HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05141996 - C8 CLAIM
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
May 14, 1996
Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOAR_ D ACTION
the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT
and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of
California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors
(Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code
Amount: $10,000.00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note alRFr w1EJ)
CLAIMANT: Patricia Bosnich APR 2 2 1996
ATTORNEY: COUNTY COUNSEL
Date received MARTINEZ CALIF.
ADDRESS: 4860 Clayton Road, #18 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON April 19, 1996
Concord, CA 94521
BY MAIL POSTMARKED: Hand Delivered
1. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel
Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim,
DATED: April 22, 1996 JAIL BATCHELOR, Clerk `
eputy11/1
II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
T
( .IThis claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2.
( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying
claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8).
( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send
warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3).
( ) Other:
Dated: /f'2,f qit BY: Deputy County Counsel
III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2)
( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3).
IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present
( �) This Claim is rejected in full.
( ) Other:
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for
this date.
Dated: `M y I PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By , Deputy Clerk
WARNING (Gov. code section 913)
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six• (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or
deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6.
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult
an attorney, you should do so immediately, *For additional warnina see reverse side of this notice.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the
United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez,
California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to
the claimant as shown above.
� r
Dated: f BY: PHIL BATCHELOR b IDeputy Clerk
CC: County Counsel County Administrator
1 CLAIM AGAINST COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
2 AND MERRITHEW HOSPITAL
3 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL/RETURN RECEIPT
4 This Claim is made on behalf of PATRICIA BOSNICH against
the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA AND MERRITHEW HOSPITAL.
6 Board of Supervisors RECEIVED
7 County of Contra Costa
1020 Ward Street
8 Martinez, California 94553 AR19
MM
Director/Chief Administrator g
9 Merrithew Hospital CLERK p ACCfS't'ACO.
10 2500 Alhambra Avenue
Martinez, California 94553
11 The following Claim for damages is hereby made by Patricia
12 Bosnich and the particulars of the claim are as follows:
13 1. Names and address of Claimants:
14 Patricia Bosnich
15 Permanent and Current Address:
16 4860 Clayton Road, #18
Concord, CA 94521
17 2. Address to Which Notices are to be Sent:
18 Patricia Bosnich
19 4860 Clayton Road, #18
Concord, CA 94521
20 3 . Amount of Claim:
21 Over $10,000; the court of proper jurisdiction is the
22 Superior Court of the State of California.
23 4. Date and Place of Occurrence:
24 November 1,' 1995, Merrithew Hospital, Martinez, CA.
25 5. Other Circumstances:
26 On or about November 1, 1995, Patricia Bosnich was a
patient at Merrithew Hospital, in Martinez, CA.
27 At said time and place, Claimant was so negligently cared
28 for, supervised, monitored, attended, and managed that she was
caused to sustain a burn/abrasion type injury on her left thigh.
1
1
2 The entities against whom this claim is made negligently
3 cared for, supervised, monitored, attended, and provided medical
nursing services for Patricia Bosnich. As a . result of this
4 negligence, Claimant sustained the injuries set forth above.
5 6. Itemization of Injuries, Extent of Damage and Basis
of Computation:
6 As a direct and proximate result of the aforementioned
7 acts, conduct and omissions of the entities against whom this
claim is filed, claimant has suffered physical and emotional
8 injuries and damages, as well as the incursion of medical and
economic expenses and losses.
9 Claimants injuries include, but are not limited to, a
10 substantial burn on her left thigh.
11 7. Employees Causing Injury and Damages:
12\ Employees and agents of the entity against whom this claim
is filed who are .responsible for the occurrences identified
13 herein are presently unknown.
14 DATED: April 10, 1996
15 IWIA
16 Patricia Bosnich
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
CLAIM C`�
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
May 14, 1996
Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION
the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT
and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of
California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors
(Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code
Amount: Unknown Section 913 and 915.4. Please not Mt, % ,
CLAIMANT: Garaventa Enterprises APR 2 9 �0��
Gary Lazdowski
ATTORNEY:
Date received COUNTY COUNSEL.
MARTINEZ CALAF
ADDRESS: 4080 Mallard Drive BY DELIVERY TO CLERK .ON_e=ri 1 26, 1996
P.O. Box 5397
Concord, CA 94520 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: Halld DP1 i verPd via: Risk Mgmt.
I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel
Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim.
DATED: April 29, 1996 PpHHIL ATCHELOR, Clerk �/
BY: Deputy 411
II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
( ) This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2.
( This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying
claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8).
( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send
warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3).
(✓) Other• I L,-- eA _ `-e tri C_2�L4
cAcL\", U-,,_(-L\ C� e
Dated: l 3c� + J g 9G BY: Deputy County Counsel
III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2)
( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3).
IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present
(Y ) This Claim is rejected in full.
( ) Other:
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for
this date.
Dated: �PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, ByE^QoDeputy Clerk
WARNING (Gov, code section 913)
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six• (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or
deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6.
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult
an attorney, you should do so immediately. *For additional warning see reverse side of this notice.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the
United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez,
California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to
the claimant as shown above.
Dated:_ ,�- -,�99� BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by ,wf�o,, �r . Deputy Clerk
CC: County Counsel County Administrator
Garaventa Enterprises
4080 MALLARD DRIVE • P.O. BOX 5397 c
CONCORD, CALIFORNIA 94520
(510)689-8390 RECEIVED
c �
April 23, 1996 6 r
a �
CLERK OARD O SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA CO.
Contra Costa County
Risk Management
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, 6th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Dear Ms. Aumock,
Thank you for your letter dated March 29, 1996 regarding the 01/04/96 accident
involving a county vehicle and our truck.
Our position in this matter has not changed in that the county vehicle did in fact
back into our truck. Please be advised that we will be seeking reimbursement for all
repairs, towing bills and down time from the date of the accident to the date the truck was
placed into service.
Should any medical claims arise from this accident on behalf of our employee, we
will subrogate the claim against the County of Contra Costa.
Please be assured that it is our intention to settle this claim in what ever manner is
appropriate. Should you have any question regarding this matter, please phone our office.
Sincerely,
Gary Lazdowski
GARAVENTA ENTERPRISES
Y�!
cc: Mike Machanich, Solid Waste Insurance Managers s s
Ed Maghakian, Solid Waste Insurance Managers v"
OFFICE-OF COUNTY:COUNSEL DEPUTIES:
VICTOR J.WESTMAN f PHILLIP S.ALTHOFF
SHARON L.ANDERSON
COUNTY COUNSEL CONTRA COSTACOUNTY BRANDON D.BAUM
, „„„ ANDREA W.CASSIDY
COUNTYADMINISTRATION,BUILDINGI� VICKIE L.DAWES
SILVANO B.MARCHESI `66F MICH E S.D.
FAS
651 PINE STREET' LOOR MICHAEL D.FARR
ARTHUR W.WALENTA,JR. MARTINEZ;-CALIFORNIA.9456S 1-0116 LILLIAN T FUJI1
ASSISTANTS �s f' DENNIS C.GRAVES
GREGORY C.HARVEY
KEVIN T KERR
GAYLE MUGGLI ';} q r. EDWARD V.LANE,JR.
OFFICE MANAGER MARY ANN MASON
PAUL R.MUNIZ
SITYAMALAI RAJENDER
PHONE(510)646-2074 VALERIE J.RANCHE
F.
FAX(510)646-1078 D AVNA J.SILVER SCHMIDT
VICTORIA WILLIAMS
NOTICE OF INSUFFICIENCY
AND/OR
NON-ACCEPTANCE OF CLAIM
TO: CLAIMANTS LISTED BELOW,
Garaventa Enterprises
Gary Lazdowski
4080 Mallard Dr.
P.O. Box 5397
Concord, CA 94520
The claim you presented against the County of Contra Costa(your letter of April 23, 1996) fails to comply
substantially with the requirements of California Government Code Section 910 and 910.2, or is otherwise
insufficient for the reasons checked below:
[ ] L The claim fails to state the name and post office address of the claimant.
[ ] 2. The claim fails to state the post office address to which the person presenting the claim
desires notices to be sent.
[x] 3. The claim fails to state the date, place or other circumstances of the occurrence or transaction
which gave rise to the claim asserted.
[x] 4. The claim fails to state the name(s) of the public employee(s) causing the injury, damage, or
loss, if known.
[x] 5. The claim fails to state whether the amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars ($10,000).
If the claim totals less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), the claim fails to state the amount
claimed as of the date of presentation, the estimated amount of any prospective injury,
damage or loss so far as known, or the basis of computation of the amount claimed. If the
amount claimed exceeds ten thousand dollars($10,000), the claim fails to state whether
jurisdiction over the claim would rest in municipal or superior court.
[ ] 6. The claim is not signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf.
[ ] 7. Other:
VICTOR J. WESTMAN, County Counsel
By: e,
GrordC. Harvey
Deputy County Counsel
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL
(C.C.P. §§ 1012, 1013a,2015.5;Evidence Code§§641,664)
I declare that my business address is the County Counsel's Office of Contra Costa County,651 Pine Street,Martinez,California
94553;I am a citizen of the United States,over 18 years of age,employed in Contra Costa County,and not a party to this action. I
served a true copy of this Notice of Insufficiency and/or Non-acceptance of Claim by placing it in an envelope addressed as shown
above,sealed and postage fully prepaid thereon,and thereafter was,deposited this day in the U.S.Mail at Martinez,California.
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: April 30, 1996 at Martinez,California.
cc: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors(original)
Risk Management
(NOTICE OF INSUFFICIENCY OF CLAIM:GOVT.CODE§§910,910.2,920.4,910.8)-
CLAIM C v
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
MAY 14, 1996
Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION
the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT
and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of
California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors
(Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code
Amount: $1,812.40 + Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all
CLAIMANT: SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY APR 1996
ATTORNEY: BRUCE D. ROGIE MARTINEZ UNSEL
395 OYSTERPOINT BLVD. , #300 Date received
ADDRESS: SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94080 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON APRIL 22, 1996
BY MAIL POSTMARKED: APRIL 19, 1996
I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel
Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim.
DATED: APRIL 22, 1996 PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk
BY: Deputy
II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
(A-4 This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2.
( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying
claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8).
( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send
warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3).
( ) Other:
Dated: Jbi54 BY Deputy County Counsel
III, FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2)
{ ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3).
IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present
(J ) This Claim is rejected in full.
( ) Other:
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for
this date.
Dated: ' XJX am , /,PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By Deputy Clerk
WARNING (Gov. code section 913)
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six- (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or
deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6.
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult
an attorney, you should do so immediately. *For additional warnino see reverse side of this notice.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the
United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez,
California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to
the claimant as shown above.
Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Deputy Clerk
CC: County Counsel County Administrator
C1a_r� to: BOAP,D OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COS?A CQUNTY
INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT
A. Clam relating to causes of action for death or for injury to person or to per-
sonal property or growing crops and rich accrue on or before December 31, 1987,
must be presented not later than the 100th day after the accrual of the cause of
action. Claims relating to causes of action for-death or for injury to person
- or to personal property or growing crops and Mich accrue on or after January 11,
1988, must be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause
of action. Claims relating to any other cause of action must be Presented not
later than one year after the accrual of the cause of. action. (Govt. Code 5911.2.)
B. Clam must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisars at its office in
Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pias Street, Martinez, CA 94553.
C. If claim is.against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than
the County, the name of the District should be filled in.
D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be
filed against each public entity.
E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims, Penal. Code Ser. 72 at the end of this
fo_�.
R£: Claim By ) Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp
Superior National Insurance
RECEIVED
Company - ) '
Against the County of Contra Costa_ E
2 2
or )
District)` CLERD O 096
F SUP RVISORS
Fill in name ) CONTRA COSTA CO.
The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or
the above-named District in the sum of $ 1812 . 4 0 c o n t i n u i n ga'id in Support of
this claim represents as follaws:
1. When did the damage or injury occur? -(Give exact date and hour)
October 30 , 1995 , 4 : 50 p .m.
2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county)
Mt •_Diablo Blvd near So Thompson Road , Lafavettp CA— - -
3. Hou did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if
required) -
See attached Attachment to Claim (etc)
u. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers,
servants or employees caused the injury or damage?
Officer Womack was unattentative and negligent and failed to stop .
5- wnat are rne na-m-es of county or district officers, servants or employees causing
the d'a=age or lnj=y?
Officer Eric Womack.
15. What damage or injuries do you claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or
damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage.
See attached Attachment to - Claim (etc . )
7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (include the estimated amount of any
prospective injury or damage.)
See Payment Listing attached .
Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors and hospitals.
See attached Attachment to Claim (etc . )
9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury:
DATE ITEM AMOUNT
See attached Attachment to Claim (etc . )
Gov. Code Sec. 910.-2 rovides:
"The' claim-�st be, ed by the claimant
SEM NOTICES TO:' (Attorney) or by some ,person/, his behalf
Name and Address of Attorney
Law Offices of Bruce D.. -Bogie
395 Oyster PointBlvd ,*- #-3-00 (Claimant's Wgnature)
South San Francisco , CA 94080 perior ' National Tnqurance Company
395 Oyster Point Blvd-. , Suite 300
(Address)
South San Francisco , CA 94080
Telephone No. Telephone No. 415-737-9098
T V
NOTICE
Section 72 of the Penal Code provides:
"Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for aflowance or for
payment to any state board or officer,, or to any county, city or, district board or
officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent
claim, bill, account, voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in
the county jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding
one thousand ($1,000), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or' by imprisonment in
the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000, or by
both s-=h i=prisonment and fine.
Attachment to Claim Against Contra Costa County
(Superior National Insurance Company Claimant)
3 . On October 30, 1995, at about 4: 50 P.M. , Hugo Latorre
was in the course and scope of his employment with California
Dental Ceramics, Inc. , and driving a vehicle on Mount Diablo
Boulevard near So. Thompson Road, in Lafayette, California. Mr.
Latorre stopped his vehicle for a pedestrian. Officer Eric
Womack, driving a vehicle owned by the County of Contra Costa,
failed to stop behind Mr. Latorre and rearended Mr. Latorre's
vehicle. Mr. Latorre was injured in the accident.
Superior National Insurance Company was the workers'
compensation insurer for Hugo Latorre's employer, California
Dental Ceramics, Inc. , on October 30, 1995. Mr. Latorre
demanded, has received, and may be entitled to receive
additional, workers' compensation benefits as a result of the
injuries he sustained as a result of this accident.
6. Mr. Latorre has complained of bilateral head, neck and
back pain with pain radiating into his left hand since the
accident. Superior National Insurance Company has expended a
total of $1,812 .22 to date in workers' compensation benefits to
or on behalf of Mr. Latorre. Mr. Latorre's workers' compensation
claim remains pending and Superior National Insurance Company may
pay additional sums for further workers' compensation benefits to
or on behalf of Mr. Latorre, and Superior National Insurance
Company reserves the right to amend this claim to state the total
amount which such has been ascertained.
7. See attached Payment Listing setting for all
expenditures by Superior National Insurance Company to date.
8. Eric Wolfgang Womack
3675 Mt. Diablo B. #130
Lafayette, CA 94549
(510/943-7411)
Hugo Latorre
4492 Buckhorn Court
Concord, CA 94521
(510/674-9063)
Jessica Ugalde
3573 Terrace #33
Lafayette, CA 94549
John S. Riddel, D.C.
3147 Putnam Blvd. , #E
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
9. See attached Payment Listing
SUPERIOR NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY 04/15/96
PAYMENT LISTING BY PAYEE
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Claim Number 02-57351 Claimant HUGO LATORRE DOI 10/30/95
Payment Type:Mo MEDICAL Status o
Taxid
Tr Pay Check Check Service Service
Type Date Amount No From To Payee
a as as aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
P PT MC 01/31/96 150. 00 5 12/06/95 12/06/95 HCX INC.
P PT M2 03/15/96 5. 04 3200079391 04/11/96 04/11/96 HUGO LATORRE
P PT M8 04/09/96 92 .88 3200082874 02/22/96 02/29/96 JOHN S. RIDDEL D.C.
P PT M8 03/26/96 94.72 3200080837 02/08/96 02/20/96 JOHN S. RIDDEL D.C.
P PT M8 03/21/96 25.22 3200080049 12/04/95 12/04/95 JOHN S. RIDDEL D.C.
P PT M8 02/22/96 253 .89 3200075719 01/16/96 01/30/96 JOHN S. RIDDEL D.C.
P PT M8 02/08/96 162 . 08 3200073597 01/04/96 01/10/96 JOHN S. RIDDEL D.C.
P PT M8 02/01/96 631. 35 3200072490 12/01/95 12/30/95 JOHN S. RIDDEL D.C.
P PT M8 01/12/96 397.64 3200069546 11/15/95 11/27/95 JOHN S. RIDDEL D.C.
Grand Total 1812 .82
w (A .
co
100
C) A
Ole
0. v
v � �
0A ��.
ccC, (D
oCD
0
0 0
& r
N /9 O�
nWom
> O W
�p N
fa S1
(A Q.
C"
W N O�
41 �
C
„O
tD
N+
0
N
cn
y
RECEIVED
LAW OFFICES OF
BRUCE D. ROGIE L-APR2 1996
395 Oyster Point Boulevard CLERK BOARD of suPERvisoRs
Suite 300 CONTRA COSTA co.
South San Francisco, California 94080
(415)737-9098
Bruce D. Rogie FAX (415)737-9130
April 16, 1996
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Contra Costa
651 Pine Street
Martinez, CA 94553
Re: Hugo L.atorre
Claim Against the County of Contra Costa
Dear Sir or Madam:
Enclosed is an original and one copy of a Claim Against the County of Contra Costa.
Please return the file-stamped copy of this claim in the enclosed envelope.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
LAW OFFICES OF BRUCE D. ROGILE
iza Azarse
Legal cretary
/laa
Enclosures
CLAIM Q1_9
J., BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
May 14, 1996
Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION
the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT
and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of
California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors
(Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code
Amount: $10,000.00 + Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all
CLAIMANT: Dorothy Cain APR 19 1996
ATTORNEY: William H. Curtis, Esq. COUNTY COUNSEL
Date received MARTINEZ CALIF.
ADDRESS: 3625 Mt. Diablo Blvd. , Ste. 250 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON April l9,1996
Lafayette, CA 94549
BY MAIL POSTMARKED: Nanrl T1o1 V�r�'Gl
I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel
Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim.
PpHHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk
DATED: April 19, 1996 BY: Deputy
II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
(This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2.
( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying
claimant. The Board cannot act 'for 15 days (Section 910.8).
( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send
warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3).
( ) Other:
Dated: BY: Deputy County Counsel
III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2)
( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3).
IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present
( °�) This Claim is rejected in full.
( ) Other:
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for
this date.
Dated / ,�9 9 PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By �, Deputy Clerk
T—
WARNING (Gov. code section 913)
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or
deposited in the mail to-filea court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6.
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult
an attorney, you should do so immediately. *For additional warnino see reverse side of this notice.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the
United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez,
California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to
the claimant as shown above.
Dated: C4a&..)Deputy.Q, / l q�j( BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Clerk0
CC: County Counsel County Administrator
1 FOLEY McINTOSH & FOLEY.
Professional Corporation
2 William H. Curtis, Esq., SBN 139920
3625 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Suite 250
3 Lafayette, CA 94549
4 Telephone: (510) 284-3020
5 Attorneys for Claimant
DOROTHY CAIN-
6 RECEIVE[
7
8 tp 19=
CLERIC
9 CONTRA CO3'1A CO.
10
11 ) CLAIM FOR PERSONAL INJURIES
12 CLAIM OF DOROTHY CAIN, ) (SECTION 910 OF THE GOVERNMENT
) CODE)
13 vs. )
14 COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA. )
15 )
16 TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY:
17 You are hereby notified that DOROTHY CAIN, whose address is 626 Maureen Lane,
18 Pleasant Hill, California 94523; Telephone: 510-689-6008, claims damages from the COUNTY
19 OF CONTRA COSTA in an amount in excess of $10,000.
20 This claim is based on personal injuries sustained by claimant on October 28, 1995, at
21 approximately 9:00 p.m. in the vicinity of 1983 Reliez Valley Road, Contra Costa County,
22 California, under the following circumstances:
23 The Claimant was going to her company's Halloween party hosted by
24 Mary Mahoney at 1983 Reliez Valley Road. When she arrived at the party, she
25 parked her car in front of the next-door neighbor's home to the south of 1983
26 Reliez Valley Road. The Claimant then exited her car and walked around to the
27 rear of the car, and then towards the house. There was an abrupt drop-off of
28
CURTIS/CAIN/CLAIM.N01 4-
i several inches between the paved shoulder of the roadway and the immediately
2 adjacent unpaved shoulder of the roadway which caused the Claimant to fall and
3 suffer a severely broken right foot.
4 In addition, although the County had provided for street lights along the
5 roadway, the County had allowed tree cover and other foliage to block the
6 illumination of the nearest street light. As a result, the area surrounding the site
7 of the injury was pitch dark as compared to other areas of the roadway where the
8 light was not obscured by trees.
9 Said road, the paved shoulder and the immediately adjacent unpaved
10 shoulder of the roadway, then were, and now are, owned and controlled by
.11 Contra Costa County (hereafter the "County"), and at the time of the injury were
12 heavily traveled by both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The paved shoulder of .
13 the roadway, at the time of the injury and for approximately eight months prior,
1.4 was several inches (i.e., five or more inches) higher than the unpaved shoulder
15 of the roadway, and ended in an abrupt drop-off, for at least 1000 feet in each
16 direction. Both the paved shoulder of the roadway and the unpaved shoulder of
17 the roadway were of the same dark grey color. The difference in elevation of the
18 unpaved shoulder of the roadway and the paved shoulder of the roadway, and the
19 sharp drop-off, constituted a dangerous condition of public property that created
20 a substantial risk of injury to pedestrians walking with due care on the shoulder
21 of the roadway, .including the type of fall and injury sustained by Claimaint.
22 Said street lights then were, and now are, also owned and controlled by o
23 the County, and at the time of the injury street lighting was necessary for the safe
24 travel of both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. The blockage of street lighting in
25 the vicinity of Claimant's injury was a condition that exited at the time of the
26 injury and for approximately eight months prior to this time, and constituted a
27 dangerous condition of public property that created a substantial risk of injury to
28 pedestrians walking with due care on the shoulder of the roadway.
CURTIS/CAIN/CLA IM.NO 1 -2-
C �
1 The roadway was constructed, and thereafter periodically resurfaced, by
2 County employees. During the course of construction, and subsequent
3 resurfacing of the roadway, the last resurfacing being approximately eight months
4 prior to claimant's injury, and while acting within the scope of their employment,
5 the County's employees negligently caused the paved shoulder of the roadway to
6 be constructed several inches higher than the unpaved shoulder of the roadway,
7 and to have a sharp drop-off, as alleged above.
8 The County was also responsible for the construction and maintenance of
9 said street lighting. The County failed to discharge its duty to properly maintain
to said street lighting by allowing trees and other foliage to obscure and block said
11 lighting, as alleged above.
12 The County had actual notice of the above-referenced dangerous conditions
13 at least eight months prior to Claimant's injury.
14 The County also had constructive notice of the above-referenced dangerous
15 conditions, as they existed in substantially that same state and appearance for
16 approximately eight months prior to the time of Claimant's injury, and were of
17 such an obvious nature that they and their dangerous character should have been
18 discovered by the County in the exercise of due care, and would have been so
19 discovered by a reasonably adequate inspection system maintained and operated
20 with due care.
21 The County had actual and constructive notice of said dangerous
22 conditions in sufficient time prior to Claimant's injury to have corrected them.
23 The County willfully of maliciously failed to guard or warn against the
24 dangerous conditions alleged above, which, among other things, constitutes a
25 violation of Civil Code § 846.
26 1Alternatively, the County employed outside contractors, or others, whose
27 names and identities are not presently known to Claimant, to construct and
28 thereafter resurface the above-mentioned roadway; and to construct and maintain
CURTIS/CAIN/CLAIM.NO1 -3-
1 the above-mentioned street lighting. These outside contractors, or others, through
2 their negligent acts and omissions, created the above-mentioned dangerous
3 conditions. The County is vicariously liable for said negligent acts and
4 omissions, as well as any intentional torts, of said outside contractors, and others,
5 pursuant to Government Code § 815.4.
6 Alternatively, said outside contractors, and others, were the agents and
7 employees of the County and acted within the scope of the agency.
8
9 The names of the public employees causing Claimant's injuries under the described
10 circumstances are not known to Claimant at this time.
11 The injuries sustained by Claimant, as far as known, as of the date of presentation of this
12 claim, consists of a severely broken right foot, with an ongoing disability and permanent
13 residuals. The Claimant has undergone surgery. She has also suffered severe emotional distress
14 as a result of the subject incident. The Claimant has incurred medical expenses, loss of
15 earnings, special damages, general damages, as well as prospective damages including future
16 medical expenses, future loss of earnings, prospective special damages and prospective general
17 damages.
18 Jurisdiction over the claim would rest in Superior Court.
19 All notices or other communications with regard to this claim should be sent to Dorothy
2 o Cain, c/o William H. Curtis, Esq., FOLEY, McINTOSH & FOLEY Professional Corporation
21 at 3675 Mt. Diablo Blvd., Suite 250, Lafayette, California 94549; Telephone: 510-284-3020.
22
23 Dated: April , 1996
24 FOLEY McINTOSH & FOLEY
Professional Corporation
25
26
By
27 WILLIAM H. C RTIS, ESQ.
Attorneys for Claimant
28 DOROTHY CAIN
CURTIS/CAIN/CLAIM.N01 -4-
CLAIM
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
May 14, 1996
Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION
the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT
and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of
California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors
(Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code
Amount: $1,497.00 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Narnings%
CLAIMANT: Richard Cohn
ATTORNEY:
Date received
ADDRESS: 1909 Parkside Drive BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON_April 18, 1996.
Walnut Creek, CA 94596-3549
BY MAIL POSTMARKED: Hand Del iver6d
1. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel
Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim.
DATED:_ April 19, 19% JaIl �ep�tyLOR, Clerk
II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
(4 This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2.
( ) This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying
claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8).
( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was: filed Late and send
warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3).
( ) Other:
Dated: Deputy County Counsel
III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2)
( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3).
IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present
(Y ) This Claim is rejected in full.
( ) Other:
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for
this date. ,�
Dated: c9 iqq!PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, Bye (e wL_ 4a. Deputy Clerk
WARNING (Gov, code section 913)
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six. (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or
deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6.
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult
an attorney, you Should do so immediately. *For additional warnina see reverse side Of this notice.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the
United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez,
California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to
the claimant as shown above.
Dated: BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by Deputy Clerk
41
CC: County Counsel County Administrator
1
;Claim to: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY C `O
INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT
A. -Claims relating to causes of action for death or for injury to person or to per-
sonal property or growing crops and which accrue on or before December 31, 19879
must be presented not later than the 100th day after the accrual of the cause of
action. Claims relating to causes of action for death or for injury to person
or to personal property or growing crops and which accrue on or after January 1,
1988, must be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause
of action. Claims relating to any other cause of action must be presented not
later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Govt. Code 5911.2.)
B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in
Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553•
C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than
the County, the name of the District should be filled in.
D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be
i.. oaiLicC1 public rKii�y.LL i
E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims, Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this
?orm.
RE: Claim By ) R erved f Clerk' l filing stamp
RICHARD COHN1909
)
WALNUTRI RE E DR. )
FK
6-3549 RECEIVE®
Against the County of Contra Costa )
or ) 1 8 1996
District) CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Fill in name ) CONTRA COSTA CO. J
The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or
the above-named District in the sum of $ 4 � 7 and in support of
this claim represents as follows:
-
1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour)
2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county)
/fes �' ✓ -, zoz_-�
3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if
required
96 .
4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers,
servants or employees caused the injury or damage?
(over)
5. What are the names of county or district officers, servants or employees causing
,the damage or injury?
6. What damage or injuries do you claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or
damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damne.� R,/
�
7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any
prospective injury or damage.)
B. Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors and hospitals.
9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury:
DATE ITEM AMOUNT
• f �I a e e e s e e e s a e f # �I �I • it �t g e e • ct �I e e e * a e • # e e * s e f e
Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides:
"The claim must be signed by the claimant
SEND NOTICES T0: (Attorney) or ,some Person on his behalf."
Name and Address of Attorney
Claimant's Signature)
RICHARD COHN
1909 PAR�SIDF. DR-
WALNUT §1JWVD>i33uo-LnN-lVM
94596-3549 'HQ 30IS>1aVd 606L
NHOD 08VH011A
Telephone No. I Telephone No. 3 �Z
NOTICE
Section 72 of the Penal Code provides:
"Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for
payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city or district board or
officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent
claim, bill, account, voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in
the county jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding
one thousand ($10000), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in
the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000, or by
both such imprisonment and fine.
CLAIM
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
May 14 1996
Claim Against the County, or District governed by) BOARD ACTION
the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT
and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to you is your notice of
California Government Codes. ) the action taken on your claim by the Board Of Supervisors
(Paragraph IV below), given pursuant to Government Code
Amount: $100,000.00 + Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all 54A 14W
112D
CLAIMANT: Patricia Mulherin MAY 0 1 1996
ATTORNEY: Jody I. LeWitter COUNTY COUNSEL
1330 Broadway, Suite 1700 Date received MARTINEZ CALIF.
ADDRESS: Oakland, CA 94612 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON April 30, 1996
BY MAIL POSTMARKED: April 29, 1996
I. FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel
Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim.
DATED:_ May 1, IL eputyLOR, Clerk J4
1996 ��: � �
II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
(� This claim complies substantially with sections 910 and 910.2.
( } This claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying
claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8).
Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send
warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3).
( ) Other:
f
Dated: BY: �% _ Deputy County Counsel
III. FROM: Clerk of the Boa ! County Counsel (1) County Administrator (2)
( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3).
1V. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present
(J) This Claim is rejected in full.
( } Other:
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for
this date.
Dated:-tYJ !4_. 1g9G, PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk, By �,,, o , �,Q, pQ�►_�, Deputy Clerk
WARNING (Gov. code section 913)
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six. (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or
deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6.
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult
an attorney, you should do so immediately. *For additional warning see reverse side of this notice.
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the
United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez,
California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to
the claimant as shown above.
Dated: `�' ( (o���/ BY: PHIL BATCHELOR by eputy Clerk
CC: County Counsel f.�- County Administrator
1
Eggleston, Siegel & LeWitter (/
attorneys at law
1330 Broadway, Suite 1700
Jonathan H. Siegel Oakland, California 94612 of counsel
James L eWitter (510) 451-9500
Jody I. Eggleston FAX (510) 834-7111 Jewel&Leary
Pamela Allen
M.Jane Lawhon 7
Paula A.
Whitney R.. Gabriel
Ap
April 29, 1996
RECEIVED
Via Facsimile (510) 646-2547 and First Class Mail APR 3
� r
Ron Harvey, Liability Claims Manager i€.i_K i,D 0-r-SUpEKvjS0pren+4s % c�C' ,z4 Co
Contra Costa County
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street, 6th Floor
Martinez , CA 94553
Re : Mulherin v. Contra Costa County and Maria Bito
EEOC Charge No. 376960263
Confidential Settlement Demand
Dear Ron:
Please be advised that this office represents Patricia Mulherin.
I am unhappy to be in the position of having to write you again
in regard to the continued problems caused by one of your
supervisory personnel, Maria Bito. It appears that Ms . Bito
mercilessly harassed Ms . Mulherin, until Ms . Mulherin was forced
to take a leave of absence .
Ms . Mulherin has been working for the County of Contra Costa in
the Medical Records Department since she was 22 years of age,
giving her approximately 26 years of service to the County.
During that time period, she has diligently applied herself to
her work, received commendations, pay raises and good performance
reviews . All was well until Maria Bito was assigned as her
supervisor in August of 1991 . At that point, Ms . Bito began
mercilessly harassing Ms . Mulherin. As despicable as it is, the
more Ms . Mulherin reacted to the harassment by Ms . Bito
(expressing fear, and a desire to work even harder than ever) ,
Ms . Bito perceived that as a sign of weakness and doubled her
harassment in an attempt to get Ms . Mulherin to quit her
employment . I cannot begin to outline the harassment incurred by
Ms . Mulherin at the hands of Ms . Bito. As a generalization, I
would note that Ms . Mulherin was harassed both because of her
disability (asthma and high blood pressure) and her age . Having
had the experience of representing Janet Maldon, I would say that
there is a similar streak in Bito' s behavior towards her
subordinates (including these two individuals and others) . That
n .
Ron Harvey
April 29, 1996
Page 2
is, Bito mercilessly harasses any individual who shows any
physical impairment, legally protected or not . In Ms . Maldon' s
situation it was limitations due to her pregnancy. In
Ms . Mulherin' s situation it was the effects of asthma and high
blood pressure .
Ms . Mulherin was diagnosed with asthma in 1991 or .1992 . Ms . Bito
made numerous negative comments about her asthma, complained
about her needing to take time off for a doctor' s appointment,
and told her that because she coughed on occasion due to her
asthma, she would separate her so that she wouldn' t disturb other
people . She also told her that her conduct on the phone was
improper because she had to cough. Ms . Mulherin also suffers
from high blood pressure, which in no way affects her job
performance . Before Ms . Bito, Ms . Mulherin' s high blood pressure
was controlled without any medicine . After Ms . Bito became her
supervisor and started relentlessly harassing her, her blood
pressure rose significantly, requiring various medications (after
being placed on a medical leave away from Ms . Bito, it has
decreased) . Ms . Bito consistently screamed at Ms . Mulherin about
her blood pressure, stating, "You can control your blood
pressure . "
The harassment which Ms . Mulherin was subjected to included
constant monitoring, looking over her shoulder, screaming and
yelling at her, and writing her memos . The criticism was non-
stop. Complaints consisted of things such as, "Your handwriting
is too neat, " "You are too neat, " "You are too slow, " "You can
control your nerves . It' s all in your head, " "You make me so
damn mad when you look at me that way, " "I will fire you because
you are incompetent, " "You are not trying to improve, " and "You
are pretending that you don' t know. " There are witnesses to this
conduct .
I would have to say that the more Ms . Zito harassed Ms . Mulherin,
the more difficult it was for Ms . Mulherin, of course, to get her
job done . However, Ms . Mulherin not only treasured her
employment with the County, but was an incredibly diligent, long-
term employee . She responded to Ms . Bito' s constant criticisms
by trying to improve her performance in any way possible, even
though it was already very good. She worked overtime, without
pay, and skipped breaks, even though she had been told that the
County prohibited this, so that there was less for Bito to yell
at her about . When Ms . Bito screamed at her that her desk was
piled up (this was the day after she returned from a two-week
vacation, and of course there were things on her desk which were
put there while she was gone) , Ms . Mulherin simply dug in, worked
extra time, and got all the work done . When the stress was
mounting, Ms . Bito simply gave her more work in an effort to
discombobulate her.
Ron Harvey
April 29, 1996
Page 3
Ms . Mulherin almost had a nervous breakdown due to this
unrelenting harassment . One example that led up to her
disability leave. is that shortly before it she called her sister-
in-law one morning at 7 a.m. , hysterical because she thought she
had forgotten to do an assignment at work. The possibility of
making an error was simply too much, given her work environment .
In fact she had not forgotten to do it, but her response attests
to the horrendousness of her work situation. Ms . Mulherin
started to experience severe problems with sleeping, eating,
self-control and self-esteem. She couldn' t concentrate . She
couldn' t even remember to pay her phone bill . She suffered from
hives and various other physical symptoms . She was unable to do
any of the activities she had done before .
This harassment culminated on May 26, 1995 . Ms . Bito took
Ms . Mulherin into a separate room and screamed at her for an
extended period of time . She told her she was not happy with
anything she did, that she should do better, that she was playing
games with her, that she behaved like a child, that she had
mental problems, that she was incompetent, and that she would
fire her because she was incompetent . When Ms . Mulherin looked
very upset at this, Bito replied that she could control her
nerves and this was all in her mind. Ms . Mulherin was forced to
go home sick that afternoon. Ms . Bito then proceeded to clean
Ms . Mulherin' s desk and move it directly in front of her own. On
May 30, Ms . Mulherin' s doctor put her off on disability leave,
where she has been until the present . This was consistent with
Ms . Bito' s arbitrary and harassing behavior. (She had another
employee' s desk turned to face a wall because she couldn' t stand
the sight of that person' s face . )
Ms . Bito also harassed Ms . Mulherin due to her age, and made
negative remarks about her age and seniority.
I am sure you know by now, Liven the complaints about Ms . Bito by
Ms . Mulherin, Ms . Maldon and other employees, that Ms . Bito was
completely out of control . She referred to employees as learning
disabled, stupid, and other derogatory terms, in a loud and
oppressive manner.
Ms . Mulherin has returned to work starting April 22, 1996 . Her
doctor' s release is for part-time work, for six weeks, and to be
reevaluated at that time . The release indicates that "Miss
Mulherin' s stress level will need to be closely watched, and that
contact with Maria Bito should be avoided. I believe that Pat
has an excellent chance to successfully return as long as she
continues to be supported and to be given the benefit of
reasonable accommodation. " We understand that Ms . Bito has been
transferred from the Medical Records Department and will not be
in any way supervising her.
Ron Harvey
April 29, 1996
Page 4
We believe we will be able to prove that Ms . Mulherin was
discriminated against and harassed due to her disabilities and
age, and that the discrimination caused severe emotional
distress, a required year-long leave of absence, and the loss of
a year of Ms . Mulherin' s life .
As I am sure you are aware, under both the Fair Employment and
Housing Act and Title VII, if a cause (not the sole cause) of an
action taken against an employee is her protected status -- here
either her disability or age -- the action is discriminatory.
Mixon v. FEHC (1987) 192 Cal .App. 3d 1306, modified, reh'g denied;
Watson v. Department of Rehabilitation (1989) 212 Cal .App. 3d
1271, rev. denied; Lam v. University of Hawaii (9th Cir. 1994) ,
40 F. 3d 1551, aff'g in part, rev'q and rem'cr in part . After the
Supreme Court case of St . Mary' s Honor Center v. Hicks (1993) 113
S . Ct . 2742 , it has been well-established that there need not even
be direct evidence of the discrimination (which there is here) .
An employee need only establish a disbelief of the employer' s
reasons for the treatment of the plaintiff in question,
accompanied by a belief of mendacity.
I would also note that evidence in regard to how other employees
were treated, which is quite damaging, will be admissible . That
is because discrimination and harassment of other employees is
relevant to a number of issues, including motive and hostile
environment . Bihun v. AT&T Information Sys . , Inc . (1993) 13
Cal .App.4th 976 ; EEOC v. Farmer Bros . Co. (9th Cir. 1994) 31 F. 3d
891 .
The County was strictly liable for Ms . Bito' s conduct because she
was a supervisor. Further, since the County knew or had reason
to know that Ms . Bito had harassed a number of other employees,
and was unable to cope with any sort of possible physical
disability, the County is independently liable for allowing Bito
to continue supervising employees until way past the time at .
which it was reasonable to pull her off the job. The County did
not appropriately counsel or discipline Bito until too late . See
generally, Ellison v. Brady (9th Cir. 1991) 924 F. 2d 872 ;
Intlekofer v. Turnage (9th Cir. 1993) 873 F. 2d 773 ; Fisher v. San
Pedro Peninsula Hosp. (1989) 214 Cal .App. 3d 590, 609, n. 6, rev.
denied; Kelly-Zurian v. Wohl Shoe Co. (1994) 22 Cal .App. 4th 397 .
Ms . Mulherin has filed charges of discrimination with the EEOC,
to be cross-filed with the Department of Fair Employment and
Housing. We will also be filing individual charges against
Ms . Bito. As you know, the remedies available to Ms . Mulherin
under the Fair Employment and Housing Act and Title VII are quite
broad and include emotional distress damages, lost wages, past
and future, lost benefits, attorneys fees, and punitive damages
against the individual actor.
Ron Harvey
April 29, 1996
Page 5
Please note that even if everything goes well, Ms . Mulherin will
have been off work for almost a year. Her salary was $34 , 963
annually. She received SDI of $17, 472 . She was required to
preserve her sick leave (per letter dated December 6 , 1995) to
pay back $3 , 226 . 98 to the County, which she did. The total loss
to date, thus, is $20, 717 . 98 . The emotional distress she suffered
is immense, and the detailing of it is quite shocking. Even the
workers compensation psychiatrist hired by the County determined
that Ms . Mulherin was suffering from an adjustment disorder, with
a depressed mood (the appropriate diagnosis is more severe) , and
noted that it is "partly related to conflicts with Ms . Bito,
estimated to be 30-% . 111
I write this letter at this point in time to propose the
following resolution of Ms . Mulherin' s claims against the County
and Ms . Bito. The proposed resolution is as follows :
1 . An agreement that Ms . Mulherin will be reasonably
accommodated according to her doctor' s work restriction;
2 . Ms . Bito will have nothing to do with the supervision
of Ms . Mulherin and will be instructed not to speak with her, not
to go near her, and to, in short, stay away;
3 . Ms . Mulherin be compensated for the emotional distress
that she has incurred, in the amount of $95, 000 ;
4 . Ms . Mulherin be reimbursed for lost wages in the amount
of $20, 718 ;
5 . Ms . Mulherin be reimbursed for her attorneys fees,
which to date are $2, 368 .
As I know you are well aware as a risk manager, there are certain
advantages to an early resolution of this case . First, we think
it would allow Ms . Mulherin to go back to work on a basis having
this matter behind her a little more. Second, from your
perspective, as you know, attorneys fees that the County will be
required to pay my office for the processing of this case (as
well as outside counsel if you intend to use such) will dwarf the
1 Dr. Trahms determined that Ms . Mulherin was not disabled under
the statutory terms of the Workers Compensation Act . However,
the standards under the Fair .Employment and Housing Act and
Title VII is very different from the Workers Compensation .Act .
In fact, this finding by Dr. Trahms will be of great assistance
to us in representing Ms . Mulherin, as we will be able to prove
that even your hired expert attributed serious problems to
Ms . Bito' s conduct .
Ron Harvey
April 29, 1996
Page 6
reasonable demand that is set forth herein. Third, Ms . Bito' s
record speaks for itself . She does not have a friend, much less
a sympathetic ear, in the Medical Records Department.
Ms . Mulherin' s record also speaks for itself . _ She has been a
long-term, loyal and diligent employee of the County. A jury
will be able to judge what happened. Fourth, we are happy that
Ms . Bito has been transferred out of the Medical Records
Department, and pray that she is not supervising any other
employees . However, the County must recognize that it continued
to allow her to supervise employees when it was well aware that
she harassed and discrimination against employees .
Ms . Mulherin' s offer is open for two weeks . If, as I understand
it, due to the County' s procedures there is a good faith interest
in seeking a remedy to the situation but it cannot be done in
that time frame, please advise . However, given that Ms . Mulherin
will hopefully be ready to return to work shortly, we would
appreciate at least a dialogue in regard to her return to work.
Very truly yours,
Jody I . LeTVitter
JIL/ts UAW Local 2320
I W
IN O 'q
�1 C m
+; - d
O �
61
3
NCi (01 [MTJ
� Hz � l-'
01 H H
to H cn f�
OP. xw30
Ln
wt"' y0-3H
0 H '-< y
00 K
�dz
m
H H
C
a ri)
H
4�
t
UY 3 l 45 }
O
CJtAiu