Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-75-110011 /4 '77, R ::(). A R..:SuLUTTUN i\LITHURIV,ILX 011 •-'0 PA': TO 101' c't ()tC117.: •C'T P :71-<t 1. ,L, : c • :W..U• 1W:7W ,2' .:1: 1. W. • rt.1 :* 0,2 4'‘ 1i 11 01.1 ,;. ... • eci .i in Li:(2 er 21 L. Zourt o r - , c ;I., -1 persoh in ju i es su- ered ur pri 2 e on 1e;eil' Jeectivc pu 1 c sidewafl; on ti,c2 Nortilest cornir 0 .i. W. Virst J.W. i rst •eii• , • i i , or ; i , ,_..e ,nesL L1is ia i. ui Lilo pre - were (7(mciticLed 1,•: the (2,r1.i,•:e oi7 the Ci ALtorne said or:Lice recommends Li-1,11. s el e se or the sum o: ,(); L's 7 1 1 , I A .../R 1 : !ie(..:t ion 1. t he !;!.17ect,. o is 'hereby Zed L.() •„..0 wiLilukit the admission o 1 ia • 1,.0 s III o :P. • 0 )11 i:11 and 2or.pleLe T. en. 01 her • a8,. ies sii-isered on Apr Hle Ci,- lor n'iejed persona) 411 , when she ,:e on an a tegedly 1/ it • • def:ec'Live pub'li c siciewa I on iwca orntn: 0r c;.W. O'Ltist JtreeL and ;;.W. i1 rst Ave 1ie, fii ,;.' , p011 Le en'ocution DE ,71 re ease re ea S jL1O ‘2. t-.. r.);1..rUL demonds. ;s ISI Tr,r: S Si on epori..nent T• • C i LAi.!_onLeT: Alultirs A. fEaas 2 - tlonorable Members of the City Commission John S. Li ov ittp 11t r C1T Otr Mt*M,, t'LQRlpA R4pR1Ct MtMORANOYM Waif Novomber A , 1 , rrt.t to15-061 sutl�e� t NerlllfNcil< ENcilfaWlEs ;4etiernen1 (), claim. Marilyn K. Troxell, et vir. vs. City of Miami. 475-1.1240. Mrs. Marilyn K. Troxell and her husband, Randolph Troxell, filed an action against the City of Miami in the Circuit Court of ©ado County, hearing No. 75-11240, claiming personal injuries suffered on April 29, 1974, when Mrs. Troxeil fell on an al'egediy defective public sidewalk on the northwest corner of S.W. First Street and S.W. First Avenue, Miami, Florida. The investigation of this case and the pre-trial discovery were conducted by the office of the City Attorney. Such investigation revealed that such curb existed in a condition of disrepair for a period of several weeks. The asphalt had come off leaving a hole in front of the pedestrian crosswalk. The claimant, who is a professional dancer and dancing instructor, alleges that her shoe heels were caught behind the curb at the hole in front of the pedestrian crosswalk when she attempted to cross the street; she further alleges that such mishap caused her to fall forward into the street. The claimant sustained abrasions of the knees and a fracture of talus of the right ankle, which resulted in limitation of movement of both knees and the right ankle. The claimant was hospita;ixed and the physician who treated her will rate claimant as having a permanent disabi lit',' of 10% to 1". as a result of the accident. After litilation had proceeded for a considerable period of time and after negotiations, c;aimant's counsel agreed to accept the sum of $2,650.00 in settlement. Exposure to the City because of the physical injuries and permanent impairment is well in excess of the proposed settlement. By way of illustration, the hospital bill amounts to $1, 169.00; the doctor's bill to $593.85: other out-of-pocket expenses to $130.00, making a total. or $1,897.87 Tot City Commission nes Tro:r. t ' !titt let11C±111 Fromt City Attorney patrt 11!11-'7"+ for medical expenses incurred by the claimant se Mr. In addi- tion, there are expenditures for nursing cure, anti OS 0' services and consortium alleged by claimant's husband. Based upon the advice of Mr. Jose B. Alvarez of the Torts Division, it is recommended that the instant claim be settled for $2,650.00. JSLt 3f3A t r19