Arizona Medical Malpractice Laws

Bad Surgical Outcome Litigation in Orlando

A lot of clients call and ask us if they can bring a case after a bad surgical result. A lot of times early on we don’t know if the bad result was the result of negligence or just a bad outcome. A lot of things can happen; infections, injuries, nerves can get cut even if the doctor doesn’t do anything wrong, but there are cases where the doctors or nurses are negligent and cause harm. So until we get the records and have them reviewed by experts, we really don’t know if you have a case. So if you have a question about whether or not you have a malpractice case, call me, Nathan Carter at Calling, Gilbert, Wright, and Carter at 1-800-49-LEGAL.

By: Nathan Carter

Medical Malpractice Claims in Phoenix

We handle medical malpractice claims. A lot of lawyers don’t. They’re very time consuming, they’re very expensive often times. We have an obligation to establish that your physician has breached the standard of care, fell below the standard of care, and that that breach has caused you injury. You may have been harmed by your physician, and you may have a viable malpractice claim, but it may not be economically worth pursuing.

Pursuing Malpractice Claims

Often times these days, medical malpractice claims take tens of thousands and we’ve had some, as much as hundreds of thousands of dollars in client costs to pursue them to conclusion. It’s gotta be a good injury, it’s gotta be significant, because otherwise, it may not be cost-effective to pursue it.

Wattel & York

If you’ve been injured, give us a call. We’ll tell you if we think we can help you out. Call is free, consultation is free. We represent you. We work on a contingency basis. That means no money up front. We get paid at the end of the case. And if we don’t collect money for you, there’s no fee.

By: David Wattel

Succeeding in a Malpractice Case in Orlando

To succeed in a medical malpractice case in Florida, there are three things you have to prove. You have to prove that the doctor was negligent and deviated or fell below the standard of care, then you have to prove that that negligence caused your harm, and then we have to prove what your damages are. So there are three things you have to prove to be successful in a malpractice case. Until we get your records and have them reviewed by experts, we don’t really know if the doctor has fallen below the standard of care. So if you have a question about that and would like us to review your records for free, call me. Nathan Carter at Colling Gilbert Wright & Carter, 1-800-49-LEGAL.

By: Nathan Carter

Hi, my name is Nathan Meyer. I’m a partner at Jaburg Wilk. My practice areas include insurance coverage, insurance bad faith, insurance UM and UIM litigation, as well as commercial litigation, professional liability litigation, and general liability litigation. There’s actually been some very favorable rulings for insurance companies regarding punitive damages. It started with a United States Supreme Court case in 2003 in Campbell. There is also recently been some Court of Appeals cases that has significantly reduced punitive damages award amounts to much more reasonable amounts in Arizona.

Reducing Punitive Damage Awards

In the United States Supreme court case “Campbell”, the court actually reduced a $145 million punitive damages award all the way down to a million dollars, or at least they said – they told the Utah Supreme Court, “We’re sending this back to you, and you need to reduce this award to something around a million dollars.”

In a recent Arizona Court of Appeals case, there was a $54 million punitive damages award. And the Court of Appeals initially reduced that from $54 million down to $620,000. Then the Arizona Supreme Court actually reduced it from $620,000 all the way down to $155,000. So it’s a substantial reduction.

Also you have another recent case called “Orellana the Prime Life Insurance Company”, and they reduced a punitive damage award from about $1.3 million all the way down to $320,000. So courts are really reducing some of these egregious punitive damages awards amounts down to something much more reasonable.

3 Factors Courts Consider When Reducing Punitive Damage Awards

In “Campbell V. State Farm”, that 2003 United States Supreme Court case, the court established three guide post a court should look at when they’re reviewing these large punitive damages awards.

One is reprehensibility, the degree of reprehensibility of the defendant’s conduct. Two is the disparity, and that’s where you get the ratio of the punitive damages to the compensatory damages. And the third is comparability to civil authorized fines, and those are usually fines authorized by statutes.

For example, in Arizona there is a maximum $50,000 fine per six month period when you violate the unfair claim settlement practices act. So those are the three things that courts look at when considering whether to reduce punitive damages.

By: Nathan D. Meyer