Margaret Floyd vs Larry Tamburro

[pdf-embedder url=”http://eastvalleyfamilyphysicians.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/margaret_floyd_vs_larry_tamburro.pdf”

. Elliot Grysen . RYSEN & ASSOCIATES 06 River Street grin Lake, MI 49456 16 7~2121 616 847—6208 Sfacsimile) tate Bar No. 0 1871 ounsel for Plaintiff

aren Tobler Hanson OBLER 8: ASSOCIATES ‘

201 S. Alma School Road, Suite 8550 esa, Arizona 85210

tate Bar No. 021361

o—Counsel for Plaintiff

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA

ARGARET FLOYD, individually and n begialf ($3111 E’fitfiolr IljézJIlIelfJiciaries of ece ent . ’ ’ CV 2 0 0 9 – ’ Plaintiff, D I 0 0

No. CV—2009~

g/Iort, Non-Motor Vehicle; ARRY S. TAMBURRO, MD. 8: ‘ edical Negligence) ANE DOE TAMBURRO, Husband & Wife; AST VALLEY FAMILY PHYSICIANS, PLC; AI-IMOOD SHAHLAPOUR, MD. & AN E DOE SHAHLAPOUR, Husband & Wife SSOCIATED INTERNISTS OF WATUKEE, P.C.;

nd JOHN AND ANE DOES I-V; i COMPLAINT nd BLACK AN WHITE CORPS.I—V; ,-.

nd GREY PARTNERSHIPS I-V, Defendants.

25 26 27 28

Plaintiff, for hef cause of actionagainst the above named and fictitiously designated

efendants, alleges as follows:\OOOQChw-bwtx)

1.

Margaret Floyd, individually and on behalf of the statutory beneficiaries of ecedent, William Floyd (“Plaintiff”) is a resident of Phoenix, Arizona. Defendants Larry . Tamburro, MD. and Jane Doe Tamburro, Husband and Wife, (“Defendants Tamburro”); ast Valley Family Physicians, P.L.C. (l’Defendant East Valley”); Defendants Mahmood R. hahlapour and Jane Doe Shahlapour (“Defendants Shahlapour”); and Associated nternists of Ahwatukee, RC. (“Defendant Associated Internists”) all practice or provide

edical care and services in the State of Arizona in the County of Maricopa, and on

nformation and belief Defendants are residents of Maricopa County, Arizona. Plaintiff

rings this action pursuant to the Arizona Medical Malpractice Act, A.R.S. 12-561 et. seq. II.

The events which are subject to this litigation occurred in Maricopa County, rizona.

III.

The true names of John and Jane Does I-V, Black and White Corporations I-V, and rey Partnerships I-V are presently unknown to Plaintiff and, therefore, they are esignated by use of fictitious names and capacities. Plaintiff is informed and believes and herefore alleges that each Defendant so designated may be legally responsible in some

anner for the events referred to herein and proximately caused damage to Plaintiff. If Iaintiff at a later time discover the identities of these fictitiously named parties, Plaintiff ill at that time seek leave of the Court to amend this Complaint and name the presently ‘ctitiously-named Defendants and more fully describe their conduct which has contributed

o damages sustained by Plaintiff.

IV. That each of the individually named Defendants were at all times acting for the

enefit of their marital community.V.

At all times pertinent hereto, each of the individually named Defendants acted as

he agent, ostensible agent, and / or servant of every other named Defendant.

VI.

At all times mentioned herein, Defendant Tamburro was functioning as a physician icensed to practice medicine within the State of Arizona and held himself out to Decedent,

illiam Floyd and to the public as qualified and skilled in family medicine and licensed

KOOOKJCth-bmw

nder the laws of the State of Arizona. And, at all times pertinent hereto and for years 10 11 12 13 l4 15 16 17 1 8 19 20 21 22

ast, Defendant Tamburro engaged in the practice of family medicine where persons equiring care and treatment are given such for a consideration. And, at all times pertinent ereto, Defendant Tamburro represented and held himself out to the public, and in articular Decedent Floyd, as a qualified physician educated and prepared to receive the ublic, and in particular Decedent Floyd for his general and family practice care, diagnosis, nd treatment.

VII.

At all times mentioned herein, Defendant Shahlapour was functioning as a hysician licensed to practice medicine within the State of Arizona and held himself out o Decedent, William Floyd and to the public as qualified and skilled in internal medicine nd licensed under the laws of the State of Arizona. And, at all times pertinent hereto and

or years past, Defendant Shahlapourj engaged in the practice of internal medicine where

23 ersons requiring such care and treatment are given such for a consideration. And, at all 24 “mes pertinent hereto, Defendant Shahlapour represented and held himself out to the 25 ublic, and in particular Decedent Floyd, as a qualified physician educated and prepared

26 27 28

0 receive the public, and in particular Decedent Floyd for his internal medicine care,

iagnosis, and treatment.VIII.

Jane Doe Tamburro and Jane Doe Shahlapour , upon information and belief, are the pouses of Defendants Tamburro and Shahlapour, and are named as a party herein because hey benefitted financially from the professional earnings of their spouse, whereby the

ommunity property of such husband and wife were augmented.

IX.

At all times mentioned herein, Defendant East Valley is an Arizona corporation

\OOO‘JO‘M-bww

hich provides medical and family care and services in Maricopa County, Arizona, or the 10 I l 1 ‘ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 ‘ 20 21 22 23 24

urrounding area, and employs, controls, or otherwise is related to Defendant Tamburro,

At all times mentioned herein, Defendant Associated Internists is an Arizona orporation which provides internal medicine physicians, nurses, and medical staff in

aricopa County, Arizona, or the surrounding area, and employs, controls, or otherwise

XI. All Defendants named herein, either individually, or by and through their duly

uthorized agents, servants, and / or employees, had the duty to provide to Decedent Floyd

25 ith competent and qualified medical care, and to properly diagnose, treat, render 26 ompetent advice and assistance, monitor, test, and render the same in accordance with the 27 edical standards of care. Plaintiff relied upon Defendants covenant to so render 28 ompetent care. All named Defendants breached this duty.

4KOOO‘JONLII-b-UJN

10 11 12 13 14 1s 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

XII. This matter exceeds the jurisdictional limit of this Court and Plaintiff will at the

ppropriate time, and in the proper form, request a trial by jury of all applicable issues.

XIII.

Beginning with care received back as early as 2004 and a diagnosis of colon cancer

‘n 2008, for a consideration which Plaintiff would pay and was required to pay, these efendants undertook to furnish medical and nursing care, attention, counsel, diagnosis, esting, screening, management, treatment, and supervision for Decedent Floyd. Plaintiff elied upon these Defendants as specialists in their designated field, and as such the elationship of patient and physician and/ or patient and nurse, and/ or patient and edical staff was thereby created, all within the setting of Defendants East Valley and ssociated Internists and under the direct supervision of Defendants Tamburro and

hahlapour.

XIV.

Beginning as early as 2004, for a fee paid, Defendants recommended, managed, iagnosed, tested, interpreted, and provided medical care and treatment to Decedent Floyd

ith substantial financial reward to these Defendants. Plaintiff was never informed that this medical diagnosis, management, testing, nterpretation, care and treatment by: these Defendants could result in the complications nd death of William Floyd. These Defendants negligence has caused the death of William loyd and has caused Plaintiff to suffer economic damages as well as non-economic

amages including pain, suffering, psychological, and hedonic damages.\DOOKJmUl-D-UJN

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

27 28

‘ XV.

These Defendants took on the care and treatment William Floyd and were thereby esponsible to work up, advise, counsel, obtain informed consent, evaluate, monitor, iagnose, test, and properly treat Decedent Floyd for his symptoms and medical

onditions. The advice, counsel, obtaining of informed consent, evaluation, monitor, iagnosis, testing, care and treatment of these Defendants fell below the applicable tandard of care, and that as a direct and proximate result of these respective Defendants,

‘ ach and every one, falling below the applicable standard of care, Decedent Floyd suffered

a nd died under their care.

XVI.

As a further direct and proximate result of the negligence of Defendants actions both ndividually and jointly, the Plaintiff has suffered monetary damages including special – amages and costs directly associated ‘with the death of Decedent Floyd. Special damages Include all additional medical expenses incurred by the Plaintiff as a result of Defendants’

I egligent diagnosis, care and treatment.

XVII. The actions as described above, constitute negligence in failing to provide proper ounseling, testing, monitoring, work up, evaluation, diagnosis, nursing, and treatment by

hese Defendants, which would have resulted in cement by Decedent Floyd.

XVIII. As a result of the Defendants actions, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of ordinary

a nd special damages in this action based upon Defendants lack of informed consent.l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 i9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

xxx. ‘

At the time of the events set forth above, these Defendants pursued a medical iagnosis, care and treatment which resulted in conduct that was outrageous, negligent, eprehensible and in conscious disregard for Decedent Floyd’s safety and welfare, causing- ’ suffering and eventual death under their care. Defendants’ course of conduct was so nreasonable and merely for the financial benefit of each and every Defendant, and such ourse of conduct was so malicious, wilful, wanton, reckless and / or grossly negligent as o warrant the imposition of punitive damages to punish Defendants and to deter such ehavior in the future. These Defendants behavior, each and every one, included

onsciously placing Decadent Floyd’s health at substantial risk of harm resulting in his

eath.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following judgment or relief against

efendants, jointly, separately and their marital communities, as follows:

1. For an award of general damages in an amount sufficient to fairly compensate Plaintiff, in, an amount not presently ascertained, but in excess of the jurisdiction amount of this Court, consistent with proof in this action;

2. For the reasonable value of special damages including medical expenses incurred to date and to be incurred in the future, in an amount not presently ascertained, but in excess of the jurisdictional limits of this Court, consistent with the proof in this action, together with prejudgment interest thereon;

3. For an award of punitive damages in an amount to be proved at trial herein under the respective legal theories outlined above;

4. For Plaintiff’s costs incurred as a result of Defendants negligent and

imprudent care and treatment, together with prejudgment interest thereon;For Plaintiff’s costs incurred as a result of the injuries; For Plaintiff’s taxable costs in bringing this action;

For such additional damages as this Court deems a – ropriate;

9°39.“

a» ems appropriate.

For such other and further relief WhiC o

A.

. I A 13.13 iot sen / Counself Pla’ A;

806 River Street Spring Lake, chigan 49456

ated thisgday of March , 2009.

:\Documents and Settings\gloria\Local Settings\Temp\complaint.wpd

Leave a Reply