Results

Maudlin v. Fed. Emergency Mgmt. Agency, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133209

NATHAN B. MAUDLIN, JEANNE G. MAUDLIN, and FLANDERS-SCOTT, LLC, Plaintiffs, vs. FEDERAL EMERGENCY… For NATHAN B. MAUDLIN, JEANNE G. MAUDLIN, FLANDERS-SCOTT, LLC, Plaintiffs: Nathan B. Maudlin, KLEZMER & ASSOCIATES, New Harmony, IN.

Jurisdiction: U.S. Federal
Court: Indiana Southern District Court
Date: Sep 30, 2015

Marion County Health Dep’t v. Hill, 15 N.E.3d 688

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Jul 09, 2014

Banks v. Evans Limestone Co., 13 N.E.3d 555

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: May 27, 2014

Gordon v. Toyota Motor Mfg. of Ind., 2013 Ind. App. Unpub. LEXIS 450

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: NATHAN B. MAUDLIN, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., New Harmony, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Apr 09, 2013

Arnold v. Rose Acre Farms, Inc., 966 N.E.2d 107

Overview: Where an employee was injured in a collision when he crossed the center line of a public road to turn into his employer’s facility, the injury did not arise out of the course of his employment under Ind. Code § 22-3-2-2(a) because the public road was not part of the employer’s premises for purposes of the Indiana Worker’s Compensation Act.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Mar 27, 2012

Burdette v. Perlman-Rocque Co., 954 N.E.2d 925

Overview: Under Ind. Code § 22-3-2-2, Indiana Worker’s Compensation Act did not provide compensation for the employee’s death as evidence was presented supporting the determination that his fall was caused by a personal condition, vertigo, and not because conditions in the area where he fell increased his risk of falling or the dangerous effects of his fall.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Feb 22, 2011

R.M. v. Second Injury Fund, 943 N.E.2d 811

Overview: Even though a claimant entitled to 500 weeks of worker’s compensation benefits under Ind. Code § 22-3-3-10 had only received 264 weeks of benefits, he was still entitled to recover additional benefits from Second Injury Fund because his employer and its worker’s compensation insurer went out of business, effectively exhausting his benefits.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Jan 31, 2011

Maclellan Integrated Servs. v. Marano, 2010 Ind. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1631

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: NATHAN MAUDLIN, Klemer Maudlin, P.C., New Harmony, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Nov 24, 2010

Pioneer Auto Truck Sales, Inc. v. Burch, 2010 Ind. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1216

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Aug 31, 2010

Abbott v. Mainsource Fin. Group, 931 N.E.2d 909

Overview: Where a bank teller suffered a heart attack during an armed robbery but her physicians indicated that she had recovered from the acute cardiac event and sustained no permanent damage, she was not entitled to compensation for the cost of preventative medications under Ind. Code § 22-3-3-4(c) because there was no unresolved work-related injury.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Aug 06, 2010

Celadon v. Sharon, 2010 Ind. App. Unpub. LEXIS 728

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, P.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Jun 04, 2010

Devoy & Hicks Body Shop v. Wallace, 2009 Ind. App. Unpub. LEXIS 1739

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: NATHAN B. MAUDLIN , MARY C. HAMILTON, Klezmer Maudlin, New Harmony, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Oct 20, 2009

Ag-One Coop v. Scott, 914 N.E.2d 860

Overview: Although it was frustrating that an employee went without medical care or worker’s compensation while his first and second employers disputed liability for his shoulder injuries, the second employer could not have acted in bad faith under Ind. Code § 22-3-4-12.1(a) in denying his claim when only the first employer was ultimately found liable.

FOR APPELLEE: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer Maudlin, Indianapolis, Indiana; DANIEL S. TOMSON, Mercer Belanger, …

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Oct 13, 2009

Wright Tree Serv. v. Hernandez, 907 N.E.2d 183

Overview: Award of death benefits in a worker’s compensation case was affirmed because substantial evidence supported the administrative findings and conclusion that an employee’s death occurred by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment with the employer and that the claim was compensable pursuant to Ind. Code § 22-3-2-2.

FOR APPELLEE: NATHAN B. MAUDLIN, New Harmony, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Jun 08, 2009

Mayes v. Second Injury Fund, 888 N.E.2d 773

Overview: Indiana Worker’s Compensation Board’s denial of Indiana Second Injury Fund benefits to workers’ compensation claimant under Ind. Code Ann. § 22-3-2-13 was reversed, even though claimant entered into third-party settlement, as Fund’s liability was derivative of employer’s liability and Board approved extension of employer’s liability.

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT: Randal M. Klezmer, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Supreme Court
Date: Jun 24, 2008

Muncie Reception Diagnostic Ctr. v. Wright, 2008 Ind. App. Unpub. LEXIS 493

ATTORNEYS FOR APELLEE: RANDAL KLEZMER, Klezmer & Associates; SCOTT M. DILLON, Scott M. Dillon, LLC, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Jan 31, 2008

Mayes v. Second Injury Fund, 873 N.E.2d 136

Overview: Because the record did not show the amount of compensation a workers’ compensation claimant had received from a confidential third-party settlement, the claimant had failed to prove that further compensation under the Second Injury Fund under Ind. Code § 22-3-3-13, even if allowed, would not result in a double recovery under Ind. Code § 22-3-2-13.

FOR APPELLANT: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer and Associates, Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: Sep 11, 2007

Krause v. Ind. Univ. – Purdue Univ. at Indianapolis, 866 N.E.2d 846

Overview: In a worker’s compensation case, when an employee refused services from her attending physician, the employer was required under Ind. Code § 22-3-3-4 to notify her that such refusal would result in her not being provided pain treatment services from any other physician. Medical treatment was included in “all compensation” under the statute.

FOR APPELLANT: RANDAL M. KLEZMER, Klezmer & Associates, Indianapolis, Indiana; SCOTT M. DILLON, Scott M. Dillon, L.L.C., Indianapolis, Indiana.

Jurisdiction: Indiana
Court: Court of Appeals
Date: May 24, 2007

McCauley v. Nucor Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9688

… Vice, BROWN & JAMES PC, St. Louis, MO.; Randal M. Klezmer, KLEZMER & ASSOCIATES, Indianapolis, IN.

Jurisdiction: U.S. Federal
Court: Indiana Southern District Court
Date: Feb 09, 2007

McCauley v. Nucor Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9690

… Vice, BROWN & JAMES P.C., St. Louis, MO; Randal M. Klezmer, KLEZMER & ASSOCIATES, Indianapolis, IN.

Jurisdiction: U.S. Federal
Court: Indiana Southern District Court
Date: Feb 09, 2007

Contact Us for a Free Consultation

Required
Required