Defense Base Act Compensation Blog

The Modern Day DBA Casualty

Posts Tagged ‘Dorothy Clay Sims’

Congratulations Dorothy Clay Sims

Posted by defensebaseactcomp on July 5, 2011

Casey Anthony Trial : Not guilty verdict in death of daughter Caylee

Dorothy Clay Sims, whose name DBA Claimants remember for her work in exposing AIG’s infamous Dr G ,Dr John Dorland Griffith, was a major part of the legal team that just secured a not guilty verdict in the Casey Anthony trial.

See

Dr. John Dorland Griffith Exposed, Publicly, Finally

Dr John Dorland Griffith Exposed Case No. 2008-LDA-00287

BRB Overturn’s X Files Case ALJ Paul C Johnson and Dr John Dorland Griffith

Defense Base Act Comp only applauds the work done by Dorothy Sims, and expresses no opinion on the guilt or innocence of Casey Anthony.

Posted in AIG and CNA, Independent Medical Examinations | Tagged: , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Dr. John Dorland Griffith Exposed, Publicly, Finally

Posted by defensebaseactcomp on June 29, 2010

Forwarded by a Contributor to the blog:

Dr. John Dorland Griffith, Star of the DBA X FilesAIG’s hired gun,

Thank you, Judge Jeffrey Tureck, for confirming what we at  American Contractors in Iraq and Afghanistan  have been saying all along about Dr John Dorland Griffith at the DBA X-files.

Dorothy Clay Sims you are a true American hero.

Your extensive knowledge on PTSD, your diligence and passion for justice has finally shown up this charlatan for what he is.
Thank you for the lives you will have saved, for helping  injured civilian contractors where very few will.

To those who stood idly by or even helped arranged for their clients to travel from five or six states away to see this bogus hired gun may you go down with him.

In light of this ruling, Case No. 2008-LDA-00287, we request  that all prior cases that were denied because of Dr Griffiths’ misleading testimony (notably ALJs Romero and Kennington who declared themselves so impressed with him in earlier decisions) be reopened so that justice can be done.

From the decision  Judge Jeffrey Tureck,

“In regard to Dr. Griffith, to put it bluntly, he was a terrible witness.

He was sarcastic, arrogant, argumentative and flippant, and often refused to answer the questions put to him.

On his own, he assumed facts for which there was no support in the record, and then offered his opinion based on these assumed facts.

For example, he assumed that the Claimant was at fault in the incident where his truck was shot at (e.g., TRG 142-48), that Claimant was worried that he would have to pay $17,000 to repair the truck (e.g .• TRG 35), and that Claimant was depressed due to his three divorces (TRG 48-49, 312).

He provided different answers to substantially similar questions throughout his testimony. As an example, his testimony regarding whether Claimant is malingering or exaggerating changed constantly, to the point that his opinion regarding this question is incomprehensible. See, e.g., TRG 49-53, 309-10, 317.

Further, he believes that anyone in Claimant’s shoes would be trying to collect compensation rather than
work, since he believes “no one feels like working
“. E.g., TRG 442.8

He also believes that if the Claimant actually was suffering from PTSD, the carrier would not be opposing the claim.
TRG 161.

Moreover, his medical judgment is clouded by his belief that PTSD is a highly overused diagnosis. TRG 317.

The full flavor of Dr. Griffith’s testimony can only really be appreciated by reading the
entire 490-page transcript and viewing the videotape of his May 8, 2009 deposition; but reading
pages 29-35 of the transcript would be a good starting point.

His bias against Claimants; his irrationality; and his unwillingness to provide a straight answer to a question; are exhibited throughout his testimony.

Dr. Griffith’s opinion in this case is not credible and has no probative value.”

So this raises the question of why Dr. Griffith, who indicates he is well off financially continues to work at the age of78.

Is it just good sport helping AIG deny injured contractors the benefits they are entitled too?

There is more to come on this weasel.  This claim is just the tip of the iceberg.

See also  AIG, Their DME, the Saga Continues

Judge Turek decision and order

Issue Date: 14 June 2010
In the Matter of
DARCY FRASER
Claimant
v.
KBR / SERVICE EMPLOYEES INT’L
Employer
and
INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE STATE
OF PENNSYLVA / AIG
Carrier
David C. Barnett. Esq.
Ft. Lauderdale; FL
For the Claimant
Billy 1. Frey, Esq.
Jerry R. McKenney; Esq.
Houston, TX
For the Employer/Carrier
Before: JEFFREY TURECK
Administrative Law Judge
Case No. 2008-LDA-00287
OWCPNo.02-174615
DECISION AND ORDER

Posted in ACE, AIG and CNA, Civilian Contractors, Contractor Casualties and Missing, Defense Base Act Law and Procedure, Department of Labor, Follow the Money, KBR, PTSD and TBI | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 17 Comments »

 
%d bloggers like this: