I have a potential psych malpractice claim, but I have been having a difficult time finding an attorney in Southern California who will even review the documentation. A couple of them told me that although the case is viable, it's basically a problem due to the limits on malpractice claims in California, and one wasn't comfortable with the arbitration agreement.
I've just started looking for the attorney, I'm just wondering are these types of cases full of hurdles. Thanks in advance for your observations.
We can review the documentation, but the issue will ultimately come down to an expert witness who can testify on your behalf, that based upon their review of the records, the standard of care was not met in the performance of your health care.
All malpractice cases are full of hurdles. It is harder in some specialties to obtain experts than in others. Maybe it is the lack of potential value in the case. You do not indicate what your injuries were or what brought you to the psychiatrist in the first case. It could be that your injuries are hard to separate fro your original problem or condition. The reasons offered by the attorneys that you did consult are not clear and obviously different. I am sure if the case had greater potential value there would be more interest.
Call several med mal lawyers, and someone should be willing to investigate
Malpractice claims of all kinds are extremely expensive and difficult due to limitations around the country. In addition psychiatric claims tend to be even more expensive because of the high cost of experts. You should consider writing to your state legislator since each year most states impose additional limitations on medical neglience claims. When there is no evaluation of a claim and viable claims are not litigated the cost of treatment for victims falls on the state taxpayers.