Mitchell Leeds, LLP

Call today for a
Free Consultation


Toll Free: 877-637-1045

Recognized California
Medical Malpractice Lawyer

$68 MillionLargest Jury Verdict in Fresno County history for failure to comply with hospital standards for patient safety, leaving elderly man in permanent coma. Jury also awarded punitive damages.
$5.5 MillionSettlement for failure to diagnose acute blood loss after cancer surgery resulting in brain damage to physician
$7 MillionPlus Settlement: Negligent performance of intubation post-operatively, resulting in severe brain damage to minor child.
$10.8 MillionConfidential settlement for an adult who suffered catastrophic injury from a stroke
$22 MillionRobyn Frankel vs. Palo Alto Medical Foundation GroupJury verdict for paralysis caused to patient after an unnecessary procedure.
$4.25 MillionSettlement for failure to quickly respond to a minor plaintiff’s hyperthermia after surgery resulting in catastrophic injuries including brain damage
$4 MillionSettlement for failure to diagnose fetal distress resulting in minor plaintiff suffering from severe static encephalopathy
$5.5 MillionSettlement for failure to diagnose and treat kernicterus resulting in severe brain damage of child

Settle for More.

Free Consultations. You Don't Pay Unless We Win.

Contact Us Today for YourFree Consultation

Fill out the form below and we'll be in touch within 24 hours!

    California Medical Malpractice Damage Cap Objective of Initiative

    On March 24, 2014, California ‘s $250,000 limit on medical malpractice compensation for pain and suffering, which turned into a standard for other states about forty years ago, could be elevated under a voter initiative. Supporters stated they have amassed 830,000 names, sufficient to be eligible for the November election, encouraging changes in supposed non-financial compensation to justify inflation, efficiently increasing the cap to over $1 million. In addition, the proposal would demand drug and alcohol tests for physicians.

    If victorious, the initiative would act in opposition to California’s 1975 milestone malpractice tort liability law identified as the Medical Injury Compensation Reform Act. Trial attorneys and consumer groups had attempted frequently in the courts and the legislature to invalidate the law. Whereas the measure would revoke the pain and suffering cap, supporters stated their main objective was to better patient wellbeing. They declared doctors and hospitals were not doing enough to restrain prescription drug abuse or regulate physicians. In addition, the proposal would demand physicians to refer to a statewide prescription drug database before putting patients on medication. The measure is called the Troy and Alana Pack Patient Safety Act subsequent to two young siblings being ran down and murdered in 2003 by a woman who was inebriated and intoxicated on prescription drugs.

    Doctors and insurance corporations were contesting the initiative, stating the drug abuse conditions were put in by trial attorneys to persuade voters to pass a measure whose actual function was to build up payments in claims. The proposal, which would also request physicians to report colleagues alleged of drug or alcohol impairment, demanded no less than 504,760 names that were due on March 24, as stated by the California Secretary of State.


    lorum ipsumlorum ipsum Say

    "In over 25 years of practice on the defense side of malpractice cases, Jeff Mitchell is the attorney I fear most. He takes very good cases. Jeff has the medicine and the applicable literature down cold. He is without a doubt the best cross-examiner I have ever seen. I have paid his clients a lot of money over the years."
    - John M.

    Our Locations

    Google Analytics Alternative