Legal Question in Medical Malpractice in California

Within one year of the date of the malpractice or the date of discovery of the malpractice (which also must be within three years of the date of the malpractice). There is a an exception for minors under six years (they get three years to file, or until they turn age 8, whichever is longer).

One year if the patient is an adult. Your 'belief' is not sufficient grounds to file. When claiming medical malpractice, your claim must be supported by the opinion of a doctor who is a 'qualified expert' in that field of medicine, who is prepared to say the treatment fell below the acceptable standard of care, and that you suffered legally recognized damage. Neither your opinion about malpractice, nor mine, is relevant nor 'proof' of malpractice. What may seem obvious to you and I is not necessarily a conclusion an expert will support. Would your other treating doctor[s] be willing to provide that opinion? If not, you can get independent experts for that purpose if your treating doctors say there is negligence but they won't testify. I can provide referrals and assistance if necessary. If you obtain such an expert's opinion, and if you determine that you have a case with MERIT [provable case with a likelihood of winning], VALUE [substantial provable damages, such as medical injuries and financial losses] and COLLECTABILITY [defendant with substantial assets or insurance to collect against], then you would have grounds to bring your legal claims in a lawsuit. Keep in mind that you have only one year maximum from 'notice' or learning of the suspected malpractice to bring suit.

If serious about hiring counsel to help in this, and if this is in SoCal courts, feel free to contact me.