Lead Counsel independently verifies DePuy Hip Replacement attorneys in Independence by conferring with Missouri 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.
The Depuy hip replacement device, designed to last 10 to 15 years, has experienced a high failure rate occurring within five years and the manufacturer voluntarily recalled the product. Many patients have undergone revision surgery because of the failure and have experienced pain, swelling, and difficulty walking.
If your DePuy hip replacement has failed prematurely, it is in your best interest to consult an Independence lawyer who handles DePuy hip replacement cases. The lawyer can tell you if you are entitled to compensation, prepare your claim, and may achieve a settlement that is satisfactory to you instead of going to trial.
An attorney can often resolve your particular legal issue faster and better than trying to do it alone. A lawyer can help you navigate the legal system, while avoiding costly mistakes or procedural errors. You should seek out an attorney whose practice focuses on the area of law most relevant to your issue.
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.