Published on:


It seems like the future of ride share is the development of autonomous vehicles and other forms of automated transportation.  The safety ramifications related to this new technology cannot be overstated.  Thankfully, the federal government has been working on a solution to foreseeable problems in this arena.  We are reserving judgment on the effectiveness of the solutions being proposed in Washington.  We are grateful that an effort is being made. The Chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Frank Pallone (NJ Democrat), said yesterday , “We are working on a bipartisan, bicameral basis to draft a self-driving car bill that will help ensure that these life-saving technologies are safety deployed.”



To date, the federal government has offered guidance but no hard and fast rules (law) regulating self driving vehicles.  From the prospective of the consumer, this is problematic.  The major players in the self driving vehicle landscape, like Uber, Lyft, Google and other ride share companies, stand to benefit from lack of oversight.  The less regulation, the more profit for these corporate behemoths.  The problem with this approach is the lack of accountability to the consumer.  Dollars and cents are not the only measure of success.  Safety should be the number one concern of all of the implementers of this radical new technology.  Autonomous vehicles are an opportunity to change the world for the better.  Leaving the early regulation of this technology in the hands of Uber and Google is the same as letting the fox guard the hen house.

We have vast experience with ride share litigation.  Our clients have benefited greatly from our experience in this specialized area of the law.  We have pioneered techniques to overcome the ride share world’s argument that the drivers are independent contractors.  If you have been injured in a ride share vehicle, call us for a consultation at no cost.

Published on:


Sexual abuse and assault has become an epidemic in Illinois, and nationwide.  At Goldberg & Goldberg, we have vast experience representing the victims of Sexual Abuse and Sexual Assault, as well other victims of predatory behavior.  Our lawyers have represented victims of sexual abuse and assault at the hands of celebrities, artists, musicians, professional athletes, corporate CEOs, clergy, doctors, nurses, nursing home workers, day care workers and others in positions of power.  At Goldberg & Goldberg, we become partners with our clients in the healing process and believe that part of our mission is to assist every victim of sexual abuse and assault on their healing journey.


Published on:

For over 50 years the lawyers at Goldberg & Goldberg have represented the victims of Birth Injury and Birth Trauma caused by the hands of doctors and hospitals.  Over that period of time, we have learned a thing or two about birth injuries, how they occur, what impact they have on the victim over a lifetime and how to litigate birth injury cases.  This blog post is an effort to educate the families of the victims of birth trauma on how to proceed with a birth injury or birth trauma lawsuit.


  1. NOT ALL LAWYERS ARE CREATED EQUAL:  This might sound snobby, and we apologize if it does, but as obvious as this statement is, most people do not know how to spot someone who has expertise in birth injury litigation and someone that doesn’t.  The internet has allowed a class of lawyers to develop that are only interested in advertising their services in order to find cases to refer to other lawyers who actually know how to handle these cases.  In the City of Chicago, there are very few lawyers that have the competency and financial resources to handle a birth injury case.  Internet lawyers advertise for birth injury cases in the hopes of referring them to a lawyer that knows what he/she is doing and getting a percentage of the fee.  These lawyers do not actually handle their own cases.  How do you avoid these lawyers?  Ask the right questions.  Ask them to show you examples of settlements and verdicts that they have obtained as lead counsel.  If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is usually a duck.  The same can be said about trial lawyers.
  2.  WHY CAN’T I DO THIS ON MY OWN?:  In almost all cases you need a lawyer to handle a birth injury case on behalf of your injured friend or loved one.  Birth Injury cases are some of the most complex and difficult cases a lawyer can handle.  The medicine is complex and the lawyers hired by the hospitals and doctors are sophisticated.  Regardless of what risk management at the hospital might tell you, if you attempt to handle a complex matter like a birth injury case on your own, you will not be treated fairly.  Hire a lawyer early to protect your rights.
Published on:

The Atlantic published an article today in the wake of the accident that caused a pedestrian to be killed by a self-driving Uber vehicle in Tempe, Arizona.  A link to that article can be found here. This is hardly the first incident involving a wrongful death at the hand of a self driving vehicle.  In 2016 in Florida, a Tesla operating is auto-pilot mode struck another vehicle and killed the driver.  The article asks the question, “What are the legal implications in accidents involving self driving car?”  While the answer might seem obvious, there are quite a few factors that will impact the answer.

First, the article raises the point that this accident happened in Arizona which has declared itself open for business when it comes to testing and operating self driving automobiles.  Arizona’s Governor signed an executive order in August of 2015 which required the Arizona Department of Transportation to take steps to support the testing and operation of self-driving vehicles on Arizona’s roads.  An investigation into what Arizona did or did not do to make sure the roads were safe for self-driving cars and the general public needs to be investigated.

Obviously, UBER in this case, or whatever company owns the self-driving vehicle involved in the accident is the first place to investigate when it comes to determining who is at fault for an accident involving an autonomous vehicle.  Other self driving-vehicle companies like Lyft, Waymo, Tesla, GM and Intel have set down roots in Arizona too.  Since we know that 96+% of all automobile accidents are the result of driver error, this is the obvious place to start any investigation.

Published on:

The opioid crisis has wracked our country.  This epidemic has touched all four corners of the United States and has left no part of our nation untouched.  Like the rest of the country, the State of Illinois, Cook County and the City of Chicago have been devastated by the disastrous affect opioids have had on the community at large, and on individuals and their families.  The federal government and the State of Illinois has collected significant data that is nothing short of shocking.  Between 1999-2014, the number of opioid overdose deaths tripled.  In 2014 alone, 60.9% of all drug overdose deaths in America involved opioids.  In the State of Illinois, overdose deaths involving opioids increased by 44% from 2013 to 2016.  80% of all overdoses fatalities in the State of Illinois in 2016 were related to opioids.  Cook County and the City of Chicago have been particularly devastated due to the fact that this is the largest population center in Illinois.  What does this mean?


There is no question that in a very short period of time opioid use and abuse has increased exponentially in America.  From 1999 to the present the amount of opioid pain medication prescribed and consumed in the United States has quadrupled.  Chicago has been flooded by opioid pain medications.  Pill pushing doctors and complicit pharmacies and pharmaceutical companies have created a situation where patients who are prescribed these medications for legitimate medical conditions, become addicted and then are forced into a viscous cycle of abuse that often involves criminal behavior and ultimately death by overdose.

Some of the most common opioid medications include:

Published on:

Invokana is a prescription medicine used to treat type 2 diabetes.  It is manufactured by Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. which is a division of Johnson & Johnson under license from Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation.  Janssen claims that Invokana is proven to more effectively lower A1c levels in type 2 diabetics than other drugs in its class, like Januvia.

The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) is now warning users of Invokana that this medicine may lead to ketoacidosis, a condition which causes the users body to produce extremely high levels of blood borne acids called ketones which can cause significant injury to the user in the form of diabetic come and require hospitalization and, in some cases, heart attacks, strokes, kidney failure or other injury and death.

If you, or a loved one, has experienced ketoacidosis after taking Invokana, please do not hesitate to contact Goldberg & Goldberg.  We are a leading firm of trial lawyers located in Chicago, Cook County, Illinois.  For over 50 years we have represented the victims of negligence in medical products and drug and pharma cases.  We have obtained the largest personal injury verdict in Illinois history which involved a drug product negligence claim.  If you or a loved one is suffering or has suffered after taking Invokana, we are available to you for a FREE CONSULTATION.

Published on:

A recent study published in Pediatric Reseach documents the relationship between abnormal PCO2 and unfavorable outcomes in infants suffering from hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.  The object of the study was to determine if hypocapnia could be correlated with adverse outcomes in infants with moderately severe to severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.

The study utilized 234 instances of hypocapnia to determine if there was independent predictive value in data concerning abnormal PCO2 levels and abnormal outcomes for these children.  The studies authors determined that there is independent predictive value in the relationship between hypocapnia and adverse and unfavorable outcomes.

The authors of the study determined that future studies of normocapnia will be important in determining the extent of the relationship between abnormal PCO2 and adverse outcomes in infants with moderately severe to severe hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.

Published on:

The Supreme Court of the United States has deferred action on a petition to hear a case involving a child who was brain injured at birth during labor and delivery at Evans Army Community Hospital in Colorado.  Critics of the Feres Doctrine hoped that the Supreme Court would use this opportunity to clarify and make fair the controversial doctrine.  The Feres Doctrine was articulated in Feres v. United States, 340 U.S. 135 (1950).  Justice Robert Jackson, writing for the court, wrote the opinion which held that the United States is not liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act for injuries that active members of the military experience due to the negligence of other active members of the military.

Isabella Ortiz was born in 2009.  Her mother was a Captain in the United States Air Force.  During the planned caesarian section delivery Capt. Ortiz was given a medication to which she had a known allergy.  As a result, her mother’s blood pressure dropped which caused Isabella to suffer hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy.   The lack of oxygen to her brain caused her to sustain brain damage.  As a result, she cannot walk on her own and needs assistance at school.

Her claim was originally filed in Federal Court in Colorado where it was dismissed because the court found that Isabella’s injuries flowed from conduct that was “incident” to military service.  The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals also denied the claim, applying the genesis test to the Feres Doctrine and ruling that Isabella’s injuries were directly related to her mother’s injuries making Feres directly applicable.

Published on:

The Illinois Appellate Court, First District has decided that when a plaintiff dies during medical malpractice litigation, even after the statute of limitations has run, the estate can add a wrongful death claim.  Previously, plaintiffs were faced with inconsistent statutes which made this scenario unclear.  In Lawler v The University of Chicago Medical Center Justice Delort, writing for the appellate court, resolved this conflict in favor of justice for the victims of medical malpractice.

The court found that since the defendants were on notice of the claim for medical negligence brought by Ms. Prusak before her untimely death that same complaint was not barred by the expiration of the statute of limitations or repose simply because her death claim did not accrue until after the expiration of the same because the original claim was filed within the statute.

Published on:

You have already suffered the indignity of being the victim of medical negligence.  You, or a loved one, has been seriously injured or killed by a doctor, nurse or hospital that engaged in conduct that fell below the standard of care for a well-qualified healthcare provider under like or similar circumstances.  You have been forced to relive this tragedy over and over again when you interviewed your lawyer, answered written discovery, gave a deposition, participated in mock trials and/or focus groups and were forced to attend fruitless mediation sessions.  The indignity is compounded by the smugness of the defendants and their attorneys and their unwillingness to accept their part of blame for your suffering, grief and sorrow.  Your case is going to trial.  What should you expect?

Trial can be terrifying for a plaintiff in a medical malpractice case.  Going to trial means uncertainty.  Going to trial means that the fate of your case will be decided by a jury of 12 people who do not necessarily know and understand the depth of the tragedy that you have experienced.  It is the job of your attorney to make the experience of trial as comfortable for you as possible.

In Cook County, where we do a lot of our trial work, the trial date is assigned months before the trial by the presiding judge of the Law Division.  On the day of the actual trial, your case is assigned to a trial judge at random by the court computer.  Once you are assigned to a trial judge, and assuming that none of the parties ask for a substitution of judge (every party has the right to change trial judges one time by statute) then the trial can actually begin.  Usually the parties receive a call from the trial judge once the case has been assigned for trial asking them to appear before the judge at a certain time.  The judge will usually spend some time talking to the lawyers and learning a little about the facts of the case.  Depending on the judge, some time might be spent trying to mediate a settlement.  Some judges are very good at brokering deals for settlement and some are not.  Depending on the judge’s level of interest you might spend hours or days trying to reach a settlement agreement.  The parties also will exchange motions that are known as motions in limine.  These motions are meant as a device to limit evidence or argument that might be presented to the jury.  Once motions conclude, the judge will call up a venire of jurors for what is known as voir direVoir dire is the lawyers opportunity to see and speak to prospective jurors make sure they are appropriate to serve on the jury.  Once the jury is selected, the lawyers can begin the presentation of evidence.  This typically begins with an opening statement, which tells the jury what the evidence will show, and ends with a closing argument, which is a lawyer’s presentation of what  the evidence means.  After closing arguments, the jury gets the case, deliberates and renders its verdict according to the law provide by the judge.

Contact Information