Estate of Prather v. Sherman Hospital Systems
35 N.E.3d 198
Ill. App. Ct.2015Background
- Baby Gianna Prather suffered severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy at birth in 2005 at Sherman Hospital and now resides at Misericordia Home; the State pays her care and has asserted a lien on any recovery.
- Mother (original plaintiff) filed suit for medical malpractice; case transferred from Cook County to Kane County under defendants’ forum non conveniens motion.
- Northern Trust was appointed plenary guardian of Gianna’s estate; Gianna’s grandmother Josefa acted in the litigation and rejected defendants’ $3 million settlement offer while the guardian of the estate did not object.
- Trial court appointed a guardian ad litem (Daniel Konicek) to evaluate settlement; Konicek reviewed redacted materials, concluded plaintiff’s chance of recovery at trial was low, and recommended acceptance of the $3 million offer.
- Trial court approved the settlement over Josefa’s objections, set aside $150,000 for home modifications, and dismissed the action; plaintiff appealed raising venue, guardian-ad-litem appointment, adequacy/confidentiality of settlement, and alleged discovery/HIPAA issues.
- Appellate court reviewed procedural and substantive challenges and affirmed: transfer to Kane County and settlement approval were within the trial courts’ discretion; several procedural defects in the appellate record were construed against appellant.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Transfer (venue/forum non conveniens) | Transfer from Cook County was improper; plaintiff’s choice of forum should be respected | Transfer appropriate because most witnesses, hospital, and events centered in Kane County; Cook County congested | Transfer to Kane County was not an abuse of discretion and was proper under forum non conveniens |
| Appointment of guardian ad litem | Appointment improper because Josefa (guardian of the person) had not been removed and thus could not be supplanted | Appointment appropriate; guardian ad litem may be appointed to recommend settlement and plaintiff’s counsel waived objection | Appointment was proper; plaintiff’s counsel expressly waived objection and Ott authorizes such appointment |
| Approval / adequacy of settlement | $3M inadequate given asserted $22.5M damages; settlement favored State and defendants; confidentiality tainted process | Settlement reasonable given low probability of plaintiff’s success and risk defendants would win at trial | Trial court did not abuse discretion in finding settlement in minor’s best interest and approving it |
| Discovery / HIPAA / confidentiality | Defendants improperly withheld/unredacted materials and used placental slides improperly; ex parte communications tainted process | Ex parte/redacted communications are normal in settlement process; guardian ad litem based recommendation on redacted materials; no preserved ruling on suppression | Appellate review precluded by lack of rulings/record; confidentiality and discovery complaints do not show prejudice; no reversible error shown |
Key Cases Cited
- Fennell v. Illinois Central R.R. Co., 2012 IL 113812 (sets forum non conveniens balancing framework)
- Ott v. Little Company of Mary Hospital, 273 Ill. App. 3d 563 (trial court may appoint guardian ad litem to effectuate/approve a minor’s settlement)
- Dawdy v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., 207 Ill. 2d 167 (applicability of Rule 187/forum non conveniens principles)
- Foutch v. O’Bryant, 99 Ill. 2d 389 (appellant’s burden to present complete record; defects resolved against appellant)
- Knapp v. Bulun, 392 Ill. App. 3d 1018 (interlocutory orders incorporated into appeal from final judgment)