Estate of Colley vs. Palm Garden of Vero Beach
In this lawsuit against Palm Garden for nursing home abuse negligence, our Florida nursing home abuse attorneys allege that Palm Garden staff failed to properly monitor Louise Colley’s INR levels. As a result, she began profusely bleeding and later died.
The outrageous case ultimately led to the arrest of a Palm Garden nurse for her neglect of Louis Colley.
Why Monitor INR in a Nursing Home Resident at Palm Garden of Vero Beach?
Louise Colley, like many other nursing home residents, was on a blood thinner called Coumadin (also known as Warfarin). Coumadin and Warfarin are often used in older adults to treat and prevent blood clots. These dangerous blood clots can lead to a stroke or heart attack, so doctors will order blood thinners to reduce the clot and avoid a catastrophic health outcome.
Profuse Bleeding in Warfarin Patients
Anyone on Coumadin or Warfarin will have ‘thin blood’ that does not clot quickly. As a result, if they start bleeding, it can become serious quite quickly. Because Warfarin affects a patient’s blood clotting proteins, doctors will order the patient get regular INR tests to make sure their levels are normal and the patient is not internally bleeding to death.
Ms. Colley’s Case Against Palm Garden
Louis Colley was a Warfarin patient with doctor orders to have her INR measured. Palm Garden charted that her INR levels were measured as ordered and within normal levels.
One day, Ms. Colley started bleeding from multiple orifices in her body. She was taken to the emergency room from Palm Garden of Vero. When Ms. Colley presented to the hospital with profuse bleeding, the doctors confirmed that her INR levels were grossly abnormal. Clearly, they were not being measured at the nursing home.
Upon investigation by officials, the Palm Garden staff member admitted she lied about the resident’s INR levels. She was subsequently arrested for neglect of the elderly.
Questions on a Palm Garden Nursing Home Lawsuit?
If you suspect your loved one was neglected at a Palm Garden nursing home, or any other facility, contact our experienced and compassionate nursing home abuse attorneys at Senior Justice Law Firm. We are here to help you and your family get answers. Call now for a free case consultation – 561-717-0817.
Colley vs. Palm Garden of Vero Beach Lawsuit
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 19TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO.:
MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
PALM GARDEN OF VERO BEACH, LLC d/b/a PALM GARDEN OF VERO BEACH; PALM HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, LLC; and PALM GARDEN HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, LLC.
Defendants.
____________________________________/
COMPLAINT
COMES NOW the Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, by and through undersigned counsel, and sues the Defendant, PALM GARDEN OF VERO BEACH, LLC d/b/a PALM GARDEN OF VERO BEACH (hereafter “PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME”), PALM HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, LLC (hereafter “PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT”) and PALM GARDEN HEALTHCARE HOLDINGS, LLC (hereafter “PALM GARDEN CORPORATE”) and further alleges:
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
1. This is a cause of action for damages, which exceeds Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00), exclusive of costs, interest, and attorney’s fees, is being filed within the applicable statute of limitations.
2. This negligence action is being brought by the Plaintiff for violations of Chapter 400 against the above Defendants while LOUISE COLLEY was a resident at the Defendants’ nursing home, Palm Garden of Vero Beach located in Vero Beach in Indian River County, Florida (hereafter “the nursing home” or “the facility”).
3. At all times material, LOUISE COLLEY was a resident of Indian River County, Florida.
4. At all times material, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS has been appointed or is in the process of being appointed the personal representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY.
5. At all times material, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, was a limited liability company doing business in Indian River County, serving as the legal licensee for the Indian River County facility, with an agent in Indian River County.
6. At all material times, Defendant, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT was a Florida for profit limited liability company that was in the business of owning, managing and controlling a chain of nursing homes, including the subject nursing home located in Indian River County, Florida.
7. At all material times, Defendant, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE was a Florida for profit limited liability company that was in the business of owning, managing and controlling a chain of nursing homes, including the subject nursing home located in Indian River County, Florida.
8. At all times material hereto, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME is subject to the provisions of Chapter 400 of Florida Statutes, Titles 10 and 59 of the Florida Administrative Code, and OBRA 1987, which set the standards for operating nursing homes such as this facility.
9. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, was the licensee of the nursing home facility in Vero Beach, Florida, which was authorized to do business in the State of Florida and to operate a nursing home under the name of ‘Palm Garden of Vero Beach’, in Indian River County, Florida, and is subject to the provisions of Florida Statutes Chapter 400.
10. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME employed the nurses, staff and caretakers at the facility as employees or agents, and is therefore responsible for their tortious conduct.
11. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, was operating the facility and had a duty to ensure reasonable operation of the facility and reasonable care to residents, as the licensee of the facility, including hiring, retaining and supervising the staff members that provide care to residents.
12. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME owed a duty to its residents, including but not limited to LOUISE COLLEY, to provide reasonable and appropriate care.
13. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, employed the nurses, staff and caretakers at the facility as employees or agents, and is therefore responsible for their tortious conduct.
14. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, was operating the facility and had a duty to ensure reasonable operation of the facility and reasonable care to residents, as the licensee of the facility, including hiring, retaining and supervising the staff members that provide care to residents.
15. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT owed a duty to its residents, including but not limited to LOUISE COLLEY, to provide reasonable and appropriate care.
16. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, employed the nurses, staff and caretakers at the facility as employees or agents, and is therefore responsible for their tortious conduct.
17. At all times material hereto, the Defendant, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, was operating the facility and had a duty to ensure reasonable operation of the facility and reasonable care to residents, as the licensee of the facility, including hiring, retaining and supervising the staff members that provide care to residents.
18. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE owed a duty to its residents, including but not limited to LOUISE COLLEY, to provide reasonable and appropriate care.
19. Venue is appropriate in this action as the events giving rise to the cause of action occurred in Indian River County, Florida, the subject facility is located in Indian River County, Florida, one of more of the Defendants reside in Florida and the Plaintiff resides in Indian River County, Florida.
20. All conditions precedent to the filing of this action, including compliance with the notice provisions and pre-suit requirements of Chapter 400, have been met or waived.
FACTS GIVING RISE TO THIS CAUSE OF ACTION
21. Before her admission to Palm Garden of Vero Beach, LOUISE COLLEY lived independently in her Vero Beach home.
22. On or around May 11, 2017, LOUISE COLLEY was admitted into the Palm Garden of Vero Beach facility for short-term rehabilitation with the intention of returning home.
23. Upon admission and at all times material thereafter, Ms. Colley needed monitoring and assistance with her medications, including blood/lab levels as she was on dialysis and took Coumadin.
24. During her residency at the facility, LOUISE COLLEY was neglected.
25. Many times, Ms. Colley’s daughters would find their mother dirty and observed her position in bed was rarely changed.
26. Consequently, LOUISE COLLEY developed bedsores and would require frequent re-admission to the hospital due to her neglect-related injuries sustained at the facility.
27. Of significance, LOUISE COLLEY was re-admitted to PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME from Indian River Medical Center on or around June 25, 2017. Due to her Coumadin prescription, Ms. Colley’s doctors ordered that her INR levels be monitored.
28. Tragically, the facility staff at the facility, including but not limited to Donna Bowman, (“the female LPN”), failed to monitor and/or measure Ms. Colley’s INR levels, as ordered by Ms. Colley’s doctors.
29. In the course and scope of their employment and/or agency with the Defendants, the Defendants’ staff entered false and/or inaccurate charting that Ms. Colley’s INR levels were at therapeutic levels, despite the fact that Ms. Colley’s INR levels were not actually measured.
30. Facility management participated in this negligence and/or ratified the misconduct.
31. As a result of the facility staff’s failure to appropriately monitor Ms. Colley’s INR levels, LOUISE COLLEY suffered uncontrolled bleeding from her rectum and vagina on or around June 30, 2017.
32. On or around June 30, 2017, LOUISE COLLEY was rushed to Indian River Medical Center, where life-saving measures were performed and her family was informed of their mother’s deteriorated condition.
33. Due to her neglect and the severity of her injuries, LOUISE COLLEY was admitted to in-patient hospice on or around July 2, 2017.
34. State and federal agencies were notified and later appeared at Indian River Medical Center to investigate the suspected nursing home negligence. Physicians at Indian River Medical Center confirmed that Ms. Colley’s reported INR levels at the facility were incorrect.
35. LOUISE COLLEY passed away shortly thereafter on July 7, 2017.
WRONGFUL DEATH DAMAGES
36. LOUISE COLLEY wrongfully died on July 7, 2017 as a direct and proximate result of the Defendants’ negligence, more fully described above and below.
37. As a direct and proximate result of the rights violations outlined above and below, the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY and the survivors of the Estate, including but not limited to MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS (daughter) and Debbie Colley Brooks (daughter), are entitled to all damages recoverable for the wrongful death caused by the Defendants, as alleged above and below, including but not limited to:
a. Damages for LOUISE COLLEY’s bodily injury, pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of the capacity for the enjoyment of life, expensive hospitalization, the value of reasonable nursing services and nursing care provided to LOUISE COLLEY, medical and nursing care and treatment and aggravation of previous existing conditions, from the time of his injury until the time of her death;
b. Medical bills and expenses;
c. Funeral expenses;
d. Loss of Net Accumulations;
e. MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS and the decedent’s survivors, the children of the deceased, have suffered mental pain and suffering which will continue for the rest of their life, and they have suffered the loss of services and support of their mother, LOUISE COLLEY, and have incurred medical and funeral expenses as a result of LOUISE COLLEY’s death, and have suffered the loss of LOUISE COLLEY’s love and companionship.
SURVIVAL DAMAGES
38. Alternatively, if these injuries did not cause LOUISE COLLEY’s death, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS claims all damages recoverable under a survival action, including but not limited to the non-economic and economic damages of the decedent for bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and aggravation of a previously existing condition, from time of injury of LOUISE COLLEY to the time of her death. These survival damages occurred as a direct and proximate result of the negligence of the Defendants’ outlined above and below.
COUNT I:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME RESULTING IN DEATH
39. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
40. At all material times, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME was the licensee of the nursing home.
41. At all material times PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME owed a duty to LOUISE COLLEY to provide reasonable nursing home care, pursuant to Fla. Stat. Sec. 400.
42. Defendant, PALM GARDEN NURSNG HOME, as the licensee of the facility was responsible and liable for the nurses and/or staff that cared for LOUISE COLLEY because they employed the nurses and/or staff at the facility.
43. Additionally, or in the alternative, Defendant, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME as the licensee of the facility was responsible and liable for the nurses and/or staff at the facility that cared for LOUISE COLLEY because they had actual control of their actions, and the right to control their actions, and thus those persons were agents of PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME.
44. The negligent conduct of the nurses and/or staff of the facility, as described below, was performed in the course and scope of the employment and/or agency with PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME.
45. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, through its employees, agents and apparent agents, including but not limited to its R.N.s, L.P.N.s, C.N.A.s and other personnel violated LOUISE COLLEY’s rights protected under Chapter 400 for Nursing Home residents by providing negligent and substandard nursing home care as follows:
a. Failure to appropriately monitor INR levels;
b. Failure to follow doctor’s orders;
c. Failure to properly chart;
d. Failure to properly evaluate risk of skin breakdown;
e. Failure to institute appropriate skin breakdown monitoring;
f. Failure to appropriately and timely respond to skin breakdown;
g. Failure to keep the resident clean, free of infection, and to change diapers and linens;
h. Failure to appropriately and timely respond to blood flow and infection;
i. Failure to appropriately prevent blood flow issues and infection;
j. Failure to prevent the falls of the resident;
k. Failing to treat the resident for injuries;
l. Failure to document the resident’s injuries;
m. Failure to report the resident’s signs of injury/illness to her healthcare providers;
n. Failure to inform the resident’s family of the resident’s deteriorated condition;
o. Failure to monitor the resident;
p. Failure to appropriate staff and train employees and agents;
q. Failure to prevent provide appropriate nutrition and hydration; and,
r. Failure to provide appropriate nursing home care under all the circumstances.
46. As a proximate result of the Defendant’s deprivation of and infringement upon LOUISE COLLEY’s Chapter 400 rights as alleged in this Complaint, which includes the above alleged negligence, LOUISE COLLEY wrongfully died.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages against Defendant, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, and further demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable.
COUNT II:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT RESULTING IN DEATH
47. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
48. At all material times, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT was the management company of the facility.
49. At all material times, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT was the owner/operator of the facility.
50. At all material times, the nursing home owned and/or operated and/or managed by PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT was licensed pursuant to Fla. Stat. Sec. 400, and held itself to the public, including LOUISE COLLEY as a nursing home that owed a duty to provide reasonable nursing home care services within the applicable standards of care, including protecting the rights guaranteed under Fla. Stat. Sec. 400, and providing care that met the standard of care for nursing homes.
51. Accordingly, at all material times, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT owed a duty to LOUISE COLLEY to provide reasonable nursing home care, and to not violate her rights as resident of nursing home, guaranteed by Fla. Stat. Sec. 400.
52. Defendant, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT as the manager of the facility was responsible and liable for the nurses and/or staff that cared for LOUISE COLLEY because they employed the nurses and/or staff at the facility.
53. Additionally, or in the alternative, Defendant, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT as the manager of the facility was responsible and liable for the nurses and/or staff at the facility that cared for LOUISE COLLEY because they had actual control of their actions, and the right to control their actions, and thus those persons were agents of PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT.
54. The negligent conduct of the nurses and/or staff of the facility, as described below, was performed in the course and scope of the employment and/or agency with PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT.
55. Accordingly, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT is responsible for the negligent conduct of the nurses and/or staff.
56. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, by and through its employees, agents and apparent agents at the nursing home, as described above, were negligent and violated LOUISE COLLEY’s Chapter 400 rights as follows:
a. Failure to appropriately monitor INR levels;
b. Failure to follow doctor’s orders;
c. Failure to properly chart;
d. Failure to properly evaluate risk of skin breakdown;
e. Failure to institute appropriate skin breakdown monitoring;
f. Failure to appropriately and timely respond to skin breakdown;
g. Failure to keep the resident clean, free of infection, and to change diapers and linens;
h. Failure to appropriately and timely respond to blood flow and infection;
i. Failure to appropriately prevent blood flow issues and infection;
j. Failure to prevent the falls of the resident;
k. Failing to treat the resident for injuries;
l. Failure to document the resident’s injuries;
m. Failure to report the resident’s signs of injury/illness to her healthcare providers;
n. Failure to inform the resident’s family of the resident’s deteriorated condition;
o. Failure to monitor the resident;
p. Failure to appropriate staff and train employees and agents;
q. Failure to prevent provide appropriate nutrition and hydration; and,
r. Failure to provide appropriate nursing home care under all the circumstances.
57. As a proximate result of the Defendant’s deprivation of and infringement upon LOUISE COLLEY’s Chapter 400 rights as alleged in this Complaint, which includes the above alleged negligence, LOUISE COLLEY wrongfully died.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages against Defendant, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, and further demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable.
COUNT III:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN CORPORATE RESULTING IN DEATH
58. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
59. At all material times, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE was the corporate company of the facility.
60. At all material times, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE was the owner/operator of the facility.
61. At all material times, the nursing home owned and/or operated and/or managed by PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, was licensed pursuant to Fla. Stat. Sec. 400, and held itself to the public, including LOUISE COLLEY as a nursing home that owed a duty to provide reasonable nursing home care services within the applicable standards of care, including protecting the rights guaranteed under Fla. Stat. Sec. 400, and providing care that met the standard of care for nursing homes.
62. Accordingly, at all material times, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE owed a duty to LOUISE COLLEY to provide reasonable nursing home care, and to not violate her rights as resident of nursing home, guaranteed by Fla. Stat. Sec. 400.
63. Defendant, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE as the manager of the facility was responsible and liable for the nurses and/or staff that cared for LOUISE COLLEY because they employed the nurses and/or staff at the facility.
64. Additionally, or in the alternative, Defendant, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE as the manager of the facility was responsible and liable for the nurses and/or staff at the facility that cared for LOUISE COLLEY because they had actual control of their actions, and the right to control their actions, and thus those persons were agents of PALM GARDEN CORPORATE.
65. The negligent conduct of the nurses and/or staff of the facility, as described below, was performed in the course and scope of the employment and/or agency with PALM GARDEN CORPORATE.
66. Accordingly, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE is responsible for the negligent conduct of the nurses and/or staff.
67. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, by and through its employees, agents and apparent agents at the nursing home, as described above, were negligent and violated LOUISE COLLEY’s Chapter 400 rights as follows:
s. Failure to appropriately monitor INR levels;
t. Failure to follow doctor’s orders;
u. Failure to properly chart;
v. Failure to properly evaluate risk of skin breakdown;
w. Failure to institute appropriate skin breakdown monitoring;
x. Failure to appropriately and timely respond to skin breakdown;
y. Failure to keep the resident clean, free of infection, and to change diapers and linens;
z. Failure to appropriately and timely respond to blood flow and infection;
aa. Failure to appropriately prevent blood flow issues and infection;
bb. Failure to prevent the falls of the resident;
cc. Failing to treat the resident for injuries;
dd. Failure to document the resident’s injuries;
ee. Failure to report the resident’s signs of injury/illness to her healthcare providers;
ff. Failure to inform the resident’s family of the resident’s deteriorated condition;
gg. Failure to monitor the resident;
hh. Failure to appropriate staff and train employees and agents;
ii. Failure to prevent provide appropriate nutrition and hydration; and,
jj. Failure to provide appropriate nursing home care under all the circumstances.
68. As a proximate result of the Defendant’s deprivation of and infringement upon LOUISE COLLEY’s Chapter 400 rights as alleged in this Complaint, which includes the above alleged negligence, LOUISE COLLEY wrongfully died.
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages against Defendant, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, and further demands a trial by jury of all issues so triable.
COUNT IV:
SURVIVAL ACTION AGAINST PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME
69. Plaintiff re-allege paragraphs 1 through 35 and 38, 40 – 45 and further allege:
70. This survival action is made in the alternative to the above wrongful death claim.
71. As a direct and proximate result of the above negligence, LOUISE COLLEY suffered serious injury.
72. If the serious injuries sustained at PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME did not cause the death of LOUISE COLLEY, the Plaintiff alleges all damages recoverable under a survival action, including but not limited to the non-economic damages of decedent for bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and aggravation of a previously existing condition, from time of injury of LOUISE COLLEY to the time of her death.
WHEREFORE Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, claims all recoverable damages against Defendant, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, and demands trial by jury.
COUNT V:
SURVIVAL ACTION AGAINST PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT
73. Plaintiff re-allege paragraphs 1 through 35 and 38, 48 – 56 and further allege:
74. This survival action is made in the alternative to the above wrongful death claim.
75. As a direct and proximate result of the above negligence, LOUISE COLLEY suffered serious injury.
76. If the serious injuries sustained at PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME did not cause the death of LOUISE COLLEY, the Plaintiff alleges all damages recoverable under a survival action, including but not limited to the non-economic damages of decedent for bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and aggravation of a previously existing condition, from time of injury of LOUISE COLLEY to the time of her death.
WHEREFORE Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, claims all recoverable damages against Defendant, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, and demands trial by jury.
COUNT VI:
SURVIVAL ACTION AGAINST PALM GARDEN CORPORATE
77. Plaintiff re-allege paragraphs 1 through 35 and 38, 59 – 67 and further allege:
78. This survival action is made in the alternative to the above wrongful death claim.
79. As a direct and proximate result of the above negligence, LOUISE COLLEY suffered serious injury.
80. If the serious injuries sustained at PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME did not cause the death of LOUISE COLLEY, the Plaintiff alleges all damages recoverable under a survival action, including but not limited to the non-economic damages of decedent for bodily injury and resulting pain and suffering, disability, disfigurement, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, expense of hospitalization, medical and nursing care and treatment, and aggravation of a previously existing condition, from time of injury of LOUISE COLLEY to the time of her death.
WHEREFORE Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, claims all recoverable damages against Defendant, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, and demands trial by jury.
COUNT VII:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME FOR NEGLIGENT HIRING
81. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
82. As the employer of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME was required to make an appropriate investigation before allowing her unfettered access to vulnerable residents.
83. An appropriate investigation would have revealed the unsuitability of the female LPN for the particular duty to be performed and/or for employment in the facility in general.
84. It was unreasonable for PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME to hire the female LPN in light of the information it knew, or should have known.
85. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME’s employment of the female LPN.
86. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME failed to conduct reasonable background check and/or investigation on the female LPN prior to her employment around the facility’s vulnerable residents.
87. If PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME would have performed a reasonable background check and/or investigation on the female LPN, they would not have allowed her to work around vulnerable residents.
88. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
a. Failing to perform a reasonable background check on the female LPN prior to her employment at the facility;
b. Negligently hiring the female LPN;
c. Failing to properly educate and/or train the female LPN to handle or care for vulnerable residents; and,
d. Failing to perform a reasonable investigation into the work history, qualifications and prior employment incidents of the female LPN, prior to her employment at the facility.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT VIII:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT FOR NEGLIGENT HIRING
89. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
90. As the employer of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT were required to make an appropriate investigation before allowing her unfettered access to vulnerable residents.
91. An appropriate investigation would have revealed the unsuitability of the female LPN for the particular duty to be performed and/or for employment in the facility in general.
92. It was unreasonable for PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT to hire the female LPN in light of the information it knew, or should have known.
93. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT’s employment of the female LPN.
94. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT failed to conduct reasonable background check and/or investigation on the female LPN prior to her employment around the facility’s vulnerable residents.
95. If PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT would have performed a reasonable background check and/or investigation on the female LPN, they would not have allowed her to work around vulnerable residents.
96. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
e. Failing to perform a reasonable background check on the female LPN prior to her employment at the facility;
f. Negligently hiring the female LPN;
g. Failing to properly educate and/or train the female LPN to handle or care for vulnerable residents; and,
h. Failing to perform a reasonable investigation into the work history, qualifications and prior employment incidents of the female LPN, prior to her employment at the facility.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT IX:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN CORPORATE FOR NEGLIGENT HIRING
97. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
98. As the employer of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE were required to make an appropriate investigation before allowing her unfettered access to vulnerable residents.
99. An appropriate investigation would have revealed the unsuitability of the female LPN for the particular duty to be performed and/or for employment in the facility in general.
100. It was unreasonable for PALM GARDEN CORPORATE to hire the female LPN in light of the information it knew, or should have known.
101. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN CORPORATE’s employment of the female LPN.
102. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE failed to conduct reasonable background check and/or investigation on the female LPN prior to her employment around the facility’s vulnerable residents.
103. If PALM GARDEN CORPORATE would have performed a reasonable background check and/or investigation on the female LPN, they would not have allowed her to work around vulnerable residents.
104. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
i. Failing to perform a reasonable background check on the female LPN prior to her employment at the facility;
j. Negligently hiring the female LPN;
k. Failing to properly educate and/or train the female LPN to handle or care for vulnerable residents; and,
l. Failing to perform a reasonable investigation into the work history, qualifications and prior employment incidents of the female LPN, prior to her employment at the facility.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT X:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME FOR NEGLIGENT RETENTION
105. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
106. As the employer of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME were required to ensure the continued suitability and appropriateness of the female LPN as an employee before allowing her unfettered access to vulnerable residents.
107. During her employment, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME became aware, or should have become aware, of problems with this employee demonstrating his unfitness.
108. In spite of this, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME failed to take action.
109. An appropriate investigation would have revealed the unsuitability of the female LPN for the particular duty to be performed and/or for employment in the facility in general.
110. It was unreasonable for PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME to hire the female LPN in light of the information it knew, or should have known.
111. Before the aforementioned incident involving the Plaintiff occurred, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME were aware and/or should have been aware and/or were put on notice of the incompetence and/or potentially harmful propensities of the female LPN.
112. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME’s employment of the female LPN since the facility received complaints of incompetence and/or other improper conduct by the female LPN before the aforementioned incident involving the Plaintiff occurred, but PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME failed to investigate or take any measures to prevent further improper conduct.
113. Even after obtaining knowledge of the incompetence and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME allowed the female LPN to remain an employee and assist vulnerable residents, thereby endangering residents such as Plaintiff.
114. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME owed Plaintiff a duty to terminate and/or discipline staff that were unfit, unqualified and/or did not have the disposition to be in contact with vulnerable residents or the residents at large.
115. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
a) Failing to discharge, terminate or reassign the female LPN before she came into contact with Plaintiff;
b) Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation;
c) After receiving notice of the incidents and improper conduct by the female LPN, allowing him to continue in his job duties and functions;
d) Negligently retaining the female LPN as an employee; and,
e) Failing to timely and appropriately react to problems with the female LPN.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT XI:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT FOR NEGLIGENT RETENTION
116. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
117. As the employer of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT were required to ensure the continued suitability and appropriateness of the female LPN as an employee before allowing her unfettered access to vulnerable residents.
118. During her employment, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT became aware, or should have become aware, of problems with this employee demonstrating his unfitness.
119. In spite of this, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT failed to take action.
120. An appropriate investigation would have revealed the unsuitability of the female LPN for the particular duty to be performed and/or for employment in the facility in general.
121. It was unreasonable for PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT to hire the female LPN in light of the information it knew, or should have known.
122. Before the aforementioned incident involving the Plaintiff occurred, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT were aware and/or should have been aware and/or were put on notice of the incompetence and/or potentially harmful propensities of the female LPN.
123. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT’s employment of the female LPN since the facility received complaints of incompetence and/or other improper conduct by the female LPN before the aforementioned incident involving the Plaintiff occurred, but PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT failed to investigate or take any measures to prevent further improper conduct.
124. Even after obtaining knowledge of the incompetence and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT allowed the female LPN to remain an employee and assist vulnerable residents, thereby endangering residents such as Plaintiff.
125. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT owed Plaintiff a duty to terminate and/or discipline staff that were unfit, unqualified and/or did not have the disposition to be in contact with vulnerable residents or the residents at large.
126. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
a) Failing to discharge, terminate or reassign the female LPN before she came into contact with Plaintiff;
b) Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation;
c) After receiving notice of the incidents and improper conduct by the female LPN, allowing him to continue in his job duties and functions;
d) Negligently retaining the female LPN as an employee; and,
e) Failing to timely and appropriately react to problems with the female LPN.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT XII:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN CORPORATE FOR NEGLIGENT RETENTION
127. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
128. As the employer of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE were required to ensure the continued suitability and appropriateness of the female LPN as an employee before allowing her unfettered access to vulnerable residents.
129. During her employment, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE became aware, or should have become aware, of problems with this employee demonstrating his unfitness.
130. In spite of this, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE failed to take action.
131. An appropriate investigation would have revealed the unsuitability of the female LPN for the particular duty to be performed and/or for employment in the facility in general.
132. It was unreasonable for PALM GARDEN CORPORATE to hire the female LPN in light of the information it knew, or should have known.
133. Before the aforementioned incident involving the Plaintiff occurred, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE were aware and/or should have been aware and/or were put on notice of the incompetence and/or potentially harmful propensities of the female LPN.
134. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN CORPORATE’s employment of the female LPN since the facility received complaints of incompetence and/or other improper conduct by the female LPN before the aforementioned incident involving the Plaintiff occurred, but PALM GARDEN CORPORATE failed to investigate or take any measures to prevent further improper conduct.
135. Even after obtaining knowledge of the incompetence and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE allowed the female LPN to remain an employee and assist vulnerable residents, thereby endangering residents such as Plaintiff.
136. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE owed Plaintiff a duty to terminate and/or discipline staff that were unfit, unqualified and/or did not have the disposition to be in contact with vulnerable residents or the residents at large.
137. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
a) Failing to discharge, terminate or reassign the female LPN before she came into contact with Plaintiff;
b) Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation;
c) After receiving notice of the incidents and improper conduct by the female LPN, allowing him to continue in his job duties and functions;
d) Negligently retaining the female LPN as an employee; and,
e) Failing to timely and appropriately react to problems with the female LPN.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT XIII:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME FOR NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION
138. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
139. Before the incident occurred between the female LPN and the Plaintiff, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME were aware and/or were put on notice and/or should have known of the potentially incompetent and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN.
140. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME employment of the female LPN since the facility received complaints of incompetence and other improper conduct by the female LPN prior to the incident involving the Plaintiff, but PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME failed to investigate or take any measures to prevent such acts of incompetence and/or improper conduct.
141. Even after obtaining knowledge of the incompetence and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME allowed the female LPN to remain an employee and assist vulnerable residents thereby endangering residents such as Plaintiff.
142. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME owed Plaintiff a duty to supervise, monitor, control and direct staff that were unfit, unqualified and/or did not have the disposition to be in contact with vulnerable residents or the residents at large.
143. PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
a) Allowing the female LPN to have unfettered access to vulnerable residents while in the facility when the facility knew or should have known of her incompetence and/or improper conduct;
b) Allowing and/or directing the female LPN to care for and/or treat vulnerable residents; and
c) Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN NURSING HOME, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT XIV:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT FOR NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION
144. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
145. Before the incident occurred between the female LPN and the Plaintiff, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT were aware and/or were put on notice and/or should have known of the potentially incompetent and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN.
146. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT employment of the female LPN since the facility received complaints of incompetence and other improper conduct by the female LPN prior to the incident involving the Plaintiff, but PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT failed to investigate or take any measures to prevent such acts of incompetence and/or improper conduct.
147. Even after obtaining knowledge of the incompetence and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT allowed the female LPN to remain an employee and assist vulnerable residents thereby endangering residents such as Plaintiff.
148. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT owed Plaintiff a duty to supervise, monitor, control and direct staff that were unfit, unqualified and/or did not have the disposition to be in contact with vulnerable residents or the residents at large.
149. PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
a) Allowing the female LPN to have unfettered access to vulnerable residents while in the facility when the facility knew or should have known of her incompetence and/or improper conduct;
b) Allowing and/or directing the female LPN to care for and/or treat vulnerable residents; and
c) Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN MANAGEMENT, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
COUNT XV:
CLAIM AGAINST PALM GARDEN CORPORATE FOR NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION
150. Plaintiff re-adopts and re-alleges paragraphs 1 through 37 and further alleges:
151. Before the incident occurred between the female LPN and the Plaintiff, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE were aware and/or were put on notice and/or should have known of the potentially incompetent and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN.
152. Plaintiff was within the zone of foreseeable risk created by PALM GARDEN CORPORATE employment of the female LPN since the facility received complaints of incompetence and other improper conduct by the female LPN prior to the incident involving the Plaintiff, but PALM GARDEN CORPORATE failed to investigate or take any measures to prevent such acts of incompetence and/or improper conduct.
153. Even after obtaining knowledge of the incompetence and/or harmful propensities of the female LPN, PALM GARDEN CORPORATE allowed the female LPN to remain an employee and assist vulnerable residents thereby endangering residents such as Plaintiff.
154. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE owed Plaintiff a duty to supervise, monitor, control and direct staff that were unfit, unqualified and/or did not have the disposition to be in contact with vulnerable residents or the residents at large.
155. PALM GARDEN CORPORATE breached these duties to the Plaintiff by:
a) Allowing the female LPN to have unfettered access to vulnerable residents while in the facility when the facility knew or should have known of her incompetence and/or improper conduct;
b) Allowing and/or directing the female LPN to care for and/or treat vulnerable residents; and
c) Failing to conduct a reasonable investigation.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, MADELYN RENNE COLLEY SEARS, as Personal Representative of the Estate of LOUISE COLLEY, demands judgment for damages, interest, and costs, against PALM GARDEN CORPORATE, and a jury trial on all issues so triable as a matter of right.
DATED this 9th day of May, 2018.
/s/ William J. Sarubbi II Esq.
William J. Sarubbi, II, Esq.
Florida Bar No.: 113401
SENIOR JUSTICE LAW FIRM
1903 S. Congress Ave, Suite 380
Boynton Beach, Florida 33426
Phone: (561) 717-0813
Fax: (561) 708-6781
Email: eservice@SeniorJustice.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff
« Previous PostNext Post »
