Daily Archives:

Court Rules Medical in Malpractice Case

Our firm was NOT involved in this case. This week the Court of Appeals announced its decision in a medical malpractice case. The plaintiff alleged she was suffered a systematic allergic reaction from a stent inserted in her coronary artery. She brought suit against the doctor who inserted the stent.

Eller Law Firm PLLC

206-801-1188

All claims must be brought to court within the statute of limitations. We welcome inquiries, but contacting our office does not obligate us to take your case.

Case results reported on this site, while accurate, are not a prediction or estimate of the results for you in your case. Each case presents unique and specific factual and legal circumstances. Past performance does not guarantee future performance.

The material on this website is not a substitute for legal advice. Information is general in nature and intended for a general audience. We do not cite to legal authority, or follow formal citation formats except in “Pocket Brief” segments of the website.

Even the more detailed “Pocket Brief” segments are only summaries of law and should not be relied upon without legal counsel.

Legal information is accurate and up to date when posted, but some information may be overtaken by subsequent changes in the law.

Personal Injury Statute of Limitations
Hold Harmless Agreements
Chronic Pain Conditions
한국어 Korean Speaking Paralegal
Personal Injury FAQs
What is Mahler Money?
Landlord Liability for Personal Injury
Negligence
Logging Injuries

Eller Law Firm PLLC

A SiteOrigin Theme