Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [infoguys-list] was the stroke avoidable.

Expand Messages
  • suesarkis@aol.com
    Bill - I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered. Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have gone not
    Message 1 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      Bill -

      I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered.
      Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have gone
      not only unanswered but totally ignored. Bewildered because now I would
      also like to know who won the iPod which she offered early last month. If
      my memory serves me correctly, she was going to raffle that after she
      received 300 opinions. Perhaps she hasn't received 300 yet.

      I truly don't remember how many responses to the inquiry there were and I
      also do not know whether there were private responses. What I do know,
      however, is that the question should be answered immediately, if not sooner.


      Sincerely yours,
      Sue
      ________________________
      Sue Sarkis
      Sarkis Detective Agency


      (est. 1976)
      PI 6564
      _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

      1346 Ethel Street
      Glendale, CA 91207-1826
      818-242-2505

      "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

      If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
      thank a military veteran



      In a message dated 11/1/2010 8:32:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
      oracleintl@... writes:

      Hey Sue -- I don't think anyone actually responded to that post but me. I
      don't know if she paid that, but I can tell you she didn't pay me.

      That makes you wonder about all this "donation" business doesn't it?

      Bill


      In a message dated 10/29/2010 8:21:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
      _suesarkis@..._ (mailto:suesarkis@...) writes:

      Amy -

      John's stroke my pitutti. Who won the $250 for the best analogy that you
      offered. You said the author of the best one would receive $250.

      Who did you pay? How many more times must one ask? Since I didn't submit
      one, obviously I do not have a jealous nor ulterior motive. I just want
      to know who the winner was.

      Sincerely,
      Sue

      In a message dated 10/29/2010 5:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
      __Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) _
      (mailto:_Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:Jurydoctor@...) ) writes:

      this case involves John's stroke. I need to know what you need to know in
      order to make a decision and what opinions, if any you have about the case.
      $20 to Smile train for each opinion as always your opinions are extremely
      helpful and I thank you in advance.

      Amy

      Plaintiff argues that:

      1. The Primary care physician sent John to the ER thinking he was having
      an evolving stroke.
      The nurse and ER doctor made the correct differential diagnosis of CVA/TIA
      but failed to do the tests necessary to rule out evolving stroke or call
      in a neurologist to consult;

      2. The radiologist should have called the ER doctor to report the
      significant changes in John's brain seen on CT, even though there was no
      "acute"
      (immediate) damage seen;

      3. The hospital is responsible for radiology and ER, plus it had
      complaints from the doctors about the communication between ER and
      radiology and
      failed to take steps to improve the procedures; and,

      4. The proper stroke protocols of putting John on blood thinners and
      providing the interventions to keep his carotid arteries open for blood
      flow
      would have prevented the complete blockage that happened several days
      later.
      Evolving carotid stenosis is among the most readily treatable causes of
      stroke. Timely treatment allows these patients to avoid disaster and live
      long
      and healthy lives.

      The defense argues that:

      1. John was told to follow up with his doctor in three days and did not do
      so (Jane said she signed John out and did not recall this instruction in
      the discharge papers; rather, she thought that if John got better, then it
      was likely the Valium reaction, as the ER doctor told her). John did get
      better. If John followed up with his doctor, he might not have had a major
      stroke.
      But then John acutally experienced a major stroke event and was rushed
      back to the hospital. (Several days later)

      2. John's problem was unavoidable, this is 20/20 hindsight

      3. Jake's underlying hardening of the arteries has continued to progress
      and that is what has made him unable to function; and,

      4. The doctors are independent contractors and if mistakes were made it
      was by the doctors for which the hospital is not responsible.

      John and Jane have since divorced. John moved in across the street with a
      woman who has orthopedic disabilities. Jane continues to feel for John and
      loves him.

      John worked for a company doing computer aided drafting. His last project
      was "Titan". John designed the containers that would be outfitted by the
      military and utilized to transport mobile command and control centers for
      use
      in our war efforts in the middle-east. Jake was an artist and avid
      musician. He had a music studio in his house. He loved to work on old cars
      and
      ride one of his two Harley Davidson motorcycles. His loss of cognition and
      motor controls have rendered him incapable to work or enjoy his hobbies.







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Bob Hrodey
      ... I respect you, Bill, but that s bull&^%! Considering the task discussed, I KNOW for a fact that you have at least 30-40 minutes available for just goofing
      Message 2 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        oracleintl@..., wrote the following at or about 11/1/2010 10:51 AM:
        > I have never been that slow!
        >

        I respect you, Bill, but that's bull&^%!

        Considering the task discussed, I KNOW for a fact that you have at least
        30-40 minutes available for just goofing off at least once every week!:-D

        --

        Enjoy,

        /Bob/
        ________________________________________________________________
        Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
        Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA,
        NAPPS
        Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, & P.A.W.L.I.
        Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice
        337-4638 Fax
        email: inquiry@... <mailto:inquiry@...> or
        rth@... <mailto:rth@...>
        Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • oracleintl@aol.com
        Yeah, OK, but I d feel sooooooooo dirty afterwards . . . ; ) Bill In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:14:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, rth@hrodey.com writes:
        Message 3 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          Yeah, OK, but I'd feel sooooooooo dirty afterwards . . .

          ; )

          Bill


          In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:14:34 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
          rth@... writes:




          _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) , wrote the following at
          or about 11/1/2010 10:51 AM:
          > I have never been that slow!
          >

          I respect you, Bill, but that's bull&^%!

          Considering the task discussed, I KNOW for a fact that you have at least
          30-40 minutes available for just goofing off at least once every week!:-D

          --

          Enjoy,

          /Bob/
          __________________________________________________________
          Hrodey & Associates Established 1977
          Post Office Box 366 Member of NALI, ASIS, FBINAA,
          NAPPS
          Woodstock, IL 60098-0366 NCISS, & P.A.W.L.I.
          Licensed in IL & WI (815) 337-4636 Voice
          337-4638 Fax
          email: _inquiry@..._ (mailto:inquiry@...)
          <mailto:_inquiry@..._ (mailto:inquiry@...) > or
          _rth@..._ (mailto:rth@...) <mailto:_rth@..._
          (mailto:rth@...) >
          Illinois License 115-000783 Wisconsin 8045-063

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • oracleintl@aol.com
          So, you re the moderator, demand proof or bounce her out of here. Bill In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:07:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, suesarkis@aol.com
          Message 4 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            So, you're the moderator, demand proof or bounce her out of here.

            Bill


            In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:07:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
            suesarkis@... writes:





            Bill -

            I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered.
            Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have
            gone
            not only unanswered but totally ignored. Bewildered because now I would
            also like to know who won the iPod which she offered early last month. If
            my memory serves me correctly, she was going to raffle that after she
            received 300 opinions. Perhaps she hasn't received 300 yet.

            I truly don't remember how many responses to the inquiry there were and I
            also do not know whether there were private responses. What I do know,
            however, is that the question should be answered immediately, if not
            sooner.


            Sincerely yours,
            Sue
            ________________________
            Sue Sarkis
            Sarkis Detective Agency

            (est. 1976)
            PI 6564
            _www.sarkispi.com_ (_http://www.sarkispi.com/_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/) )

            1346 Ethel Street
            Glendale, CA 91207-1826
            818-242-2505

            "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

            If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
            thank a military veteran

            In a message dated 11/1/2010 8:32:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
            _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

            Hey Sue -- I don't think anyone actually responded to that post but me. I
            don't know if she paid that, but I can tell you she didn't pay me.

            That makes you wonder about all this "donation" business doesn't it?

            Bill

            In a message dated 10/29/2010 8:21:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
            __suesarkis@..._ (mailto:_suesarkis@...) _
            (mailto:_suesarkis@..._ (mailto:suesarkis@...) ) writes:

            Amy -

            John's stroke my pitutti. Who won the $250 for the best analogy that you
            offered. You said the author of the best one would receive $250.

            Who did you pay? How many more times must one ask? Since I didn't submit
            one, obviously I do not have a jealous nor ulterior motive. I just want
            to know who the winner was.

            Sincerely,
            Sue

            In a message dated 10/29/2010 5:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
            ___Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:__Jurydoctor@...) _
            (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) ) _
            (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) _
            (mailto:_Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:Jurydoctor@...) ) ) writes:

            this case involves John's stroke. I need to know what you need to know in
            order to make a decision and what opinions, if any you have about the case.
            $20 to Smile train for each opinion as always your opinions are extremely
            helpful and I thank you in advance.

            Amy

            Plaintiff argues that:

            1. The Primary care physician sent John to the ER thinking he was having
            an evolving stroke.
            The nurse and ER doctor made the correct differential diagnosis of CVA/TIA
            but failed to do the tests necessary to rule out evolving stroke or call
            in a neurologist to consult;

            2. The radiologist should have called the ER doctor to report the
            significant changes in John's brain seen on CT, even though there was no
            "acute"
            (immediate) damage seen;

            3. The hospital is responsible for radiology and ER, plus it had
            complaints from the doctors about the communication between ER and
            radiology and
            failed to take steps to improve the procedures; and,

            4. The proper stroke protocols of putting John on blood thinners and
            providing the interventions to keep his carotid arteries open for blood
            flow
            would have prevented the complete blockage that happened several days
            later.
            Evolving carotid stenosis is among the most readily treatable causes of
            stroke. Timely treatment allows these patients to avoid disaster and live
            long
            and healthy lives.

            The defense argues that:

            1. John was told to follow up with his doctor in three days and did not do
            so (Jane said she signed John out and did not recall this instruction in
            the discharge papers; rather, she thought that if John got better, then it
            was likely the Valium reaction, as the ER doctor told her). John did get
            better. If John followed up with his doctor, he might not have had a major
            stroke.
            But then John acutally experienced a major stroke event and was rushed
            back to the hospital. (Several days later)

            2. John's problem was unavoidable, this is 20/20 hindsight

            3. Jake's underlying hardening of the arteries has continued to progress
            and that is what has made him unable to function; and,

            4. The doctors are independent contractors and if mistakes were made it
            was by the doctors for which the hospital is not responsible.

            John and Jane have since divorced. John moved in across the street with a
            woman who has orthopedic disabilities. Jane continues to feel for John and
            loves him.

            John worked for a company doing computer aided drafting. His last project
            was "Titan". John designed the containers that would be outfitted by the
            military and utilized to transport mobile command and control centers for
            use
            in our war efforts in the middle-east. Jake was an artist and avid
            musician. He had a music studio in his house. He loved to work on old cars
            and
            ride one of his two Harley Davidson motorcycles. His loss of cognition and
            motor controls have rendered him incapable to work or enjoy his hobbies.

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • rjmlegalservices@yahoo.com
            Stop Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry® ... From: oracleintl@aol.com Sender: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:17:59
            Message 5 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              Stop
              Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®

              -----Original Message-----
              From: oracleintl@...
              Sender: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 12:17:59
              To: <infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com>
              Reply-To: infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] was the stroke avoidable.

              So, you're the moderator, demand proof or bounce her out of here.

              Bill


              In a message dated 11/1/2010 12:07:41 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
              suesarkis@... writes:





              Bill -

              I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered.
              Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have
              gone
              not only unanswered but totally ignored. Bewildered because now I would
              also like to know who won the iPod which she offered early last month. If
              my memory serves me correctly, she was going to raffle that after she
              received 300 opinions. Perhaps she hasn't received 300 yet.

              I truly don't remember how many responses to the inquiry there were and I
              also do not know whether there were private responses. What I do know,
              however, is that the question should be answered immediately, if not
              sooner.


              Sincerely yours,
              Sue
              ________________________
              Sue Sarkis
              Sarkis Detective Agency

              (est. 1976)
              PI 6564
              _www.sarkispi.com_ (_http://www.sarkispi.com/_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/) )

              1346 Ethel Street
              Glendale, CA 91207-1826
              818-242-2505

              "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

              If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
              thank a military veteran

              In a message dated 11/1/2010 8:32:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
              _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

              Hey Sue -- I don't think anyone actually responded to that post but me. I
              don't know if she paid that, but I can tell you she didn't pay me.

              That makes you wonder about all this "donation" business doesn't it?

              Bill

              In a message dated 10/29/2010 8:21:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
              __suesarkis@..._ (mailto:_suesarkis@...)_
              (mailto:_suesarkis@..._ (mailto:suesarkis@...) ) writes:

              Amy -

              John's stroke my pitutti. Who won the $250 for the best analogy that you
              offered. You said the author of the best one would receive $250.

              Who did you pay? How many more times must one ask? Since I didn't submit
              one, obviously I do not have a jealous nor ulterior motive. I just want
              to know who the winner was.

              Sincerely,
              Sue

              In a message dated 10/29/2010 5:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
              ___Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:__Jurydoctor@...)_
              (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) )_
              (mailto:__Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...)_
              (mailto:_Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:Jurydoctor@...) ) ) writes:

              this case involves John's stroke. I need to know what you need to know in
              order to make a decision and what opinions, if any you have about the case.
              $20 to Smile train for each opinion as always your opinions are extremely
              helpful and I thank you in advance.

              Amy

              Plaintiff argues that:

              1. The Primary care physician sent John to the ER thinking he was having
              an evolving stroke.
              The nurse and ER doctor made the correct differential diagnosis of CVA/TIA
              but failed to do the tests necessary to rule out evolving stroke or call
              in a neurologist to consult;

              2. The radiologist should have called the ER doctor to report the
              significant changes in John's brain seen on CT, even though there was no
              "acute"
              (immediate) damage seen;

              3. The hospital is responsible for radiology and ER, plus it had
              complaints from the doctors about the communication between ER and
              radiology and
              failed to take steps to improve the procedures; and,

              4. The proper stroke protocols of putting John on blood thinners and
              providing the interventions to keep his carotid arteries open for blood
              flow
              would have prevented the complete blockage that happened several days
              later.
              Evolving carotid stenosis is among the most readily treatable causes of
              stroke. Timely treatment allows these patients to avoid disaster and live
              long
              and healthy lives.

              The defense argues that:

              1. John was told to follow up with his doctor in three days and did not do
              so (Jane said she signed John out and did not recall this instruction in
              the discharge papers; rather, she thought that if John got better, then it
              was likely the Valium reaction, as the ER doctor told her). John did get
              better. If John followed up with his doctor, he might not have had a major
              stroke.
              But then John acutally experienced a major stroke event and was rushed
              back to the hospital. (Several days later)

              2. John's problem was unavoidable, this is 20/20 hindsight

              3. Jake's underlying hardening of the arteries has continued to progress
              and that is what has made him unable to function; and,

              4. The doctors are independent contractors and if mistakes were made it
              was by the doctors for which the hospital is not responsible.

              John and Jane have since divorced. John moved in across the street with a
              woman who has orthopedic disabilities. Jane continues to feel for John and
              loves him.

              John worked for a company doing computer aided drafting. His last project
              was "Titan". John designed the containers that would be outfitted by the
              military and utilized to transport mobile command and control centers for
              use
              in our war efforts in the middle-east. Jake was an artist and avid
              musician. He had a music studio in his house. He loved to work on old cars
              and
              ride one of his two Harley Davidson motorcycles. His loss of cognition and
              motor controls have rendered him incapable to work or enjoy his hobbies.

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • suesarkis@aol.com
              Amy - I don t doubt the donations and I think I implied that when I mentioned the Alzheimer s issue. I am surprised about the minimal amount of responses you
              Message 6 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
              • 0 Attachment
                Amy -

                I don't doubt the donations and I think I implied that when I mentioned the
                Alzheimer's issue. I am surprised about the minimal amount of responses
                you have received in that I know you post to other groups as well. 15
                seems like a very poor showing.

                However, what I am concerned about is that you offered on this list a
                payment of $250 to the winner in regards to sending in the best analogy
                regarding a scenario you provided. Although I only remember seeing one response
                with an analogy, you might have received many privately. I have no way of
                knowing. However, since it was a post sent exclusively to this group
                contrary to your normal posts I would expect the winner to be from this group.
                We would all like to know who that winner was.

                Now, regarding your poor response numbers. I think Bob Hrodey explained
                why he gave up responding and I am quite positive that many have for the
                same reason. I've mentioned that to you in the past. You do not take the
                time to separate one from the other and it sometimes comes off looking like
                one idiot rambled on incessantly. That, in turn, makes it impossible for any
                of us to respond either in favor or opposed to some of the comments.

                I also believe that many do not respond because your initial posts are
                usually so lacking in information that common sense should dictate we need to
                know. Yes, as we pose questions you usually do state that you will go back
                and ask and do provide answers when you receive them. However, even those
                posts are sometimes convoluted and confusing.

                So, in closing I will ask again, WHO WON THE $250 ????

                Sincerely,
                Sue


                In a message dated 11/1/2010 10:08:35 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                jurydoctor@... writes:

                Sue,
                I have received 15 opinions so far..You are right 300 opinions. Only
                need 285 to go..
                Please tell Bill that we went thru this donation business 5 years ago when
                the investigators checked me out and called the places I donate to.
                It kind of sickens me...
                But I keep on plugging away.
                Escpecially since, I donate 20 bucks per opinion to charity.. you'd think
                people would respond out of a sheer sense of altruism.
                Perhaps I am too naive.
                I do appreciate your kindness.
                Amy





                -----Original Message-----
                From: SueSarkis <SueSarkis@...>
                To: infoguys-list <infoguys-list@yahoogroups.com>
                Cc: Jurydoctor <Jurydoctor@...>
                Sent: Mon, Nov 1, 2010 12:07 pm
                Subject: Re: [infoguys-list] was the stroke avoidable.



                Bill -

                I must admit that I am now at a cross between angered and bewildered.
                Angered because my repeated requests for the answer about the winner have gone
                not only unanswered but totally ignored. Bewildered because now I would
                also like to know who won the iPod which she offered early last month. If
                my memory serves me correctly, she was going to raffle that after she
                received 300 opinions. Perhaps she hasn't received 300 yet.

                I truly don't remember how many responses to the inquiry there were and I
                also do not know whether there were private responses. What I do know,
                however, is that the question should be answered immediately, if not sooner.


                Sincerely yours,
                Sue
                ________________________
                Sue Sarkis
                Sarkis Detective Agency






                (est. 1976)
                PI 6564
                _www.sarkispi.com_ (http://www.sarkispi.com/)

                1346 Ethel Street
                Glendale, CA 91207-1826
                818-242-2505

                "one Nation under God" and "in GOD we TRUST"

                If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English,
                thank a military veteran



                In a message dated 11/1/2010 8:32:21 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                _oracleintl@..._ (mailto:oracleintl@...) writes:

                Hey Sue -- I don't think anyone actually responded to that post but me. I
                don't know if she paid that, but I can tell you she didn't pay me.

                That makes you wonder about all this "donation" business doesn't it?

                Bill


                In a message dated 10/29/2010 8:21:00 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
                _suesarkis@..._ (mailto:suesarkis@...) writes:

                Amy -

                John's stroke my pitutti. Who won the $250 for the best analogy that you
                offered. You said the author of the best one would receive $250.

                Who did you pay? How many more times must one ask? Since I didn't submit
                one, obviously I do not have a jealous nor ulterior motive. I just want
                to know who the winner was.

                Sincerely,
                Sue

                In a message dated 10/29/2010 5:16:25 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                __Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:_Jurydoctor@...) _
                (mailto:_Jurydoctor@..._ (mailto:Jurydoctor@...) ) writes:

                this case involves John's stroke. I need to know what you need to know in
                order to make a decision and what opinions, if any you have about the case.
                $20 to Smile train for each opinion as always your opinions are extremely
                helpful and I thank you in advance.

                Amy

                Plaintiff argues that:

                1. The Primary care physician sent John to the ER thinking he was having
                an evolving stroke.
                The nurse and ER doctor made the correct differential diagnosis of CVA/TIA
                but failed to do the tests necessary to rule out evolving stroke or call
                in a neurologist to consult;

                2. The radiologist should have called the ER doctor to report the
                significant changes in John's brain seen on CT, even though there was no
                "acute"
                (immediate) damage seen;

                3. The hospital is responsible for radiology and ER, plus it had
                complaints from the doctors about the communication between ER and
                radiology and
                failed to take steps to improve the procedures; and,

                4. The proper stroke protocols of putting John on blood thinners and
                providing the interventions to keep his carotid arteries open for blood
                flow
                would have prevented the complete blockage that happened several days
                later.
                Evolving carotid stenosis is among the most readily treatable causes of
                stroke. Timely treatment allows these patients to avoid disaster and live
                long
                and healthy lives.

                The defense argues that:

                1. John was told to follow up with his doctor in three days and did not do
                so (Jane said she signed John out and did not recall this instruction in
                the discharge papers; rather, she thought that if John got better, then it
                was likely the Valium reaction, as the ER doctor told her). John did get
                better. If John followed up with his doctor, he might not have had a major

                stroke.
                But then John acutally experienced a major stroke event and was rushed
                back to the hospital. (Several days later)

                2. John's problem was unavoidable, this is 20/20 hindsight

                3. Jake's underlying hardening of the arteries has continued to progress
                and that is what has made him unable to function; and,

                4. The doctors are independent contractors and if mistakes were made it
                was by the doctors for which the hospital is not responsible.

                John and Jane have since divorced. John moved in across the street with a
                woman who has orthopedic disabilities. Jane continues to feel for John and
                loves him.

                John worked for a company doing computer aided drafting. His last project
                was "Titan". John designed the containers that would be outfitted by the
                military and utilized to transport mobile command and control centers for
                use
                in our war efforts in the middle-east. Jake was an artist and avid
                musician. He had a music studio in his house. He loved to work on old cars
                and
                ride one of his two Harley Davidson motorcycles. His loss of cognition and
                motor controls have rendered him incapable to work or enjoy his hobbies.







                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • suesarkis@aol.com
                In a message dated 11/1/2010 10:12:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, jurydoctor@aol.com writes: the $250 best analogy went to Janet Wilson. You can confirm this
                Message 7 of 12 , Nov 1, 2010
                • 0 Attachment
                  In a message dated 11/1/2010 10:12:22 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
                  jurydoctor@... writes:

                  the $250 best analogy went to Janet Wilson. You can confirm this her email
                  address _jwilson5011@..._ (mailto:jwilson5011@...)
                  I do not think I am giving out confidential info on her since she posted
                  with her email address to another yahoogroup that also gives opinions.
                  Amy


                  Amy,

                  Now wasn't that easy. I do not need to confirm as you wouldn't post if it
                  wasn't true. However, would you mind sharing the analogy with us? I
                  would like to see it as I pounded my head trying to think of one and truly
                  couldn't come up with a beneficial one for your purpose as I understood it to
                  be.

                  Sue


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.