A good PI lien is the core for a good PI case. Today, marginal PI attorneys are trying to downgrade the PI lien. Don’t let this happen to your office. Too often your new staff member does not know the difference between a lien or an Assignment. They need training. Otherwise the price can be non payment for your hard work.

Some devious PI attorneys will tie up your PI fees.

Dr. JRK of Orange County brought this doozie to us. Following are some gems from the “lien”:

	That the attorney is NOT a fiduciary … in other words- he has minimal legal duties to pay you or be fair;
	Nor is attorney personally responsible for your fees;
	That only 1/3 of any settlement will be safeguarded for all health care professionals…all docs have to share the 1/3 no matter what;
	And if you oppose this “lien” that the attorney’s signature on the lien, “shall be null and void as if the document was not signed.”

Wow---breathtaking what some PI attorneys will do. Or what they won’t do. For a copy of this refined ‘masterpiece’ contact johntawlian@shawnsteel.com

A drunk taxi driver, Tuvshin Vaanjav rear-ended Alfredo Trejo and his 3 passengers on a LA freeway. All four were taken by ambulance. All four were admitted to Beverly Hospital.

Dr. Gustavo Nino, DC whose effective testimony convinced the jury of his proper management of this case. In the hands of an amateur this case could have easily been worth only 10% of the jury award.

First, each client was treated individually---not in a cookie cutter fashion.

The driver, Alfredo suffered right shoulder pain. Dr. Nino referred him for an MRI and ortho who diagnosed a “partial tear of his rotator cuff.” Defendant doctor claimed the tear was “pre-existing.”

One passenger suffered a lumbar disc bulge that was somewhat pre-existing, but aggravated. Another passenger was hurt in the right hip and right elbow and severe neck pain. Defendant doctor claimed this passenger did not suffer any neck pain. The third passenger received only DC care.

In all cases defendant orthos [two of them] plus an infamous “neuroradiologist” who never saw an abnormal x-ray, were not believed by the jury.

Defendants offered a total of $130,000 for all 4 victims. The combined medical bills were about $50,000. Instead the victims opted for trial. The jury awarded $241,218 for all 4. Gotanda vs. Vaanjav: VC 056 088, Norwalk Superior Court, Judge Howard Halm. July 5, 2011.

PRACTICE TIPS

	“DRUNK CASES ARE DRAMATIC CASES FOR ANY JURY;
	WITH SMART REFERRALS FOR QUESTIONABLE EXTREMITY INJURIES…PRO-CHIROPRACTIC MD FOLLOWUP IS VITAL;
	EACH PATIENT WAS TREATED AS AN INDIVIDUAL --- NO COOKIE CUTTER DIAGNOSIS OR SIMILAR TREATMENT PLANS.