A state law intended to deter frivolous medical malpractice lawsuits, a key element of the malpractice reforms adopted in 1985, was upheld Thursday by a divided Illinois Supreme Court.
In separate rulings on appeals from Cook and Winnebago Counties, the state high court rejected challenges to a provision of the law that requires a doctor to vouch for the merits of a medical malpractice claim before legal action is filed.
The requirement was a key element in a package of malpractice-law reforms adopted by the state legislature in response to concerns in the early 1980s about the availability of and affordability of medical malpractice insurance.
”There was concern from some of the practitioners at the time that they couldn`t get insurance even if they could afford it,” said Senate President Philip Rock (D-Oak Park), a sponsor of the legislation.
The law was challenged in separate appeals by lawyers for the husband of a woman who died in 1986 after an artery was severed during back surgery at St. Elizabeth`s Hospital in Chicago and a Rockford man who wanted to file a malpractice lawsuit against an anesthesiologist in 1989.
In both cases the lawsuits were dismissed for failure to file the required doctor`s certificate.
Lawyers argued that requiring advance approval from a doctor puts an unfair burden on victims of malpractice.
The state Appellate Court had rejected earlier challenges. But in 1989, a three-judge appellate panel in Cook County reinstated the Chicago claim, ruling that the law was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court`s decision overturns that ruling.
The Chicago appeal had been pending before the court for nearly two years. Oral arguments were in March 1990.
The decision to uphold the constitutionality of the law was 4-1 in the Chicago case, with two justices not participating, and 4-3 in the Winnebago County case.
The Supreme Court said requiring a doctor to vouch for the merits of a malpractice claim in advance was no different than requiring testimony from medical experts at trial.
The requirement was ”designed to reduce the number of frivolous suits that are filed and to eliminate such actions at an early stage, before the expenses of litigation have mounted,” wrote Chief Justice Benjamin Miller, who authored the majority`s opinion.
”The problem with frivolous malpractice claims is that they cost a lot of money,” said Ruth Van Demark, a Chicago lawyer who defended the statute.
”Insurance premiums for doctors were way out of sight, and that`s reflected in the cost to patients.”
Van Demark said medical malpractice lawsuits in Cook County had increased by more than 120 percent between 1981 and 1985.
The number of suits dropped dramatically in 1986. Since then, Van Demark said, the annual filings were relatively stable-around 1,200 a year in 1988 and 1989-until a 12 percent jump in 1990 after the Appellate Court overturned the law.
Justice William Clark wrote dissenting opinions in both cases.
”If such a right exists in the medical malpractice context, what will prevent the legislature from enacting similar statutes in other areas of the law?” Clark asked. ”Could the legislature require, for example, that persons seeking to challenge the constitutionality of a statute first obtain the approval of an expert in constitutional law, or that persons seeking a dissolution of marriage first obtain approval of a marriage counselor?”
Also Thursday, the state Supreme Court upheld the death sentence imposed on Robert St. Pierre, 29, who pleaded guilty in 1988 to killing a Skokie couple. The murders allegedly were at the request of the couple`s adopted daughter and her boyfriend.
