kcrouch_206bw.jpg

Partner


Education

ITT, Chicago-Kent College of Law (J.D. - 2007) — CALI Award, Torts, CALI Award, Legal Writing III

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (B.A.—2004)

 



Katherine C. Crouch

Katherine Crouch is a partner with Lindsay, Pickett & Postel, LLC having joined the firm in July of 2013. Her practice focuses primarily upon civil defense litigation, representing the interests of a variety of insurance clients and self-insured companies. Prior to arriving at the firm, Kate has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in a number of civil litigation specializations, including premises liability, construction negligence, product liability, and professional and medical malpractice.

Kate graduated from Chicago-Kent College of Law in 2007, where she received CALI awards for the highest grade in Torts and Legal Writing III and was a member of the Civil Litigation Clinic. She is also a graduate of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, earning a degree in Political Science. Kate is licensed to practice in the State of Illinois, as well as in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois, Western District of Wisconsin, and Northern and Eastern Districts of Texas.

Kate is a member of the Illinois Association of Defense Trial Counsel and the Women’s Bar Association of Illinois.  In addition to her legal work, Kate currently sits on several fundraising boards and is active in her Roscoe Village community. She is also the past president of the University of Chicago Cancer Research Foundation Associates Board. 


Practice Highlights

King v. Kramer, 10-cv-123, Western District of Wisconsin (Jan. 24, 2013 jury verdict) – obtained defense verdict on behalf of correctional care nurse charged with deliberate indifference to the medical needs of a pretrial detainee who allegedly suffered fatal seizures as result of withdrawal from benzodiazepines. Case brought under 42 U.S.C. §1983, alleging violations of Fourteenth Amendment.

Weaver v. Illinois Contract Glazing, 09 L 165 (Circ. Ct. Cook Co.) Obtained a defense verdict in favor of a subcontractor following a two-week trial in Cook County in a construction injury case involving a career-ending injury to a journeyman carpenter.  Plaintiff asked for almost $7 million in compensation for medical specials, lost past and future wages, pain and suffering, and a loss of normal life. 

Anderson v. Carroll, 11 L 10224 (Circ. Ct. Cook Co.) Earned a verdict significantly below our last offer in a rear-end auto accident case. We admitted negligence, but denied causation and contested the nature and extent of the plaintiff’s injuries.  The jury accepted and adopted our position that only the first year of medical treatment was related to the accident in question and made nominal awards for loss of normal life and pain and suffering.  In this instance, admitting negligence allowed us to streamline this case and spare the jury’s time and attention, which contributed to an excellent result for our client. 

Confidential (Circ. Ct.Cook Co.) Favorably resolved, after one week of trial, an action brought against a construction company whose equipment allegedly fell, striking a woodworker and fracturing his thumb.  His fracture developed into complex regional pain syndrome that was unresolved by the treatment offered. Plaintiff demanded $9 million in compensatory damages, including loss of normal life, future medical and household expenses, and lost income. Our client’s settlement was in the low six figures and was attained as a result of aggressive pretrial motion practice. 

Chatham Park Village Co-Op vs. DRF Installations, Inc., 16 L 5616 (Circ. Ct. Cook Co.) Secured the dismissal with prejudice of a lawsuit filed against our client, a contractor who provided hot water systems to a residential co-op on Chicago’s south side. Plaintiff sought compensatory and punitive damages, alleging that the hot water systems provided, were designed in a faulty manner, failed to operate properly, and were maintained inadequately by our client.  Plaintiff indicated that only a seven-figure settlement would be considered. Through aggressive discovery depositions and an extensive analysis of the documents related to this project, we showed Plaintiff’s counsel that her case lacked merit.  Our lone concession in allowing dismissal was that each side would bear its own costs. 

Kaczmarek v. Fifth Third Bank, 15 M6 11176 (Circ. Ct. Cook Co.) Earned summary judgment in favor of a premises owner in a slip and fall on ice, successfully demonstrating that Plaintiff’s account of the origin of the ice lacked sufficient certainty and specificity for a finding of an unnatural accumulation.  

Kilian v. BCLS, 17 L 1112 (Circ. Ct. Cook Co). Secured summary judgment in favor of a snow and ice contractor, successfully arguing that Plaintiff could not offer any evidence other than speculation that she slipped on snow or ice that spilled off of a snowplow blade. 

Frantz v. She-Nannigan’s Green Street Inc., 13 L 11360 (Circ. Ct. Cook Co.) Obtained summary judgment in favor of a bar owner in a personal injury action brought by a patron who slipped and fell on broken glass, sustaining serious and permanent wrist and nerve injuries. Plaintiff’s demand was $600,000 at the time when the defense motion was granted, with the Court agreeing that constructive notice could not be proven.