What sorts of things will people file medical lawsuits over, when it costs only $10 to do so? Well, there’s failure to take care of a complaint of being 7 1/2 years pregnant. “After the plaintiff’s dismissal, she attempted to sue the judge.” (SymTym, Sept. 29).
8 Comments
I guess one good thing about this is that there is no indication that the ER did a CT, Ultrasound and other tests, so that this fraudulent presentation to the ER only cost $400 for the ambulance ride, $800 dollars for the ER visit and only those that were truly sick had to wait. This cost is then passed on to those with private insurance as does the legal fees.
I don’t see any fraud. I see “Crazy Lady.”
I agree with Todd. Moreover, what state was this in? I hate when we get this stuff without a court, case number and all that good stuff. Because how on earth do we verify this? How did the source you linked to even get this thing? I would not come across on of these things and I’m a lawyer. If he got this because someone emailed it to him on the Interent, we need to wonder whether this crazy lady exists.
I like how she filled in the form:
“This court is the proper court because:
…
…
I said so.”
Though in fairness to her, many forum-shopping trial lawyers seem to have the same opinion on jurisdiction.
Yes, but they’re club members lawyers, so the courts believe them.
Hmm, there was supposed to be a strike tag across “club members” in that last post – I must have typoed it.
Miller is being unreasonable. The entire court order is quoted, and makes clear from its reference to demurrers, tentative ruling, and citation to CRC 391 that it is in California (and predates 2007). How did the blogger get it? If Miller had read the post, he’d see the blogger claims to be the defendant.
To answer some of the questions above:
1. state = California
2. ambulance ride probably $700-750
3. “How did the source you linked to even get this thing?” Direct mail to my office, Superior Court of California case# 04AS04203
4. blogger = defendant