In
Copyright Since September 11,
2000This web site is in no manner affiliated with any Kaiser entity and the for profit Permanente
Permission is granted to mirror this web site -
Please acknowledge where the material was obtained.
Link for Translation of the Kaiser Papers
kaiserpapers.com/legalstuff/
LAWSUITS INVOLVING KAISER AND
THE FOR PROFIT PERMANENTE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS
Managed
Care Liability in Texas - by George Parker Young, written in 1999
provides a great deal of information on this topic and specific to what
took place in the state of Texas.
http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
Here a part of the introduction:
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
In a 1996 concurrence, Texas Supreme Court Justice Raul Gonzales wrote:
“Recent developments in the health care industry have diffused the medical chain of authority for the sake of containing costs and increasing profits. For example, there are reports that in managed care systems like health maintenance organizations (HMOs), physicians are subjected to gag orders and are given financial incentives not to perform
certain procedures or make referrals to outside specialists. Some HMOs hire bargain-rate labs and allow nonphysicians to decide what is or is not appropriate treatment based solely on economic considerations, not on the best interests of the patient....Unless the Legislature acts in a comprehensive way to address this issue, courts will be forced to re-think traditional notions of duty and standards of care, leading to fundamental doctrinal shifts gauged both to protect victims of medical malpractice and to shield physicians from frivolous malpractice claims.”
and here are some excerpts related specifically to Kaiser Permanente cases in the state of Texas:
Appendix 2: U.S. District Judge Means’ Unpublished Opinion in White v. Kaiser
Appendix 3: U.S. District Judge Fitzwater's Unpublished Opinion in Ravenell v. Kaiser
Appendix 7: U.S. District Judge McBryde’s Published Opinion in Cyr & Lacker v. Kaiser
Appendix 8: Shea and Class Action Patterned on Shea: Ehlmann v. Kaiser; First Amended
Complaint and U.S. District Judge Means’ Unpublished Order
Appendix 12: Judge Jeff Walker’s Summary Judgment of No ERISA Conflict Preemption in Cyr &
Lacker v. Kaiser
Appendix 15: TDI Consent Order: Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas
Appendix 21: U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay’s Order denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand in Silva
v. Kaiser Permanente
Appendix 25: Steven Andrew Olsen Coalition for Patients’ Rights v. Kaiser, Cause No. 302263 (Sup.
Ct. Cal. Mar. 26, 1999); Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Demurrer to The First
Amended Complaint
Rice v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan of Tex., Inc., Civil Action No. 3:99-CV-0714-L, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, DALLAS DIVISION, September 27, 2000, Decided, September 27, 2000, Filed; September 28, 2000,
Entered on Docket
OVERVIEW: State claims for negligence and medical malpractice against health plan affiliates were not preempted by ERISA because plaintiffs challenged quality of health plan, not the manner in which it was administered.
CORE TERMS: health care, preempted, containment, removal, cause of action, subject matter jurisdiction, federal question, state law, employee benefit plan, medical malpractice...
http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
Here a part of the introduction:
INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW
In a 1996 concurrence, Texas Supreme Court Justice Raul Gonzales wrote:
“Recent developments in the health care industry have diffused the medical chain of authority for the sake of containing costs and increasing profits. For example, there are reports that in managed care systems like health maintenance organizations (HMOs), physicians are subjected to gag orders and are given financial incentives not to perform
certain procedures or make referrals to outside specialists. Some HMOs hire bargain-rate labs and allow nonphysicians to decide what is or is not appropriate treatment based solely on economic considerations, not on the best interests of the patient....Unless the Legislature acts in a comprehensive way to address this issue, courts will be forced to re-think traditional notions of duty and standards of care, leading to fundamental doctrinal shifts gauged both to protect victims of medical malpractice and to shield physicians from frivolous malpractice claims.”
and here are some excerpts related specifically to Kaiser Permanente cases in the state of Texas:
Appendix 2: U.S. District Judge Means’ Unpublished Opinion in White v. Kaiser
Appendix 3: U.S. District Judge Fitzwater's Unpublished Opinion in Ravenell v. Kaiser
Appendix 7: U.S. District Judge McBryde’s Published Opinion in Cyr & Lacker v. Kaiser
Appendix 8: Shea and Class Action Patterned on Shea: Ehlmann v. Kaiser; First Amended
Complaint and U.S. District Judge Means’ Unpublished Order
Appendix 12: Judge Jeff Walker’s Summary Judgment of No ERISA Conflict Preemption in Cyr &
Lacker v. Kaiser
Appendix 15: TDI Consent Order: Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas
Appendix 21: U.S. District Judge Sam Lindsay’s Order denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Remand in Silva
v. Kaiser Permanente
Appendix 25: Steven Andrew Olsen Coalition for Patients’ Rights v. Kaiser, Cause No. 302263 (Sup.
Ct. Cal. Mar. 26, 1999); Plaintiff’s Opposition to Defendants’ Demurrer to The First
Amended Complaint
Rice v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan of Tex., Inc., Civil Action No. 3:99-CV-0714-L, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, DALLAS DIVISION, September 27, 2000, Decided, September 27, 2000, Filed; September 28, 2000,
Entered on Docket
OVERVIEW: State claims for negligence and medical malpractice against health plan affiliates were not preempted by ERISA because plaintiffs challenged quality of health plan, not the manner in which it was administered.
CORE TERMS: health care, preempted, containment, removal, cause of action, subject matter jurisdiction, federal question, state law, employee benefit plan, medical malpractice...
Silva v. Kaiser Permanente, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3-98-CV-0767-L, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS, DALLAS DIVISION, May 25, 1999, Decided, May 25, 1999, Filed; May 26, 1999, Entered on Docket
OVERVIEW: Plaintiffs who sought remand to state court of their action alleging medical malpractice and negligence were unsuccessful, because of preemption by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.
CORE TERMS: removal, preempted, containment, utilization, state law, lymphoma, doctors, subject matter jurisdiction, federal question, implicated...
Sibley v. Kaiser Found. Health Plan, No. 06-98-00157-CV, COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, SIXTH DISTRICT, TEXARKANA, August 11, 1999, Submitted, August 12, 1999, Decided
OVERVIEW: Defendant accused of employment discrimination moved for summary judgment after disproving an essential element of plaintiff's cause; the burden shifted to plaintiff, who failed to raise an issue of fact about the element negated.
CORE TERMS: summary judgment, cause of action, outrageous, termination, terminated, duty, emotional distress, discharged, pet, racial
discrimination...
Dinkins v. Dallas Pathology Assocs., No. 05-98-02104-CV, COURT OF APPEALS OF TEXAS, FIFTH DISTRICT, DALLAS, April 22, 1999, Opinion Filed, PURSUANT TO THE TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS SHALL NOT BE CITED AS
AUTHORITY BY COUNSEL OR BY A COURT. http://legalstuff.kaiserpapersThe Kaiser Papers A Public Service Web Sitekaiserpapers.com/legalstuff//afterreform.html
Cyr/Lacker v. Kaiser Foundation
Health Plan of Texas A recent case involving claims of negligent selection, credentialing and monitoring is Cyr v. Kaiser
Foundation Health Plan.202 In Cyr, Barbara suffered severe cardiac injuries and Robert Lacker suffered the
cardiac death of Mr. Lacker, husband and father. The plaintiffs sought damages arising out of their respective
injuries based on Kaiser’s negligent system of health care.
In support of negligent credentialing allegations, Plaintiffs cited TDI’s Reports and actions against Kaiser.
Read more at: http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
A closely-watched medical malpractice lawsuit ended with the Kaiser Permanente health care giant agreeing to
pay $5.35 million to the family of a man who died after doctors failed to diagnose his heart disease. The family of
Ronald Henderson, 56, had accused Kaiser Permanente's North Texas HMO of negligence in his death, claiming
the firm was so intent on slashing its costs that it failed to provide him with adequate care. The deal was struck
shortly after the jury in a nonbinding "test trial" sided with Henderson's family and said it would have awarded
them $62 million if it were a real trial.
see:http://horror.kaiserpapersThe Kaiser Papers A Public Service Web Sitekaiserpapers.com/legalstuff//heart/tex2116.html
Estate of Henderson v.Kaiser PermanenteMisdiagnosis at ER resulting in patients death
https://kaiserpapers.com/legalstuff/henderson.html
Ehlmann
v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas, (5th Cir. 2000)
Synopsis: ERISA: No Duty to Disclose Physician Compensation Arrangements-Ehlmann v. Kaiser Found Health Plan of Texas1--The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) have no fiduciary obligation to disclose physician compensation under ERISA absent special circumstances or specific inquiry.
http://legalstuff.kaiserpapersThe Kaiser Papers A Public Service Web Sitekaiserpapers.com/legalstuff//Ehlmann-v-kaiser.html
also at:
http://www.txnd.uscourts.gov/pdf/Opinion/497cv264_94.pdf
Synopsis: ERISA: No Duty to Disclose Physician Compensation Arrangements-Ehlmann v. Kaiser Found Health Plan of Texas1--The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) have no fiduciary obligation to disclose physician compensation under ERISA absent special circumstances or specific inquiry.
http://legalstuff.kaiserpapersThe Kaiser Papers A Public Service Web Sitekaiserpapers.com/legalstuff//Ehlmann-v-kaiser.html
also at:
http://www.txnd.uscourts.gov/pdf/Opinion/497cv264_94.pdf
Jack
Noble v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas and John B. Delcambre,
M.D.severed right spinal accessory nerve
Description: This case involved an injury suffered by Mr. Noble, who was a 56-years-old water department employee. During surgery to repair a stomach problem. Dr. Delcambre operated to remove a subaceous cyst on Mr. Noble's neck. While removing the cyst, Dr. Delcambre severed the right spinal accessory nerve in Mr. Noble's neck. Over the next several months, the doctor and other doctors at Kaiser failed to properly diagnose the injury. Once the diagnosis was made (almost six months later), it was too late to repair the nerve damage. As a result, Mr. Noble suffered disabling injuries. $300,000.00
https://kaiserpapers.com/legalstuff/jack.html
Description: This case involved an injury suffered by Mr. Noble, who was a 56-years-old water department employee. During surgery to repair a stomach problem. Dr. Delcambre operated to remove a subaceous cyst on Mr. Noble's neck. While removing the cyst, Dr. Delcambre severed the right spinal accessory nerve in Mr. Noble's neck. Over the next several months, the doctor and other doctors at Kaiser failed to properly diagnose the injury. Once the diagnosis was made (almost six months later), it was too late to repair the nerve damage. As a result, Mr. Noble suffered disabling injuries. $300,000.00
https://kaiserpapers.com/legalstuff/jack.html
LETHA
ANN RAVENELL& KENNETH RAYRAVENELL, V.KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH
PLAN
OF TEXAS, )
Department of Labor Law Suit
orginally filed under ravenel.txt
Entry found on this topic found in http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
In Ravenell, the plaintiffs sought to recover from the Kaiser Health Plan and related health care providers and physicians based on theories of negligence and gross negligence and based on a theory of vicarious liability, and on grounds of respondeat superior and ostensible agency for the negligence of the agents, employees, physicians and providers. Id. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged Kaiser Health Plan failed to order proper diagnostic tests, failed to properly diagnose Mrs. Ravenell’s condition, failed to properly train the health care providers, and failed to have adequate treatment policies relating to conditions such as Mrs. Ravenell’s.
Id.
The Kaiser HMO defendants removed the Ravenell case to federal court, claiming ERISA preemption. The
plaintiffs moved to remand, urging the court to find the state law claims were not related to an ERISA plan, and
thus were not preempted. In finding the plaintiffs’ claims were not preempted, District Court Judge Sidney
Fitzwater reasoned: Plaintiffs’ suit is not an action to redress injuries flowing from decisions concerning what benefits are to be paid or which ones are permitted [by the employer’s plan]. .......Read More at: http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
In the unpublished Order Granting Motion to Remand in White v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas, Civil Action No. 4:96-CV-0685-Y, January 17, 1997, the federal district court found the plaintiffs’claims (negligence per se, negligence based on respondeat superior, ostensible agency, and agency by estoppel, fraud, constructive fraud, negligent
misrepresentation, and the Deceptive Trade Practices Act) should be remanded because the federal court lacked jurisdiction. The court did not specifically address the issue of complete preemption but discussed the Kaiser Defendants failure to demonstrate “that Plaintiffs’ claims fall within the scope of § 502(a)(1)(b) and (a)(3) of ERISA.” Id. at 1-2.
Read more at: http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
Department of Labor Law Suit
orginally filed under ravenel.txt
Entry found on this topic found in http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
In Ravenell, the plaintiffs sought to recover from the Kaiser Health Plan and related health care providers and physicians based on theories of negligence and gross negligence and based on a theory of vicarious liability, and on grounds of respondeat superior and ostensible agency for the negligence of the agents, employees, physicians and providers. Id. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged Kaiser Health Plan failed to order proper diagnostic tests, failed to properly diagnose Mrs. Ravenell’s condition, failed to properly train the health care providers, and failed to have adequate treatment policies relating to conditions such as Mrs. Ravenell’s.
Id.
The Kaiser HMO defendants removed the Ravenell case to federal court, claiming ERISA preemption. The
plaintiffs moved to remand, urging the court to find the state law claims were not related to an ERISA plan, and
thus were not preempted. In finding the plaintiffs’ claims were not preempted, District Court Judge Sidney
Fitzwater reasoned: Plaintiffs’ suit is not an action to redress injuries flowing from decisions concerning what benefits are to be paid or which ones are permitted [by the employer’s plan]. .......Read More at: http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
In the unpublished Order Granting Motion to Remand in White v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas, Civil Action No. 4:96-CV-0685-Y, January 17, 1997, the federal district court found the plaintiffs’claims (negligence per se, negligence based on respondeat superior, ostensible agency, and agency by estoppel, fraud, constructive fraud, negligent
misrepresentation, and the Deceptive Trade Practices Act) should be remanded because the federal court lacked jurisdiction. The court did not specifically address the issue of complete preemption but discussed the Kaiser Defendants failure to demonstrate “that Plaintiffs’ claims fall within the scope of § 502(a)(1)(b) and (a)(3) of ERISA.” Id. at 1-2.
Read more at: http://www.texhealthlaw.org/Public/images/mgdcare.pdf
Kaiser denied a PSA test for a
50 year old male. Kaiser
claimed
that it is not an accurate test for prostate cancer and denied a
digital
exam after patient developed back pain.
File: /www/txnd/docs/judges/solis.html
Document Title (if any): U.S. District Court - Northern District of Texas
Score: 0.7742
Summary: Birth: 1951 Year Service Began: 1991 Appointed by: President George Bush Education: McMurry University 1973 BA; University of Texas School of Law 1976 JD Legal Practice: Sole practitioner, Abilene 1988; Moore and Holloway, Abilene 1981 - 1982 Government: Assistant Criminal District Attorney, State of Texas, Abilene 1976 - 1981; Criminal District Attorney, Taylor County, State of Texas, Abilene 1983 - 1987; Special Prosecutor, West Central Narcotics Task Force, Abilene 1988 Judicial: Judge, ...
Highlighted Summary: ... are available to the public as a service of PACER. Case Number - Civil Style Document No. Pages Date Entered 4:99-cv-516 Cristantielli vs Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas 39 21 08/01/00 3:99-cv-2141 Avalon Residential Care Homes, Inc. vs City of Dallas 64 18 02/02/01 3:99-cv-1993 Barett vs ...
File: /www/txnd/docs/judges/means.html
Document Title (if any): U.S. District Court - Northern District of Texas
Score: 0.7742
Summary: David and Sue Winningham vs Anheuser-Busch, Inc., et al. American Airlines, Inc. vs Rogerson ATS, et al. Great West Caualty Company vs Omniflight Helicopters, Inc., et al.
Highlighted Summary: ... Hermann n/a 5 07/24/97 4:89-cv-515 Texas Housing Authority vs Verex Assurance, Inc. 159 6 01/12/98 4:97-cv-264 Mary Ellen Ehlmann, et al. vs Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas, et al. 94 7 08/24/98 4:99-cv-079 Lockheed Martin Corporation vs Raytheon Company 51 10 02/19/99 4:99-cv-760 Keith and ...
File: /www/txnd/docs/judges/solis.html
Document Title (if any): U.S. District Court - Northern District of Texas
Score: 0.7742
Summary: Birth: 1951 Year Service Began: 1991 Appointed by: President George Bush Education: McMurry University 1973 BA; University of Texas School of Law 1976 JD Legal Practice: Sole practitioner, Abilene 1988; Moore and Holloway, Abilene 1981 - 1982 Government: Assistant Criminal District Attorney, State of Texas, Abilene 1976 - 1981; Criminal District Attorney, Taylor County, State of Texas, Abilene 1983 - 1987; Special Prosecutor, West Central Narcotics Task Force, Abilene 1988 Judicial: Judge, ...
Highlighted Summary: ... are available to the public as a service of PACER. Case Number - Civil Style Document No. Pages Date Entered 4:99-cv-516 Cristantielli vs Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas 39 21 08/01/00 3:99-cv-2141 Avalon Residential Care Homes, Inc. vs City of Dallas 64 18 02/02/01 3:99-cv-1993 Barett vs ...
File: /www/txnd/docs/judges/means.html
Document Title (if any): U.S. District Court - Northern District of Texas
Score: 0.7742
Summary: David and Sue Winningham vs Anheuser-Busch, Inc., et al. American Airlines, Inc. vs Rogerson ATS, et al. Great West Caualty Company vs Omniflight Helicopters, Inc., et al.
Highlighted Summary: ... Hermann n/a 5 07/24/97 4:89-cv-515 Texas Housing Authority vs Verex Assurance, Inc. 159 6 01/12/98 4:97-cv-264 Mary Ellen Ehlmann, et al. vs Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Texas, et al. 94 7 08/24/98 4:99-cv-079 Lockheed Martin Corporation vs Raytheon Company 51 10 02/19/99 4:99-cv-760 Keith and ...
| Case Number | Style | Filed/Location | Type/Status |
| DC-00-04459 | TRAN MINH ET AL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION H DBA |
06/15/2000
134th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-01-01468 | FINCK ANTHONY VINCENT NF vs. PERMANENTE MEDICAL ASSOC |
02/23/2001
44th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-02-08899 | GARCIA ARLENE vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEA DBA |
09/17/2002
162nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-88-04406 | THOROUGHMAN ANDREA E vs. KAISER FOUNDATION |
04/07/1988
192nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-89-04538 | WRIGHT SHARON vs. BROWN TRACY |
04/14/1989
160th District Court
|
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT
CLOSED
|
| DC-90-04534 | MARTINEZ GLORIA vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEA DBA |
04/18/1990
68th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-90-06108 | DAVENPORT DEBORAH S ETAL vs. PARKER COLLEGE OF CHIROPR |
05/23/1990
160th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-90-06189 | SMITH KEVIN J vs. RUBICON CORPORATION |
05/24/1990
162nd District Court
|
OTHER (CIVIL)
CLOSED
|
| DC-90-08264 | MUNOZ DEBBIE M ETAL vs. MCNABB JOHN R MD ETAL |
07/13/1990
116th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-90-08624 | FERRELL CHILES C ETAL vs. KAISER PERMANENTE |
07/23/1990
44th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-90-11550 | HOLLEY JEFF ETAL vs. KAISER PERMANENTE |
09/27/1990
193rd District Court
|
DEBT/CONTRACT
CLOSED
|
| DC-90-12437 | PETTY VALARIE NF vs. KAISER PERMANENTE |
10/19/1990
44th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-91-01193 | HAHN KAY SUZANN vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
01/31/1991
192nd District Court
|
DEBT/CONTRACT
CLOSED
|
| DC-91-06746 | TINKLER RICHARD ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
06/10/1991
162nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-91-11347 | MINTON CHARLES ETAL vs. ECHOLS B R DR ETAL |
09/19/1991
101st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-91-12412 | KEENE PAULA vs. MCNABB JOHN MD ETAL |
10/15/1991
134th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-92-02001 | CHRISTIANSEN RICHARD M vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
02/10/1992
116th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-92-11436 | COOPER DAN G vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
09/18/1992
101st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-92-15077 | WILLIAMS JUNE vs. TAN DOMINGO DR ETAL |
12/22/1992
68th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-93-02774 | ZAHERI EIDI vs. KAISER PERMANENTE |
03/17/1993
14th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-93-03314 | FYFFE ROBERTA vs. TEXAS EMPLOYMENT COMMISSI |
03/29/1993
160th District Court
|
WORKERS COMPENSATION
CLOSED
|
| DC-93-03582 | BOWMAN NAOMIA vs. WADE DEAN DR ETAL |
04/06/1993
298th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-93-05008 | LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSUR vs. KAISER PERMANENTE |
05/11/1993
298th District Court
|
WORKERS COMPENSATION
CLOSED
|
| DC-93-11261 | MOORE STEPHEN L vs. KAISER PERMANENTE |
10/26/1993
116th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-94-02866 | FRIERSON DORIS ET AL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
03/24/1994
95th District Court
|
DEBT/CONTRACT
CLOSED
|
| DC-94-03580 | SOTO DONNA NF vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
04/13/1994
192nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-94-07832 | LESLIE BETTY ETAL vs. TRIGO LUIS C III MD ETAL |
08/04/1994
116th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-94-09130 | TUCKER JANICE RENEE vs. KAISER PRUDENTIAL HEALTH |
09/01/1994
162nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-94-12704 | ROBERSON WILLIAM E vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
12/09/1994
101st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-02956 | SELLS MARY CATHIE vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
03/27/1995
68th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-03470 | HENDRIX LINDA S vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
04/11/1995
160th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-03905 | FOUNTAIN T C vs. WILLIAMS ERIC MD ETAL |
04/21/1995
95th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-04896 | REYNA DIANA P vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
05/18/1995
191st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-07723 | GUEST EMMETT ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
08/04/1995
101st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-09765 | HILL DOROTHY JEAN ETAL vs. COLUMBIA HCA OF HOUSTON |
09/08/1995
134th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-09896 | WARD VANESSA D vs. AHMADI HAMID MD ETAL |
09/12/1995
116th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-12981 | BURGESS ETHYE ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION |
12/12/1995
134th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-13430 | ALMANY TRACEY M ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
12/27/1995
162nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-96-06042 | RHONE JESSE J ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
06/14/1996
191st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-96-08001 | HAWES MARY ANN NF vs. KAISER PERMANENTE |
08/07/1996
160th District Court
|
SEVERANCE CIVIL
CLOSED
|
| DC-96-09149 | WALLACE GLENDA ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
08/30/1996
298th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-96-11564 | MASON KAREN vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
11/04/1996
101st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-97-00967 | GREEN JUSTIN FREDERICK vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
01/31/1997
68th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-97-04477 | ROBERTS CLOVIS ETAL vs. MEDICAL CITY DALLAS HOSPI |
05/14/1997
162nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-97-04970 | DINKINS MARGARET THERESA vs. DALLAS PATHOLOGY ASSOCIAT |
05/30/1997
95th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-97-08990 | HURT KATHY ETVIR vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
10/03/1997
162nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-97-09986 | BURBA RANDALL ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
11/05/1997
68th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-98-00949 | POLK LINDA ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
02/03/1998
44th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-98-01996 | HARRIS DEBRA vs. PRICE IVORG GARRETT MD |
03/09/1998
192nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-98-08159 | MELOY CURTIS vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
10/21/1998
193rd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-98-08575 | JONES PATTY J vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
11/05/1998
116th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-98-09868 | JACCAR MICHAEL G vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
12/31/1998
191st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-98-09869 | DEVAUGHN CLARISSA vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
12/31/1998
68th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-99-00205 | MANDIS DELMA vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
01/12/1999
44th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-00-06939 | ALLEN YOLANDA M ETAL vs. GOWLIKAR TULSIRAM MC ETAL |
08/29/2000
134th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-85-15656 | HAWKINS JANET KAY ETAL vs. INTERNATIONAL PLAYTEX INC |
11/20/1985
160th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-88-04406 | THOROUGHMAN ANDREA E vs. KAISER FOUNDATION |
04/07/1988
192nd District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-93-02311 | DICKINSON SUSAN ET VIR vs. RADIOLOGY CONSULTANTS ET |
03/05/1993
101st District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-94-12402 | ALMEIDA BRENDA ETAL vs. RICHARDSON MARILYN R MD |
12/01/1994
298th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-03905 | FOUNTAIN T C vs. WILLIAMS ERIC MD ETAL |
04/21/1995
95th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-09386 | MORGAN MARY LOU ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH |
08/31/1995
134th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-95-12981 | BURGESS ETHYE ETAL vs. KAISER FOUNDATION |
12/12/1995
134th District Court
|
DAMAGES
CLOSED
|
| DC-96-02263 | JUDGE AUDREY vs. ASTLE WILLIAM |
03/04/1996
193rd District Court
|
MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT
CLOSED
|
| DC-96-03828 | PUENTE JOSE ETAL vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOB |
04/17/1996
192nd District Court
|
DEBT/CONTRACT
CLOSED
|
| DC-97-07698 |