Share this on:
 E-mail
43
VIEWS
1
COMMENTS
 
SHARES
About this iReport
  • Not verified by CNN

  • Click to view NRajamannan's profile
    Posted January 17, 2014 by
    NRajamannan
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois

    More from NRajamannan

    Cook County Denies Motion to Intervene to retrieve Northwestern University Authorization to Waive Patient's Rights Regarding Illegal Human Experimentation and surgical placement of Non-FDA approved Medical devices in their hearts during open heart surgery

     

    Motion denied to retrive Authorization to waive patients rights to have full informed consent regarding the use of the echo data from the clinical testing of the IMR ETlogix and the Myxo ETlogix from 2004-2007.

     

    Waiver IRB number 1532-004

     

    1 STATE OF ILLINOIS

    2 COUNTY OF COOK

     


    SS .

     


    3
    IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY , ILLINOIS
    4 COUNTY DEPARTMENT , LAW DIVISION

    5

    6 MAUREEN OBERMEIER,

    7 Plaintiff ,

    8 vs . No . 08 L 012426

    9 NORTHWESTERN MEMORIAL HOSPITAL; THE NORTHWESTERN
    10 MEDICAL FACULTY FOUNDATION ; PATRICK McCARTHY , M .D .; and
    11 EDWARDS LIFESCIENCES,

    12 Defendants .

    13 Report of proceedings had at the hearing in
    the above-entitled cause before the HONORABLE WILLIAM E .
    14 GOMOLINSKI, Judge of said Court , conunencing at 12 :11 p .m . on January 6, 2014 .
    15

    16 APPEARANCES :

    17 LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL J. BURNETT , by MR . MICHAEL J BURNETT
    18 On behalf of the Plaintiff ;

    19 ANDERSON, RASOR & PARTNERS , LLC, by MS . AMY PLEUSS
    20 On behalf of the Defendants Northwestern Memorial Hospital , The Northwestern Medical
    21 Faculty Foundation , and Patrick McCarthy , M .D.;
    22
    EICHORN & EICHORN , LLP, by
    23 MR . KIRK BAGROWSKI
    On beha lf of the Defendant Edwards
    24 Lifesources, LLC .

     

    312.236.6936

    Fax 312.236.6968

     

    JE EN

     


    1 THE COURT: All right . For the record ...

    2 MS. PLEUSS : Good afternoon , your Honor.

    3 Amy Pleuss on behalf of Northwestern Memorial Hospital ,

     


    4 Northwestern Medical Foundation, and Dr . McCar thy.

     


    5 MR. BAGROWSKI: Kirk Bagrowski on behalf of Edwards

     


    6 Lifesciences.

     


    7 MR. BURNETT : Michael Burnett on behalf of the

     


    8 petitioner , Dr. Maureen Rajamannan .

     


    9 THE COURT : All right. This comes before us on

    10 Dr. Rajamannan 's petition for leave to intervene as of

    11 right or in the alternative to leave to intervene by

     


    12 permission .

     


    13 Counsel has provided to me a six-page petition

     


    14 and a five-page memorandum of law . I've read it in

     


    15 great detail. I've gone through it page by page , step

    16 by step . I noticed different things in here. Your

     


    17 mot ion to -- petition to leave to intervene is denied .

     


    18 It 's denied for the following reasons: The sole basis

     


    19 for your intervention is based upon an alleged cause of

     


    20 act ion that Dr . Rajamannan may or may not have regard ing

     


    21 defamation of character , fraud, misrepresentation , some

     


    22 other things , some other causes of action which may or

     

     

    23 may not be directed against Dr . McCarthy .

     

    I understand

     


    24 your claim that based upon the IRB, the Institutional

     

    312.236.6936

    Fax 312.236.6968

     

    JE EN

     


    1 Review Board , it 's your allegation that Dr . McCart hy

    2 made misrepresentations to the institutional review

     


    3 board which resulted in a waiver as opposed to an actual

     


    4 consent document that was given from the IRB. As a

     


    5 result of the waiver , the consent form was unnecessary ,

     


    6 according , and based upon a motion to quash a subpoena

     


    7 that was granted to Northwes tern Univers ity . You are

    8 coming in now asking for me to provide the waiver

     


    9 document that I previously found may or may not be

     


    10 privileged under the Medical Studies Act.

     


    11 In your context , I 'm not sure if it is or it's

     


    12 not . It may or may not be. It 's a separate hearing at

     

     

    13 a separate date and separate time .

     


    I understand

     


    14 Dr. Rajamannan 's request , as you term her to be a

    15 whistle blower , to be able to obtain this information

     


    16 which would so to speak clear her name in the medical

     


    17 community , but those all go to damages also in the

     


    18 separate lawsuits which you may or may not have . You 're

     


    19 free to file those lawsuits any time you want to . I 'm

     


    20 not sure that they 'd be part and parcel with what we 're

     


    21 doing in this case,

     

    ...

    What do you think of this story?

    Select one of the options below. Your feedback will help tell CNN producers what to do with this iReport. If you'd like, you can explain your choice in the comments below.
    Be and editor! Choose an option below:
      Awesome! Put this on TV! Almost! Needs work. This submission violates iReport's community guidelines.

    Comments

    Log in to comment

    iReport welcomes a lively discussion, so comments on iReports are not pre-screened before they post. See the iReport community guidelines for details about content that is not welcome on iReport.

    Add your Story Add your Story