Steve Mohn v. Robert W. Posegate, M.D., et al

Plaintiff claimed under count I that Dr. Posegate was
negligent in his initial examination of him in August 1977.

In a second amendment of count I, plaintiff claimed
Dr. Posegate failed to monitor his treatment by
optometrist Dr. Larry Williams.

In count II, plaintiff alleged that Sangamon Eye Associates
Ltd., through its agents and employees, inter alia, was
negligent in its examination on various counts:

failing to perform a complete eye exam, failing to advise
of dangers associated with participation in athletic
activities, failing to inform plaintiff of signs of
retinal detachment,
failing to use proper diagnostic methods to diagnose
lattice degeneration, and failing to diagnose
plaintiff's condition in timely manner.
Plaintiff alleged that he was injured when struck
by a baseball in July 1983.

Summary judgment for Dr. Poseman on count I; partial summary judgment for Sangamon Eye Associates Ltd on count II; on remaining allegations, jury rendered verdict for Sangamon and against plaintiff.

Unknown

Unknown

Appellate court rejected defendant's
claim that because plaintiff had not
presented issues for review in
post-trial motion, those issues could
not be reviewed.

Appellate court agreed with Dr.
Posegate and Sangamon that no genuine
issue of material fact supports findings
of negligence regarding Dr. Posegate.

Appellate court agreed with plaintiff
that a genuine issue of material fact
exists with respect to whether Dr. Posegate
properly monitored treatment of plaintiff
by optometrist, Dr. Larry Williams.

Appellate court agreed with plaintiff
that genuine issues of material fact
exist with respect to whether Sangamon,
through Williams, was negligent in its
care, according to count II.

Appellate court affirmed in part and
reversed in part judgment of the trial
court.

Defendant appealed to Supreme Court
because plaintiff had not raised issues
in post-trial motion.

Supreme Court found that a party need
not raise in post-trial motion any
issue concerning the pretrial entry of
summary judgement as to part of a cause
of action in order to preserve the issue
for review.

Appellate court judgment affirmed.

Record entered by ET