Lawyers at DBS successfully litigate a wide variety of civil cases and argue appeals in some of the most challenging jurisdictions in the country.
DBS Obtains a Defense Verdict
Hospital and Nurse
Outcome:Defense Verdict
On July 28, 2025, DBS attorneys Mark Burden and Peter LeGrand obtained a defense verdict in favor of the firm’s clients, a local hospital system and an emergency medicine nurse, in a case tried before Hon. David E. Schwartz in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois. Plaintiffs claimed that the hospital, through the actions of the emergency medicine nurse, was medically negligent in evaluating and discharging a patient without first contacting the patient’s family in May 2018.
On May 30, 2018, the patient arrived at the hospital’s emergency department around midnight with an altered mental status. The patient was treated and monitored for nearly three hours. During the course of the patient’s stay, his vitals improved to normal levels and his mental status change completely resolved. The patient instructed his medical providers not to contact his family, refused to speak to social work, and told his providers that he wished to leave the hospital. The patient was discharged around 3:00 a.m. and was heard to arrive home at around 3:30 a.m. by a family member. Around 7:00 a.m., the patient was found deceased in the front yard of his home.
Plaintiffs contended that the standard of care required defendants to contact the patient’s family prior to discharge. Plaintiffs also argued that the patient’s altered mental status had not resolved prior to discharge. Plaintiffs further argued that patient’s death was caused by a substance the patient ingested prior to his hospitalization, arguing that the same substance that caused his altered mental status later rebounded in his system and caused his death.
The defense contended that all evidence demonstrated that the patient’s altered mental status had completely resolved prior to discharge, that his vitals and the notations of the providers demonstrated he had a normal heart rate, was oxygenating appropriately, was ambulating appropriately, and was conversing normally. Because the patient’s altered mental status was resolved, he was decisional. The defense explained that the medical providers were required to respect the privacy requests of a decisional patient. The defense further argued that the autopsy showed that the patient’s death was caused by a substance that was ingested after the patient left the hospital.
After the plaintiffs’ attorney requested $3,000,000 in damages during closing arguments, the jury returned a verdict for the defendants.