Dic, Disseminated Intravascular Coagulation

[TGrossenbacher]

My question involves malpractice in the state of AZ. My wife passed away April 2019 from a routine lung biopsy. She was diagnosed with Lupus and Fibromyalgia 4 years prior. She was admitted to Abrazo Arrowhead for difficulty breathing. While there she was diagnosed with COPD. Emphysema and Pneumonia. She did smoke but only 5 to 7 cigarettes a day. While there she was treated for Sepsis once but I believe she was in Septic shock several times. She was also being treated for a kidney stone which led to severe bleeding. There are other circumstances I won't discuss in this type of forum. But after speaking to her Rhuemotologist I'm convinced that she suffered from DIC or Dissemenated Intravascular Coagulation. The failure to test for it caused a massive bleed and she coded. An autopsy was not performed.
I understand the difficulty of this case. I've spoken to 7 lawyers. None of them would come on board.
I need a lawyer that sees beyond the complexities of this case. Someone either retired, looking for a challenge or female lawyer looking to secure justice for a mother and wife. We have 2 college age girls. My youngest graduated high school without her mother.
Please contact me Terry @ 480 645 6575

[PayrolGuy]

I'm very sorry for the loss of your wife but trust me on this. You don't want a lawyer that is trolling of clients on legal forums.

[llworking]

My question involves malpractice in the state of AZ. My wife passed away April 2019 from a routine lung biopsy. She was diagnosed with Lupus and Fibromyalgia 4 years prior. She was admitted to Abrazo Arrowhead for difficulty breathing. While there she was diagnosed with COPD. Emphysema and Pneumonia. She did smoke but only 5 to 7 cigarettes a day. While there she was treated for Sepsis once but I believe she was in Septic shock several times. She was also being treated for a kidney stone which led to severe bleeding. There are other circumstances I won't discuss in this type of forum. But after speaking to her Rhuemotologist I'm convinced that she suffered from DIC or Dissemenated Intravascular Coagulation. The failure to test for it caused a massive bleed and she coded. An autopsy was not performed.
I understand the difficulty of this case. I've spoken to 7 lawyers. None of them would come on board.
I need a lawyer that sees beyond the complexities of this case. Someone either retired, looking for a challenge or female lawyer looking to secure justice for a mother and wife. We have 2 college age girls. My youngest graduated high school without her mother.
Please contact me Terry @ 480 645 6575

This forum is not a referral service for lawyers. If you have had 7 lawyers pass on the case the odds of you finding anyone that wants to take it on would be pretty slim. The expenses alone for expert opinions would be very expensive. Plus, no autopsy was done.

[pg1067]

I've spoken to 7 lawyers. None of them would come on board.

Here's the thing. Medmal cases are handled on contingency. That means that a lawyer must determine that the contingent fee he/she is likely to receive will justify the amount of time spent on the case. A standard contingent fee is 1/3, so let's say a case is worth $100,000. The lawyer will receive $33,333.33, and let's say the lawyer values his/her time at $300 per hour. That means the case will be worthwhile if the lawyer believes he/she can achieve the $100,000 recovery in less than 111.11 hours. Keep in mind that the lawyer also has to take the risk of advancing expert witness fees since medmal cases require expert medical testimony, so that factors into things as well. If seven lawyers are not willing to take the case, that's a pretty good indicator that either there are problems with the liability issues or the case isn't worth too much (or both).

I need a lawyer that sees beyond the complexities of this case.

Not sure what this means, but contingent fee cases involve a relatively simple cost-benefit analysis (as explained above). If "complexities of the case" means difficulties associated with proving the case, no intelligent lawyer is going to disregard those things.

Someone either retired, looking for a challenge or female lawyer looking to secure justice for a mother and wife.

I've been a lawyer for nearly 20 years and have been in the legal field for over 30. I've never heard of a lawyer taking a case solely because he/she was "looking for a challenge." I'm also a bit curious why a male "lawyer looking to secure justice" wouldn't be good enough.

Sorry to pee in your soup, but unrealistic expectations will do more harm than good.