Papadillos wrote:
Read this about New York law on medical malpractice:
http://www.mcandl.com/newyork.html
If you are able and willing to pay for legal help, you should be able to
find a med mal attorney to take your case. If, on the other hand, you want
to have the case taken on a contingency-fee basis the case may be too small
and the risk of loss (i.e, costs of litigation exceeding potential return)
too great for any (good) lawyer to take.
A medical doctor is not a good judge of whether you can or should sue or
not. I suspect that a lawyer who does take the case will do so in
anticipation of settling with an insurer, not taking the case to trial. The
cost of trial preparation and expert testimony is likely to exceed recovery.
In my humble opinion.
On 18/04/2008 00:32, in article X6RNj.1796$Cn4.202@news02.roc.ny, "Hugh
Semmler" <hughe@frontiernet.net> wrote:
My wife fell and her arm was dislocated . She waited in the ER for over 5
hours before treatment. She suffers constant pain in her arm and receives
treatment for it. Her Dr says they waited to[o] long to return
her arm to a normal position, Besides missing a bone fragment in an X ray.
Even tho her DR agrees she should sue. Not one Lawyer will sue because
they say they cant prove that her arm was injured 100% in the fall
Can someone explain this to me? this happened at Strong Memorial in
Rochester NY. Does that make a difference?
Keep shopping for attorneys. It is not true that not one lawyer who will
sue.
I understand that a good case can be unattractive if proof is difficult.
But there are always attorneys who will accept the difficulty.
It may be that the real problem with finding an attorney is that the damages
are too small to generate the kind of money that would pay the attorney's
share of the recovery. All that means is keep shopping for attorneys.
This answer must not be relied on as legal advice for the reasons posted
here: http://mcgyverdisclaimer.blogspot.com . And I am not your attorney.
McGyver
Thank you so much
