Welcome to WordPress. Soon we will start blogging!
This monograph will present the landmark decisions and attempt to sculpt from these trees a unity which is relatively straightforward to understand even for the trial lawyer for whom this monograph represents an initial foray into these dark forests of scientific evidence.
In medical negligence litigation this author has advised orally and in writings that unless one can look to a recovery of at least $150,000, then “don’t do the case.” This is not true in motor vehicular negligence litigation where many lawyers obtain recoveries which compensate the client for small injuries; cervical spine strain; lumbosacral strain; contusions and abrasions. One of the reasons that this is possible is that the cost of automobile related litigation is much less than that of medical negligence litigation. The duty in driving an automobile or motor vehicle is well understood; liability is much easier to establish and juries are easily able to see causation; damages are “common sense.” Folks don’t view automobile litigation as “personally” as do medical professionals view medical negligence actions; there generally is no reptutational “fall out” from a rear-end collision. Automobile accidents are common-place in everyday life.
In many cases, where insurance coverage is in effect, usually it is not even necessary to file suit. The dollar for dollar profitability for a lawyer is much greater in automobile negligence cases than in medical negligence litigation although the upside potential in medical negligence litigation is perhaps substantially higher than in automobile litigation.

1st Aug, 2011 | by coMEDco | in Uncategorized Tagged as | 1