With a combination of highly experienced attorneys in the areas of health care law and litigation, Greensfelder is uniquely equipped to represent health care providers in a variety of matters requiring advocacy and litigation. Our medical malpractice work is concentrated in the representation of hospitals, physicians, and nurses against suits filed in the various state courts in Illinois and Missouri. Our team has secured numerous medical malpractice defense verdicts in Illinois and Missouri, with recent defense verdicts on claims in excess of $10 million.

The successful defense of medical negligence claims depends in large part on the ability to understand the technical aspects of the medical or nursing care at issue. Our attorneys, assisted by registered nurses who are members of this practice group, are experienced in dealing with complicated medical issues in a variety of disciplines, and effectively communicating with judges and juries about those technical issues.

5 key benefits of our team

Experienced Litigators

Our attorneys successfully handle complex medical litigation resulting in defense verdicts. Greensfelder is a top firm in Missouri and Illinois for defending cases at the trial and appellate level.

In-House Expertise

Our litigation team includes in-house registered nurses with clinical experience. Our medical library includes texts from the most respected and influential authors on everything from emergency medicine to surgical techniques. And our attorneys combine decades of experience in representing providers.

Technology

Our team deftly handles large cases using hundreds or thousands of exhibits. Our sophisticated e-discovery platform allows us to manage and identify key medical records, lab and diagnostic reports and other evidence. When it's time for trial, we use state-of-the-art technology to present the most effective defense.

Experts

We are well-connected with the best experts from around the country.

Collaboration

We work closely with in-house counsel in developing case strategies and defenses to bring about the most effective resolution of your case.

Our depth and breadth

We handle medical malpractice and wrongful death cases of all types. Matters include, but are not limited to:

• Obstetrical cases including cerebral palsy, hypoxic encephalitis, birth traumas
• Emergency care cases
• Primary care/internal medicine cases
• Surgical cases
• Cases over claims of failure to obtain informed consent
• Specialty area cases (cardiology, neurology, pediatrics, hematology, pathology, radiology, endocrinology, oncology, pediatrics, ophthalmology, etc.)

• Defense verdict for a surgeon and orthopedic group opposing a patient’s claim that the surgeon breached the standard of care in lacerating the median nerve during carpal tunnel surgery. The jury found in favor of the defense after three days of evidence during a 2016 trial in Jefferson County, Illinois.
• Defense verdict on behalf of a hospital system and two pediatric neurosurgeons in a multimillion-dollar wrongful-death medical malpractice case arising out of surgery to repair a pseudomeningeal cyst.
• Defense verdict for an Illinois hospital in a claim brought on behalf of a fetus alleging injuries and total damages in excess of $10 million as a result of the exposure in utero to I-131 iodine used to diagnose thyroid cancer in the mother.
• Defense verdict for an Illinois hospital and emergency physician in a claim alleging delay in treatment caused the death of a 50-year-old woman.
• Summary judgment for a regional EMS resource hospital in Southern Illinois sued because its EMS medical director assisted in the development of a regional EMS transportation plan. Following a fatal automobile accident, a full-term pregnancy was automatically routed to a facility that could not treat the mother or the fetus appropriately. The resource hospital had no involvement in the treatment of the patients. The receiving hospital had obtained IDPH waivers on mandatory equipment without notification to the resource hospital. The trial court found that the facility which was working within the Illinois EMS system and immune from liability.
• Defense of orthopedic surgeon performing a joint-replacement surgery on patient with a pre-surgery history of MRSA. The patient developed a severe post-surgery infection of the joint and underwent eleven surgical procedures. Discovery revealed plaintiff sought total disability claim pre-surgery due to an unrelated condition. Able to settle matter for significantly less than the medical expenses and lost wages of over $1 million.
• Negotiated favorable settlement for physician sued for battery and assault relating to surgery on the incorrect foot. Upon realizing the operation was proceeding on the wrong foot, the physician temporarily woke the patient from anesthesia to obtain oral permission to operate on that foot. The physician then completed surgery on both feet in direct contradiction to plaintiff’s directions. Negotiations began with an intractable plaintiff demanding seven figures and resolved with a minor financial payment and apology.
• Judgment in favor of a nurse sued for sciatica after intra-muscular injection of medication. The plaintiff’s first documented complaint of sciatic pain was one month post-injection. The plaintiff’s treating physician testified at trial that there were “numerous” potential causes for plaintiff’s subsequent numbness and tingling. The plaintiff’s expert testified that the sole basis of his opinion was the plaintiff’s history that the plaintiff had no problems before the injection and developed sciatica “shortly after the injection.”
• Defense verdict in a medical negligence case in which plaintiffs sought over $1 million in past and future damages related to an alleged surgical error.
• Reversal of a $1.4 million plaintiff’s verdict in a wrongful death case due to an instructional error in which the plaintiff’s verdict director assumed a disputed fact.
• Represented a dentist in three matters before the Missouri Dental Board relating to claims related to alleged violations of the Dental Practice Act. After investigation and an appearance before the board, all three matters were closed without any sanction being issued.