Articles Posted in Legislation

Published on:

By

Corporate defendants often rely on a familiar playbook: rotate employees, claim ignorance, and hope the passage of time erases responsibility. But in Illinois, the law does not allow corporations to wipe the slate clean simply by losing or replacing the people who once knew the truth.

This is the concept of corporate memory, and it is one of the most effective legal tools available to trial lawyers. It allows us to expose what a corporation actually knew, when it knew it, and how that knowledge relates to the harm suffered by our clients. Corporate memory is not tied to an individual person. It belongs to the corporation itself.

The leading Illinois case on this principle, Campen v. Executive House, confirms that once a corporation learns of a dangerous condition, a prior bad act, or a foreseeable risk, that knowledge becomes part of the corporation. It cannot be “discharged” through turnover. It cannot be forgotten because a new manager arrived last year. And it cannot be erased by convenient claims of “I wasn’t here then.”

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

Understanding the Real Meaning of Trial Work

Trial work is more than standing before a jury and delivering sharp arguments—it’s the art and discipline of guiding a case from uncertainty to clarity. At its heart, trial work is a blend of preparation, persuasion, and performance. It’s the work that tests a lawyer’s instincts, judgment, composure, and command of the law.

Good trial work has always been about more than theatrics. The real craft lies in understanding how facts, people, and law interact once a case steps into a courtroom. A trial lawyer lives in that intersection, translating complexity into narratives that judges and juries can not only follow, but believe.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

 

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.”

Rideshare-Lawuits-Attorneys-Pensacola-300x202

 

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:

By

SEXUAL ABUSE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT

Sexual abuse and assault has become an epidemic in Illinois, and nationwide.  At Goldberg & Goldberg, LLC, 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, LLC, 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.

surviving-r-kelly-300x169
SURVIVING R. KELLY PART II, THE RECKONING

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

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.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

This blog entry comes courtesy of the President of the Illinois Trial Lawyers Association and was published in the February 24, 2011 edition of the Belleville News Democrat:

It is once again time to set the record straight with your editorial board. There was never a health care crisis in this state and there were no “jackpot justice conditions” that caused doctors to flee Illinois.

Your editorial board and the president of the Illinois State Medical Society (ISMS) have chosen to ignore important facts when it comes to medical care access in this state. Over the years, we have consistently increased the number of physicians in our state. That’s right. The American Medical Association data reflects increases for each of the last 45 years. Clearly not a climate of doctors leaving Illinois or retiring early.

Funny how it used to be, for years, ISMS would falsely claim doctors were fleeing our state and that we already had a shortage of doctors because of fabricated “jackpot justice conditions.” As the data has failed to support that claim, the dialogue now shifts to an attempt to create a “future crisis”. In fact, a recent survey – funded in part by ISMS – clearly demonstrated oversaturation of physicians in the largest populated area of our state. That’s correct – more than enough doctors in the greater Chicagoland area.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 (DRA) overhauled Medicare’s perspective on payment for medical care related to “never events” including a list of delineated hospital acquired conditions. Hospitals will no longer receive reimbursement for conditions that are (a) high cost or high volume or both, (b) result in the assignment of a case to a DRG that has a higher payment when present as a secondary diagnosis, and (c) could reasonably have been prevented through the application of evidence-based guidelines. The ten categories for hospital acquired conditions are: Foreign Object Retained After Surgery,.Air Embolism,,Blood Incompatibility, Stage III and IV Pressure Ulcers, Falls and Trauma including, Fractures, Dislocations, Intracranial Injuries, Crushing Injuries, Burns and Electric Shock, Manifestations of Poor Glycemic Control including, Diabetic Ketoacidosis, Nonketotic Hyperosmolar Coma, Hypoglycemic Coma, Secondary Diabetes with Ketoacidosis and Secondary Diabetes with Hyperosmolarity, Catheter-Associated Urinary Tract Infection, Vascular Catheter-Associated Infection, Surgical Site Infection Following Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) – Mediastinitis, Bariatric Surgery, Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass, Gastroenterostomy, Laparoscopic Gastric Restrictive Surgery, Orthopedic Procedures and Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)/Pulmonary Embolism (PE).

While the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have prohibited hospitals from recovering payment for the treatment of secondary conditions acquired in the hospital, practically, these charges are often submitted and paid by Medicare long before and attorney becomes involved and makes a claim for medical malpractice. Careful examination of the supporting documentation Medicare provides at the time they require reimbursement often reveals that benefits were paid for hospital acquired events.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

Fact: Did you know independent authoritative studies have shown that medical malpractice claims have little effect on overall health care costs?

• Malpractice claims boost overall health care costs no more than a tiny percentage according to the Congressional Budget Office.

• The Congressional Budget Office has also concluded that the most anti-patient medical malpractice “reforms” may lead to poorer health care and worse patient outcomes.

Continue reading →
Published on:

By

The Illinois Supreme Court in a 4-2 decision struck down limits on damages awards in medical malpractice cases with its decision in Lebron v. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital on thursday. The court held that the legislation was unconstitutional. The majority opinion, authored by Justice Fitzgeral held, in part: “[W]e necessarily consider…the legislature’s goal in enacting the statue-responding to a health-care crisis. Our separation of powers analysis, however, does not stop there. The crux of our analysis is whether the statue unduly infringes upon the inherent power of the judiciary. Here, the legislature’s attempt to limit…damages in medical malpractice actions runs afoul of the separation of powers clause.”

This is a major victory for patients and consumers in Illinois. The legislature has tried, on three seperate occasions, to enact caps on damages in medical malpractice cases. For years lobbiests for the insurance industry have argued that medical malpractice awards have contributed to the high cost of health care in Illinois despite the fact that insurace payouts on these claims have remained level for the past two decades.

All citizens of Illinois should have a right to ask a jury of their peers for redress when they have been victimized by negligence, regardless of the profession of the guilty party. To see a copy of the Supreme Courts landmark opinion look here.

Published on:

By

Earlier this week the Illinois Supreme Court announced that it would likely release its decision on medical malpractice reform in the case of Lebron, et al vs. Gottlieb Memorial Hospital, et al today.

Unfortunately, it appears that the court did not release the decision today as anticipated. This is not an uncommon occurence. The Lebron case was argued before the court over one year ago and the supreme’s decision is much anticipated by the trial bar and general public.

The Medical Malpractice Reform Act of 2005 was determined to be unconstitutional by Judge Diane Larsen of the Circuit Court of Cook County. Her ruling determined that caps on damages in medical malpractice cases are not allowed by the state constitution, something that the Illinois Supreme Court has decided on two prior occasions.

Contact Information
33 N Dearborn St,
#1930
Chicago, IL 60602
Phone: 312-368-0255 Fax: 312-368-0368 Toll Free: 877-368-0233

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Goldberg & Goldberg, LLC
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design