08192017Headline:

Boston, Massachusetts

HomeMassachusettsBoston

Email Staff Writer Staff Writer on LinkedIn Staff Writer on Twitter Staff Writer on Facebook
Staff Writer
Staff Writer
Contributor •

Choosing a Personal Injury Lawyer

Comments Off

A claimant will often request the advice of his or her attorney when evaluating the value of a particular claim or case. I assume that this is because the attorney has greater exposure to jury verdicts, medical issues, case law, statutes, issues relating to liability and potential weaknesses–all factors that impact case valuation. In choosing a personal injury lawyer, it is important that the attorney does in fact have experience and knowledge of these areas for the kind of case for which you are asking advice.

Legal practice is highly specialized and, the more complex a case, the more specialization that is necessary. In product liability claims, pharmaceutical claims and toxic torts, the defendants will often be a large corporations. Managers of large corporations are often very careful about many aspects of the business and even more careful about mistakes: careful against making mistakes and careful against disclosing mistakes. With this in mind, any attorney seeking to prove corporate fault must have almost as good an understanding of the business as the manager who may be attempting to cover up mistakes. Typically there will be a fairly smart person or a number of smart people who will have had an opportunity to create an explanation for the circumstances causing injury well before the lawyers arrive. Your lawyer must, for example, be able to identify inconsistencies and unusual behavior in the evidence in order to find the specific mistake and the cause of the mistake.

Each “type” of case is different–and in fact, each case is different. In a medical malpractice case, the attorney must have specialized knowledge of medicial diagnosis and treatment at issue. He or she must have an excellent understanding of the particular procedure or diagnosis about which one is complaining. This is just a start as, for example, if the claim is that a medical professional may have missed a diagnosis in rendering treatment, it must be established that proper diagnosis would likely have led to successful treatment of the underlying disease. A compentent attorney who is specialized in these particular fields should be able to identify and resolve these issues.

For additional examples of the specific specialization needed for various types of cases, please email me through boston.injuryboard.com. Thanks for reading.