Yearly Archives: 2022

Texas employers often tell their employees that they are working “at will” as a means to suggest Texas employers are free at any time to take any action against an employee, including firing them. However, Texas law has various protections for injured workers, including Texas Labor Code, Section 451.001. The protections and legal analysis of a potential wrongful termination or discrimination claim does not stop there and includes various protections for employees injured while on the job.

Specifically, the Texas Labor Code forbids an employer from wrongfully terminating or retaliating against an employee for initiating and/or filing a workers’ compensation claim. Based upon this law, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP has recently filed suit against Michael McCreery d/b/a B-Mac Company. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client was a loyal and hard-working employee of B-Mac company who on or about August 21,2018 sustained a lifting injury to his neck and back while working on the job. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client reported this injury to his superiors and employer as is required for Texas workplace injuries. Texas employees who are injured while performing their work duties are granted certain protections for workers’ compensation. Under Texas law, a workers’ compensation claim is the primary way that Texas workers’ receive benefits, including medical and income benefits after they are injured at work. Without these protections and benefits guaranteed under the Texas Labor Code, Texas workers would have to fend for themselves after an injury they sustained on the job that may impair their ability to continue work in the near future or long-term.

After Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client suffered the work injury and reported it to his employer he was met with hostility, harassment and ultimately terminated on or about September 28,2018. Simply pursuing a workers’ compensation claim for an on the job injury under Texas law cannot be met with negative actions or termination. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP has filed suit on behalf of this injured worker to protect his right against wrongful termination under the Texas Labor Code. The suit seeks lost wages, future lost earning capacity, mental anguish damages, pain and suffering, and punitive damages arising from the wrongful firing.

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s lawyers strongly believe in the importance of protecting injured workers, who suffer from retaliation or discrimination. Nobody should lose their job or face further repercussions for simply doing their job and what is legally allowed of them after a workplace injury. If you have been the victim or workplace discrimination or wrongful termination, call us today for a no-cost initial evaluation of your potential legal rights and remedies.

The attorneys at Doyle Dennis Avery LLP Trial Lawyers have dedicated decades of their legal careers developing and refining their skills to protect workers throughout the United States. Texas law, similar to all states, provides specific protections to workers who suffer from retaliation, termination, or firing by their employer. Businesses and the economy do not run without the hard work of millions of Americans, and when they face discrimination and termination at work, they deserve to know what protections, benefits, and remedies are available to them.

Due to Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s vast experience in Texas courts, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP was hired to file suit against DISA Global Solutions Inc, DISA Holdings Corp, University MRO LLC, University Services LLC, and Pyschemedics Corporation for various alleged violations and negligence regarding Federal and State business practices. DISA Global Solutions is a foreign corporation doing business in Harris County, Texas where their headquarters are located. DISA Global Solutions is a third-party administrator for drug testing for companies working in the upstream and downstream energy sector. University MRO LLC and University Services LLC are both wholly owned entities of DISA who aid in their completion of work. Psychemedics is a foreign corporation with headquarters in Massachusetts and operating as a hair drug testing company throughout the United States, including Harris County, Texas. The suit was filed in Harris County District Court in Houston, Texas.

DISA Global Solutions and their entities control over the management and administration of drug testing for virtually the entire upstream and downstream energy sector. DISA completely controls the drug testing process from collection to laboratory analysis. DISA determines who is selected for drug testing, what kind of drug test is performed, when employees should be drug tested, and mandates and controls how an employee is tested. DISA then sends the specimens to Psychemedics for processing before the report is sent the Medical Review Office of University Services, a DISA entity. DISA exclusively utilizes University Services, an entity wholly owned by DISA, to provide services as the Medical Review Office(“MRO”). University Services is then responsible for receiving and reviewing laboratory results for the drug testing program and evaluating medical explanations for certain drug test results. DISA maintains the final decision whether to accept the drug test result or reject it. DISA also decides and controls under which a contractor employee member may request a re-analysis of his or her original specimen. Thus, DISA through its contracts and agreements virtually controls all aspects regarding to drug testing for the upstream and downstream energy sector.

This suit was filed against Defendants regarding their collection, testing, reporting, administration, mismanagement and dissemination of a false positive drug test result on or about November 5, 2018. Prior to Defendants’ improper conduct, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client worked in the oil and gas industry for approximately 10 years. During this period, they were tested multiple times and never tested positive for illegal drug use. As part of pre-employment screening for a new job in the energy industry, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client was sent to DISA Gulf Coast Service Center to take a urine and hair follicle drug test on or about November 5, 2018. The Defendant then inaccurately concluded Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client tested positive for an illegal drug. The result simply was inaccurate and incorrect. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client did not and does not use illegal drugs. During the same time period, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client was under the continued medical care related to a high-risk pregnancy, and as part of this treatment, the client never tested positive for any illegal drugs. Since the false positive test result, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client has continued to receive drug tests and repeatedly confirmed that they do not take illegal drugs.

The Defendants as a result of the false positive placed Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client’s name into both DISA’s and Pyschemedics’ drug testing databases. These misrepresentations and false statements have barred Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client from obtaining employment with oil and gas industry employers who either have agreed to use DISA for their drug testing or companies with zero tolerance drug testing program. As a result of its conduct, Defendants have embarrassed and humiliated Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client and completely blackballed them from working in the oil and gas industry. Defendants actions caused Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client to suffer serious economic and noneconomic harm, including irreparable damage to the client’s reputation and loss of employment. In addition, Defendants have harmed Doyle Dennis Avery LLP Client’s employment prospects, ruined their reputation, resulted in substantial emotional and financial distress, and destroyed the client’s standing in the community.

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP , on behalf of their client, is pursuing compensation for harm done by the Defendants. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client suffered mental anguish, and of reasonable probability will continue to suffer mental anguish in the future, past and future reputational harm, past and future lost wages, and damages generally. Our lawyers are proud to represent workers against employers who refuse to follow the law and do not respect the rights of their employees. In this case the Defendants allegedly had actual, subjective awareness of the risk involved with their behavior, but nevertheless continued with coconscious indifference to the rights, safety, or welfare of Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client.

Workplace safety is incredibly important, but more important is the standards companies have regarding measuring it. Companies need to know that the protections and safeguards they have in place actually work. In this case, it is alleged the Defendants did not ensure those safeguards and protections worked properly and as a result seriously harmed Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client. The attorneys at Doyle Dennis Avery LLP proudly and fervently support their clients in pursuing the justice they deserve. If you have experienced discrimination or wrongful termination, call us for a free evaluation of your potential legal claim.

PREMISES LIABILITY AND DOG BITE LAWSUIT

In May 2020, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP filed suit on behalf of our client against individual defendants. The client had been the victim of a violent dog mauling at the residence of the defendants. The suit, which was filed in Nueces County, Texas states defendants’ negligence in numerous matters with regard to the handling of a known dangerous animal caused serious permanent injuries and damages to Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client.

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client in November 2019 was invited to the Defendants’ residence. When the client arrived, they were introduced by the Defendant to their dog who was represented as friendly. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client went to pet the dog when it lunged at the client and clamped down on the right side of the client’s face. As a result of this incident, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client suffered severe injuries and impairment, nerve injury and scarring arising out of a long laceration that perforated their facial muscles as a result of the vicious mauling. The dog also was not vaccinated properly at the time of the attack. The physical pain and mental trauma immediately following the attack was severe. The client required immediate medical treatment including stitches, antibiotics, pain medications, and a tetanus shot. The client has also faced long term care issues from this attack.

This incident has greatly changed Doyle Dennis Avery LLP client’s life with permanent disfigurement and damage to the client’s face. The client has a large scar due to the encounter with continued issues with pain, numbness, and sensory loss along the scar. The client’s damages also include medical costs and the mental anguish caused by the initial attack, distress during the recovery, and continued anguish caused by the condition the client has been left in from the attack.

The defendants’ callous disregard for their visitors’ rights and safety ultimately caused this unfortunate and preventable incident. Known to the defendants and unknown to Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client the defendants’ dog, a pit bull, had vicious propensities and posed a danger to humans when not properly controlled. Defendants showed gross negligence in failing to handle their known dangerous animal, failing to take measures to make the dog less of a threat to attack people, and otherwise failing to exercise the ordinary care of a pet owner. Defendants grossly negligent behavior regarding their own pet ultimately resulted in life changing physical and mental injuries to Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client. As a result, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client seeks damages related to the physical and mental trauma associated with the mauling and those damages he is owed as he continues to suffer from the repercussions of the attack.

If you are seriously injured due to the gross negligence of individuals you may have a claim to recover damages for injuries and associated damages. Individuals at fault due to gross negligence can be held liable for their behavior if you were seriously injured or harmed as a result. Doyle Trial Lawyers can help you understand your rights and how to pursue a claim against defendants whose negligent behavior results in severe injuries and damage to individuals. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP works on a contingency fee basis, which means we do not get paid unless your case has a positive resolution. Please reach out to Doyle Dennis Avery LLP  today for a free consultation to discuss your legal rights after a serious injury caused by other’s gross negligence.

On June 3^rd, 2021 The Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed a $1.7 million dollar judgement in favor of Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client Joseph Ball against Alleyton Resource Company LLC. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s team of attorneys in Ball v. Alleyton Resource Company LLC had successfully presented the case to a Fort Bend County District Court Jury who on July 26,2019 awarded Mr. Ball with $1,706,187 in damages, including $164,168 in past wages, $675,519 in future lost wages, $100,000 in past mental anguish, $16,500 in future mental anguish, and $750,000 in punitive damages. The judgement also will come with a substantial amount of interest owed on the $1.7 million dollar judgement over the last couple years. The jury found that Alleyton Resources retaliated and wrongfully terminated Mr. Ball for instituting procedures under the Texas Worker’s Compensation Act.

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client drove a ready-mix concrete truck and worked for Alleyton for nearly a decade. After suffering a workplace injury, Mr. Ball instituted worker’s compensation proceedings. As a result, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client was fired. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s team presented evidence in the prior trial that Alleyton Resource Company LLC violated its internal policies, concealed the reason for Ball’s termination, contradicted its basis for the firing, and failed to timely and accurately document the termination.

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals found no error in the previous jury trial and their final judgement in Ball v Alleyton. It further rejected Alleyton’s arguments such as that the admissible evidence is factually insufficient to support the jury’s findings that Alleyton terminated Ball because he had instituted a proceeding under the Texas workers’ compensation statute. Alleyton also asserted that a trial court abused its discretion when it admitted the claims diary into evidence over a hearsay objection, but this argument too was rejected by the Appeals Court. Furthermore, Alleyton in their appeal objected to the jury’s exemplary damages award and its inability to offer certain instructions in the jury charge. The Texas Fourteenth Court of Appeals further rejected these arguments in upholding the prior judgement in favor of Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client.

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s client will now be owed not only the initial $1.7 million dollar judgement but also significant interest earned on that amount as well. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s team of experienced trial attorneys and staff are proud of their work once again in helping their clients receive adequate compensation and financial support after a life changing work accident. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP is proud of their track record in not just this case but the hundreds of cases over previous decades successfully pursued by our team. If you suffer a workplace injury then are retaliated against as a result, please contact the experienced trial attorneys at Doyle Dennis Avery LLP to help you pursue the justice you deserve. Our team is eager to continue fighting for clients we believe in their quest for justice. Call today and schedule a free consultation with our team of experienced trial attorneys!

In January 2021, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP and co-counsel filed a suit on behalf of our clients who are nationals of the Republic of Kosovo. The suit was filed against CIGNA Defendants, including Life Insurance Company of North America et al, and AECOM Defendants, including AECOM and AC FIRST LLC. The lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of The State of California County of Los Angeles pertains to our clients’ work in Afghanistan for AECOM as part of AECOM’s contracts to provide support services to the United States military personnel. We are proud to assist our clients seeking the compensation and benefits owed to them for their support of American military in Afghanistan.

In 2016, AECOM was awarded the EAGLE-AFG contract by the Army Contracting Command – Rock Island. The EAGLE-AFG is a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract valued at $429 million with 1 base year and 4 option years. Under this contract, AECOM was to provide maintenance, supply, and transportation services to the U.S. and Coalition partners at several locations in Afghanistan, including Kandahar and Bagram Airfields. AECOM used its entities GSS and AC First to supply this labor and fulfill the contract.

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s clients were employed in Afghanistan from 2012 through 2017 by AECOM. The clients were nominally employed at the time by GSS, but were actually the employees of AC First and AECOM. As part of these contracts for employment, the AECOM defendants represented that they would offer and procure long-term disability insurance for employees working in Afghanistan. Indeed, each of our client’s contract with GSS included, upon agreement of employment, the offer of a benefits plan including Long Term Disability Coverage. The AECOM Defendants told our clients that they had contracted with CIGNA to provide long-term disability insurance. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s clients accepted the coverage with the AECOM defendants and paid monthly for the CIGNA disability insurance coverage through payroll deductions. AECOM after procurement of the policy through CIGNA was provided coverage to employees, like Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s clients, who worked for either AC First or, nominally, for GSS. This policy went into effect on January 1, 2017.

Despite this promise of coverage, after our clients sustained disabling injuries, they submitted claims to CIGNA for disability coverage. In response, CIGNA closed the claims and alleged that foreign nationals, like Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s clients, were not covered by the CIGNA Policy. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP therefore has filed this lawsuit against both the AECOM Defendants and the CIGNA defendants. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s clients left the safety of their homes in Kosovo to travel into an active war zone in Afghanistan. Our clients provided necessary support for U.S. Military’s operations in the area. During their employment, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s clients were exposed to repeated life-threatening and graphic events, including mortar, rocket, suicide, and ground attacks. These incidents and other work-related accidents left our clients with very severe and permanent pain, disfigurement, injuries and damage. Due to Defendants’ conduct and failure to procure or pay disability benefits, Doyle Dennis Avery LLP ’s clients suffered significant economic damage, humiliation, worry, distress, and continuing economic and physical damage. In denying these claims, misrepresenting our clients’ insurance coverage, and /or failing to produce coverage, Defendants additionally acted with oppression, fraud, and malice.

Doyle Dennis Avery LLP is proud to support our foreign clients as they supported our US Military. Countless Americans and thousands of civilians, like our clients from Kosovo, support American Military operations across the world. If you are one of these individuals and suffered serious injury and suffering due to the gross negligence of American corporations you may have a claim to recover damages for injuries and associated damages. American companies at fault due to gross negligence can be held liable for their behavior if you were seriously injured or harmed as a result. Doyle Trial Lawyers can help you understand your rights and how to pursue a claim against defendants whose negligent behavior results in severe injuries and damage to individuals. Doyle Dennis Avery LLP will not charge you to complete an initial evaluation of your claim. Call us today to discuss your potential claim.