Medical Malpractice Lawyers - California to New York, Texas, Alabama and Georgia to Alaska, in Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado and Connecticut, Obstetrical Malpractice Lawyers, Delaware to Idaho and Illinois, Birth Injury Attorneys, Indiana, Hawaii, Kansas, Kentucky and Louisiana, to Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota and Missouri, Malpractice Attorneys in Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Against Doctors in New Mexico, and Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, from South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia and Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin to West Virginia and Wyoming.

Our medical malpractice lawyers have enormous respect for the disciplines of medicine and the extraordinary technologies that have been developed to diagnose and treat human disease. Indeed, it specifically because of that respect for medicine that our medical malpractice attorneys are offended when we discover that our clients have received "below standard" treatment, in violation of the standards of medical care.

The definition of medical malpractice is the health care provider's "failure to adhere to the accepted standards of medical care." The scope of medical malpractice is as broad as the science and art of medicine itself, as broad indeed as all of chapters in the textbooks in every discipline of medicine. The medical malpractice lawyer, indeed, rarely will encounter a medical malpractice case with facts similar to a case he previously prosecuted. Rather, with each case the medical malpractice attorney must learn the pertinent sliver of medicine from scratch, and learn it better than the defendant doctor and defense experts whom the malpractice lawyer will be required to confidently interrogate at trial.

Below, our medical malpractice lawyers will describe the nature of our work, from the methods by which we will prepare ourselves and the experts essential to prevail in medical negligence cases, through to the trial lawyer creativity and spontaneous attorney advocacy that is developed in part from experience and in part again from our superior knowledge of the subject matter. In the left column of this page and in the text below we will do so in part through examples of our actual medical malpractice cases.

Free Consultations. Our medical malpractice lawyers invite you contact us for a free consultation. Submit the "Contact" form and one of our medical malpractice attorneys will call you to discuss the facts of your case, provide his initial case evaluation and preliminary recommendations. Our medical malpractice lawyers will consider cases in most states, from California to New York, from Texas to Florida, in Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Our medical malpractice attorneys welcome the opportunity to speak with you.

Our Medical Malpractice Lawyers Will Consider Cases Arising in Any Discipline of Medicine, The Criteria For the Case Being The Physician's Violation of the Medical Standards of Care, and Damages Sufficient to Justify the Expense of Prosecuting the Case.

Medical malpractice cases can arise in every discipline of medicine. The internist may fail to diagnose the disease, leading to disease progression to the point where the client may permanently crippled or have little time left to live. The obstetrician may fail to note fetal distress leading the baby to be born with severe brain damage. The surgeon may close leaving a foreign object behind in the patient's thoracic cavity leading to infection and organ damage. Anesthesiologist error may result in brain damage and permanent coma. The medical malpractice lawyer may have a sense that the doctor fell below the standard of care in his or her treatment of the patient, but the attorney will always send the case to a medical expert for confirmation. Indeed, it is the requirement in some states that an expert must certify that a medical malpractice case has merit before the case is filed, and whether required by law or not, it is certainly good practice.

The Importance Of Highly Qualified Medical Experts to Medical Malpractice Lawyers and Their Importance in the Success of the Medical Negligence Case.

The first involvement of the medical expert in the case is to confirm that the physician fell below the applicable medical standard of care, and to confirm furthermore that the physician's negligence was the cause of the client's substantial injury or the progression of his disease. The medical malpractice lawyer will first obtain medical records and will supply them to the medical expert for his initial review. In addition to providing his opinions on medical negligence, causation and damages, the expert is commonly pivotal in directing the malpractice lawyer's education on the areas of medicine involved in the case. The expert will suggest to the medical malpractice lawyer the authoritative texts on the subject matters, which the lawyer will read many times over before ultimately taking the defendant physician's and defense experts' depositions, and then preparing to present the case at trial. Indeed, the medical malpractice lawyer will be acutely aware of the evidentiary advantages of identifying favorable language in medical texts and then obtaining the defense expert's admission that the text is authoritative, because with that, the attorney may read the favorable text to the jury.

It is also the "quality" of the plaintiff's medical experts that most likely will translate into success of the medical negligence case at trial. As clear as the medical malpractice lawyer will attempt to present his case, the muddier the defense attorney will attempt to obscure his client's liability. Unfortunately, many times the medical subject matter is so complex, and the usual defense experts to ready to contradict even the strongest plaintiff's case, that jurors will often have difficulty discerning medical truth from fallacy. However, one thing that jurors are good at is recognizing the qualities of the experts qualifications. Are they truly experts. Have they published on the subject matter. Are the experts respected professors or general practitioners.

In one very strongly contested AIDS medical malpractice and fraud case described in the left column of this page, the most highly regarded AIDS experts in the world agreed to testify for one of our Law Group medical malpractice lawyers. The experts included Luc Montagnier, the discoverer of HIV and head of France's National AIDS Laboratories, Michael Gotlieb, the discoverer of AIDS and co-founder of the American Foundation for AIDS Research, Don Francis, the head of the first CDC AIDS task force who discovered that AIDS was a sexually transmitted disease, John Curnutte, the head of the largest AIDS vaccine project in the world, Roger Detels, the Chairman of the Epidemiology Department at UCLA and senior investigator on the largest study in the world on AIDS patients and drug efficacy, among a dozen others of the most highly qualified AIDS scientists and physicians in the world.

Where the medical malpractice lawyer can call the better qualified experts, the likelihood is increased that he will succeed in the case. The medical malpractice lawyer must also be capable of being tough with the defense experts, who will most commonly be worn out physicians who spend half their professional lives testifying solely for the defense in medical negligence litigation. Since most medical malpractice cases are decided on the jury's assessment of the medical expert testimony, half the medical malpractice lawyer's job will be in calling the better experts and asking the questions to elicit their testimony to make the case; and the other half of the medical malpractice lawyer's job will be to make plain to the jury the deficiencies in the qualifications of the defense experts and through strong cross-examination, the deficiencies in their opinions.

Medical Malpractice Lawyers Enjoy Substantial Opportunity for Advocacy and Even Creativity in the Presentation of the Medical Negligence Case.

Just as physicians will say that the practice of medicine is less a science than an art, so too is the art of the medical malpractice lawyer. These are not auto accident cases in which the questions are as straightforward as demonstrating that the other driver ran the red light. Medical malpractice cases are like a three dimensional sculpture in which the clay is the medicine and the knives are the attorneys tools of direct and cross examination.

To take another example from the left column of this page, one of our Group medical malpractice lawyers brought suit against an internist and neurologist for failure to diagnose an "atrial myxoma," the most rare tumor in the human body. It is a tumor in the upper left chamber of the heart that most cardiologists would have never heard of. The patient, Mrs. Z, presented to the internist with symptoms of two feinting episodes. The internist performed a number of tests, including an electrocardiogram, and then referred Mrs. Z to a neurologist. The neurologist in turn performed a number of tests, all of which were negative, and sent the patient back to the internist. The internist then diagnosed vaso vagal syncope, which is what lawyers and doctors would call a garbage bag diagnosis, a psychological diagnosis, but essentially a conclusion that the physicians were unable to identify anything physical to account for the patient's symptoms. Soon after Mrs. Z had a stroke, was taken to the hospital, which also failed initially to diagnose the atrial myxoma, then a second stroke, after which the diagnosis was made, the atrial myxoma surgically removed, but Mrs. Z left with a mild aphasia, meaning some difficulty at times using language.

When potential clients present to medical malpractice lawyers, the attorneys will most commonly obtain the medical records and send them for expert reviews by physicians with superior credentials practicing in the same medical specialties as the prospective defendants. Both the internist and neurologist experts to whom the medical malpractice lawyer provided the records came back with the same analysis, that while they wouldn't expect the treating doctors to consider atrial myxoma in their differential diagnosis, the internist and neurologist should have considered more common cardiac diseases, should have done an echocardiogram to rule them out, and if either had done so, they would have seen the atrial myxoma and averted the two strokes and consequent aphasia.

Now, that is a somewhat complicated set of steps to expect a jury to follow. In the usual failure to diagnose case, the medical malpractice lawyer's inquiries are two-fold, did the physicians consider the disease in their "differential diagnosis," and did they do what is required to rule it out. Here, the standard of care would not have required the physicians to consider atrial myxoma in their differential diagnosis, hence the necessity for the more complex set of premises essential to establish the physician's liability.

Our medical malpractice lawyer would agree that the defense attorneys were able to give the much more powerful opening statements. They pounded the podium in indignation, arguing accurately enough that atrial myxoma had been identified in only a few case reports in all the medical literature, that it was the most rare tumor in the human body, and that it was an "autopsy diagnosis," never before diagnosed in a living human being.

Our medical malpractice lawyer's opening statement essentially tracked the several premises set forth by his experts. And to be truthful, the jurors mostly slept through our medical malpractice lawyer's opening, but were wide eyed at the defense attorneys' pounding of the podium and strong contemptuous language condemning the medical malpractice attorney for even considering bringing this good physicians into court on such trumped up charges.

Our Law Group medical malpractice lawyer led with his chin, calling as his first witness the defendant internist, and then led with his chin again, asking "Doctor, Did you consider atrial myxoma in your differential diagnosis?"

The defendant internist was obviously well prepared for this question, just the faintest smile, before his attack, in the same contemptuous voice as characterized his attorney's opening statement, "Mr. Henke, you don't think of Zebras when you hear hoof beats." Indeed, that is a common medical syllogism meaning that, when a physician is presented with a patient's symptoms, he doesn't consider in his differential diagnosis first the rare or unlikely of potential causes for the symptoms; rather he considers and first attempts to rule out those diseases that are least rare and most likely to be the cause.

But our medical malpractice lawyer recognized that the defendant internist has just handed him the case. He turned immediately back to the internist and said softly, "Mitral valve prolapse," and they more loudly, "It's a horse, isn't it doctor!" The defense attorney objected, but our medical malpractice lawyer pointed out that the doctor had "opened the door," and the Judge ruled permitting the interrogation. Again, "Mitral valve prolapse," softly, and then more loudly "It's a horse, isn't it doctor!" The internist, trapped, responded, "I don't know what you mean." And the medical malpractice lawyer, who had done his research, spelled it out for the doctor and jury, "Well, as you know, mitral valve prolapse will occur in about 6 percent of women Mrs. Z's age, right? It's a horse!" The internist looked to his attorney, as did our medical malpractice lawyer, as the did jury, and then the internist acknowledged, "Okay, mitral valve prolapse is a horse!"

"Mitral stenosis," the medical malpractice lawyer then said softly, and then more loudly, "It's a horse, isn't it doctor." And the internist now less contemptuous, acknowledged, "Okay, yes, it's a horse."

"Idiopathic subaortic stenosis" the medical malpractice lawyer again said softly, and then more loudly, "It's a horse, isn't it doctor." And again, the internist, no longer smiling, replied "Yes, its a horse."

And then the punch line, "Doctor, upon hearing the 'hoof beats,' Mrs. Z's symptoms of feinting, had you merely thought 'horse,' any of these common cardiologic entities which might have accounted for the fainting, and had you just looked in the direction of the hoof beats, done an echocardiogram, you would have seen the zebra, wouldn't you have doctor."

The jurors couldn't help themselves, even the judge couldn't help smiling, the defense attorney standing up and objecting vehemently again to the line of questioning. But this difficult case, in that moment, just a few questions into the interrogation of the first witness, was over.

The interrogation was faithful to the medical malpractice lawyer's theory of the case, and also faithful to what would be the testimony of the plaintiff's experts. The zebra syllogism provided the medical malpractice lawyer's "hook" to make plain to the jurors the sense of the more dry medical premises upon which the defendant physicians properly should have been held liable for their medical negligence. It was the tactics of the defense attorneys and their client's which were designed to mislead the jury; the tactics simply failed.

The medical malpractice lawyer insists that he would have won this case, one way or another, but the lesson from this story really is that experience and unrelenting preparation are the medical malpractice lawyer's most powerful tools. Without the preparation, the above line of questioning might have been interrupted at the first question attempting to define mitral valve prolapse as a horse, by the defendant internist's response "I don't understand." It was the attorneys preparation which permitted him to immediately respond, insisting that the internist agree that a disease which occurs in 6 percent of a randomly selected population his client's age was a "horse."

Our medical malpractice lawyer will admit that he returned to the zebra syllogism in his closing argument in the case, just because it was a "visual aid" to make more tangible the medical premises naturally leading to the recognition of the defendant physicians' negligence; and he'll admit that he has used the syllogism a few times since then in failure to diagnose cases. But that's why experience, in addition to preparation, is an important component in the making of a good medical malpractice lawyer.

Our medical malpractice lawyers provide free initial consultations. You may submit the "Contact" form and one of our medical malpractice attorneys will call you to discuss your case, offer his preliminary case evaluation and initial recommendations. Our medical malpractice lawyers will consider medical negligence cases against physicians in every medical specialty and all other health care providers, throughout most states, from New York to California, from Florida to Texas, from Alaska and Hawaii to Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming. As we discuss below, our medical malpractice attorneys have a particular interest in birth injury obstetrical malpractice cases, however, we welcome the opportunity to review any case involving clear negligence on the part of the health care provider. Our medical malpractice lawyers are here to serve you.

Our Obstetrical Malpractice Attorneys and Birth Injury Lawyers Describe What Are Unfortunately the More Common Instances of Obstetrical and Hospital Negligence Resulting in Serious Birth Injury. Our Medical Malpractice Lawyers with Consider Cases involving Obstetrical or Hospital Negligence resulting in Birth Injury in Most States, from California to New York, from Texas to Florida, in Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Birth injury lawyers are attorneys who concentrate on medical negligence cases involving the failures of obstetricians and other health care providers, including hospital staff, midwives and others, whose failures to adhere to medical standards prior to delivery, during delivery and in the days following delivery result in injury to the newborn. Sometimes, the parents will be aware of the physicians' or health care providers' errors or may become aware of their baby's injuries during or shortly after delivery. Sometimes the parents will not be aware of their health care providers errors and may only learn of their child's injuries as he or she fails to meet his milestones later in childhood.

On separate pages our obstetrical malpractice lawyers will discuss just a few types of birth injuries that commonly will result from medical negligence. The first includes the category of brain injury that can result from hypoxia or anoxia, the depravation of oxygen during delivery, most commonly accompanied by medical or hospital staff negligence in failing to timely attach a fetal monitor or in their failure to timely or properly respond to indications of fetal distress. Brain injury can also occur traumatically during delivery, including by the obstetrician's heavy handed manipulation of the baby's head, including by forceps. There may be indications that the baby may have suffered brain damage from hypoxia where the baby is born blue, or with a low APGAR score. There may be indications that the baby suffered brain damage traumatically from the shape of the head following delivery. However, evidence that the baby has suffered brain damage may not appear obvious until much later, as the parents track the child's milestones and find that the child has fallen behind the statistical expectations.

The second category of birth injury that our obstetrical malpractice lawyers will separately discuss involves Brachial plexus injury and Erb's palsy, which are most commonly evident when it is observed that an infant will move one arm but not the other arm. The brachial plexus is a network of nerves in the shoulder area that govern sensation and movement in the arm. It is generally recognized that Erb's palsy and brachial plexus injury result from excessive traction by the obstetrician or mid-wife or other health care provider during delivery. It can occur if the obstetrician fails to identify shoulder dystocia, where the baby's shoulder becomes stuck behind the mother's public bone. There are effective standard techniques for manipulation of the baby to free the shoulder during delivery, including the McRoberts maneuver and suprapubic maneuver, neither of which put the baby at risk if properly performed. And there are other procedures which the trained obstetrician will avail that are also effective should the initial techniques fail. Where the obstetrician fails to avail the techniques or performs them improperly the baby will suffer the brachial plexus injury. If the upper brachial plexus nerves are torn or stretched the child will suffer Erb's palsy. A more serious condition, labeled global palsy, may occur if both the upper and lower brachial plexus nerves are stretched or torn. The most serious brachial plexus injuries result from avulsion, where the nerves are torn from their point of attachment to the spinal cord. Neuroma injuries may also occur, resulting in scar tissue that puts pressure on the nerve. Some injuries referred to as neurapraxia, stretch injuries that do not involve a tear, are the most likely of the injuries to heal on their own without surgical intervention. There are a variety of diagnostic studies that can be performed when it is observed that one of the baby's arms hangs limp at the baby's side, sometimes turned with a bent wrist. MRI or CT studies may be performed to look for bone or joint damage in the location of the shoulder or neck. Nerve conduction studies or electromyography may be conducted to determine if there are nerve signals present in the muscles of the affected upper arm. Nerve surgery within the first three months can often be effective, however, surgery delayed more than one year is unlikely to be effective.

If your child has been diagnosed with an intellectually disability, or if you have noticed that he or she is not timely meeting his or her milestones, or has suffered a brachial plexus injury, or another birth injury, our medical and obstetrical malpractice lawyers would welcome the opportunity to speak with you. We provide free consultations, without any obligation. You may submit the "Contact" form and one of our birth injury attorneys will call you to discuss your case, offer his initial case evaluation and preliminary recommendations. Our obstetrical malpractice lawyers will consider birth injury cases arising in most states of the United States from Alaska to Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming. Our birth injury attorneys are here to serve you.

Our Medical Malpractice Attorneys Welcome You to Contact Us for a Free Consultation. Our Medical Malpractice Lawyers Will Consider Lawsuits Against Health Care Providers, Physicians, Specialists and Hospitals, in Most States from New York to California, from Texas, Georgia and Florida to Michigan, Illinois, Ohio and Pennsylvania, from Alaska to Hawaii, Including Birth Injury Cases Against Obstetrician's and Hospitals from Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

If you have been injured as the result of medical malpractice on the part of a physician, specialist, any other health care provider or hospital, our medical malpractice attorneys welcome you to avail our free consultations. You may submit the "Contact" form and one of our medical malpractice lawyers will call you to discuss your case, offer his preliminary case evaluation and initial recommendations. Our medical malpractice attorneys will consider cases involving serious medical consequences and significant future medical expenses or significant past and future earnings losses from Alaska to Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming, including birth injury lawsuits resulting from obstetrical or hospital staff negligence. The potential client is also encouraged to inquire about the attorney's qualifications, including his experience as a medical malpractice lawyer and serious injury trial attorney and any other qualifications that the potential client deems important in the attorney who will represent him in his lawsuit.

Generally speaking, after the initial interview, if the attorney and potential client consider that there is sufficient likelihood that the treatment by the doctor or other health care provider was negligent, and that as the result, the potential client suffered significant general damages and special economic damages, then the medical malpractice lawyer will obtain the medical records and forward them to an appropriately qualified expert to obtain a medical opinion whether the treating health care provider "fell below the standard of care" in his treatment of the potential client. In many states it is required that such a medical review be obtained prerequisite to filing a medical malpractice case, and in our estimation it is just good practice, because it only serves our clients if we accept only clearly valid cases of medical malpractice.

*Jury Verdicts and Settlements:

$2.7 million dollar jury verdict. Medical malpractice, drug product and medical fraud case. Medical malpractice and drug product liability attorney Henke represented 5 plaintiffs in a consolidated four month trial in which the jury found the defendants liable on multiple causes of action, from medical and hospital negligence to fraud and conspiracy to defraud the plaintiffs with dangerous and ineffective FDA approved and unapproved drugs. The Law Group lawyer designated highly distinguished scientists, epidemiologists and AIDS physicians to testify for the plaintiffs in the case, including Luc Montagnier, the head of France's National AIDS Laboratories who discovered HIV; Michael Gotlieb, co-founder of AMFAR, the astute physician who discovered AIDS, Don Francis, head CDC AIDS Task force who first discovered the causes of AIDS, Roger Detels, the senior investigator on largest epidemiological study on AIDS drugs and their efficacy, John Curnutte, senior investigator on the largest AIDS vaccine study, Peter Wolfe, Member of the Scientific Advisory Committee to the American Foundation for AIDS Research. He conceived the "test" litigation to rectify the epidemic of AIDS drug fraud that followed upon the AIDS epidemic by suing also hospitals with the strategy that if punitive damages could be obtained against the hospitals that tolerated AIDS physicians who used on their patients ineffective AIDS drugs that hospitals across the nation would recognize the danger of failing to revoke the staff privileges of physicians who practiced AIDS drug fraud. In addition to awarding compensatory damages, the jury found the defendant hospital liable both for negligence and conspiracy to defraud, and awarded 1.6 million dollars in punitive damages against the hospital. The case was chronicled in most of the most legitimate newspapers in the United States, from the front page of the New York Times to the front page of the Los Angeles Times, from the Washington Post to the San Francisco Chronicle and Examiner, in legal journals, including the National Law Journal, and on national television, including Tom Brokaw's NBC Evening News and CNN . Pharmaceutical product liability attorney, Henke, also testified before Congress with regard to these cases and the need to rein in AIDS drug fruad, at the invitation of the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives.

$3.8 million dollar gross jury verdict in medical malpractice case involving failure to diagnose atrial myxoma, the most rare tumor in the human body. The plaintiff had presented initially to the defendant internist with a history of two episodes of feinting. The internist did a battery of tests including an electrocardiogram. When the tests failed to identify a medical cause for the feinting episodes the internist referred the patient to a neurologist who in turn did a battery of tests, also failing to identify a medical cause for the feinting episodes. The internist then diagnosed "vaso vagal syncope" a medical term suggesting a psychological cause for the feinting and referred the patient to a psychologist. The patient then had a stroke and the atrial myxoma was diagnosed during her hospitalization. The medical experts engaged by our Group medical malpractice attorney, Henke, offered to testify that while it was not required by the standard of care that the physicians consider atrial myxoma in their differential diagnoses, if they had considered other more common cardiologic disease and had they done an echocardiogram to rule them out, they would have seen the atrial myxoma. The case is discussed more fully in the center column of this page. Our medical malpractice attorney also discussed his successful trial strategy in an article entitled ""Medical Malpractice, Overcoming Common Defenses in Uncommon Medical Malpractice Cases" published a discussion of the trial strategy employed in the case in "Forum," the journal of the California Trial Lawyers Association/Consumer Attorneys Association of California. Discussions of the case have also appeared as chapters in two books.

$1.5 million dollar settlement in a pharmaceutical product liability birth injury case. The case involved an experimental drug which the manufacturer sought to test for its efficacy as a sedative, employing over 1000 physicians nationwide. One of our Group pharmaceutical product liability lawyers, Henke, obtained from another, Pennsylvania Law Group drug product lawyer the list of the physicians who served as investigators for the drug company when 3 of his clients in the same small city contacted him with similar limb defects characteristic of the teratogenic drug, all of whose mothers were treated during pregnancy by the same obstetrician. It was confirmed that the mothers' common obstetrician was on the list of investigators who received the drug from the pharmaceutical company. The three cases, including the one above referenced case were filed against the drug manufacturer and the physician. The physician no longer had the patients' medical records. The clients mothers recalled receiving a sedative during pregnancy but did not recall the name of the drug. However, the Group pharmaceutical product liability attorney developed expert testimony that the limb defects were characteristic of limb defects caused by the suspect drug which combined with the evidence that the common obstetrician had access to the teratogenic sedative was deemed sufficient for the manufacturer and physician to resolve the above referenced case and the two others out of court for substantial settlements. The settlements were achieved despite that the mothers exposure to the drug and the births of the clients occurred more than 30 years prior to the case being filed, leading the manufacturer and physician to file demurrers and motions for summary judgment asserting the statute of limitations defense. The Group pharmaceutical product liability lawyer, Henke, responded to the motions with the contention that the manufacturer had sought to obscure that it had supplied the notorious drug to physicians in the United States, and that the physician intentionally concealed from the mothers that the drug might have been the cause of their babies birth defects. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on the motions, and the settlements were achieved shortly thereafter..

*The results obtained in the cases listed were dependent upon the facts of the cases, and the results will differ in other cases based on different facts

Driving Under the Influence of Cell Conversation Results in DUI Level Driving Impairment And a 4 fold Increased Likelihood that the Driver will Cause an Accident.

Read the Law Group Scientific Review Article.

Our Law Group attorneys have reviewed all the epidemiology and controlled experimental literature on the effect of cell phone conversation to impair driver attention. Driving under the influence of cell conversation results in DUI level driving impairment and renders the motorist four times more likely to cause an accident. Contrary to popular belief, it is not "holding" the cell phone which results in the impairment. It is the diversion of conscious attention to the internal-cognitive tasks associated with the give and take of the cell conversation away from the external-visual tasks essential for safe driving. Indeed, it does not matter whether the motorist uses a handheld or hands-free cell phone, the impairment is the same, and the 4 fold increased likelihood that the motorist will cause an accident is precisely the same. Yes, a number of states have enacted "handheld cell phone" laws; unfortunately that is just a function of politics. The scientists are not in dispute. All agree that driving under the influence of cell phone conversation, regardless of the device used, results in the identical DUI level driving impairment and increased likelihood that the driver will cause an accident.

* Name:

* Phone:

* E-mail:

Describe Your Case:

pharmaceutical product liability attorneys

The Law Group - An Affiliation of Trial Lawyers in Most States of the United States, Serving Clients in Medical Malpractice Cases against Physicians, Hospitals and other Health Care Providers.

Our Law Group was first conceived in the 1990's when attorney Henke was serving as a Governor of the 5th largest trial lawyer association in the United States and regularly meeting with the officers and Governors of most of the state trial lawyers associations, including to develop strategies to defeat insurance industry efforts to obtain "tort reform laws" -- laws which would have significantly curtailed the rights of the injured to be fully compensated, for example "caps" on general damages. Many of us came to gain high regard for the professionalism of others of the trial lawyers from across the county. And where it was common that we would be contacted by potential clients from other states we would often recommend or refer the potential clients to lawyers in our loosely affiliated group or to other attorneys who we considered best situated or qualified to consider the cases. In personal injury litigation where a particular lawyer already had a "leg up" on a particular type of case, for example an auto defect case, with his experts already developed, we might recommend that the potential client might save substantial litigation costs or otherwise be best served by the other trial attorney. We also will sometimes cooperate with others of our serious injury trial lawyers, either in sharing documents and other evidence developed in previous cases against the same defendant, as in product liability cases, or sometimes by helping to identify and prepare an expert for another Group lawyer in another state. Sometimes we may offer to serve as local counsel where an out of state attorney appears as trial counsel pro hac vice, or we may assist with appeals in our states for another trial lawyer where we may be more familiar with the issues or appellate litigation. This is the way our informal affiliation of lawyers grew with experienced trial lawyers in most of the states. Our medical malpractice lawyers will consider representing potential clients who have suffered serious or catastrophic injuries as the result of medical negligence in most states, from Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

It is every potential litigant's right to ask about the credentials of any lawyer whom he would consider to represent him. Decisions with regard to the best lawyer for you should not be made on the basis of attorney advertisements. Rather such decisions should be made on the basis of a comparison of the credentials of the lawyers whom the potential client would consider to represent him. Our Law Group attorneys provide free consultations and we welcome your inquiries with regard to our credentials as serious injury trial lawyers and as experienced in our practice areas specifically relevant to your case, and we invite you also to ask any additional questions about our qualifications that you may deem important in the attorney you will choose to represent you.

It is beyond the scope of this web site and page to attempt to do justice to the credentials of all of our Law Group lawyers, and so on the web site subject matter pages and here we have limited our discussion of specific credentials to those of Group attorney Henke, as was most convenient, given that he is the author of most of the practice areas pages, which we hope will provide greater information with regard to the sophisticated trial strategy that qualified and experienced lawyers bring to the prosecution of the broad description of cases discussed.. In addition, because it would be beyond the scope of our page limits to discuss the significant trial victories and settlements of all our group members, in the left column of this page it is discussed only the jury verdicts of this one Group lawyer, except that, given that he doesn't practice food poisoning law, a recent E. coli HUS case and settlement obtained by another of the Group members, Nick Allis, is discussed. The cases cited are furthermore intended to describe the type of trial advocacy that can be brought to bare in the various auto, medical malpractice, drug product liability and food poisoning cases described, not to stress the amounts of the settlements and jury verdicts, because as noted in the left column, as required by state bar rules, the damages recovered in any particular case are dependent upon the facts of each case, including the nature and extent of the client's injury, and his general and special economic damages.

So that the reader may consider some of the types of credentials that attorneys may have, among others, in determining a lawyer's suitability for a particular case, from lawyer directory legal ability and ethics ratings to elected office in state trial lawyers associations, awards and recognition by his peers, such as trial lawyer awards, education, training and experience in the particular practice areas, such as big rig truck accident cases or medical malpractice or pharmaceutical product liability or food poisoning or premises liability or elder abuse litigation, as examples; articles published on specific legal subject matter, or experience serving as class action lawyers, as might pertinent in some cases, or examples of the attorney's appellate advocacy, we provide the specific credentials of attorney Henke, however only by way of example of one Group member's qualifications. By providing his credentials he does not claim that his credentials are superior to those of any other Group lawyer or any other attorney in his or any other state. He will not accept cases arising outside the state of California, and will only appear as trial counsel in pending litigation in another state at the request of an attorney in the other state, where the attorney requests that he serve as trial counsel in the pending litigation, with the consent of the client, and only where the trial court judge in the out of state litigation consents to his appearance as trial counsel pro hac vice. His credentials, however, might serve the purpose sought to be achieved here, only to suggest what might be some of the questions that any prospective client may want to ask the lawyers in the state in which his cause of action arose whom he would consider to represent him, along with all the other questions that the prospective client deems important, in selecting the attorney best qualified and experienced to prosecute his or her potential litigation.

For example, the first of attorney Henke's credentials discussed below is his Martindale & Hubbell rating. And indeed, often as lawyers consider recommending or referring clients to lawyers in other states they will commonly consult the lawyers' Martindale & Hubbell "legal ability" and "ethical standards" ratings. Martindale & Hubbell is the most respected attorney rating directory in the United States. The ratings are most commonly based upon interviews with Judges before whom the lawyer has appeared and interviews with other prominent lawyers in the attorney's community.

Law Group attorney, Henke and his law firm are "AV" rated by Martindale and Hubbell, the highest lawyer "legal ability" rating ("A") and highest attorney "general ethical standards" rating ("V"). The "A" is defined by Martindalee & Hubbell to mean "very high to preeminent" in "legal ability" and the "V" is defined to mean "very high" in "general ethical standards". According to Martindale & Hubbell: "AV Peer Review Rating shows that a lawyer has reached the height of professional excellence. He or she has usually practiced law for many years, and is recognized for the highest levels of skill and integrity." Martindale & Hubbell also assigns numerical ratings, from 1.0 to 5.0, with 4.5 to 5.0 satisfying the criteria for an "AV" rating. Henke's numerical rating is 5.0.

He is recognized as one of the "Top Lawyers in America," a member of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum, commonly referred to as "the most prestigious group of trial lawyers in the United States."

He is a former Governor of LATLA, the 5th Largest Trial Lawyer Association in the United States, elected and reelected to the position, year after year, by LATLA's large trial lawyer membership.

He was nominated by LATLA for the coveted and prestigious "Trial Lawyer of the Year" Award specifically for a medical negligence case brought against multiple physicians and a hospital. He was also given its President's Award, and was given the privilege to serve as the Editor-in-Chief of the Association's Law Journal, "The Advocate.".

His cases, trial work and victories in "test" litigation, including medical malpractice, birth injury and drug litigation have been the subject of substantial legal commentary in respected state and national legal journals from the National Law Journal to the California Lawyer.

His medical malpractice cases have also been the subject of substantial legitimate news coverage from front page articles in the New York Times and Los Angeles Times, from the Washington Post to the San Francisco Chronicle and Examiner. He has appeared to discuss his medical malpractice cases on national legitimate television news, Tom Brokaw's Evening News, CNN; his cases, trial strategies and successes have also been described in 2 books.

He has also testified before Congress at the invitation of the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee of the United States House of Representatives specifically with regard to his successful prosecution of certain medical malpractice and drug "test" cases, and his contention that punitive damages are an important tool in assuring that drugs are safe and that health care providers, including physicians and hospitals, adhere to the medical standards of care.

He has also published over 30 legal articles, most on subject relating to medical malpractice and trial strategy in professional journals from "Trial" the Journal of the American Trial Lawyers Association, "The Forum," the Journal of the California Trial Lawyers Association, Consumer Attorneys Association of California, and the "Advocate," the Journal of the Los Angeles Trial Lawyers Association, Consumer Attorneys Association of Los Angeles, including , "Mandatory Class Action," Trial Magazine, ATLA; Henke with Professor Dean Neubauer, "Medical Malpractice Legislation," Trial Magazine, ATLA, "Negligence Per Se and Drug Product Liability Cases," Advocate, LATLA; "Statute of Limitations/Delayed Discovery Rule in Drug Product Liability Litigation," Advocate, LATLA, "Amending the Complaint at Trial to Add Punitive Damages, "Advocate," LATLA; Henke with Inner Circle Member James Butler, "The Right of Counsel to Speak to Press on Pending Civil Litigation: First Amendment Protections Reaffirmed," Forum, CTLA; "Falsification of Medical Records: How to Establish it and how best to handle it," Advocate, LATLA; "Medical Malpractice, Overcoming Common Defenses in Uncommon Medical Malpractice Cases," Forum CTLA; "Children’s Rights v. Government Claims Provisions," Advocate, LATLA; "Statistics," Advocate, LATLA; "Defendant's Counsel's Sub-rosa Interview with Plaintiff's Treating Physicians," Advocate, LATLA; "Special Defenses, "Advocate, LATLA; "Framing Economic Damages," Advocate, LATLA; "Character Evidence and the Ostensible Secondary Purpose, " Advocate, LATLA; "Legislation," Advocate, LALTA; "Proving Economic Damages of Undocumented Aliens, " Advocate, LATLA; "Initiative Checklist," Advocate, LATLA; "Selecting the Medical Negligence Case," Advocate, LATLA; "The Reasonable Suspicion Standard in Drug Product Liability Cases," Advocate, LATLA; "Use of Rebuttal Expert Testimony at Trial,"Advocate, LATLA; "Proving Negligent Failure to Diagnose a Rare Disease," Advocate, LATLA; "Breach of the Physicians Obligations of Confidentiality," Advocate, LATLA; "Taking Expert Depositions," Advocate, LATLA; "Jury Selection," Advocate, LATLA; "Epidemiology and Applied Statistics," Advocate, LATLA; "Recovery for Increased Susceptibility for Future Medical Disease," Advocate, LATLA; "Strict Liability," Advocate, LATLA; "Contention Interrogatories," Advocate, LATLA; "Ex Parte Interviews with Plaintiff's Treating Physicians," Advocate, LATLA; "The High Cost of Forum Depositions," Advocate, LATLA. Full Bibliography Available Upon Request.

He has also obtained extraordinary published state and federal appellate results, including in sophisticated medical and pharmaceutical product liability effecting lasting, significant changes in the law favorable to his clients and other plaintiff litigants. An attorney's experience in appellate advocacy is not only useful on appeals, but may be important in some cases to overturn before or during trial a bad ruling of the trial judge that guts the case or deprives the client of an element of his damages. To take one example, in the context of pre-trial motions a Judge struck Henke's clients' punitive damage claims relying of newly enacted tort reform legislation requiring that in cases against health care providers the punitive damage claim must not be stated in the original complaint, as was the practice when the complaint was filed prior to enactment of the law, but by amendment to the complaint based upon evidence of the validity of the punitive damage claim. Henke obtained a stay of the trial to take an extraordinary writ to the appellate court, obtaining an immediate decision from the Court of Appeals ordering the trial court to reinstate the clients' punitive damage claims, and then he went forward to obtain in addition to compensatory damage awards for his clients, a $1.6 million jury verdict against one of the defendants.

To take another example, after more than 1000 federal cases involving children who had suffered serious birth defects were assigned by the federal Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation to a federal Judge sitting in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, the District Court Judge in Ohio certified a "mandatory class action" binding together the 1000 birth defect cases assigned to his court and all the other thousands of birth defect cases involving the drug filed nationwide, including those filed independently in the state courts. The pharmaceutical product liability lawyers in Henke's office had over 40 cases involving exposure to the drug, most of them involving children born with severe limb defects, and had developed an extensive list of experts fully prepared to testify in the individual pharmaceutical product liability trials against the manufacturer. The Plaintiffs' Lead Counsel Committee and the attorneys for the drug manufacturer then settled the mandatory class litigation involving the thousands of children born with birth defects nationwide for $120,000,000. The federal District Court Judge then issued an order approving the settlement. Group attorney Henke and his other firm members considered the settlement to be woefully inadequate to compensate the many thousands of children with serious birth defects for even the smallest fraction of the fair measure of the value of their injuries and damages. So Henke filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit challenging the District Court's certification of the mandatory class action and settlement. Attorney Henke's petition for writ of mandamus was successful in obtaining the United States Court of Appeals' order instructing the District Court Judge to decertify the mandatory class and void the class settlement.

Henke had argued that "mandatory class action" offended the individual client's right to the attorney of his choice, and control over his individual litigation, arguing that the sole legitimate exception that the Court of Appeals should recognize should be that mandatory class action might be justified in the rare instance where the defendant had a demonstrated limited fund of assets and insurance insufficient to pay all claims brought against it, proof that the large manufacturer in this drug product liability class action clearly could not and had not substantiated. The United States Court of Appeals adopted Henke's arguments, issuing a landmark published decision severely restricting the availability of mandatory class actions, with the sole exception mentioned above. The decision altered the law of class action in an enduring way, and now almost all class actions must be framed as "voluntary class actions" where each plaintiff has the opportunity to opt out, choose his own attorney to represent him and pursue his individual litigation independently if he so chooses. The case indeed applies to all mass tort litigation, and all class actions, rendering mandatory class action essentially unavailable except in very rare class litigation.

Mr. Henke received his Juris Doctorate degree from the University of San Francisco, served on the USF Law Review, received the American Jurisprudence Award for Civil Procedure, and interned at the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit while in Law School.

Martindale & Hubbell ratings, elected offices in trial lawyers associations, awards and honors from professional organizations, recognition in professional journals, publications in trial lawyer journals, significant appellate victories, and experience preparing and presenting to settlement judges and juries cases in the legal subject area of the potential client's case, as well as the relevant settlements and jury verdicts the lawyer has obtained as the lead trial attorney, are all credentials that a potential client may wish to consider in comparing the qualifications of the lawyers whom he would consider to represent him, among such other qualifications as the client deems important in the lawyer who will represent him. We strongly recommend that decisions with regard to the choice of a lawyer be made on the basis of legal qualifications, and we welcome all prospective clients to inquire about our Group lawyers' qualifications.

Our Medical Malpractice Lawyers Provide the Following Attorney Disclaimers For All States of the United States.

Please read the full Terms and conditions on our Required Legal Notices page. The following is a synopsis:

Please understand that this Medical Malpractice Lawyers page, and all other pages on this site are provided for informational purposes only, describing the various practice areas discussed. The content of the pages, including this page, are not intended as legal advice and should not be interpreted as legal advice; and in particular the content should not be interpreted as legal advice as to the potential merits or viability your particular case or any particular case.

Our personal injury lawyers provide free consultations to those who contact us, but again, you must understand that if we are unable to accept your case, that will be merely a function of our law firm specific intake guidelines and should not be interpreted as a conclusion on our part that your case lacks merit or that it is not viable litigation.

Furthermore, please understand that merely reviewing this site, this web page or any of the other pages of this site, or submitting a case evaluation request, or speaking with Mr. Henke or another attorney does not and cannot create an attorney-client relationship with Mr. Henke or his law office. The only way that an attorney-client relationship can be created with Mr. Henke or his law firm is by a written attorney-client retainer agreement signed both by the client and Mr. Henke. If a case does not fall within our office intake guidelines or if it arises in another state, we may recommend or refer you to another lawyer, but please understand also that our recommending or referring you to another lawyer does not create an attorney-client relationship with Mr. Henke or his law firm. We do no supervise any litigation undertaken by any other lawyers, including attorneys or law firms to which we may recommend or refer a client. The recommendation or referral of potential client to another lawyer does not give rise to any duty or obligation or responsibility on the part of Mr. Henke or the Henke Law Office. Furthermore, every client must independently investigate the credentials of any lawyer whom he would consider to represent him, and the Henke law office does not under any circumstances accept liability for errors or ommissions of other lawyers or any other liability including in connection with his recommendation or referral of the client to another lawyer. Our Law Group, as set forth above, is merely a loose affilliation of lawyers, we are not a law firm or a partnership or association of lawyers.

It is the intent of our medical malpractice lawyers in framing this page, and the content of this Serious Injury Attorneys web site, to comply with all laws and attorney ethical rules in all states in which such rules exist. Specific Rules applicable in particular states are set forth below and on the Required Legal Notices Page of this web site, which we invite you to consider, and incorporate on this web page.

By virtue of the characteristics of Internet communication of lawyer advertisements generally, including by the ability of persons to view the advertisement beyond state borders, and indeed worldwide, the following notices are provided for all states of the United States. The state laws and state bar rules and other laws governing Internet communication generally and lawyer advertisements in particular are constantly changing. Mr. Henke, has made an effort on this general informational web page and on the Required Legal Notices page to comply with all the applicable state laws, state bar rules and other rules governing lawyers and attorneys in anticipation that this lawyer advertisement might be viewed by citizens of any state of the United States.. This attorney advertisement, authored by attorney Henke, is not intended for those whose potential cases do not have a nexus with the state of California, e.g., by virtue the cause of action arising in the state or a defendant's incorporation in the state or the location of its principal place of business in the state.

The following are particular admonitions intended to comply with the laws and rules of the identified states:

Alabama: No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers.

Colorado: Colorado does not certify attorneys as specialists in any field.

Florida: The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. Before you decide, ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.

Iowa: The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. This disclosure is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa. NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC: Memberships and offices in legal fraternities and legal societies, technical and professional licenses, and memberships in scientific, technical and professional associations and societies of law or field of practice do not mean that a lawyer is a specialist or expert in a field of law, nor do they mean that such a lawyer is necessarily any more expert or competent than any other lawyer. All potential clients are urged to make their own independent investigation and evaluation of any lawyer being considered. This notice is required by rule of the Supreme Court of Iowa.

Kentucky and Oregon: THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT.

Mississippi: The Mississippi Supreme Court advises that a decision on legal services is important and should not be based solely on advertisements.

Missouri: Neither the Supreme Court of Missouri nor the Missouri Bar reviews or approves certifying organizations or specialist designations.

Nevada: The State Bar of Nevada does not certify any lawyer as a specialist or expert.

New Mexico: LAWYER ADVERTISEMENT.

Tennessee: None of the attorneys in this firm are certified as a Civil Trial, Criminal Trial, Business Bankruptcy, Consumer Bankruptcy, Creditor's Rights, Medical Malpractice, Legal Malpractice, Accounting Malpractice, Estate Planning or Elder Law specialist by the Tennessee Commission on Continuing Legal Education and Specialization. Certification as a specialist in all other listed areas is not currently available in Tennessee.

Texas: Unless otherwise stated, Henke Law Office attorneys claiming certification in an area of law are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization.

Wyoming: The Wyoming State Bar does not certify any lawyer as a specialist or expert. Anyone considering a lawyer should independently investigate the lawyer's credentials and ability, and not rely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise.

For all those states which consider informational lawyer web pages to be advertisements, please take notice, this web site and web page is an advertisement. Mr. Henke considers the foregoing disclaimers to be good for all to consider, including that decisions with regard to your choice of lawyer should not be made based on the content of attorney advertisements, and the disclaimers in this section and on the Required Legal Notices page should be considered by those seeking counsel in all states: The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon attorney advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. The lawyers of the Law Group and Henke Law Office state: “Before you decide on an attorney to represent you, to the extent that you may consider this office, please ask us to send you free written information about our qualifications and experience.” We do not hold ourselves out to be specialists in states which certify specialists. All potential clients are urged to make their own independent investigation and evaluation of any lawyer being considered.

This web site and the instant page are not intended by Henke for the purpose of soliciting any prospective clients in any state except California for the commencement of any civil action. If attorney Henke were to file a civil lawsuit in any of the other state, he would do so only on the request of an attorney who was a member of the Bar of the other state, who would serve as the local attorney in the litigation, only in connection with pending litigation, with the consent of the client, and only with the permission of the state court for Henke to appear as the attorney for the client pro hac vice. We do not solicit clients in any such state; we will only consder inquiries from attorneys in these other states who consider that they might benefit from our expertise.

Medical Malpractice Lawyers Attorneys New York Illinois California Florida Texas Ohio Pennsylvania Michigan Georgia

The Law Group - An Affiliation of Trial Lawyers in Most States of the United States, Serving Clients in Medical Malpractice Cases against Physicians, Hospitals and other Health Care Providers.