CLAIM FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES FOR WILFUL AND WANTON VIOLATIONS OF ILLINOIS NURSING HOME ACT DO NOT SURVIVE DEATH OF RESIDENT - Mark P. Loftus

September 26, 2025

Recently, in Vincent v. Strathmoor , the Illinois Supreme Court was presented with a singular question of law:
– does a claim for punitive damages based upon allegations of willful and wanton violations of the Illinois Nursing Home Care Act(210 ILCS 45/1-101 et seq) survive the death of the nursing home resident, upon whose behalf the case was brought?
The case arose after Marjorie Vincent died in December of 2006 while a resident of Alden-Park Strathmoor, a nursing home in Rockford. After her death, the legal representative of her estate filed a three count complaint against Alden-Park. Count III of the Complaint, based upon the Nursing Home Act, alleged that the defendant acted with conscious or reckless disregard for Marjorie’s health and safety and that the misconduct was willful and wanton. Additionally, in Count III, plaintiff reserved the right to bring a claim for punitive damages. Defendant Alden didn’t wait for plaintiff to do so and moved to dismiss Count III. The defendant argued that punitive damages do not survive the death of the person whose injuries serve as the basis for the cause of action. The trial court agreed and struck the reservation of the right to request punitive damages in Count III. The Plaintiff appealed but the Appellate Court agreed with the trial court. The plaintiff them sought relief from the Illinois Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court however, agreed with the Appellate Court. The crux of their ruling was pretty basic. The Court ruled that generally, the right to punitive damages for personal injuries does NOT survive the death of the injured party. For a punitive damage claim to survive the death, the award of punitive damages must be expressly authorized by the statute on which the cause of action is based. As the Nursing Home Act does not contain a clause authorizing punitive damages, no such claim could be made.

Red Tesla sedan driving on a road.
September 26, 2025
According to online reports, Tesla ignored a $60 million dollar settlement overture in the wrongful death case that ultimately resulted in a $242 million dollar jury verdict against the car maker. The lawsuit grew out of 2019 crash where a Tesla Model S with Autopilot engaged, plowed through a Florida intersection and crashed into a Chevy Tahoe. Neima Benavides Leon and her boyfriend, Dillon Angulo were standing near the Tahoe when the Tesla crashed into it. Leon was killed and Angulo suffered serious injuries. A lawsuit was filed against Tesla, asserting that although the Autopilot feature was engaged, the vehicle did not brake. Florida law permits a monetary demand to be issued before trial. If the defendant fails to accept the demand within 30 days it is considered rejected. If the plaintiff then goes to trial and secures a verdict 25% greater than the offer, the defendant is on the hook for plaintiff’s investigative expenses and attorneys’ fees. Tesla is appealing the jury verdict, citing “substantial errors of law and irregularities at trial.”.
Johnson's baby powder container, white bottle, blue text, red seal, 400g.
September 26, 2025
This important ruling got kind of lost in the news cycle. A couple weeks ago, the United States Supreme Court refused to vacate a $2.2 billion dollar ovarian cancer verdict against Johnson & Johnson[“J & J”]. The verdict was originally returned by a Missouri jury in 2018 on behalf of 22 women. The original verdict was actually $4.7 billion but a Missouri Appellate Court reduced the award to $2 billion. Each of the women claimed that there was asbestos and asbestos-laced talc in J & J talcum powder products they used, and they developed ovarian cancer as a result. Asbestos is known to cause cancer. Talc, in its raw form is often found in close proximity to naturally occurring asbestos. When J & J mined talc, that talc sometimes contained asbestos. And that asbestos sometimes found its way into J & J personal hygiene products. [In 2019, J & J recalled 33,000 bottles of J & J products after FDA testing found asbestos in test samples]. J & J, has known of the risk of asbestos contamination in talc products since the 1970’s. Some 21,000 plus ovarian cancer cases are pending against J & J throughout the United States.
Movie poster for
September 26, 2025
Reports today say that DuPont and the State of New Jersey have reached a $2 Billion dollar settlement arising out of DuPont’s release of “forever chemicals” into soil, wetlands and other areas in New Jersey – and then forgetting to clean up the mess they made. The settlement with DuPont is reportedly the largest environmental settlement ever obtained by a state. “Forever chemicals” – also known as PFAS(referring to per and polyfluoroalkyl substances) are man-made chemicals that are used in an extensive variety of products as they are both water and grease-resistant. The chemicals are linked to litany of health problems, including increased risk of certain cancers(kidney, testicular and breast) liver damage, thyroid issues and reproductive problems(such as decreased fertility, low birthweight and developmental problems). NJ.Com is reporting that one of the sites where DuPont created munitions created such significant contamination in the environment that over 300 homes required filters to prevent toxic chemicals from seeping into their homes. The settlement terms provide that DuPont will spend $875 millions cleaning up the contamination and set aside another $125 million to cover other damages that may arise. Additionally, DuPont will also set p a $1.2 billion funding source and reserve fund of $475 million to ensure that even if the company fails to make payments, or goes bankrupt, public funds will not be used. For a stark introduction into the nature of PFAS, check out Dark Waters, a compelling and criminally underrated movie based on the decades old fight waged by attorney Robert Bilott against DuPont for contaminating West Virginia rural communities.