It’s been said that the best things in life you have to earn the hard way. Obtaining the services of a good medical malpractice lawyer is almost as hard.
While many people continue to believe that there many medical malpractice suits being filed are frivolous at best, the reality is that it is not easy to file a malpractice suit. Being the complainant places the burden on the aggrieved party and his attorney to prove that malpractice has occurred. And before medical malpractice lawyers in Philadelphia will even consider accepting a case for representation, he must be convinced of two things: that there is a good chance of victory and that any compensation that would result will be large enough to cover the cost of litigation. So anyone who wants to file a malpractice case must prove himself to the lawyer and then together with the lawyer, they need to convince the court of the justness of their claim. People requiring competent malpractice suit representation would do well to browse McLaughlin & Lauricella, P.C. Trial Attorneys site.
Medical malpractice lawyers in Philadelphia Pa are very selective in accepting cases to represent out of need. Nearly all cases they agree to prosecute are taken on contingency basis. This means the lawyer usually advances all costs necessary for the litigation, and that he only gets paid a percentage of any compensation awarded; that will only happen if they win. In fact, most members of the American Bar Association accept malpractice cases only on contingency basis.
Just how selective are malpractice lawyers? Here are a few things that would cause them to reject a prospective client:
a) If the extent of the claimed injury or damage suffered is not substantial enough to warrant prosecution: If the prospective client only claims an amount which would not cover the cost of litigation, a malpractice attorney would usually reject the case. However, if the prospective client wants to prosecute as a matter of principle, the attorney may decide to accept based on payment not being contingent on winning or the size of any award for compensation.
b) If the client cannot provide sufficient documentation: The client needs to have enough evidence to prove that he suffered injury or damage that can be directly attributed to malpractice by a medical practitioner. The client needs to provide proof that he had a doctor and patient relationship with the offending medical practitioner at the time of the injury through malpractice.
c) If the client has a history of filing frivolous damage suits: There is no shortage of people who think many malpractice suits are just attempts at easy money. While each case is accepted based on its merits, a bad reputation sours the chances of victory.
Despite the care exercised by malpractice lawyers, only about a fifth of cases tried result in compensation being paid. This is despite the fact that a majority of malpractice cases filed in court involve irreversible injury or death. You can’t blame malpractice lawyers for being so selective.