Lead Counsel independently verifies Pradaxa attorneys in El Paso by conferring with Texas 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.
Pradaxa is prescribed to patients who have a common type of heart rhythm abnormality termed AF (non-valvular atrial fibrillation) to reduce the risk of stroke and blood clotting. However, Pradaxa has been linked to excessive bleeding that can be fatal.
You may have a case against the drug maker or distributors if you have taken Pradaxa and suffered one or more of its side effects, including sever or uncontrollable bleeding, coughing up blood, blood clots, and unusual bleeding from the gums. An attorney experienced in Pradaxa lawsuits and the pharmaceutical industry can determine if your situation warrants legal action.
No matter what your legal issue may be, it is always best to seek legal help early in the process. An attorney can help secure what is likely to be the best possible outcome for your situation and avoid both unnecessary complications or errors.
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.