Robert John Potrykus Jr.

Robert Potrykus

Unfortunately for Mr. Magor, he claims he had a bad experience with a prior medical physician . He wished to discuss the process of examining a possible medical malpractice claim and what would go into pursuing a claim. I provide an initial free consult. When pursuing a malpractice claim, my firm policy requires a cost deposit for a medical board-record review and medical consulting expert opinion to establish the malpractice parameters (medical malpractice claims are complex). This was explained to Mr. Magor from the outset after review of some initial materials and other information he provided. He never officially retained my law firm but was only exploring a possible relationship. The matter was left for him to decide how he would like to proceed when last conversing in June (when I did contact him for a conference call while I was out of the country) and I sent him the follow-up written requirements to proceed further with his claim). Having not heard from him since June, I reached out to Mr. Magor in October to see if he still wished to discuss a possible clam and law firm retention. Unfortunately we did have to reschedule our recent phone call in October due to an illness I had. We did have our follow up discussion and addressed the same prerequisites for formal retention. As well, he was offered the option of considering information about other potential law firm referral opportunities that I could give him (to consider working with other firms where they may have more staff - and even possible medical persons on staff, and /or different policies on prerequisites for pursuing medical malpractice matters) that might work better for him and his claim. My goal is to help people to find a path to resolve their potential claims/issues even if it means not working with my firm. And even though there was no formal legal retention between him and my firm, I did send Mr. Magor a courtesy email that includes Colorado law references to assist him with regard to the applicable statutes of limitation (two year period) and the Certificate of Review legal requirement (for Expert Opinion to support a medical malpractice claim). I send this information to potential client prospects that may not evolve into an official attorney-client relationship with my firm, like that with Mr. Magor, so they may understand in particular their time requirements for pursuing a legal claim. And I wished him well and the best of luck in the future. Working with our firm, I attempt to learn about a potential client's case . If I cannot help, or if it maybe a matter that presents different or more difficult circumstances (as information develops), I try to offer other options for engagement, or referrals to other firms. Indeed it is befuddling to read Mr. Magor's review when he states: "From the start of my case in April, he was not only unprofessional but also demeaning and belittling." We were contacted by Mr. Magor through an employee benefit plan referral service. At the outset my paralegal and I took his initial information, received records from him, and then had follow up discussions. Those discussions occurred between April and June. He was then presented with terms of formal engagement. He never responded to that and I simply reached out to him in October to see if he still wish to proceed further. Stating that he was treated unprofessionally from the beginning in April, is confusing when he posted this 10/10 review on his own employee referral benefits website in June: "Reviewed by Clayton M. June 12, 2024 10/10 I'm still working with Robert, hoping to meet soon to go over my case in more detail. Robert has been great so far." Mr. Magor did not wish to receive any alternative lawyer referral options that might best suit his situation, which I typically offer to potential clients to give them different options or to compare to what other firms may do or offer. Again, I wish him well and the best of luck.