Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Appellate Law Blogs -> Illinois Appellate Lawyer Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Appellate Law
: Illinois Appellate Lawyer Blog?Slick Lawyer? Remark Not Enough To Reverse Doctor?s Malpractice Verdict
By Steven R. Merican
Sonya Wilbourn sued her doctor, Mark Cavalenes, for medical malpractice. Wilbourn claimed Cavalenes inserted the wrong size compression plate when he performed surgery on Wilbourn?s fractured femur.
The jury gave a verdict in favor of Dr. Cavalenes, Wilbourn then asked for a new trial, but the trial court refused. So Wilbourn appealed. Among her arguments to the appellate court, Wilbourn claimed she was denied a fair trial because of a prejudicial remark by the defense lawyer during his closing argument.
During his closing argument to the jury, Cavalenes?s attorney called Wilbourn?s attorney a ?slick lawyer? who tried to twist Dr. Cavalenes?s words. Wilbourn argued that the remark amounted to ?plain error.? But the First District Illinois Appellate Court ruled that the comment did not change the outcome of the trial, and affirmed the verdict.
Here?s why the court rejected Wilbourn?s argument.
We cannot disturb the trial court's denial of plaintiff's motion for a new trial based upon defense counsel's isolated reference to plaintiff's attorney as a "slick lawyer trying to twist [Dr. Cavalenes'] words." This reference was made in response to plaintiff's counsel's assertion of his personal opinion as to the credibility of Dr. Cavalenes, and was a response to plaintiff's counsel's personal belief that Dr. Cavalenes was not credible. The trial court was able to observe the effect of the improper comments on the jury, and was in a position vastly superior to determine whether the improper comments denied plaintiff a fair trial. The trial court determined that the comments did not deny plaintiff a fair trial, and based upon the record before us, we cannot disturb that ruling.
The appellate opinion also is remarkable for its discussion of the ?plain error? doctrine. The court described application of the doctrine in civil cases as ?exceedingly rare.?
Read the whole opinion, Wilbourn v. Cavalenes, No. 1-08-3603 (2/19/10), by clicking here.
Full post as published by Illinois Appellate Lawyer Blog on June 07, 2010 (boomark / email).
National Practitioner Data Bank Fact
NPDB identifies unprofessional healthcare practitioners
Reverse Mortgages
Consumer facts
Stock Splits and Reverse Stock Splits
How splits can affect stock value
Gallbladder Surgery Errors Damage Bile Duct
X-ray Procedures Can Reduce Gall Bladder Surgery Error Rates
Best Law Movies
Greatest Legal Movies selected by ABA Journal
Lawyer Jokes
Law Humor
Amherst Doctor
To Pay $9 Million in Medical Malpractice Suit
Birth Injury - Birth Injury Malpractice, Birth Injury Lawyer, Birth Injury Claims
Birth Injury alleging injuries resulting at birth from medical malpractice or negligence.
Doctor Negligence
VA Medical Center to pay $1.3 million settlement in malpractice lawsuit.
Complications at Birth
Hospital, Doctor to pay undisclosed settlement in malpractice lawsuit.
Doctor Paralyzes Patient
Hospital agrees to $3.7 million settlement in malpractice lawsuit.
Accounting Malpractice - Accountant Malpractice, Accounting Malpractice Lawsuit
Accounting Malpractice alleging financial malpractice by accountants.

Medical Malpractice Verdict $16.5 Million Verdict
Ex-Dolphin football Star Wins $11.5 Million in Medical Malpractice Lawsuit
Cerebral Palsy Verdict in Frederick
Woman Awarded $24 Million in Failure to Diagnose Claim
Maryland Malpractice Lawsuits and the Public Interest
Jury Returns $2.5 Million Malpractice Verdict








