independent contractors, for example through forms or other notices, that evidence can weigh against apparent agency. But the wording, timing, and circumstances surrounding the notice matter.
Patient’s Expectation and Understanding: The assessment can also consider why the patient went to that hospital and whether the patient independently selected the physician.

So the “holding out” factor is about whether the hospital’s presentation and communications create a reasonable belief that the doctors working there are hospital employees or agents, thereby making the hospital potentially liable for the doctors’ actions under the apparent agency doctrine.

This is how it is in the emergency room. You go to a hospital to go to that specific hospital, not to be treated by some independent contractor, and there is rarely an effort to set the patient straight.

There are limits to the doctrine. The Illinois Supreme Court has made clear that a hospital does not automatically become responsible for care provided by doctors at an independently owned outside clinic merely because those doctors have privileges at the hospital.

Statute of Limitations

Illinois’s general statute of limitations for filing a medical malpractice lawsuit is two years. This two-year period begins when the injured person knew or reasonably should have known that the injury occurred and that it may have been caused by medical negligence. However, Illinois law imposes a strict outer deadline, known as a statute of repose, which generally bars any claim filed more than four years after the alleged act or omission.

The limitations period is longer for minors under the age of 18. A malpractice claim must generally be brought within eight years of the date of the alleged malpractice, but it cannot be filed after the minor turns 22.

Exceptions to these deadlines include fraudulent concealment and other specific circumstances. Otherwise, missing these timeframes can bar a malpractice claim no matter how strong the case is.

Illinois Malpractice News Feed

August 27, 2026 – $41 Million Stroke Verdict Goes Before Illinois Appellate Court

The Illinois Appellate Court heard oral argument in the appeal of the $41 million malpractice verdict involving a lawyer who suffered a catastrophic stroke after his Coumadin therapy was allegedly mismanaged. The plaintiff’s INR remained below the therapeutic range after discharge, and he later suffered a massive stroke that left him paralyzed and cognitively impaired. The defendants are asking the appellate court to overturn the 2024 verdict.

August 20, 2026 – Plaintiff Loses Malpractice Case After Missing Expert Deadlines

The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed summary judgment against the plaintiff in Ordaz v. Hurst, a wrongful death case involving an allegedly missed aortic dissection. The lesson? Do not miss your deadlines, which apparently happened twice in this case. The plaintiff’s lawyers missed deadlines for disclosing critical expert opinions, and the trial judge struck the experts. Without that causation evidence, no jury could link the negligence to an injury. A brutal reminder that even a potentially strong malpractice case can be lost on procedure and many judges are not forgiving on expert deadlines.

July 31, 2026 – Plaintiff’s Wrongful Death Verdict Upheld

The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed a plaintiff’s verdict in Kos v. Muzykansky, a wrongful death case involving an allegedly missed gastrointestinal bleed. Causation was the battlefield, and the defense argued the plaintiff needed additional experts to explain every step of treatment that would have followed a hospital referral, which is a really tough argument to make to overturn a verdict because the trial judge is given a lot of latitude on these types of rulings. The court easily rejected that argument, finding there was sufficient expert testimony that timely hospital treatment probably would have saved the patient’s life.

June 22, 2026 – Hospital Loses Medical Studies Act Privilege Fight

In Wickersheim v. Broderick, an Illinois appellate court sided with the plaintiff in a discovery dispute involving hospital credentialing records.

The malpractice lawsuit alleges that multiple healthcare providers failed to timely diagnose and treat a subdural hemorrhage after a car crash and then failed to properly treat an intracerebral hemorrhage that developed after emergency brain surgery.

Advocate Sherman Hospital withheld and heavily redacted portions of credentialing records, arguing that the Medical Studies Act protected the documents from discovery. The appellate court held that the hospital had not met its burden of showing that the disputed documents were privileged.

This is not a ruling on who wins the malpractice case. But discovery fights like this matter. Hospitals cannot take ordinary credentialing material, put a peer-review label on it after the fact, and automatically make it disappear from the case.

April 1, 2026 – $51 Million Verdict After Failure to Check Blood Sugar

A Cook County jury awarded more than $51 million to a man who suffered catastrophic brain injury after an emergency department failed to discover dangerously elevated blood glucose.

The patient went to OSF Heart of Mary Medical Center with a severe and worsening headache. The plaintiff’s lawyers argued that obvious metabolic risk factors were in the chart but nobody ordered the simple blood glucose testing that would have revealed his diabetic crisis.

He was sent home. Days later, he suffered cardiac arrest and an anoxic brain injury. He now requires round-the-clock care.

A simple blood sugar test and a man’s life is destroyed.

January 23, 2026 – Illinois Supreme Court Affirms Defense Verdict Despite Juror’s “Surrender Note”

This is an interesting appellate issue. A juror sent the judge a note stating that she believed the doctor was negligent but was signing the verdict only to end the deliberations. Plaintiff’s counsel moved for a mistrial, arguing the note showed the jury was deadlocked and that a holdout juror had caved under pressure.

The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the defense verdict anyway. The trial court brought the jury back, polled the jurors, and satisfied itself that the verdict could be accepted.

Our lawyers think this is the wrong call. A juror who puts in writing that she believes the defendant was negligent and is signing only to end things is precisely the kind of holdout the mistrial mechanism exists to protect.

June 21, 2025 – $2.86 Million Botched Foot Surgery Verdict Affirmed

An Illinois appellate court affirmed a $2.86 million jury verdict awarded to a woman who suffered years of pain and permanent disability following two foot surgeries performed by a podiatrist. The plaintiff, who had osteoporosis and type 1 diabetes, originally sought treatment for mild bunions and was promised a minimally invasive surgical procedure with a quick recovery. Instead, the doctor performed aggressive surgeries on both feet that multiple experts later testified were medically unnecessary, poorly indicated, and violated the accepted standard of podiatric care.

After those surgeries, the plaintiff was left in constant pain, endured multiple follow-up operations, including toe fusions, bone grafts, and repeated hardware removals, and now lives with lifelong mobility limitations and daily pain. Expert testimony at trial described how the original procedures destabilized her feet, shifted pressure to other toes, and led to cascading complications.

The appellate court rejected the defense’s arguments that certain trial errors warranted a new trial.

March 7, 2025 – New Appellate Opinion

The appellate court upheld the jury’s defense verdict in a medical negligence case involving delayed diagnosis and treatment of vision loss from NAION, which is now a big injury at issue in the Ozempic litigation.

On appeal, the plaintiffs claimed multiple trial errors, including a violation of the Petrillo doctrine, an Illinois rule that prohibits defense lawyers from having private, or ex parte, conversations with a plaintiff’s treating physician without the patient’s consent.

The plaintiffs argued that defense counsel violated this rule by speaking privately with the patient’s longtime doctor. The court rejected this, finding that an earlier protective order explicitly allowed such communications with hospital-employed physicians involved in the patient’s care. Because that order remained in effect and was never modified or challenged, the communication did not violate Petrillo.

The takeaway is this: trial rulings, especially those involving evidentiary stipulations and protective orders, carry real weight on appeal. If plaintiffs believe a defense lawyer oversteps discovery rules like Petrillo, they must challenge those actions promptly and clearly.

January 13, 2025 – Broad Reach of Illinois Medical Malpractice Repose Statute Shuts Door on Late-Filed Claims

The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed summary judgment for a medical provider and physician, holding that the state’s four-year medical malpractice statute of repose barred the plaintiff’s claims.

The court also clarified that claims labeled as institutional negligence do not escape the statute of repose if they arise from patient care, even if the specific act, such as failing to notify a patient of pathology results, may appear administrative.

The takeaway is blunt but clear: plaintiffs cannot evade the statute of repose by reframing medical negligence as administrative or institutional wrongdoing.

For victims, the message is more sobering: regardless of how severe the harm or clear the negligence, if the conduct stems from medical treatment and the statutory deadline passes, the door to justice may be shut permanently.

Older Illinois Medical Malpractice Updates

November 2, 2024 – $5 Million Psychiatric Malpractice Verdict Affirmed

The Illinois Appellate Court upheld a $5 million jury award in Binkowski v. International Health Systems, Inc.

The plaintiff filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Advocate Health and Hospitals Corporation after her husband’s suicide, which occurred shortly after he was discharged from Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital. The plaintiff claimed that the hospital’s staff failed to meet the standard of care by discharging her husband, who had a high suicide risk, to an independent living facility that lacked necessary mental health support and monitoring.

At trial, the plaintiff presented expert testimony indicating that the discharge plan was inadequate for someone in her husband’s condition. He was at significant risk of self-harm and needed continued therapeutic support.

The jury awarded $1 million in damages for the emotional distress the plaintiff’s husband experienced leading up to his death and $4 million for the family’s loss of society, grief, and suffering. The appellate court affirmed.

September 20, 2024 – New Trial for Wrongful Death Plaintiff

An Illinois appellate court reversed a jury verdict in a medical malpractice and wrongful death case, ordering a new trial.

The case involved the death of a patient allegedly due to a misdiagnosed thoracic aortic dissection. The court found that the trial court improperly allowed prejudicial evidence about the estate executor’s assertion of physician-patient privilege and his alleged obstruction during discovery, which unfairly suggested that the estate was hiding evidence. Given the close nature of the case, this error likely influenced the jury’s verdict.

September 8, 2024 – Cook County v. DuPage County

Courts generally defer to a plaintiff’s choice of forum, recognizing that plaintiffs have the right to select a convenient location. But this deference has limits, especially when the selected forum has little connection to the underlying events or the parties involved.

In Adamian v. Balash, the plaintiffs argued that Cook County was a suitable venue for their birth injury lawsuit, despite the events having occurred in DuPage County. Make no mistake: plaintiffs would almost always rather be in Cook County than DuPage County for a birth injury lawsuit against a hospital.

The appellate court saw it differently. The court ruled that the trial court abused its discretion by not transferring the case, noting that the plaintiffs did not live in Cook County, and most witnesses and events were based in DuPage County.

July 26, 2024 – $6.35 Million Verdict Awarded to Man and His Wife

A $6.35 million verdict was awarded to a man and his wife following his need for a heart transplant due to a failure to diagnose coronary ischemia by his physician over several months. Despite initial tests indicating the need for further investigation, the condition was not identified, leading to a medical emergency seven months later. The patient was hospitalized in cardiac shock and ultimately required a heart transplant, which significantly shortened his life expectancy.

The jury found both the physician and the associated medical group liable, awarding $3.85 million to the patient and $2.5 million to his wife for loss of society and companionship.

June 20, 2024 – Court Finds No Abuse of Discretion in Circumcision Case

In O’Laughlin v. Northwestern Memorial Hospital, the plaintiff appealed a defense verdict in a case involving an allegedly negligently performed circumcision that allegedly caused a urethral fistula.

The appeal focused on two key issues: the trial court’s allowance of an expert witness’s testimony that the plaintiff argued was not properly disclosed, and the use of a demonstrative video showing a different circumcision procedure.

The appellate court upheld the trial court’s decisions, finding no abuse of discretion.

June 11, 2024 – Illinois Appellate Court Finds Errors in Trial Court’s Handling of Case

In a medical negligence lawsuit appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court reversed and remanded for a new trial after finding errors in the trial court’s handling of the case.

The trial court had issued a directed verdict for one defendant, and the jury found in favor of the other defendants.

The appellate court determined that there was sufficient evidence that could suggest the dismissed defendant’s actions contributed to the patient’s death, warranting jury consideration.

The appellate court also found that the trial court’s response to a jury question about the need for unanimity in the verdict was potentially misleading.

Although the parties did not request a different judge, the appellate court took the extraordinary step of ordering a new trial to be overseen by a different judge, citing the awful relationship between the plaintiff’s lawyer and the judge.

June 6, 2024 – Appellate Court Upholds Jury Verdict in Favor of Defendant

The appellate court upheld a jury verdict in favor of the defendant in a medical malpractice case involving a complex delivery that resulted in a permanent brachial plexus injury to a newborn.

The plaintiffs alleged in this Chicago birth injury lawsuit that the delivering obstetrician’s negligence during the delivery caused severe injury. The case focused on shoulder dystocia, where the baby’s shoulder became stuck behind the mother’s pubic bone.

The jury found in favor of the OB, and the appellate court concluded that the challenged expert testimony and jury instructions did not warrant a new trial.

May 29, 2024 – Trial Concludes With Jury Awarding $41 Million in Damages

A lawyer was admitted to a Peoria-based hospital for pneumonia treatment, which led to an acute kidney injury requiring dialysis. Diagnosed with atrial fibrillation, he was prescribed Coumadin to prevent stroke, necessitating careful monitoring of his blood clotting levels (INR).

Upon his discharge, his INR levels were below the therapeutic range, and there was no plan to monitor these levels post-discharge. Over the next month, he underwent dialysis at a facility where his blood was tested three times, but his dangerously low INR levels were not addressed. A month after discharge, he suffered a massive stroke, resulting in paralysis on his left side and severe cognitive deficits, rendering him unable to practice law or live independently.

The trial concluded with a Cook County jury awarding $41 million in damages.

May 24, 2024 – Appellate Court Upholds Trial Court’s Decision in Favor of Obstetrician

The Appellate Court of Illinois upheld the trial court’s decision in favor of an obstetrician accused of causing a permanent brachial plexus injury to a baby during delivery. The parents of the injured child claimed that the OB used excessive traction during delivery. The defense was that various factors unrelated to the doctor’s actions, such as natural forces of labor or in-utero crowding, caused the injury. The jury found in favor of the OB.

May 8, 2024 – New Medical Malpractice Lawsuit Against Presence Central and Suburban Hospitals Network

A new medical malpractice lawsuit was filed against Presence Central and Suburban Hospitals Network and several healthcare professionals. The lawsuit alleged that a patient was admitted for a colostomy reversal procedure. Four days later, while still hospitalized, the patient began showing symptoms of hypotension and sepsis, which allegedly were inadequately addressed by hospital staff and attending medical professionals.

The allegations further state that the patient suffered respiratory failure, ARDS, hypoxia, and septic shock. This necessitated transfer to another facility for ECMO treatment and resulted in an extended hospitalization.

April 3, 2024 – Brayboy v. Advocate Health & Hospital Corp.

In Brayboy v. Advocate Health & Hospital Corp., a mother brought her three-year-old son to the emergency room at Advocate Good Samaritan Hospital with severe flu-like symptoms. Despite initial treatment and subsequent discharge, the child’s condition deteriorated, leading to his tragic death from an untreated bacterial infection after a return visit to the hospital.

The family filed a wrongful death and survival action medical malpractice lawsuit. The family’s lawsuit argued the doctors were negligent and that the emergency room physician should be considered an agent of the hospital. This is a common battle in malpractice lawsuits as we discuss above.

The hospital disputed the agency, relying heavily on a consent form the mother signed, labeling the physician as an independent contractor.

Upon appeal, the plaintiff contested this decision, focusing on the hospital’s presentation of the doctor as its agent and the mother’s reliance on this depiction.

The appellate court reversed the lower court’s ruling, pointing out factual disputes regarding the apparent agency relationship and the adequacy and timing of the consent form provided to the mother.

March 27, 2024 – Appellate Court Reverses Lower Court’s Decision

In Larson v. Crosby, the Appellate Court of Illinois reversed a lower court’s decision granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants, a doctor, a medical group, and a medical employee. This is a good case that will be cited in the future by plaintiffs trying to invoke the discovery rule in Illinois.

The plaintiff alleged that the doctor left gauze in one plaintiff’s nasal cavity after surgery, causing severe pain, swelling, and permanent injury.

The defense attorney argued that the lawsuit was filed outside the two-year statute of limitations, claiming the plaintiff should have been aware of her injury and its wrongful cause by a specific date.

The appellate court found that the medical records and testimony did not conclusively establish that the plaintiff had enough information by the deadline to suspect a wrongful cause for her symptoms.

The most likely scenario is that parties will argue the issues to the jury, which is a win for the plaintiff.

January 4, 2024 – Plaintiff Gets New Trial From Important Appellate Opinion

In an important appellate opinion, the plaintiff got a new trial in a vicarious liability malpractice case.

The plaintiff appealed the dismissal of her medical malpractice lawsuit against West Suburban Medical Center. Her claim argued that WSMC was indirectly responsible for a doctor’s actions, which allegedly led to the amputation of her leg due to a missed cancer diagnosis.

The Appellate Court identified significant uncertainties regarding whether WSMC presented itself as the doctor’s employer or principal, known as the “holding out” element, and whether the plaintiff justifiably relied on WSMC for her medical care.

Contributing factors included WSMC’s promotional activities for its physicians, the location of the doctor’s office on WSMC’s premises, his receipt of a WSMC badge, and his various leadership roles at the hospital. Furthermore, the consent form the plaintiff signed did not unambiguously state that he was not an employee of WSMC. It is so easy to put that in the informed consent documents.

October 25, 2023 – Cook County Board Approves Two Significant Settlements

The Cook County Board approved two significant settlements for medical malpractice claims connected to patient deaths at Stroger Hospital.

In one case, a $6.75 million settlement was paid after a woman who was 35 weeks pregnant did not receive adequate fetal monitoring following a car accident. Despite arriving at the emergency room and reporting no fetal movement since the accident, the lawsuit claimed hospital staff did not properly monitor fetal well-being, respond to a problematic CT scan, perform an ultrasound, or correctly place an electronic fetal monitor.

This resulted in the baby being stillborn after an emergency cesarean section. An accompanying physician’s testimony suggested that with proper care, the baby could have survived.

In a separate case, a $1.8 million settlement was approved for the estate of a deceased patient who was treated for severe aplastic anemia. The lawsuit alleged that hospital staff failed to adequately monitor the patient while administering a medication called Promacta, leading to liver failure and death.

September 20, 2023 – Appeals Panel Affirms $49.25 Million Verdict

An Illinois appeals panel affirmed a $49.25 million verdict against Advocate Health concerning a medical malpractice case. Joseph and Christine Browning initiated the lawsuit after Joseph developed sepsis after his gallbladder removal. The lawsuit alleged the defendants misidentified an intra-abdominal infection leading to severe complications.

The hospital did what malpractice defendants do: try to blame the patient. In this case, they blamed a prior gastric bypass procedure for the complications. A Cook County jury did not buy it.

September 1, 2023 – Illinois Law Allows Punitive Damages in Wrongful Death Cases, But Not Malpractice

Illinois law now allows punitive damages in certain wrongful death cases. However, there is an exclusion for medical malpractice claims.

June 18, 2023 – Illinois Supreme Court Clarifies Respondents in Discovery

Over four decades ago, Illinois implemented a legal provision to streamline medical malpractice suits, allowing plaintiffs to initially name healthcare providers as respondents for discovery before possibly upgrading them to defendants based on evidence.

The Illinois Supreme Court, in Cleeton v. SIU Healthcare, clarified that this practice, outlined in § 2-402 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was not meant to hinder the filing of malpractice suits.

The court underscored that a plaintiff only needs to show probable cause to believe a respondent might be liable, not definitive proof at the discovery stage.

Contact Us About Illinois Medical Malpractice Cases

If you have a potential medical malpractice case in Illinois, call our malpractice lawyers today for a free consultation. We have a network of local medical malpractice firms in Illinois that we can work with to bring your case and get maximum compensation. Call us today at 800-553-8082 or contact us online.