Jump to content

ElleMD

Members
  • Content Count

    2,965
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

ElleMD last won the day on October 30 2018

ElleMD had the most liked content!

2 Followers

About ElleMD

  • Rank
    Platinum Contributor

Recent Profile Visitors

10,412 profile views
  1. Well, she doesn't have to hand the child over to some random adult who promise that sure, they will take him to see his Dad. Custody is between the parents and there can be important information that ought to be shared at the time of the exchange (Junior had an ear infection, here are his antibiotics he gets twice a day, etc.). If you must you can modify the agreement to have the exchange in a public location or police station, but you will need to have a solid reason for doing this. It isn't clear what if anything has come of her allegations and if there is any merit to them. It also isn't clear how old your child is.
  2. So, your job was to make beds and clean rooms, which your employer asked you to do. You haven't indicated you had any sort of medical condition that would require modified duties (pregnancy doesn't automatically limit this), nor that you ever provided medical documentation to this effect. While you were supposed to be working, you were on the phone with a friend were you made multiple negative comments about your boss where both your boss and presumably any guests or visitors could easily have and did overhear you. On the job. While working. Then you are acting like the injured party? When called on it you start crying and walk off the job and want to report this to HR. I'm genuinely curious what about loudly badmouthing your manager and griping about your duties to a friend while you are supposed to be working, then walking off the job, paints you in a positive light? The other complaints are either minor and or totally irrelevant to your situation. Telling other employees someone was terminated for stealing isn't even inappropriate, if i fact, that is what happened.
  3. It isn't at all clear when you are claiming the clock started let alone why you feel it should be tolled. Being sick generally does not as that is part and parcel with having a med mal case. Neither does it matter your relationship with your family as they do not have standing to bring a case, you do. If you were truly incapacitated for the entire SOL such that it was impossible for you to act, and not just inconvenient, that could be a valid reason but you should discuss it with an attorney in your area.
  4. To apply for asylum you must already be physically present in the US, which is something some of our elected officials seem not to understand. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/asylum You can file as soon as you arrive, or you have up to a year to do so (longer if circumstances permit). If you are outside the US, you would apply for refugee status, but it is not that easy. https://www.uscis.gov/humanitarian/refugees-asylum/refugees
  5. You have to have an employer first. The unemployed do not automatically receive TTD by default. IF an IW is employed and if the employer can not accommodate the restrictions and therefore is telling the IW to stay home, then yes, they do get TTD because the employer is treating them as temporarily and totally disabled. You don't have an employer. if I’m not entitled to ttd, why didn’t the judge just say no. He said ttd is a medical issue and only a doctor can determine that. He also said unemployment has nothing to do with his court. That’s a different court and he will not discuss that. 1. Not his job to explain what benefits you might or might not be entitled to 2. Because it is a medical issue. A doctor has to either indicate that you are totally incapable of working or that you have restrictions that an employer can not meet. 3. Correct. He won't weigh in on that speeding ticket you got either. Same thing. their first attorney told me that I am entitled to ttd. Who is "their"? In what context? At what time? Based on what? She offered 3 weeks of ttd because I received sdi. I asked them to replace the sdi benefits and send me the difference. TTD and SDI are mutually exclusive. SDI is for non-work related ailments. Straight from the website " You may be eligible for DI if you are unable to work due to non-work-related illness or injury, pregnancy, or childbirth." You can read about they they offset here https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0452120030 . The DA must have been fustrated because she told the judge my claim is accepted. She had just told me before we went go see the judge it was denied. My claim was accepted over a year ago. They just never informed me. i called the claims manager and complained so she sent me the accepted letter. The very next day, I received a denial letter for ttd. It just says call the adjuster if I don’t agree. I'll bet she is frustrated. As I am sure I told you about a dozen or more posts ago, claims are not all or none. The IC can accept that you fell but deny that you need medical treatment, or that you had to be off work. they are now arguing that I was terminated for caused. Who is they? And you were terminated for cause. Your employer told you that when they fired you. Did I misunderstand chapter 5 in the guide book? YES
  6. Rare is the employer who self-administers WC. Even self-insured employers typically use a TPA. Did you file a claim? Spoken with the adjuster? Start there.
  7. You mix together a whole lot of issues. If she is 17, her mother or court appointed guardian (if mom agrees that should be your parents or the man in the moon, it is not a terribly difficult process to establish someone other than the parent as the guardian), needs to enroll her in the school system where she resides. How residency is established varies from system to system but is typically outlined in the student handbook and or on the website for that system. If she is not enrolled then yes, her mother (or legal guardian) can be held responsible for her being truant.
  8. It isn't clear from your post you know what TTD is. It's temporary total disability benefits which are indemnity payments made for time you are considered totally unable to work due to the injury. If you don't have wage loss because you aren't working, that changes things. It isn't just pay for being hurt; it is income replacement for wages you would otherwise have received but for the injury rendering you unable to work. Most people don't receive it up to the time they reach Maximum medical improvement (MMI). Just because you aren't at MMI doesn't mean you get TTD. You still have the hurdle to prove that the reason you couldn't work was the injury rendered you totally unable to do so. If you reach a settlement in your case, that is one of many things than can be negotiated in the settlement. Side note- if you applied for and or received unemployment at the time you were terminated, you are going to have extra difficulty claiming you should have received TTD. One requires that you be ready able and available for work, the other requires that be impossible. If you are moving towards settlement, then it is entirely usual and may even be required (it is in most states) to mediate the case before proceeding to trial. Mediators don't rule, they "referee" for lack of a better term. It isn't the judge's job to help you fill out paperwork or explain the judicial process to you. That would be the job of a lawyer you hire to represent you. For the life of me I still can't tell what you are seeking at this point, or where in the adjudication process you are. TTD for some specified period of time? Continued medical treatment? Wrongful termination due to filing a claim? Are you at the hearing phase before the workers' compensation appeals board? District Court? You seem to take issue with the fact that the "judge" and defense attorneys know one another and don't appear to hate one another. This is incredibly common. No matter the area of law, attorneys who regularly handle those cases are going to know the judges. Work together enough and yes, they do become friendly. This is entirely normal. Presumably if you had a lawyer, that lawyer would also know the judge or hearing officer and hopefully, have some sort of professional rapport with them, even if they aren't golf buddies. In my state several of the attorneys from both sides of the aisle and at least one Commissioner are in a band together. They perform at the annual conference every year. This is a good thing. You want these parties to get along.
  9. You are still all over the map and your story doesn't make any sense. Yes, judges, hearing officers, and commissioners tend to be frustrated by pro se litigants as they rarely know what they are doing and often do not understand the process or the scope of the proceedings. The judge shouldn't be the one to tell you what the issues are. You either filed issues in which case you should know what you filed, or the employer/insurer filed issues in which case you should have received a notice of what those issues were. If you don't even know what issues are being adjudicated when you show up, you can't possibly present your case.
  10. As an assistant, you also may not be privy to all the details of her situation. There can be good reasons to allow this employee to do what they are doing. Challenging the legal management decisions made by others in authority without all the facts can be a career limiting move. You have asked about it and been told it is known and allowed. It is legal. I'd strongly consider dropping it.
  11. If your ex is looking to make life difficult, they picked a strange way to do so. Travel is months away and replacing a current passport is not terribly difficult. Annoying maybe, but easily remedied. https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/after/lost-stolen.html It is unclear why you would be the one to remedy this if the other parent is the one traveling out of country and lost the passports.
  12. This isn't a legal issue. Kids often share rooms for all sorts of reasons. A friend of mine has 4 kids in a 7 bedroom house and the oldest son and daughter chose to share a room even though they didn't have to.
  13. I'm familiar with such hearings (though not in your state) and this situation as you describe it doesn't even come close to the kind of convoluted situation that typically give rise to a hearing. Being mid-year isn't unusual. Nor does is it odd based upon the age of the student. The folks at the district office didn't wake up one day and decide that Junior is no longer a resident. Something caused them to believe Junior doesn't live in the district. They also didn't just pick another district at random and decide Junior must live there. Why district 2? Does the other parent live there? Did you live there until recently? Do you have stable housing in the district (as opposed to "couch surfing", staying at a hotel, etc.)? Did you share the court order granting you physical custody? Has this changed recently?
  14. You assume incorrectly. Unfortunately interventions become more difficult once the person reaches their majority. Early interventions when the person is still a minor are key. Not all conditions manifest that young, though it sounds like this young man has always had challenges. It is unclear where his parents are and if anyone has ever sought guardianship of him. It is NOT an easy or even cheap process but if this guy is totally incapable of managing his own affairs and not continually breaking the law, it may be warranted.
  15. 18 is legally an adult, not a teenager. Other than one parent having a pretty common medical condition and both using a controlled substance at some undetermined frequency, it is unclear how the child is actually in danger. You don't say how you are related to these two young adults or the baby. If it is your home, certainly you are free to enforce whatever rules you like for the household regarding smoking or marijuana use. You don't mention if this is medical use or recreational. Possession of small amounts is just a misdemeanor. While the jury is out regarding the true effects of marijuana use for breastfeeding mothers, I would be surprised if personal use ( as opposed to a criminal conviction for distribution and or trafficking) were enough to cause a loss of custody any more than a mother who consumes alcohol while breastfeeding. I'm not condoning using, just pointing out that it isn't the dire circumstance you appear to think it might be. You can share the following with the parents for reference https://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/breastfeeding-special-circumstances/vaccinations-medications-drugs/marijuana.html There are no laws in SC that require children have their own bedrooms. CPS isn't going around looking for kids to case manage or find foster families for. Unless your home is in such a state that it poses an imminent safety risk it won't be held against you that you are improving your home.
×
×
  • Create New...