Karl Josef Protil JR

I consulted with Mr. Protil about a medical malpractice case that has since settled for a substantial dollar amount. The case involved an emergency room physician's improper treatment of a corneal abrasion that caused a massive and rapid eye infection literally overnight and ultimately caused me to ...lose vision in the eye. During our consultation, Mr. Protil opined that the treating physician had done nothing constituting malpractice, a fact that I disputed during our consult and have since validated as incorrect. His contention was that the doctor, who used the antiquated and no-longer-recommended method of applying a pressure patch to the affected was not a breach of standard. There were two decades worth of clinical reports that had rendered pressure patching "not helpful for any one" and "very dangerous for contact lens-wearers" which I had told Mr. Protil I was. In contact lens wearers, the pressure patch creates a dark, warm and moist environment in which a bacterium called Pseudomonas Aeruginosa can thrive and enter the eye, destroying it completely in some cases within 48 hours. Twenty years earlier, physicians learned never to pressure patch an abrasion on the cornea of a contact lens wearer. Mr. Protil just didn't seem to get that fact despite empirical evidence that egregious malpractice had in fact been committed. He wrote me a letter stating his opinion that I did not have a meritorious case. Thankfully, I did not listen to him and went on to file a sucessful medical malpractice case.