[UPDATED THROUGH May 9, 2013]
Home Star Bank & Financial Services v. Emergency Care & Health Organization, Ltd.
Supreme Court Case Number: 115526
Appellate Court: First District, Division 5
Appellate Court Case Number: 1-11-2321
Issue Presented: Does the Good Samaritan Act, 745 ILCS 49/25, immunize a physician from liability for alleged negligence when he is paid by a physician group to provide emergency services to patients in a hospital?
Appellate Court Opinion Summary: Here.
Howell v. Dunaway
Supreme Court Case Numbers: 110199, 110200
Appellate Court: Fifth District
Appellate Court Case Number: 5-09-0071, 5-09-0072
Issue Presented: Is a hospital’s statutory lien for services, filed pursuant to the Health Care Services Lien Act, 770 ILCS 23/1, subject to a reduction under the common fund doctrine for attorney fees incurred by the injured plaintiff?
Appellate Court Opinion Summary: Both plaintiffs were injured in motor vehicle accidents, and sued the tortfeasors. The hospitals filed liens against any recovery pursuant to the Health Care Services Lien Act, 770 ILCS 23/1. After settling the personal injury actions, the plaintiffs filed petitions to adjudicate the liens, seeking to apply a one-third reduction in the amount of the liens to account for attorney fees incurred. The Circuit Court agreed with plaintiffs, applied the common fund reduction, and entered judgment, and the hospitals appealed. On appeal, the hospitals argued that the common fund rule was inapplicable to liens under the Act pursuant to the Supreme Court’s decision in Maynard v. Parker, 75 Ill.2d 73 (1979), on the grounds that plaintiffs’ debt to the hospitals was not dependent on the creation of the fund. The Appellate Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the Supreme Court had expanded the common fund rule to lienholder hospitals in a later decision, Bishop v. Burgard, 198 Ill.2d 495 (2002).
Citations to Opinion: 924 N.E.2d 1190, 338 Ill. Dec. 664
Wilkins v. Williams
Supreme Court Number: 114310
Appellate Court: First District, Division 2
Appellate Court Case Number: 1-10-1805
Issues Presented: (1) Does the immunity conferred by the Emergency Medical Services Act, 210 ILCS 50/3.150(a), extend to the non-emergency transport of patients? (2) Does the statute bar suits in connection with injuries sustained by third parties not directly treated by the EMS workers?
Appellate Court Opinion Summary: See here.