Lead Counsel independently verifies Drug & Defective Medical Devices attorneys in Colton by conferring with California bar associations and conducting annual reviews to confirm that an attorney practices in their advertised practice areas and possesses a valid bar license for the appropriate jurisdictions.
A medical device is anything doctors, surgeons, and other medical practitioners employ to treat an injury, disability or an illness, such as hip and joint replacements. Defective medical devices are those that have manufacturing or design problems or are marketed without proper warnings.
If you have been harmed by a medical device, you should consult with a product liability lawyer who handles defective medical device claims. He or she can tell you if you have a case and how strong a case it is. The lawyer will prepare your claim, sue the responsible party, and try to negotiate a settlement on your behalf if possible.
In legal practice, experience matters. An experienced attorney will likely have handled issues similar to yours many, many times. Therefore, after listening to your situation, the attorney should have a reasonable idea of the time line for a case like yours and the likely resolution.
An experienced lawyer should be able to communicate a basic “road map” on how to proceed. The lawyer should be able to walk you through the anticipated process, key considerations, and potential pitfalls to avoid. Once you’ve laid out the facts of your situation to the lawyer, he/she should be able to frame expectations and likely scenarios to help you understand your legal issue.
For most consumer legal issues, the size of the practice is much less important than the experience, competence, and reputation of the attorney(s) handling your case. Among the most important factors when choosing an attorney are your comfort level with the attorney or practice and the attorney’s track record in bringing about quick, successful resolutions to cases similar to yours.
Personal jurisdiction – Requirement that a particular court have authority over a person, in order to bind that person to the judgment of the court, based on minimum contacts. International Shoe Co v. Washington is a landmark Supreme Court case outlining the scope of a state court’s reach in personal jurisdiction.