Simmons v. Garces

CourtIllinois Supreme Court
CitationSimmons v. Garces, 763 N.E.2d 720, 198 Ill.2d 541, 261 Ill.Dec. 471 (Ill. 2002)
Decision Date25 January 2002
Docket NumberNo. 91093.,91093.
PartiesJennifer SIMMONS et al., Appellants, v. Rolando M. GARCES, M.D., Appellee.

Bruce R. Pfaff & Associates, Ltd., Chicago (Michael T. Gill, Bruce R. Pfaff, of counsel) for appellants.

Michael A. Pollard, Mark L. Karasik, of Baker & McKenzie, Chicago, for appellee. Justice McMORROW delivered the opinion of the court:

In this appeal we are asked to determine whether the jury's answer to a special interrogatory is incompatible with the jury's general verdict, and, if so, whether the special interrogatory controls. A jury returned a general verdict in the amount of $675,000 against defendant Dr. Rolando M. Garces and in favor of plaintiffs Jennifer Simmons (Jennifer) and Harold King (Harold), who had brought a medical malpractice action against Dr. Garces following the death of their infant daughter, LaTonya King. The jury also answered "No" to the special interrogatory: "Did dehydration contribute to cause the death of LaTonya King?" As a result, in response to Dr. Garces' post-trial motion, the circuit court of Cook County entered judgment in favor of Dr. Garces on the special interrogatory. 735 ILCS 5/2-1108 (West 2000). A divided appellate court affirmed, concluding that the jury's answer to the special interrogatory was "absolutely irreconcilable with the general verdict" and the trial court therefore "properly entered judgment in favor of defendant." 319 Ill. App.3d 308, 322, 253 Ill.Dec. 446, 745 N.E.2d 569. We allowed plaintiffs' petition for leave to appeal. 188 Ill.2d R. 315. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the judgment of the appellate court.

BACKGROUND

LaTonya King1 was born prematurely to Jennifer on December 28, 1993, and was hospitalized for two weeks thereafter. On January 21, 1994, Jennifer brought LaTonya to Dr. Garces' clinic for a checkup. The child's weight was five pounds, 12 ounces, and Dr. Garces pronounced her a perfectly healthy baby.

Dr. Garces practiced in a clinic at 7106 South Jeffery in Chicago, about a block and a half from Jennifer and Harold's residence at 7234 South Jeffery. The clinic operated on a first-come, first-served basis. Patients would sign in when they entered the clinic, and would be seen by the doctor in that order. Dr. Garces had two assistants, Sharon Robinson (Sharon), a certified medical assistant, and Shalonda Sloan (Shalonda), an 18-year-old with no formal training in patient care. One of the responsibilities of the assistants was to notify the doctor if a patient presented an emergency. If that were the case, the doctor would see the patient out of turn.

Jennifer testified that LaTonya took her normal feeding of four ounces of formula on the night of January 23, 1994. The next morning, January 24, Jennifer noticed loose stool in LaTonya's diaper when the child awoke for her feeding. Jennifer denied at trial that LaTonya took four ounces of formula at this 6 a.m. feeding, but was impeached with her deposition testimony to the contrary. At 8:30 a.m. LaTonya took two ounces of water. However, she would not take her 10 a.m. feeding, and Jennifer became concerned. She called Dr. Garces' clinic and spoke to the doctor, informing him of the situation, and he told her to switch to a formula called Pedialyte. Jennifer tried to feed LaTonya the Pedialyte, but the child would take only half an ounce.

At 12:30 p.m. Jennifer again telephoned the clinic and spoke to Sharon, who told her she should keep trying to get LaTonya to take the Pedialyte. Jennifer's subsequent attempts to feed LaTonya the formula were unsuccessful. At that point Jennifer dressed the baby warmly and walked to the clinic, arriving at about 1 p.m. After about 15 minutes, Shalonda called Jennifer's name and they went to a waiting area, where Jennifer told Shalonda that LaTonya was not sucking the bottle. Shalonda testified that she weighed and measured LaTonya, and wrote the child's height, weight, temperature and head circumference in a temporary chart. She used a temporary chart because she was unable to retrieve LaTonya's permanent chart. Shalonda then left the waiting area and went to speak to the doctor. According to Jennifer, when Shalonda returned, she told Jennifer that Dr. Garces wanted her to get some Pedialyte from a drug store. Jennifer then left the clinic and went across the street to the drug store, picked up the Pedialyte, and went home. She stated that she left the office because she was following the doctor's orders to obtain the Pedialyte.

Jennifer tried repeatedly that afternoon to feed LaTonya the formula but to no avail. She called the clinic at 2:29 p.m. and at 2:53 p.m., each time speaking to Sharon, who told her to continue her efforts. During the second of these calls, Jennifer told Sharon that LaTonya was sleeping more. At 3:56 p.m. Jennifer called the clinic again and spoke to Dr. Garces, who told her to try a different formula and if that did not work, to take LaTonya to the emergency room. Dr. Garces said he was concerned that LaTonya might become dehydrated. Soon after, at about 4:13 p.m., Jennifer called a cab. She testified that she waited inside her apartment for it to arrive, dressed the baby warmly, and then took the cab to South Shore Hospital.

Dr. Thomas Bahk, an emergency room physician at South Shore, testified that LaTonya was dead when she arrived at the emergency room at about 4:40 p.m. She had no respiration, no blood pressure, and no pulse. He and the emergency room nurses performed cardiopulmonary resuscitation but were unable to revive her. She was pronounced dead at 5:06 p.m. on January 24, 1994.

Marcel Parungao, an emergency room nurse, testified that the baby's rectal temperature at that time was 93.2 degrees Fahrenheit, and her weight was five pounds, eight ounces. He also found loose stool in her diaper. Myrna Carating, another nurse, testified that LaTonya was wearing a diaper and pajamas, and was wrapped in two receiving blankets that were "quite thin." According to Carating, Jennifer told her that LaTonya had been active at 2:30 p.m. Carating also recorded that just prior to Jennifer's and LaTonya's arrival at the emergency room, LaTonya had stiffened, her arms had stretched, and her neck was hyperextended.

Chicago Police Officers Charles Howard and Paul Anderson went to the hospital on January 24 after receiving a call about LaTonya's death. Anderson testified that Jennifer indicated she walked to the hospital. Howard gave essentially the same testimony, stating that a report prepared after they had gone to the scene indicated that Jennifer walked to the hospital on January 24. Under cross-examination, Howard and Anderson conceded that this report was not signed by a supervisor.

Between 5 and 6 p.m., Chicago police department Detectives John McMurray and David Friel were assigned to investigate LaTonya's death. After arriving at the hospital, they interviewed hospital staff members as well as Jennifer and Harold. Friel stated that they learned from Jennifer that she arrived at the hospital by taxi. Friel and McMurray closed their investigation after determining that there had been no criminal wrongdoing.

Dr. Tae Lyong An, a forensic pathologist with the Cook County medical examiner's office, conducted an autopsy. According to Dr. An, LaTonya's death was caused by "dehydration due to gastroenteritis." LaTonya had sunken eyeballs and poor skin turgor,2 or tension, both of which, according to Dr. An, are consistent with dehydration. Under cross-examination, Dr. An conceded that premature babies can be born without fully developed subcutaneous tissue and fat, and thus could have sunken eyeballs without being dehydrated. In addition, premature infants can have excess skin that would appear wrinkly and have less tension. Dr. An also acknowledged that there was just a four-ounce difference between the weight recorded for LaTonya on January 21 (5 pounds, 12 ounces), and her weight on January 24 in the emergency room (5 pounds, 8 ounces). That is a weight loss of 4.4%, which Dr. An conceded would be unlikely to cause death by dehydration. He also acknowledged that his report included no finding of tubular necrosis in the kidneys, a condition that is consistent with death by severe dehydration, nor did he find any anatomic or pathologic evidence of inflammation in the stomach or small intestine, a condition that constitutes the definition of gastroenteritis. Dr. An explained that there is such a thing as "functional change of the intestine" which, though not anatomically found, can cause diarrhea. "We call it gastroenteritis," he said. "That is nothing unusual."

Dr. An also testified that he did not think there was any evidence of hypothermia as a possible cause of death. He said he had information that Jennifer took LaTonya to the hospital by taxi. He did not remember that Jennifer walked to the hospital.

Jennifer and Harold, acting individually and as co-special administrators of LaTonya's estate, brought a wrongful-death action against Dr. Garces, alleging that LaTonya's death was a proximate result of Dr. Garces' negligence. Attached to the complaint was a physician's report asserting that LaTonya "died from dehydration."

Plaintiffs presented the expert testimony of Dr. Gilbert Given, a board-certified pediatrician, to establish that Dr. Garces deviated from the applicable standard of care and that his negligent conduct resulted in LaTonya's death from dehydration. Dr. Given testified that, in his opinion, LaTonya "was severely dehydrated and this contributed to her death." He said dehydration, which he defined as a loss of body fluids,3 is determined by the percent of weight loss. A loss in body weight of more than 10% or 12% usually indicates severe dehydration. In such instances, the child's circulation becomes involved, and the child may have lower blood pressure. According to Dr. Given, LaTonya was 12% to 14%...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
275 cases
  • Mayorov v. United States
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • March 23, 2015
    ...it,” Young v. Bryco Arms, 213 Ill.2d 433, 446, 290 Ill.Dec. 504, 821 N.E.2d 1078, 1086 (2004) (quoting Simmons v. Garces, 198 Ill.2d 541, 558, 261 Ill.Dec. 471, 763 N.E.2d 720, 732 (2002) ), and is a question of fact. Krywin, 238 Ill.2d at 226, 345 Ill.Dec. 1, 938 N.E.2d at 447.The issuance......
  • In re Detention of Erbe
    • United States
    • Appellate Court of Illinois
    • November 13, 2003
    ...that of the trial court, or even determine whether the trial court exercised its discretion wisely." Simmons v. Garces, 198 Ill.2d 541, 568, 261 Ill.Dec. 471, 763 N.E.2d 720, 737 (2002); see also People v. Hall, 195 Ill.2d 1, 20, 252 Ill.Dec. 552, 743 N.E.2d 126, 138 (2000) ("An abuse of di......
  • Blue v. Environmental Engineering, Inc.
    • United States
    • Illinois Supreme Court
    • April 7, 2005
    ...verdict. Bilderback v. Admiral Co., 227 Ill.App.3d 268, 270 [169 Ill.Dec. 156, 591 N.E.2d 36] (1992)." Simmons v. Garces, 198 Ill.2d 541, 555-56, 261 Ill.Dec. 471, 763 N.E.2d 720 (2002). Applying the above-mentioned principles, it is clear that the special interrogatory in the present case ......
  • Davis v. City of Chi.
    • United States
    • Appellate Court of Illinois
    • April 29, 2014
    ...and determinations as to such questions will not be overturned absent a clear abuse of discretion.” Simmons v. Garces, 198 Ill.2d 541, 568, 261 Ill.Dec. 471, 763 N.E.2d 720 (2002) (citing Rockwood v. Singh, 258 Ill.App.3d 555, 558, 196 Ill.Dec. 708, 630 N.E.2d 873 (1993), Magna Trust Co. v.......
  • Get Started for Free
1 firm's commentaries
  • Illinois Civil Practice Guide - 2022 Edition
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • April 4, 2022
    ...are inconsistent with a general verdict, all reasonable presumptions are exercised in favor of the general verdict. Simmons v. Garces, 198 Ill. 2d 541, 555 (2002) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). Special interrogatories should be tendered to the court, objected to, ruled on......
3 books & journal articles
  • Procedures for Objections & Motions
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...409 Ill App 3d 686, 949 NE2d 695 (1st Dist 2010); Hardy v. Cordero, 399 Ill App 3d 1126, 929 NE2d 22 (3d Dist 2010). Simmons v. Garces , 198 Ill 2d 541, 763 NE2d 720 (2002); Jones v. Rallos , 384 Ill App 3d 73, 890 NE2d 1190 (1st Dist 2008); First Nat’l Bank of LaGrange v. Lowery , 375 Ill ......
  • Table of Cases
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Illinois Objections
    • May 1, 2013
    ...App 3d 394, 857 NE2d 934 (1st Dist 2006), §4:20 Simmons v. Blauw , 263 Ill App 3d 829, 635 NE2d 601 (1994), §16:10 Simmons v. Garces , 198 Ill 2d 541, 763 NE2d 720 (2002), §1:240 Simmons v. University of Chicago Hosp. & Clinics , 162 Ill 2d 1, 642 NE2d 107 (1994), §1:60 Simmons v. Universit......
  • Rule 103 Rulings on Evidence
    • United States
    • The Illinois Rules of Evidence: A Color-Coded Guide (2019 Ed.) Article I General Provisions
    • Invalid date
    ...is offered at trial."). See also the following examples of supreme and appellate court decisions in civil cases: Simmons v. Graces, 198 Ill. 2d 541, 569 (2001); Thornton v. Garcini, 237 Ill. 2d 100 (2009); Snelson v. Kamm, 204 Ill. 2d 1, 23 (2003); Sinclair v. Berlin, 325 Ill. App. 3d 458, ......