In Seef v. Ingalls Memorial Hosp., 311 Ill. App. 3d 7, 724 N.E.2d 115, 243 Ill. Dec. 806 (III. App. 1999), a pregnant woman, Mrs. Seef, was admitted to the hospital at approximately 10:00 p.m. Seef, 724 N.E.2d at 117. Her physician, Dr. Sutkus, arrived at the hospital shortly thereafter and examined her by 10:30 p.m. Id. at 117-18. Due to Seef's temperature fluctuations and a fetal heart rate at the upper limits of the normal range, at 11:45 p.m. she was put on an external fetal monitor. Id. at 118. The doctor watched the monitor for approximately 15 to 20 minutes, saw nothing of concern, and then went to the doctors' lounge to rest. Id. At 3:05 a.m., Sutkus was roused by a nurse to attend to Seef. Id. He became concerned after observing the latest information coming from the monitor and soon ordered an emergency C-section. Id. Seef's baby was stillborn. Id. A lawsuit followed in which plaintiffs alleged, in part, that hospital employees waited too long to notify Sutkus of the baby's distress. Id. at 119. Dr. Sutkus, like Dr. Gregory, testified at his deposition that he would not have done anything differently even if he had been called to Seef's bedside earlier. Id. at 118. The Seef plaintiffs were prepared to offer expert testimony very similar to what plaintiff will present in this case, i.e., that if Dr. Sutkus had been notified of the situation earlier, any reasonably qualified obstetrician in his position would have performed the C-section sooner than he actually performed it. Id. at 119, 122. However, the trial court ruled that this evidence could not overcome Sutkus' deposition testimony and did not raise an issue for the trier of fact as to whether the hospital employees' delay in notifying Sutkus was the proximate cause of the baby's death. The court therefore dismissed the suit against the hospital. Id. at 119. On appeal, the majority of the Illinois Appellate Court affirmed the trial court's decision, adopting the trial judge's rationale. Id. at 122-23.