Let me go on to say that in this case the question I was going to ask the Senator from Kentucky is this: This poor lady was a victim in my home State of Illinois which does not allow punitive damages in medical malpractice cases. My question for him, which I will save for a time when he has a chance to answer--whether or not, under those circumstances, this victim of medical malpractice has been allowed to recover punitive damages under his bill. The reason I ask that question is I think that the section relative to State flexibility and protection of State rights is not altogether clear. If he is saying that this lady who was a victim of this explosion in her face, which led to multiple surgeries over a projected 10-year period of time, might have recovered punitive damages under S. 11, then in my home State you cannot turn to punitive damages. Your recourse, in her case, is for noneconomic losses, which are limited. I might also add the Senator should note his punitive damage section includes a phrase which is a very restrictive phrase. In my home State, when punitive damages were allowed they were allowed for reckless misconduct or willful and wanton misconduct, which is a higher level of negligence. Under the specific language of S. 11, in order to recover for punitive damages, you must show a malicious intent to injure. So to have cases of gross negligence is not enough.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a medical malpractice bill on punitive damages in Illinois.
Share
More from Dick Durbin
Investing in our airports is laying the foundation for increased connectivity and reliability.
Together, you’ve created a space where residents can access pediatric care, behavioral health services, housing and employment support, and much more.
We want to be clear: Democrats and Republicans did not work together to appropriate funds for AHRQ as a gentle suggestion for the Department to follow at their discretion or leisure.
The Trump administration has not provided transparency into the use of federal funds for the East Wing project, and they have limited congressional oversight, meaningful public input, and adherence to established federal processes.





