1. Employer fail to give Employer 's intent in a timely manner. 65.2-601.2
a. Question: Should the Court have required claims adjuster, Loretta Lawrence to
specified reasons why the claim was still being investigated after the beyond the 30
days required and continuing to 10/31/2018 ? Rule 1.5
b. Question: Was Employers failure to update Claim status, and injury status on
04/07/17, 04/17, 05/22/17 deliberate, intentional misleading of the Court? Va. Code
65.2 - 600, 29CFR Parts 1904 and 1952
c. Questions: Should Dr. Roger Talbot 's initial recommend for surgery on 05/23/17
have been considered when determining claimant 's injury was compensable on 04/17,
05/22/2017 proven by medical evidence of MRI? 65.2 - 601.2

2. The Court erred in determining claimant refused selective work on October 17, 2017?
a. Question: Did the Court take into account claimant 's testimony she had suffered
doctor patient abandonment on October 16, 2017? (18 VAC 85 -20-28, 32.1-
27.1:03)
b. Question: Did the claimant have the right to receive proper notification of doctor
patient relationship ending, an impairment rating, or a Functional capacity evaluation,
and time to seek treatment following Dr. Bryan Fox's doctor patient abandonment on
October 16,2017?
c. Question: Should the Court have questioned Dr. Rodney Brown conflicting
testimonies pertaining to alleged refusal of work on 10/17/17 and approval of
claimant 's Extended Leave on the same date 10/17/17? "
d. Question: Should the Court have required Dr. Brown to product copies of the
claimants Extended Leave from October 17, 2017 — October 17, 2018

3. The Court erred when they said claimant was not injured as claimed.
a. Question: Should the Judges have taken into account the initial attending physician
recommend of surgery May 23, 2017- SEE ATTACHED, Pp.
b. Question: Should the Court have required the defendants to provide documented
proof how the alleged MMI was reached on 10/16/17?
c. Question: Did the Court assume, because there was no change in the MRI on
(10/07/17) that claimant 's injury had improved?
d. Question: Did the Court take into account the medical professional opinion, diagnosis
and treatments of all (8)) eight physicians before and after Dr. Fox's abrupt release?
e. Question: Did the Court consider Dr. Arthur Wardell 's medical opinion was based on
all medical documents, testing, MRI 's, x-rays of all physicians; diagnosing claimants
"Permanently Aggravated conditions?
f. Question: Was Claimant rights violated as a pro se litigant with being forced to take
leave for a work injury and being given an ultimatum to backdate the leave or face
job abatement?

4. The Court erred
a. Question: Did the Court considered claimant 's testimony and proof that she had been
denied a new treating physician

Question not identified