my wife has nerve damage from a nerve block that was supposedly my wife said okay to. Well she did not and it states that the block was done post op and that she consented to it. That is real funny because I received a paper that told me not to let her make decisions for 24-48 hours because of all the medications they gave her. the only thing that they gave her to sign before was general anesthesia, with no sign of a block to be given. Now the doctor that was taking care of her never did anything either, two months after her surgery he states that she had minimal numbness and tingling, which she has had the same for almost a year now. No feeling in her thigh or calf muscle, she has lost 3 inches around her thigh and we cannot find any lawyer to help us, My wife is going to lose her job
When an attorney responds to a question, Avvo sends the answer to all the other attorneys who answered before him/her, so this response is directed as much to the attorneys who are out of state who responded as to you. And by the way, I do not do personal injury, so what I am saying is not a result of having my practice impacted.
The reason it is difficult to have a medical malpractice attorney take on a case is......as suggested by Mr. Dohner in Hallandale, Fl: the insurance industry, which with the banking industry just about owns the legislature, influenced the legislators to put up for vote a constitutional amendment that would limit non-economic damages--pain and suffering and loss of quality of life--to $250,000.00, promising that medical malpractice insurance premiums would be reduced, thereby enabling health care providers to have protection with lower costs.
Since the cost to prosecute a med/mal case is enormous, a lawyer taking on a case is looking at a limited attorney's fee after having spent an enormous amount of time in the case.. And after the lawyer has spent an enormous of money to prosecute the case. Before the law suit is filed, the lawyer will have paid his/her own consultants fees to review a massive amount of medical records [paid for by the lawyer] to determine whether the health care provider failed to meet its level of appropriate care.
As my colleague from Hallandale pointed out, unlike auto accidents and other types of tort cases which for the most part are settled without trial, medical malpractice cases typically do not settle before trial. That means even more expense. Charts. Expert witnesses testifying. Depositions being transcribed. Perhaps having a shadow jury observing. Investigations. Etc Etc Etc.
And there are plenty of times that a jury will decide against the patient. So, the lawyer will have invested a lot of his/her money, not to mention his/her time and the resources of his/her office, with a strong possibility that all will have been wasted.
So, many attorneys will pass on cases that are good ones but which are not rock solid. I once tried to get a lawyer to take a case for a friend of mine. Absolutely clear that his condition was worsened by a misdiagnosis. He dropped from 195 lbs to 85. It took 10 days for the medical folks to realize his spleen had ruptured. He had to rehab. He lost his job. It took him a long time to get back to what he had been. Here was the problem: he rehabbed and recovered so well that you could not tell by looking at him that he was just this far from death. So, he did not make for a good "victim". Over 12 attorneys passed on his case.
BTW--the insurance premium reduction for doctors? Never happened. Just like the PIP insurance just going to effect 10/1/12 to reduce fraud and lower premiums by limiting medical coverage and limiting the amount of time within which someone in an auto accident had to seek medical care. Of the rate changes submitted by insurers this month, most were for rate INCREASES, not reductions.
How many lawyers have you contacted? Maybe you have not contacted the right lawyer yet? It is difficult to ask the general public why specific lawyers have declined the case. The question would be best posed to the lawyers that have declined it. There are many reasons lawyers decline cases and it is unclear what their reasons are. Good luck.
I am sorry to hear about you and your wife's situation. I suggest contacting the Florida Bar Lawyer Referral Service. They should be able to assist you in obtaining a medical malpractice attorney in your area. I have provided the link for you below. Good luck.
I believe this is a companion question to one your wife posted a little later. Her injuries are severe enough to interest a medical malpractice lawyer in investigating the case. The fact that three lawyers turned the case down doesn't mean much. You may be talking to the wrong lawyers. You need somebody with real expertise in the field. Keep trying. If you can't find somebody good who is willing to look at the case, contact me off list and I can make a couple of recommendations. I can't guarantee that you will find a lawyer who will take the case, but you owe it to yourselves to consult with a lawyer who knows what he or she is doing.
There is a very logical explanation for your concededly accurate observation that it is much more difficult at the present time to find the kind of Medical Malpractice attorney, which is to say one who has a great deal of experience with medical malpractice litigation; has a great deal of jury trial experience, as most medical malpractice actions ultimately are resolved by presenting the allegations to a jury, which is not at all true of any other variety of tort claim (in fact, it is unique among all other actions of literally every other sort, as the probability that a matter will be resolved via formal or informal settlement processes is somewhere between 90% and 97%, depending upon which specific form of action has been formally filed as a Complaint for Damages in the Civil Division of a given County's Courthouse. Therefore, one can truly say that the evaluation of a medical malpractice claim must by necessity be accomplished, from literally the very start, with predicate assumptions which are the antitheses of those characteristic of every other action. That is no doubt incredibly difficult for a layperson to believe but it is absolutely true and I could fill a book with the reasons which underlie plain and simple truth. Unfortunately for everyone concerned, but for the doctors, hospitals, acute care facilities; certain other medical providers, AND, WITH ALMOST NO DOUBT THE MOST SIGNIFICANT BENEFICIARY OF THIS INCREDIBLE SERIES OF UNLIKELY OUTCOMES, EACH BOOTSTRAPPED UPON THE OTHER, STRAINING AT THE PRESSURE IMPOSED BY THE INCREASING DOUBT OF THE FACTS WITH WHICH THE PUBLIC WAS SYSTEMATICALLY, CONTINUOUSLY AND DIZZYINGLY BARRAGED, YET REMARKABLY NEVER IN THE END YIELDING TO LOGIC AND REASON, OR THE FACTS, FOR THAT MATTER, ALL OF THE ABOVE WERE DELIGHTED WHEN THEIR COLLECTIVE DREAMS CAME TRUE, ........LAST, BUT IN NO WAY THE LEAST, IN FACT PROBABLY THE GREATESTS BENEFICIARY OF ALL OF THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS SET IN PLACE TO AUGMENT ALL OF THE ALREADY EXISTING LEGISLATION TO PREVENT A DISASTER THAT WAS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN (MORE ON THAT IN A MINUTE)....THE MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LIABILITY INSURANCE INDUSTRY. TA-DA!!!!!!
Get free answers from experienced attorneys.
27,927 answers this week
2,908 attorneys answering
Get answers from top-rated lawyers.
27,927 answers this week
2,908 attorneys answering
Don't speak legalese? We define thousands of terms in plain English.Browse our legal dictionary