2011 IL App (1st) 102427
Ill. App. Ct.2011Background
- Citibank, N.A. loaned $1.4 million to SCA, later discovering funds were mishandled by Dr. Weinberger who fled to Europe.
- Citibank sues McGladrey for negligent audit of SCA's 2003 financials, arguing reliance on the audit for the loan decision.
- McGladrey issued its 2003 audit in March 2004 stating SCA's balance sheet fairly presented; Citibank funded the 2004 term loan in June 2004.
- During discovery Citibank disclosed three experts: Bartko (accounting), Kern (ENT doctor), and Naclerio (ENT doctor).
- Bartko opined McGladrey's audit was deficient for not using health care specialists to review medical files and uncover fraud; claimed FTI health care specialists identified red flags.
- Circuit court granted McGladrey’s motion in limine to bar Bartko from testifying about specialists’ opinions, but allowed him to discuss using health care specialists in general.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| May Bartko testify to specialists’ conclusions? | Bartko should relay team conclusions under Walker. | Bartko cannot parrot other experts' conclusions; Dura prohibits. | No; Bartko precluded from testifying to specialists’ opinions. |
| Was evidence of Citibank's contributory negligence admissible? | Exclude unrelated lending decisions; irrelevant to reliance on the 2004 loan. | Relevance to causation/reliance; admissible. | No abuse; evidence properly admitted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Walker v. Soo Line R.R. Co., 208 F.3d 581 (7th Cir. 2000) (team leader may rely on colleagues' opinions within a medical team)
- Dura Automotive Systems of Indiana, Inc. v. CTS Corp., 285 F.3d 609 (7th Cir. 2002) (an expert cannot be mouthpiece of others in a different specialty)
- Congregation of the Passion, Holy Cross Province v. Touche Ross & Co., 224 Ill. App. 3d 559 (1991) (exclude evidence unrelated to the specific auditing issues; relevance control)