Annual Fund Case Study

During the examination, the Plaintiff told him her pain was a three out of ten, with a one being the lowest and ten being the highest. The results of his neurological examination and examination on the Plaintiff’s range of motion was normal. With regard to the Plaintiff’s pre-existing history, the only records he reviewed were those from Dr. Fichtel. He did not review the Plaintiff’s medical records from 2000. He testified that based on his review of an MRI taken prior to the Plaintiff’s 2007 surgery and a CT scan taken one year after the surgery, he only saw a “very mild” progression of her cervical condition at C3-4, C4-5 and

The Plaintiffs felt that since the hospital was licensed and accredited that they should be held responsible for their employees and their actions. It states in the regulations that any infraction of the bylaws imposes liability for the injury. At any time if Dr. Alexander had questions or concerns he could have reached out to an expert in this field to consult

This proceeding before a Medical Review Panel, pursuant to La. Rev. Stat. §§ 40:1299.41, et seq., is brought by Jimmy Martinez against multiple health care providers, including Dr. Mark Kappelman, a qualified health care provider entitled to have the claim filed against him reviewed by this Panel. The claims made against Dr. Kappelman are mere allegations without support and proof. In a medical malpractice case the burden of proof is on the claimant to establish that Dr. Mark Kappelman’s actions in this matter fell below the standard of care required of similar health care providers. The claimant also bears the burden of proving whether any such alleged act or acts of negligence caused any injuries. It is the duty of the

At this time, I also approached the possibility of settling this case pursuant to a compromise and release. As you know, the Stipulations with Request for Award we were ready to accept were for 24% PD paid at a rate of $160.00 per week. The stipulation was for the applicant’s lumbar spine and left knee only. The monetary value of this stipulation would be $15,280.00. I indicated to the applicant’s attorney that I had authority to settle the claim pursuant to a Compromise and Release for $24,000.00. After further discussions, the applicant’s attorney took the Stipulations and indicated he would discuss the Compromise and Release with the applicant.

Ms. Larios claimed she was not sure if the Claimant was represented by legal counsel since she has not been served with legal documentation. She claimed she received Chiropractic invoicing from the Claimant’s physicians that she turned over to her claims adjuster at Am Trust North American. She does not recall any details about the invoices.

Due to the incident of 11/20/11, the plaintiff is alleging she sustained significant injuries as result of the insured operator’s failure to properly park the bus. Since the date of loss and over a three year period, the plaintiff had undergone multiple surgeries involving the neck, back, both knees and left foot. The plaintiff has been diagnosis with multiple herniated disc of the cervical spine requiring a discectomy, multiple herniated disc of the lumbar spine resulting in a spinal fusion, right & left medial meniscus and ACL tears requiring surgical intervention and a metatarsal fusion of the left foot. In addition to the aforementioned injuries, the plaintiff has experienced ongoing episodes of depression and incontinence. .

Regarding negotiations & settlement and the decision to litigate this claim. Harco made several attempts to settle this loss throughout the 2015 calendar year. On 01/26/15 the plaintiff made a policy limit demand of $5,000,000 with Harco making an initial offer of $725,000. Thereafter, six more attempts were made to settle this loss with no success. On 11/24/15 the plaintiff’s served a Statutory Offer of Settlement requesting $2,125,000, Harco responded with an offer of $1,800,000, to which the plaintiff did not respond leading to trial. Harco’s opinioned, with damages (medical, lost wages & pain & suffering) being capped in Colorado excluding damages for disfigurement/impairment, they did foresee the value awarded by the jury. Further noting the injury did not prevent the plaintiff from conducting normal activity (contrary to defense counsels’ 10/22/15 report). During trial proceedings, Harco suggested a Hi –Low of $2,250,000 - $1,250,000, however the plaintiff’s never responded to their

As I anticipated and previously advised you of my prediction on the issue, the Court is allowing the plaintiff to appear for her deposition after the court deadline and has recommended that the parties cooperate with each other. We are taking Lauren Cherny’s deposition tomorrow and Roger Castino is meeting me on March 2 for the inspection. We will incorporate Ms. Cherny’s testimony and Roger’s opinion into our evaluation of the potential damages and the likelihood of a verdict against us. Your insurer, USLI, will use our evaluation as one of several factors considered in determining what to offer in this case, but keep in mind that it prefers to settle cases rather than pay its attorneys to try cases. At this time, I do not know what the

As you know, this case is established for the left lower leg, abdomen and left hand with an average weekly wage of $532.80. You advised me that one of the claimant’s attending physicians had contacted you and wanted authorization for a left shoulder MRI. You advised him that the left shoulder was not established as part of the case. Ultimately, the doctor filed an MG-2 when you denied that on that grounds.

Jeri shared that the first topic has already been picked for the group: Employee Orientation/Reorientation, CPI, and CPR. There was a small group that met after Tuesday’s meeting and an additional meeting with Nancy the next morning that choose this topic and developed the processes listed below:

This 57 year old claimant is filing a Concurrent claim alleging disability since 07/31/2014 due to osteoarthritis, degenerative disc disease, pain in the low back, hips, and spine.

Mr. Villanueva states he was not employed with the company in 2004, and could not provide any details of how the claimant sustained a right hand injury. Nerveless, he alleged that the claimant never made mention of this particular injury or complained about any pre-existing pain or discomfort she had as a result of this injury.

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.

The plaintiff was treated for a left shoulder injury after the injury after the accident. In August of 2013, Dr. Olvey performed a left shoulder arthroscopy and bicep tenotomy, with subacromial decompression. The plaintiff returned to physical therapy after the shoulder surgery.

On November 28, 2012 the Court of Appeals of Tennessee At Nashville reviewed Ramin Saeedpour v. Virtual Medical Solutions, LLC, ET AL. This case is about contracts and full filling each condition of the contract. In this case Mr. Saeedpour a Chiropractor in Nashville, TN entered a contact with Virtual Medical Solutions of medical equipment for a refund of the purchase price of the equipment with money back guarantee. Virtual Medical Solutions defense is Mr. Saeedpour did not meet the conditions of the contract by not filling the survey with each possible patient.