Armstrong Olives Case Summary

Additional Damages– The Courts felt that the employer owes an obligation of good faith and fair dealing in the way in which it dismisses an employee. They did not condone terminating employees in a callous and insensitive way and showing no regard for well-being when terminating an employee. The plaintiff Mr. Beatty stated that his termination was carried out in a dishonest, unfair and insensitive way even though the termination was “without cause”. He was called to Mr. Lebeter’s office and informed of his dismissal and given his letter of termination. He stated this

Gonzales was first employed by the Plaintiff in this case on December 2, 2014. He met with the Plaintiff on January 12, 2015. He discussed with the Plaintiff her prior medical history and performed a physical examination. He then reviewed the Plaintiff’s medical records.

Laurence Kaye (“Kaye”), appellant, an attorney, represented Linda Wilson-Gaskins (“Wilson-Gaskins”), appellee, in a wrongful termination lawsuit filed against Wilson-Gaskins’s former employer, Government Employees Insurance Co. (“GEICO”). Following that representation, Wilson-Gaskins filed a complaint against Kaye alleging “legal malpractice.” The Circuit Court for Montgomery County granted summary judgment in favor of Kaye and dismissed Wilson-Gaskins’s complaint. Wilson-Gaskins appealed the dismissal of her claim. We affirmed the judgment of the Circuit Court and held that Wilson-Gaskins failed to make a prima facie case for professional negligence. We further held that a release contained in a settlement agreement between the parties

Applicant’s attorney, Mr. Juan Vera, appeared representing the applicant’s interest. Court reporting duties were provided by Ms. Elizabeth Maeyama, License No. 12060. Interpreting services were provided by Ms. Berta ZeFrench, Certification No. 36353581. The deposition started at approximately 2:24 p.m. and lasted until 3:15 p.m. The applicant testified that she arrived at applicant’s attorney’s office at 1:00 p.m. to prepare for her deposition; therefore, I anticipate applicant’s attorney’s office’s §5710 invoice to be for no more than two hours and 15 minutes. I will make a more specific recommendation regarding the yet to

The record presents no real issue of materialistic facts that Orleans Regional Hospital did not employ over 100 employees, this caused Orleans Regional Hospital to be pursued as an employer to the WARN Act. Most of the employees who were still employed at North Louisiana Regional Hospital Partnership to become employees for Brentwood, which also operated in the same physical location as North Louisiana Regional Hospital Partnership. They even had the extent of the same phone number. Both hospitals treated patients with the same conditions including psychiatric and substance abuse disorders which lead to liabilities.. The defendant had also failed to provide court with detailed information on how the total number of hours claimed attorneys fees were unreasonable. The district court however found the, reasonable for the work performed. The defendants’ false allegation that the entries are unreasonable did not persuade them that the district court abused its power and kept matters private causing

The undersigned attended the Lien Conference held at the Fresno Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board on May 11, 2017. The undersigned appeared on behalf of Mr. Rod McClelland. Mr. McClelland had an unavoidable calendar conflict on the day of the hearing. If you have any questions regarding this Lien Conference, please do not hesitate to contact either myself or Mr. McClelland.

Ms. Almanza claimed she researched and provided the claimant’s entire personnel file for this investigation and stated she was not aware of any industrial-related injuries associated with the claimants said injuries, by noting that no treating physicians ever provided any causation or the implied injuries. She provided proof with the claimant’s personnel file taken into as evidence by stating there was no medical evidence, doctors note or request of modified work duties to suggest any medical

On Thursday, November 9, 2017m at 10:45 a.m., the Investigator traveled to conduct an employer level AOE/COE investigation at the Insureds business; El Wester Lawn Mower Shop, located at 5663 York Blvd., Highland Park CA 90042-2550. We received two separate r/s’s from Mr. Fernando Rodriguez and Mrs. Cinthia Rodriguez. They confirmed the claimant’s full-time employment at their company as Certified Mechanic as of December 2012. They established that their company performs minor tune-ups on mini-bikes, mopeds, motorized bicycles that they charge $50.00; coupled with the repairs that they regularly perform on the lawn mower and other motorized gardening equipment. Mr. Rodriguez alleges on June 22, 2017, at 11:30 a.m., the claimant got through

The parties in this case include Bitty Baker the owner of Biddy’s Tea House and Crossantarie. The other party is an employee Natalie Attired. The action that is bringing these parties to court is Natalie got a full-sleeve tattoo and Biddy Baker wanted her to remove the tattoo or she would be fired since the tattoo is visible with the uniform and the older clientele would be disgusted by it. Natalie Attired is seeking unemployment compensation benefits. Natalie began working at Biddy’s in May 2009 as a waitress. Biddy’s evaluates employee’s performances every three months. Natalie has four evaluations. These evaluations show Natalie continuing to improve in her performance. Natalie was never written up for performance issues. There is no employee handbook or written policy about employee conduct or appearance. In June 2010 Natalie got a full-sleeve tattoo that covered her entire right arm from her shoulder to her elbow. The tattoo was partially covered by her uniform although lower part of the tattoo was visible when Natalie wore the short sleeve uniform. Biddy Baker was upset about the tattoo and asked Natalie to remove the tattoo or she would be fired. Natalie did not remove the tattoo and worked the rest of the week and was given a termination notice on Friday. Natalie filed for unemployment compensation July 2010. The claim was denied by the New Mexico Employment Security Board, because they stated that Natalie was fired

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.

On Wednesday, February 8, 2017, at 12:35 p.m., the Investigator traveled to Allegra Staffing Inc., to receive Vice Presidents Wyatt Gordon Higbee's recorded statement about Claimant Soledad Monroy's employment with his temp agency. Mr. Higbee received notification on April 25, 2016, of a workers' compensation CT: 6-2-13 thru 4-5-16 from the law offices of Nizinski & Associates, after Ms. Monroy’s release from her first and only full-time assignment; Myojo USA on April 5, 2015. The co-employer released her due to poor work performance but is still considered an employee. After Myojo USA she has not been reassigned.

On Tuesday, September 12, 2017, at 7:30 AM, we received a phone call from the Rose Paving Company’s Human Resources Manager, Ms. Alisa Marks. During a brief discussion with her, we explained to her our reasoning to retain the claimant’s personnel file including his hourly and statement wages for our investigation. Ms. Marks questioned our reasoning as to why that the claimant’s personnel file and his wages were needed and continually reiterated that the insurance company, CNA had this information and that they should have provided this information to us. She then proceeded to instruct us to contact CNA to ascertain this information and that she was not going to provide us with the information requested based upon the HIPPA compliance that we

The claims management team of Assistant Vice President, Bobby Taylor and Claims Manager, Sherri’ Caldwell-Ventimiglia has over 20 years of experience in managing and adjusters workers’ compensation claims. Based on my discussions with both individuals and our review of the claims files, both demonstrate they are highly engaged with the Republic program. Sedgwick’s front-line team leaders have no working caseloads allowing them to focus their attention on their claim team’s inventory and their technical staff. This, along with capped caseloads of 125 claims per examiner, directly influences the final outcome of the claims. In addition to the above, Sedgwick’s claim teams are supported by several resource units within the Sedgwick claims operation; telephonic nurse case manager, subrogation & fraud units. All three units are designed to assume many of the examiner’s responsibilities; managing medical, investigating third party and fraud. Off loading these crucial responsibilities to other units, provides the examiners the opportunity to expend their energy managing the injured worker back to the workforce and direct the claim to final resolution. All the above is designed to control claim

This project will analyze torts in the workplace. In any professional setting or work environment, one must be able to recognize exposures, risks and civil matters. This applies for employers and employees. Both parties are responsible for the safety of each other, and those around them. The ability to recognize exposures can help these party’s to protect themselves. Not only will this knowledge or idea become a great tool for the success of their everyday activities, but also a success for the organization. Moving on to the topic, torts are civil wrongs, other than breach of contract (Lau & Johnson, 2014). When involved in the workplace, there can be many factors that can hurt an employee, physically or mentally. This is why supervision is necessary, and must take part during the training or introduction of a new