Trenton W. Gill

Defense verdict secured in favor of a chiropractor.

Obtained summary judgment and appellate win for a physician and surgical group. The physician was accused of negligently reporting elder abuse. Indiana has a statute that creates immunity for such actions in certain circumstances. There is very little case law to explain the scope and exceptions to the immunity. The Trial Court agreed that immunity applied. The plaintiff appealed and the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed.

Obtained defense verdict in favor of chiropractors in negligence case. The plaintiff visited our chiropractor clients seeking treatment for a constant, severe headache, as well as lower back and ankle pain. After standard chiropractic adjustments and acupuncture, the clients suggested trying a whole-body cryotherapy session. The plaintiff agreed, but ended the session after two minutes, citing 10/10 pain and signs of hypertensive crisis. The plaintiff contended that her blood pressure was never checked prior to the cryotherapy, and therefore she should never been allowed to use the therapy. Further, Plaintiff also contended that our clients were negligent in their post-cryotherapy management. As per the plaintiff's assertions, our clients’ alleged negligence led the plaintiff to require emergency medical attention and resulted in subsequent diagnoses of hypertension and post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSD).

The defendants denied they failed to take the blood pressure. They presented evidence of standard processes and procedures which they follow every time for every patient using cryotherapy. Furthermore, once the plaintiff had a bad experience they provided reasonable care in helping her recover, including offering her every opportunity to obtain transportation home or to a hospital. She recovered quickly and did not have PTSD.  

After a three day trial, the jury returned a defense verdict on in favor of our client.

This matter involved a chiropractic malpractice claim relating to an allegation of negligent treatment resulting in a cervical spine fracture. The case centered on the element of causation, namely that the origin of the compression fracture, was complicated by the patient’s metastatic bone cancer. A licensed physician offered an opinion on behalf of the defense that the cancer was the cause of the fracture; in turn, Plaintiff designated a physical therapist (DPT) to provide an opinion to the contrary. However, as both the trial court and Court of Appeals determined, which opinions remain in-tact following the Supreme Court’s decision not to accept transfer, Plaintiff’s expert physical therapist was not qualified under the Rules of Evidence to offer an opinion on causation because such a complicated medical question, in addition to a question centering on subjective complaints of pain, required the expert opinion of a physician licensed to practice medicine. Because Plaintiff failed to designate a qualified medical opinion on the essential element of causation, defendant was entitled to summary judgment.

Summary judgment affirmed in favor of our chiropractor client.

Successfully defended chiropractor in a case transferred to us from another firm by our insurer client. After proving that the medical review panel’s negative opinion amounted to negligent billing and record keeping which could not create questions of fact for the jury, the plaintiff dismissed the case while our motion for summary judgment was pending and 1 month before the trial.

Defense of claim alleging negligence to properly maintain sidewalks and warn plaintiff of a dangerous condition.

The plaintiff claimed that the cardiologist failed to diagnose an acute aortic dissection resulting in her husband’s death. Following a three-week long jury trial with numerous experts, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant cardiologist.

Defense of convenience store in premises liability case alleging slip and fall on ice resulting in personal injuries.

Plaintiff alleged that defendant failed to diagnose and treat cauda equina syndrome, a rare neurological disease that later caused the plaintiff permanent bowel and bladder incontinence.

Plaintiffs alleged that defendant failed to give prophylactic antiobiotics prior to a cystoscopy on a patient with a history of joint replacement

Plaintiffs alleged that defendant failed to diagnose and treat pulmonary emboli.

Plaintiff alleged that defendants were negligent in administration of an injection thereby allegedly causing damage to the sciatic nerve.

Plaintiffs alleged that defendant failed to diagnose a congenital diaphragmatic hernia and ventricular septal defect by fetal ultrasound.

Plaintiff alleged that defendants failed to diagnose and treat a stroke while the patient was in the emergency department.

Plaintiffs alleged claims of medical malpractice in the performance of an appendectomy and post-surgical management.

Plaintiffs alleged defendants failed to diagnose non-accidental trauma in an infant who sustained head fractures.

Plaintiffs alleged defendant negligently performed a low forceps delivery resulting in brain injuries and developmental delays to the newborn child.

Plaintiffs alleged defendant negligently performed a hysterectomy.

Plaintiffs claimed defendant negligently maintained equipment at defendant’s building which allegedly malfunctioned causing injury to the plaintiff.

Plaintiff alleged defendant incorrectly diagnosed and treated plaintiff’s partially ruptured triceps tendon.