Eustis, FL Personal Injury Law Firms & Lawyers

Depending on the circumstances, yes, and you would take them to small claims court. The amount of the claim precludes having an attorney given the fact that the attorney will cost more than you could recover.

It is not likely that your child has a case. To successfully sue for malpractice, you need three things: 1. Evidence that the doctor/nurse deviated from acceptable standards of due care, either by act or omission. This is also referred to as negligence. A bad outcome, in of itself, is not evidence of negligence. You need a doctor to testify that the doctor/nurse was negligent. 2. Evidence that the negligence cause some harm. 3. Significant damages. If the negligence caused minor damages, it would not be economically feasible to bring a ,malpractice case, because the cost in expert witness fees would exceed your damages. I know some malpractice attorneys who require at least $500,000 in medical bills or lost wages caused by the negligence before they will consider the case. You say your child would not have suffered had the doctor's office done the job right, but you do not say what they did wrong. Remember, a bad outcome in of itself is not evidence of negligence. You need a medical doctor to say what the doctor's office did wrong. For example, all medicines have side effects, and this may be a side effect that could happen without negligence (I'm not saying it is, just that a doctor has to answer these questions). The reason I say you probably do not have case is that you say your child is now alright. Since there is no permanent harm, there is probably not enough damages to justify the expense of a malpractice suit, even if you do have a medical opinion that problem was a result of medical negligence.