I agree with Mr. ..Tashjian that you might have a claim here, but the facts need to be investigated and analyzed I recommend that you consult with a malpractice attorney immediately. Time is of the essence.. If you need a referral, please contact my office.
Nothing contained in this communication is intended to be, or shall be deemed as, legal advice, counsel, or services to on or behalf of any person or any entity. Usage of the Avvo website is not intended to and shall not create any obligation or relationship between the user and the Law Office of Herb Fox, including but not limited to, an attorney-client relationship. Further, the communications on this website between you and the Law Office of Herb Fox may not be privileged or confidential. Finally, your situation may be governed by deadlines that may or may not have already lapsed, and you may lose your rights if you do or did not act within those deadlines.
I think the Honorable Judge Sutherland covered this matter better than I ever could in the Opinion rendered in Powell v. Alabama, 1932. He stated the following:
The right to be heard would be, in many cases, of little avail if it did not comprehend the right to be heard by counsel. Even the intelligent and educated layman has small and sometimes no skill in the science of law. If charged with a crime, he is incapable, generally, of determining for himself whether the indictment is good or bad. He is unfamiliar with the rules of evidence. Left without the aid of counsel he may be put on trial without a proper charge, and convicted upon incompetent evidence, or evidence irrelevant to the issue or otherwise inadmissible. He lacks both the skill and knowledge adequately to prepare his defense, even though he have a perfect one. He requires the guiding hand of counsel at every step in the proceedings against him. Without it, though he be not guilty, he faces the danger of conviction because he does not know how to establish his innocence. If that be true of men of intelligence, how much more true is it of the ignorant and illiterate, or those of feeble intellect. If in any case, civil or criminal, a state or federal court were arbitrarily to refuse to hear a party by counsel, employed by and appearing for him, it reasonably may not be doubted that such a refusal would be a denial of a hearing, and, therefore, of due process in the constitutional sense.
Why would the damages (settlement) have been owed to you, a grandchild, rather than the spouse. The theory supporting your claim of entitlement is not at all clear.
My responses to questions on Avvo are never intended as legal advice and must not be relied upon as legal advice. I give legal advice only in the course of an attorney-client relationship. Exchange of information through Avvo's Questions forum does not establish an attorney-client relationship with me. That relationship is established only by individual consultation and execution of a written agreement for legal services.
Sign up to receive a 3-part series of useful information and advice about personal injury law.