The Stuart Suster MD Case - the Most Sadistic, Vicious, and Cruel So-Called Prosecution I’ve Ever Seen…

 

Opinion by Consumer Advocate Tim Bolen

 

Thursday May 12, 2011

 

I'm reading court documents involving, and surrounding, a case called "Wisconsin DRL v. Suster."  I've got a file box full of documents at my feet, all of which I've read, and I'm, literally, STUNNED at what I'm seeing. 

 

This case, I believe, is an example of what can happen when "we the people" aren't VERY CAREFUL about who we give authority to, to act on our behalf.  In this case, every rule of fair play has been thrown out by the perpetrators: Thexton and Moore. This case, "Wisconsin DRL v. Suster." is a "railroad" - a sheer, arrogant abuse of State power by unprincipled, unregulated employees.

 

Arthur Thexton, a prosecutor for the Wisconsin Department of Regulation & Licensing wins my nomination for the Gold Medal for Sadistic and Vicious Behavior Disguised as a Prosecution, for his actions in the Wisconsin DRL v. Suster case.  Hands down – no competition. 

 

I see cases against practitioners all over North America, and the Wisconsin DRL v. Suster case is, by far, the worst thing I’ve ever seen anywhere.  Thexton, for this case alone, should lose his job at DRL, and his license to practice law, for what he’s done to Stuart and Mary Suster.  Ruby Jefferson Moore, the so-called Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), in the case, deserves some serious review..., if not legal disbarment, herself.

 

Thexton is the one, you will remember, who UNSUCCESSFULLY prosecuted Wisconsin leading-edge practitioner Eleazar Kadile MD using nationally known CRACKPOT Robert S Baratz as his do-all, be-all “expert witness.”  Thexton also tried to prosecute, Eleazar’s wife Genia (a Nutritionist), but an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) threw out that spurious attack.  Thexton also “investigated” Robert Waters MD, for about eight years.  Thexton’s superiors at  DRL removed Thexton from the Waters case, and the new prosecutor dropped the investigation within a week. 

 

New DRL management has, after examining Thexton’s actions in other cases, made significant policy changes, reining in Thexton. Thexton has a history of abuse.

 

Ruby Jefferson Moore, you may remember, is the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) who ruled against NAET in the Barbara Lemke RN case, only to be reversed by review at DRL management level.  Moore is also the ALJ who, in another issue, was shown to have "never sided with a health practitioner in a hearing"  before, when the prosecutors were James Polewski or Arthur Thexton.

 

The Suster case missed my attention until Stuart Suster sued Arthur Thexton, and others, in Federal court.  Why?  Although Stuart Suster fits the bill as an “alternative” practitioner, he didn’t belong to any of the national organizations, and, frankly, Stuart thought of himself just as a “conventional” MD who was using new, effective things.

 

Then, lo and behold, I find Stephen Barrett and his questionable website “quackwatch.com” involved in yet another case in Wisconsin (Suster) – this one reminiscent of one of my first exposures to how sleazy, and low-life the “quackbuster” operation really is.

 

And, what was Stuart and Mary Suster’s “crime?”  They had the gall to bill health insurance companies, and INSIST on being paid, for TWO different “alternative,” and very effective, pain management treatments – both of which I’ll tell you about in a minute. 

 

But first...

 

I met Stuart Suster, and his wife Mary, this month, in the lobby of the hotel we were staying at in Madison.  Stuart and Mary were waiting for us to arrive, for our plane, because of Chicago weather, was two hours late.  I had received a strong recommendation about Suster from a doctor friend, whose judgment I trust.  He had said, “Tim, you need to hear Stuart Suster’s story…”

 

So we listened…

 

That night, and over the following week, culminating with a meeting of Doctor and Mary Suster’s patient support group, my wife Jan and I heard Stuart and Mary Suster’s story of victimization at the hands of Arthur Thexton and Stephen Barrett.  Their story keeps me awake at night. 

 

The Suster Story…

 

Stuart Suster MD is a Pain Management Specialist in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  Mary runs the office. They spend all their hours together, for not only do they share a marriage and a business, but they share a life difference – one that bonds them closer than most couples – They both live with Achondrodysplastia (dwarfism).  In their life together, they know what it is like to be “different.”   They know, quite well, what “pain” is, both in the literal and the figurative sense. 

 

The Susters, like MOST health practitioners, in their business, got into several arguments over billing for their services, with health insurance providers.  Stuart Suster offers an effective combination of pain treatments designed to restore a patient’s life to normal over time.  His pain treatment makes use of three basic tenets of pain management (a) significant amount of opioids, in the beginning, to break the pain cycle, (b) localized treatment in the form of Prolo Therapy, and (c) a shift to a more long term use of an electronic acupuncture device known as a Dynatron.

 

Health Insurance companies, I’m sure you already know, do not want to pay for services rendered by health professionals. If they pay at all, they pay a small percentage of the billing. They especially don’t want to pay for new things – and, of course, if a New York ad agency (quackbuster management) rails against it – health insurance companies will eagerly leap into non-payment mode.

 

The "quackbusters," a while back, formed an organization called CHIRI (Consumer Health Information Research Institute) for the express purpose of, as author James Carter MD, in his superb book “Racketeering in Medicine,” says "The CHIRI has for its constituency the health insurance industry.  It purports to serve that industry in an advisory capacity, by approving or disapproving a particular treatment provided by a health-care provider.  It plans to serve as a health-insurance consultant regarding the legitimacy of certain disabilities and health practitioners.  An example of an "illegal" disability would be chronic fatigue syndrome.  CHIRI is also said to have a computerized list of more than 40,000 American physicians and other medical practitioners who are suspected of using "questionable medical practices."

 

Stuart Suster, like most “alternative” practitioners, gets patients who have “been everywhere else,” and not helped. When Stuart Suster INSISTED that the treatment he gave his suffering patients be paid for – and followed up insurance company rejections with legal threats, the insurance companies reacted.  They contacted the Wisconsin Department of Regulation & Licensing and demanded an investigation of Suster, and action on their complaint.  Unlike the average citizen, the insurance carrier didn’t have to file a complaint using the regular process.  They simply sent a letter to the top man – and the next thing you know – there’s Arthur Thexton in Stuart Suster’s face.

 

And Arthur Thexton, as we've seen, in his personal dealings with his victims, is a nasty, hateful, disrespectful, man with direct access to failed MD Stephen Barrett.  In a recent court hearing in Madison, Thexton had to be warned several times by the Judge about his attitude and tone of voice.  And, as the “Federal lawsuit” against Thexton shows, Thexton completely ignores required due process.

 

Thexton’s “personalized” attack against the Susters…

 

The first salvo – (1) The next thing you know, Arthur Thexton is standing in front of the Medical Board, itself, telling the appointed members that “Stuart Suster needs to have his license taken away immediately because he’s ‘loud and angry in his dealings with insurance companies.”  Thexton, with no evidence in hand, and no good reason other than Stuart Suster’s ongoing argument with health insurance providers, had falsely accused Stuart Suster of “substance abuse.” 

 

Can you believe that?  In Wisconsin, health insurance companies have their own personal DRL “prosecutor,” on call, should some doctor “argue” with them over payment…  And, if the doctor doesn’t submit to the insurance company pressure, then their pet prosecutor simply files spurious charges against the doctor.  How handy for insurance companies (sarcasm intended).

 

(2)  The second salvo - When Suster complied with the evaluation, and sent the results of the examination (showing that Suster was ‘clean,’) to the Board through his attorney, Thexton, acting like a petulant child, filed an additional complaint against Stuart Suster, claiming that “the report should have been sent to him, Arthur Thexton, not the Board.”  

 

At the time, the Susters could afford adequate legal representation, and Arthur Thexton was stymied.  But, as we know from the two Kadile cases, and the Waters case, Arthur Thexton doesn’t like to be denied, or defied.  He has his own set of rules about the way things are – and they don’t jive with DRL policy, or normal human behavior.  To me, he simply uses his job to create as much pain for his victims as he can.  Knowing this, I’m not surprised to find what Thexton, probably on Stephen Barrett’s advice, did next.

 

(3)  Thexton went to police authorities - Health Insurance companies have a simple policy:  If they don't want to pay for a health professional's service, or pay the amount the health professional billed for, they simply turn the case over to their in-house "Fraud Investigator."  Apparently, in their collective industry mind, a health professional sending them a bill, at all, is on the edge of "fraud." 

 

The Federal government, through the Justice Department, has set up a "health fraud" task force.  Several years ago, the US government recognized "health fraud" as a major cost in US health care, and decided to do something about it.

 

It didn't take long for the health insurance industry to figure out that they could make good use of their very own seat on the "Health Fraud Task Force."  After all, it would give them close, and personal contact (like having lunch, dinner, etc.), with Justice Department "Health Fraud" Investigators and Prosecutors, Medical Board Investigators and Prosecutors, Postal Authorities, etc.  A handy relationship to have, in case some health professional sends you a bill you don't want to pay...

 

But the Justice Department isn't stupid, and isn't going to get involved in insurance/health professional billing disputes - like the Suster case.  Thexton took his allegations of "overbilling" to the "Health Fraud Task Force," and they told him to get lost...

 

Thexton took his "sexual misconduct" allegations to local police authorities - and they told him to go fly a kite.

 

Thexton took his "drug mishandling" charges to the DEA, and they told him to take his Tonka truck and go play in the sandbox...

 

They, meaning APPROPRIATE POLICE AUTHORITIES, ALL rejected Thexton's so-called allegations.  And Thexton was frustrated.

 

So, what did nasty little Arty do then?

 

(4)  The destruction of the Suster’s business - Thexton, working with one or more health insurance companies, decided to remove the Suster’s patient base, and hence their ability to pay an attorney, by ruining the Susters’ reputation and business, in the media.  Fox TV 6 in Milwaukee was contacted, and their help was enlisted in “the character assassination” of Stuart Suster.

 

The TV station, using lists provided by Thexton, contacted over a hundred of the Suster’s patients, and enlisted one of them to intentionally provoke the Susters, in front of a hidden camera, over his billing to her insurance company.  Stuart Suster, suspecting something wrong in the former patient’s demeanor and conversation, asked her to leave.  She refused, again acting in an unprofessional, provocative argumentative manner.  In retrospect, there was no doubt this woman was “playing to the camera” hidden in her bag. 

 

The TV station did an obvious “hit piece” on the Suster’s clinic.  In fact, they did a series, in some asking Milwaukee viewers to “contact Wisconsin DRL, the FBI, local police, or the DEA” if they had any information on Suster.  With such a broadcast, without any trial, or even any accusation filed, Thexton branded Suster as a criminal in the minds of Milwaukee residents.

 

Naturally, most of the Suster’s “Pain Management” business disappeared – as was Thexton’s intent.  Few new patients showed up.

 

And, yes, there are laws against Thexton doing this sort of thing, clearly spelled out in Wisconsin law.  We’ll be pursuing that avenue.

 

(5) But that wasn’t enough for Mrs Thexton’s vicious little boy, Artie.  The bad news for the Susters had only begun.

 

Next, court documents show, without any “probable cause,” Thexton filed eleven “Counts” against Stuart Suster with the Medical Board.  Thexton could not, or would not, provide ANY evidence, at all, that he had had the case reviewed by any MD’s, either from the board, or from an outside source. Nor would Thexton allow Suster’s attorney or representatives to interview his so-called ”witnesses.”   

 

Suster’s attorney challenged the validity of the accusations, and the absence of “probable cause,” and the medical board, obviously having doubts about Thexton, forced Thexton to “swear” to the charges before they would continue the case.  But worse, court documents show, Thexton had now trumped up “sexual misconduct” charges.  Suster’s attorney tried to keep Thexton from going to the media with the new charges.  But, DRL insisted.

 

The “sexual misconduct” charges, if they weren’t so devastating to the Susters, would have been laughable, and it is obvious that Thexton NEVER consulted with a practicing MD over his accusations.  Indeed, most of Thexton’s so-called “sexual misconduct” incidents described would have been easily discarded by a panel of practitioners.  So, Thexton relied on volume.

 

An interesting and important point needs to be made here.  Prior to Thexton’s entry into the case, and prior to Thexton’s relationship with the sensationalism of the Fox TV 6 reporting, there had been no actionable patient complaints, OF ANY KIND, against Stuart Suster – none. THERE HAD CERTAINLY BEEN NO COMPLAINTS OF “SEXUAL MISCONDUCT” UNTIL Arthur Thexton entered the scene. 

 

Even more amazing is that Thexton filed this complaint in 2001, SUDDENLY finding supposed “sexual misconduct” with patients dating back to 1994, through 1995, 1996, 1997, and 1998.  Thexton expects the world to believe that several women would continue seeing a doctor guilty of so-called “sexual misconduct” for up to five years without complaining – or changing doctors.

 

Thexton’s so-called “sexual misconduct” complaints included the following:

 

“respondent had the patient put on a gown that was open in the back and made her walk away from him twice, thus exposing her unclothed back and her buttocks to him….  The purpose of this contact was… the respondent’s own sexual gratification and/or sexual stimulation or degradation of the patient for the purpose of establishing control over her.”

 

The patients I interviewed in Suster’s support group had a lot to say about these accusations.  All of them were long term patients and professed complete disbelief that these things actually happened.  They stated, that in their experience, they had never, ever, been mishandled by Stuart Suster, and in fact, had never, ever, been alone in an examining room with him – that that just wasn’t the way things were done there. They also were dismayed that normal “hugging, and displays of comfort and emotional support” would be classified by a “sick-minded prosecutor” as “sexual misconduct.”

 

(6)  Eager to broadcast the suddenly-found “sexual misconduct” charges – Thexton, and his health insurance buddies, then went back to Fox TV 6 for another round of media assault against Suster, and Stephen Barrett published the whole accusation against Stuart Suster on quackwatch.com.

 

(7)  The refusal to follow “due process.”  Someone like Thexton, a system abuser, cannot operate under close supervision.  He was able to ignore "due process" for Stuart Suster, and accomplish his insurance company and quackbuster goals because he was operating prior to the entrance of NEW Management (Donsia Strong Hill) at DRL. 

 

As new DRL leader Donsia Strong Hill publicly stated “What I inherited were a group of prosecutors who basically had functioned in the past with very little supervision over them or direction or even the establishment of priorities," Strong Hill said. "We certainly have changed that."  When CBS News 3 asked Strong Hill, "You're supervising them more closely?" She responded, "They are definitely being supervised more closely."

 

Supervised more closely?  Yes.  But not soon enough to stop the vicious assault against Stuart Suster.

 

When Thexton started, and continued, the case against Suster, he was accountable to no one. He could do virtually anything, make any move he wanted to against his victims..  He didn't have to get permission, of consult with, anyone, anywhere.  Neither on the Medical Board, or at DRL.  He was autonomous.

 

So, at DRL, at the time, there was no one in the system that could, or would, protect the rights of health professionals.  Health professionals were totally at the mercy of the whim of someone like Arthur Thexton.  And, Thexton has a history of abuse.

 

So, Thexton did whatever he felt like doing, without regard for the law, or for the rights of others.

 

(a)  There is a simple rule of law in the United States.  It says “If you are accused of a criminal act, you have a right to a trial by a jury of your peers…”  This is not a complicated legal philosophy.  It simply means that “We the people” have set up a system that operates in a fair manner to deal with charges of criminal acts.  In short, criminal acts are investigated by police agencies, and if “reasonable cause” to believe a crime may have been committed is found, then a Judge, or a Grand Jury, can order an arrest, and a trial.  That “trial” will be conducted in front of a jury, what’s known as “a jury of your peers.”

 

An “administrative hearing” in front of an Administrative Law Judge, with no jury, is NOT a trial by “a jury of your peers.”

 

Arthur Thexton was, and is, in his eleven (11) counts, charging Stuart Suster with committing over fifty (50) criminal acts.

 

Even worse, is that Thexton took his “criminal act” accusations to the APPROPRIATE police agencies who HAVE REFUSED TO PROSECUTE.  So, incredibly, Thexton proceeded on his own.

 

(b)  When Suster’s legal team, aghast at Thexton’s actions, demanded that Thexton provide them with documentation, and other “discovery” items necessary to back up Thexton’s claims, Thexton REFUSED, providing the legal team with little, or no evidence backing up Thexton’s claims.

 

In the Federal lawsuit Suster filed against Thexton, et al, the complaint went like this:

 

“Count #4 - Arthur Thexton and Wayne Austin refused to adequately respond and comply with legitimate and legal due process requests concerning:   a.)   Pre-administrative hearing concerning final decision to investigate and summary judgment determination of guilt of Plaintiff. b.)    Index and cross-index to statute all Board opinions, decisions, ruling, interpretations, etc. concerning allegations in the original Complaint. c.)     Complying with the Privacy Act of 1974 since the Board assumed Federal jurisdiction and is a nominee for Federal agencies. d.)    Complying with providing all rules and regulations concerning allegations in the Complaint against Plaintiff. e.)    Complying with providing copies of Oaths of Office for all Board members and appointed officers. f.)    Providing necessary rules of interpretation or construction in the Administrative action. g.)    Providing copes of verification of certification, dating and filing of regulations used in the Complaint against Plaintiff. These are all in violation of due process and equal protection under the law of the Plaintiff.

 

 

Enter Ruby Jefferson Moore… 

 

Ruby Jefferson Moore is, and was, the Administrative Law Judge in the Suster Case.  She is named as a Defendant, along with Arthur Thexton, in a Federal Lawsuit filed by Stuart Suster for several reasons.  But, in summary,it seems this woman has no respect, what-so-ever, for the law, and it is obvious, from her actions, that she has intentionally refused to uphold the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin, or the Constitution of the United States.  Indeed, there is evidence that Moore, an appointed officer, has NOT taken the required "Oath of Office," wherein appointees swear to uphold the Federal and State Constitutions.

 

Prior to the Administrative law hearing in the "Wisconsin DRL v. Suster" case, Suster's legal team attempted to address the issue of Thexton's improper activities in the case - and make them an issue .  Thexton, with the media, and the help of the insurance companies, had approached over 100 of the Suster's patients, those involved in the insurance payment dispute.  Suster, to solve the issue, simply filed a "counter-claim," and "cross-claim" detailing what was a described as "Thexton's conspiracy."  Ruby Jefferson Moore refused to hear any "counter-claim," and/or "cross-claim" detailing Thexton's activities.  She even ordered Suster, and his agents, "NOT to contact" any witnesses.  When Suster filed Motions demanding to see Moore's legal basis for her decisions, Moore refused, and called the police to try to have Suster arrested for his complaint.

 

In some of Suster's Motions, Moore simply would not rule until the first morning of the actual hearing, so that Suster had no opportunity to appeal to a higher court.

 

The first key word here is "railroad." Thexton was the engineer.  Moore the fireman.  The second word is "corruption."

 

The language in the Federal Lawsuit clearly describes Suster’s concerns as follows:

 

“Count #3 - Arthur Thexton and Ruby Jefferson-Moore had numerous ex parte communications to conspire against Plaintiff concerning his legal pleadings and strategies that greatly prejudiced the Plaintiff’s due process rights of law.

 

Count #5 - Ruby Jefferson-Moore ordered Plaintiff to cease and desist a proper legal process of a counter-claim and cross-claiming persons that have harmed, violated or made false witness declarations and statements against the Plaintiff in violation of due process and equal protection under the law of the Plaintiff.

 

Count #6 - Ruby Jefferson-Moore ordered Plaintiff to be under an illegal jurisdiction, venue and authority when in fact the original Complaint was fatally defective and did not exist due to several missing legal and fact essential elements, overcharging with federal regulations and where overt acts were outside the statute of limitations in violation of due process and equal protection under the law.

 

Count #7 - Ruby Jefferson-Moore deliberately delayed rulings on motions of the Plaintiff, while at the same time, made timely rulings for the Board to greatly prejudice and harm Plaintiff so that he could not adequately prepare for trial in violation of due process and equal protection under the law.

 

Count #8 - All of the above Defendants discriminated against Plaintiff in violating his due process of law and equal protection under the law both individually and in combined conspiracy among themselves.  The Defendants had an improper ulterior motive for the discrimination.

 

Count #9 - All of the Defendants were only concerned with injustice, prejudice and unfairness to be administrated to the Plaintiff through their acts, words and deeds in violation of due process of law and equal protection under the law.  

 

Count #10 - All of the Defendants violated and deprived the Plaintiff of liberty concerning the right to be left alone and pursue one’s chosen profession without interference and harassment under the liberty clause of due process in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and deprived and are continuing to deprive Plaintiff of property under the property clause of due process in the Fifth Amendment causing the Plaintiff to experience undue difficulty and expense in protecting his interest.

 

After Suster sued Thexton and Moore the Administrative Hearing went downhill.

 

I watch administrative hearings all over the country, and I’ve never heard of anything happening like this before.   Federal and District Court documents have not yet been filed, and they will be, but…

 

It appears that Ruby Jefferson Moore didn’t like being sued, and used her position as an Administrative law judge in the case to wreak vengeance on Suster.  There is NO OTHER explanation I can imagine. 

 

But in summary, during the actual hearing:  (a) Moore refused to let Suster cross-examine witnesses, (b) She ignored Suster’s objections to procedures  (c)  She refused Suster’s legitimate Motions in law (d) when Suster objected to her actions and demanded that Moore act appropriately she called the police to have him arrested. and (e)  she denied Suster the right to call ANY witnesses in his defense.

 

I've never, ever, seen such outrageous behavior on the part of an ALJ before.

 

The Federal lawsuit - Part of the Solution...

 

The Administrative Law System in the United States has a special function.  It is designed to act as a specialized decision apparatus to relieve the regular court system.  Supposedly, it can work to solve problems without having to involve the more complicated, and more expensive, regular court system.  An Administrative hearing is not a "court" hearing" in that it doesn't carry the weight of a regular court.  For example, in an Administrative hearing, an ALJ may make a decision in the case, but the decision carries no weight in law.  An ALJ can only make a "recommended decision" to some other governmental body, which can accept or reject the recommendation.

 

But, as health practitioners all over the United States have found out, the Administrative Law system can be abused by those that have a special interest, or a special agenda.  For instance, we are all aware that in 1996 the Federation of States Medical Boards (FSMB) started a program to identify everything that competed with the so-called "standard of care" (drugs and surgery) as health fraud.  Indeed, the FSMB, at that point, became just one more quackbuster organization, along with the NCAHF, ACSH, CHIRI, quackwatch.com, etc... The FSMB began to train States to go after "health" oriented practitioners.

 

For years, ever since that 1996 FSMB meeting, I've advised clients involved in "alternative" medicine to simply view the Administrative System in their own State as corrupt, and if they are forced into an administrative hearing, simply go through the motions, without spending a lot of resources on the event - with an eye on the appeal process.  I advised that the legal team simply fill the ALJ's desk with appealable objections and motions in law, as they go along so that, eventually, the whole case can be decided in a real court of law.  Why?  Because in too many incidences the system had become a "kangaroo court,"  and it just wasn't worth the effort to try to change it for each case.

 

But now I've taken a different view. Harsher, by far. 

 

Why?  Because, as an American, I expect government employees, like prosecutors, regulatory agencies, and ALJs, to act on behalf of "we the people," not special interests.  And now, I want punishment, severe punishment, for those government agents who have crossed the line into "special interest," and have forsaken the public trust.

 

But the question comes up "How do 'we the people' rein in, and punish a public employee?"  Actually, it wasn't that hard of a question to get answered, once I started looking.  There is, in fact, a whole school of law on the subject.  There are three simple ways. 

 

(1) "We the people" actually set a mechanism in our system of government in place to deal with this issue, especially in agencies that have "regulatory" or "police" powers.  For example, every police department has an "Internal Affairs" division, or function.  Big agencies, like Federal, have an "Inspector General," or the function. 

 

(2)  We have the court system.  Public employees can be sued for acting "under color of authority, etc."  "Color of authority" means that an employee has taken their legitimate government function and extended it to include their own personal interest, or "special interest."  Catch an employee at this properly, and you can wreak appropriate havoc on him/her and the agency that failed to supervise him/her properly.  But, since this system itself can be abused, there are "protections," and "immunities" public employees can claim in their defense.  It is important to legally warn and set up the public employee so that the courts will not allow the offender to claim "protections," and "immunities."

 

(3)  A combination of (1) and (2) above.  This is the method we are using in Wisconsin.

 

In Wisconsin, there were a number of legal actions activated to solve the overall issues of "special interest" and "color of authority."   It was my hope that the perpetrators would ignore the ramifications, and proceed as normal.  After all, I really didn't want them to walk away with a slap on the hand.

 

Thexton and Polewski, who I consider "dim bulbs" in the legal system, acted just as I had hoped they would.

 

Now, comes the final actions...

 

One of the actions was the Federal lawsuit filed by Stuart Suster against Arthur Thexton, Ruby Jefferson Moore, etc.  The substance of the suit addressed the overall issues involved in EVERY case that Thexton and Polewski have engaged in against "alternative" practitioners in Wisconsin - about thirteen of them.

 

Earlier, a Federal lawsuit against Polewski, on behalf of a Wisconsin Dentist, had been dismissed by the Federal Court because, allegedly, Polewski was operating "within the parameters of his job."  What was REALLY interesting, during the case discovery was that "there was NO job description for Polewski, and NO operating instruction, etc. within his department."  As we know, new DRL head Donsia Strong Hill is remedying that.  Strong Hill, to her credit, has acted VERY appropriately when informed of a problem in her department.  She is, and has, been implementing the "function" of Inspector General.

 

Suster's lawsuit against Thexton was carefully written.  It says it all about the situation for all of Thexton' and Polewski's victims in Wisconsin, and it demands remedy.  It says:

 

Conclusion - Therefore, due to the severe harassment, intimidation and illegal overt acts against the Plaintiff, he has endured and suffered great harm in less income, loss of business opportunity, loss of reputation, loss of liberty and property, loss of due process of law and equal protection of the law outside of a legitimate government interest and which was totally unwarranted.

 

Damages - The Plaintiff asks this Court for a judgment in his favor and actual damages of Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) from each defendant.  The Plaintiff also asks for Twenty Million Dollars ($20,000,000) in punitive damages from each defendant.

 

Due to the fact that the defendants may be unable or unwilling to pay for said damages in cash, Plaintiff demands that any and all personal and real assets be the subject matter for damages which would include but is not limited to any and all real property, stocks, bonds, vehicles, certificates of deposits, money market accounts, equipment, furniture, jewelry, boats, sporting equipment, etc.  Therefore, the defendants’ real and person property will be subject to a Notice of Lis Pendens prohibiting the sale or disposition of said property until a final disposition of this cause of action.

 

Request for Temporary and Permanent Injunction - The Plaintiff is entitled to an immediate temporary injunction due to the continuing abuse, actions and violations of substantial rights caused by the defendants.  It is certain that irreparable and irreversible harm will result if this Court does not issue a temporary injunction and finally, a permanent injunction.  The Plaintiff will prevail on these claims and the defendants cannot prevail due to the overwhelming legal grounds and evidence against them in this case

 

Things are NOT GOOD in Wisconsin.  But, they are getting better.  The Federal Lawsuit is JUST ONE of our solutions.  There are more coming...

 

Stay tuned...

 

 

Tim Bolen - Consumer Advocate

This "Millions of Health Freedom Fighters - Newsletter" is about the battle between "Health and Medicine" on Planet Earth. Tim Bolen is an op/ed writer with extensive knowledge of the activities of a subversive organization calling itself the "quackbusters," and that organization's attempts to suppress, and discredit, any, and all health modalities that compete with the allopathic (MD) paradigm for consumer health dollars. The focus of the newsletter is on the ongoing activities, battles, politics, and the victories won by members of the "Health Freedom Movement" against the "quackbusters" It details "who the quackbusters are, what they are, where they are operating, when they appear, and how they operate - and how easy it is to beat them..."

For background information on the "Battle between Health and Medicine" go to: http://www.savedrclark.net/by_whom2.htm. A copy of THIS newsletter, and older ones, are viewable at the website http://www.quackpotwatch.org/default.htm.

For EVEN MORE interesting and related articles go to http://www.bolenreport.com.