Allied Design Consultants, Inc. v. Pekin Insurance Co.

Oral argument

• Argued

  45 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that fact question existed on proximate causation where the injuries resulting from the negligent act “were unusual, but entirely foreseeable”
• holding that the defendant physician was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law where his negligence necessitated later treatment by a second physician, after which the patient suffered a stroke
• holding that the defendant physician was not entitled to judgment as a matter of law where his negligence necessitated later treatment by a second 16 physician, after which the patient suffered a stroke
• holding that, as to causation, there was evidence to support the jury’s verdict in favor of the plaintiff in a medical-malpractice case when evidence showed that the doctor’s negligent administration of a hormone shot resulted in the patient needing an abortion
• medical malpractice committed by physician that followed initial physician’s malpractice did not constitute an intervening cause
• plaintiff in a negligence action must prove that the defendant’s conduct was both the “cause in fact” and the “proximate cause” of the injury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).