Tabert Medical Group Case Summary

The Association alleged in its lawsuit that certain elements of the property were not constructed in a good and workmanlike manner including 1) failure to properly install and flash windows and other exterior penetrations; 2) properly caulk the exterior penetrations; 3) failure to properly install the weather resistive barrier; 4) failure to properly to install the stucco exterior; 5) failure to properly install the EIFS exterior and 6) failure to install brick exterior.

She alleged from the time she has known of Mr. Arauz she never experienced anything unusual about him until his last day of work on October 12, 2016. She claimed that from what she is aware of, Mr. Arauz has never reported, demonstrated, exhibited, or complained about any reportable mishaps at work, which resulted in an injury. She said that the injuries which he is alleging were never brought to her attention by either Mr. Arauz or with any other co-workers who may have witnessed something else differently.

Witnesses Gustavo and Armando said they refute the claimant’s CT: 6/2014 through 6/2015 which included cumulate trauma of injuries to the claimant's shoulders, back, lower extremities, left elbow, hands, fingers, legs, knees, stress and anxiety. The also contested the specific claim of injury that allegedly occurred on 2/2015 when the claimant alleged injured his back, lower extremities and left knee at work.

Background: Based on the given complaint, on the 28th of March in 2014 the Plaintiff, Linda D. Daugherty suffered an injury on the property of Rauleigh J. Ringer at 814 N. Liberty Street, Alexandria, IN. She is claiming her injury was a result of negligence spawning from the actions, or lack thereof, by Mr. Ringer and Casual Lifestyles Realty, Inc., in which the connection of these three parties has not been clarified with certainty within the claim. The Defendants, by counsel, Mark Maynard, and, pursuant to Rule 12(E) of the Indiana Rules of Trial Procedure, moved for a more definite statement of the Plaintiff’s Complaint. Mark Maynard argues if said Plaintiff could amend her complaint that is supposedly so vague and ambiguous, the newfound clarity would help the defense frame a response to said Plaintiff’s claim. No other information could be

The claimant was involved in a serious work place injury on November 13, 2012. During the incident the claimant had a traumatic post left hip arthoplasty, muscle atrophy, knee surgery, and ultimately a left, below the knee amputation. In discussions with Attorney Larrabee he contends that the claimant has also sustained a specific loss regarding the right leg. As a result of the incident the claimant sustained a right lateral tibial plateau fracture, which was reduced with a plate and screw.

During the time of the claimant met with Jessica McClellan and Supervisor Jovany Villanueva, he alleged that the claimant never reported or complained about her alleged injuries that she had in her claim. He states prior to the claimant being called into the office on 2-21-15, he had not seen or heard the claimant complain of being injured at work prior to when being called into the office. The claimant did not attempt to either contact him or anyone else he is aware of that knew of the claimants injuries.

Ms. Yu claimed during her interview that she had no information to give as to the claimant’s evaluation, attendance and her past employment history. Furthermore, she had no information about the claimant’s medical history, injuries at previous employers, or any other work related injuries with this employer.

Our investigation combined with the Insured's two Supervisor’s, Ms. Levi and Ms. Mary Schweiger the claimant’s actual last day of work occurred on 10/16/2015 when the Claimant worked without any complaints of pain or discomfort as a result of his job as a PSR Agent. Ms. Levi alleged the Claimant called in sick on 10/16/2015 as Ms. Schwiger said the Claimant never returned to work on 10/17/2015.

The claimant had stated before she started at Yamaha Motor Inc. she did not report her injuries to the Human Resources Department or her supervisor when hired on 9-5-12. She stated if she did, it might have compromised her chances in gaining employment with theYamaha Motors Corporation

Plaintiff further asserts that the Defendant breached its duty of care to her by: (1) “failing to fix a hazardous condition within a reasonable time;” (2) “failing to adequately warn plaintiff of a hazardous condition;” and (3) “otherwise failing to exercise reasonable and due care under the circumstances.” The Plaintiff is seeking compensatory damages in the amount of two hundred thousand dollars, plus interest and costs.

Mr. Ortiz states that the claimant did not provide a history of being injured at work and never indicated to him that he had injuries associated with the injuries associated with the claim. He said the claimant never exhibited any physical complications when he performed his job. He stated, “I never saw nothing wrong with him.”

I have had an opportunity to review the Notice of Claim filed in the above-referenced matter. In addition, you and I had spoke about this claim on 06/02/17. You confirmed the plaintiff, Clarice Martin, is an employee of the Irvington UFSD and that she was injured while in the course of her employment on 03/16/17, when she was struck by a special ed student.

As requested, I have reviewed the facts of the above-captioned file, along with the applicable law and summarized same in this memorandum. Mrs. Mary Smith suffered an injury to her right ankle in an automobile accident on 10/3/95. After surgery and months of rehabilitation, Mrs. Smith still suffers daily. I have researched the facts regarding a personal injury action against Paul Joseph, as well as a medical malpractice action against the medical providers.

Ms. Martin provided her r/s when she observed the claimant having a seizure next to her hospital bed. No account of a head injury was mentioned or found when claimant, Ms. Alcala, collapsed to the ground. Mr. Connelius confirmed he just arrived for work when he an employee informed him about Ms. Alcala's seizure. After assessing her medical condition, he found her to be unresponsive, at which time she was transported to a local hospital and has not returned to work.

There has been an error in the court system. Apparently, the court has associated this date of injury with a different issuer. We have been in constant contact with the applicant’s attorney to correct this issue. The employer on the Application for Adjudication of Claim clearly listed Salinas Tallow Company, LLC as the employer, but for some reason, the court had a different employer listed. As soon as we fix this error, we will file a Notice of Representation. I will then file an Answer to the Application for Adjudication of Claim, specifically asserting our statute of limitation