Success Stories

Whether performance of bilateral total hip arthroplasty led to post-operative complications, including need for revision hip surgery

Defense verdict.

Alleged traumatic brain injury of an infant related to instrumental delivery with forceps extraction.

Pretrial demand $750,000. Jury verdict for plaintiff $550,000.

Wrongful death jury trial where it was alleged that the surgeon employed a substandard surgical technique while performing a laparoscopic nissen fundoplication, resulting in postoperative perforation and peritonitis, sepsis and ultimate patient demise.

Defense verdict for defendant surgeon. Pretrial demand $1,250,000.

Whether the defendant physician met the standard of care in treating plaintiff’s leukemia.

Defense verdict.

Jury trial regarding a .contract dispute

Plaintiff verdict.

Wrongful death jury trial where it was alleged that the physician and his nurse practitioner failed to diagnose/treat pulmonary embolism in a patient who was 30 days postoperative from a left ankle fusion.

Defense verdict. Pretrial demand $1,250,000.

Whether inadequate informed consent for a right total hip replacement surgery, surgical selection, and performance of the procedure, caused injuries and damages to the plaintiffs.

Defense verdict.

Alleged negligent failure to detect a developing infection in a premature infant, leading to his death.

Defense Verdict.

AT&T sought damages from an Illinois excavator associated with damages to its buried utility facilities. The excavator sought third party contribution from our client, AT&T's contract locate provider.

The trial court granted the locating company's motion to dismiss the excavator's third party contribution claim. Upon appeal, the trial court's decision stood.

Alleged negligent performance of a rhinoplasty surgery.

Defense verdict. Pretrial demand fund access.

Jury trial of plaintiff with penicillin allergy experienced anaphylactic shock when given penicillin derivative.

Defense verdict.

Lead trial counsel for defendant-Hospital in medical malpractice and premises liability action brought by a therapy patient who was recovering from surgery to remove a malignant tumor from her hip. The patient fell at the hospital’s outpatient rehabilitation clinic and sustained a displaced comminuted fracture of the femur. Plaintiff alleged that her therapists were negligent in permitting her to walk unassisted on the therapy track, and that she tripped on a rubber weather mat located on the floor near the track that rendered the premises unreasonably dangerous for her. The Hospital argued that the patient was walking on the track alone contrary to the instructions of her therapists, and that she did not trip on the mat but had her debilitated hip give out while she was inappropriately walking on the track without assistance. After three days of testimony, the jury returned a verdict for the defendant-Hospital.

Verdict for the defendant hospital.

Lead trial counsel for defendant-Hospital in medical malpractice and premises liability action brought by an elderly aquatic therapy patient who slipped in water and fell on the deck of the therapy pool and fractured her hip. The patient alleged that water on the pool deck was an unreasonably dangerous condition and that the Hospital negligently failed to warn her about the fall hazard, failed to have devices like handrails and non-skid strips on the pool deck, and failed to adequately assist her. The Hospital argued that the patient had incurred the risk of injury when she declined assistance from the Hospital, that she was aware of the hazard and failed to exercise reasonable care for her own safety, that she had no pre-existing physical deficit or limitation that predisposed her to fall, that appropriate warnings were posted about the wet pool deck, and that the pool deck was reasonably safe for its intended use. After four days of testimony, the jury returned a verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $70,000 but attributed 50% contributory fault to plaintiff for a net verdict of $35,000.

Verdict for plaintiff in the amount of $70,000 but attributed 50% contributory fault to plaintiff for a net verdict of $35,000

Plaintiff alleged that defendant physician failed to diagnose small cell lung cancer, which decreased the patient’s chance for survival.

Defense verdict.

Alleged failure to diagnose and treat myocardial ischemia patient in preoperative medical clearance prior to the patient undergoing left knee arthroscopy.

Defense verdict. Pretrial demand, fund access.

Whether the two defendants, a surgeon and gastroenterologist, breached the standard of medical care when treating the patient associated with the removal of her gallbladder and post-operative care.

Jury trial resulting in a defense verdict for both of the defendant physicians.

Siner v. Kindred Hospital, 33 N.E.3rd 377 (Ind.Ct.App, 2015)

Petition for Transfer pending.

Whether delay in diagnosis and treatment of scrotal condition lead to development of Fournier's gangrene and loss of scrotal tissue.

Defense verdict.

Plaintiff, a cardiologist, underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass surgery and experienced a stroke post-operatively.

Defense verdict.

Eichhorn & Eichhorn, LLP’s client was an Ohio lawyer handling a securities matter in Illinois as the plaintiffs’ attorney.

The Cook County chancery judge dismissed the case for perceived pretrial submission violations, but was later reversed on appeal for abusing her discretion. On remand, following the client’s dismissal by the plaintiffs, the chancery defendant renewed its request for sanctions. The chancery judge entered only one sanction; she awarded $63,205.00 in attorney’s fees to the chancery defendants for their original alleged trial preparation. Eichhorn & Eichhorn, LLP prevailed in a second appeal and the entire sanction award against the Ohio attorney was vacated.

Whether the physician breached the standard of care when performing an angiogram, which allegedly caused the patient injuries.

Jury trial resulting in defense verdict.

Vega is a landlord who operates a two unit rental building in Hammond which was permitted and zoned only as a single family dwelling. The building also was unsafe for lack of proper fire separation. After an inspection and hearings took place, City of Hammond and its Board of Public Works and Safety entered an order to remove the second unit and repair/demolish for these reasons. Vega sought judicial review of this enforcement order from the Lake Superior Court. In a bench trial, Eichhorn & Eichhorn, LLP obtained judgment on the evidence for City of Hammond and its Board of Public Works and Safety.

Judgment on the evidence for Defendants.

Eichhorn & Eichhorn, LLP’s client was an Indiana attorney who was sued by the plaintiff along with several other defendants via a variety of legal theories. The attorney supposedly was liable for alleged legal malpractice in handling a criminal appeal. The trial court granted summary judgment to Eichhorn & Eichhorn’s client on the basis that the statute of limitations had run. The plaintiff was aware of the outcome and had threatened such an action more than two years before he filed his lawsuit. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s entry of summary judgment for Eichhorn & Eichhorn’s client. The Court of Appeals rejected the plaintiff’s claim that he could not be said to have “discovered” the alleged legal malpractice until he supposedly fully understood the specific alleged error which he claimed on the part of the attorney. The court also specifically rejected the plaintiff’s theory that his legal malpractice claim did not accrue until his criminal conviction was vacated.

Court of Appeals affirmed the entry of summary judgment for Eichhorn & Eichhorn's client. Plaintiff filed a petition to transfer to the Indiana Supreme Court. On July 14, 2016, the Supreme Court denied transfer.

The patient, a 65 year old woman, was admitted to the hospital for treatment of a burn to the foot with cellulitis. She had a history of congestive heart failure and coronary artery disease with previous myocardial infarction. Plaintiff alleged that she was given overly aggressive rehydration leading to pulmonary edema which precipitated a non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. The patient had rising BUN and Creatinine indicative of pre-renal azotemia, which was the basis for the doctor’s fluid management and suspension of Lasix. The patient’s condition did not suggest pulmonary edema prior to the MI.

Defense verdict in LaPorte County, Indiana in favor of an internal medicine specialist from Valparaiso, Indiana. The jury returned a defense verdict after 45 minutes of deliberation.

Lead trial counsel for defendant-Hospital in medical malpractice action by parents of a child who suffered a permanent brachial plexus injury during an allegedly traumatic birth. The child’s parents did not speak English, presenting significant challenges for cross-examination. Plaintiffs alleged that the Hospital’s nurses negligently failed to recognize the occurrence of a shoulder dystocia, negligently failed to notify the defendant-physician in a timely manner that the shoulder was stuck, and negligently failed to take appropriate measures to relieve the stuck shoulder and safely deliver the baby. The case involved the presentation to the jury of complex concepts of obstetrics, pediatric neurology, and labor and delivery nursing. Defendant-Hospital obtained a directed verdict at conclusion of plaintiffs’ evidence following five days of testimony.

The defendant-physician initially obtained a favorable jury verdict that was reversed on appeal, and on retrial of the case the jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs on their claim for lack of informed consent.