Judge Andrew Hanen in Brownsville, Texas, has pretty much dismissed all of the claims by Orly Taitz in her lawsuit against the Government for her alleged injury from treating an undocumented immigrant who, she claims, infected her with a virus.
What remains is a bit of unfinished business where Taitz is ordered to provide the Government a list of all those undocumented immigrant children she claims to have treated in her dental practice. The Government has to produce medical records for the ones on the list. The case will go forward solely on the claim that Taitz was personally injured when she got sick after treating an undocumented patient.
- Read the article at the Brownsville Herald.
- Read Judge Hanen’s order
$5 say she won’t be able to name anyone, just her assumption that a percentage of the non-whites she treated “must have been illegals”.
I wonder: if she can’t provide such a list, does she open herself up to contempt or even perjury charges?
I think a trap door is opening for Orly. Bwahahahaha!
There won’t be any perjury or contempt proceedings. Just a dismissal.
Assuming that she treated some Hispanic children, she may name them on the assumption that they were undocumented. How would she know? I suppose that on a patient intake form she might ask if a patient is a U.S. citizen, but immigration status? And if there was an immigration status question, what undocumented alien would admit to it?
Then the government will respond that it has no records which match the patients on her list, causing Orly to screech some more.
I still find it unbelievable that she would actually have any patients whatsoever.
Social media would be a great tool to destroy her business. It would just involve posting repeats of all the things she said publicly. The trick is making sure her potential customers are the concentrated audience. I think the only reason she has patients, is because they don’t know the Orly Taitz that we know.
There is literally no evidence that she does, or has had for years. She is much too busy Googling herself to have time for the malpractice of dentistry.
Please, call Judge Hanen, please inquire about this, why won’t he rule in favor of attorney Dr. Taitz, was he threatened, was he bribed by this corrupt administration.
Seriously?
If so, you’re an idiot. Why he didn’t is patently obvious. Read his ruling.
You do realize where you are, right? There will be very few people from this site (if any) who do your dirty work… and btw , that’s not how to get a judge to do your bidding. The way to get a judge to do your bidding is to have legal precedent for your case, or a damned good explanation as to why the law should apply to your particular situation… and Orly doesn’t have that and has NEVER had that. Have fun crying in your cereal for backing a loser.
She had better have proof these children were undocumented, at the very least a long form BC that specifies as much for each one.
Krosis is a longtime poster here and his satire of Orly’s writing style was letter-perfect and hilarious.
And Poe’s Law strikes again.
Well, we know from history that there _probably_ won’t be. But isn’t that claim an essential element of her suit? I.e., could it not be considered “frivolous” (and, thus, sanctions-worthy) if it turns out that she had no factual basis for her claim of injury?
—
I concur! I took Krosis as being sarcastic.
Note to Krosis: As a lawyer, when I prep people for deposition, I stress that any sarcasm will not be reflected in the written record as sarcasm. For example, a sarcastic “yeah, sure” will be reflected in the written record as an affirmative response to a question (albeit stupid question). So, when I sometimes engage in written sarcasm myself on blogs, I can’t help but wonder whether I will have to take the heat for it later…
Then my apologies to Krosis.
Apparently I wasn’t the only one that missed it. So there’s that. 🙂
Not. Gonna. Happen.
The excessive commas were what confirmed it for me. Attention to detail.
Linky, please?
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/Taitz-v-Johnson-Order-ECF-69-179123460006.pdf
Yeah, sarcasm can be hard to see on the Internet.
Too bad. Can the government charge her with perjury? I mean, you can’t just waltz into a courtroom claiming “illegal immigrants gave me Ebola” and when asked for proof, it turns out you have none, can you?
Of course not prevailing in a case does not equate perjury, but the specificity of her claims opposed to the fact that she doesn’t even have a smidgen of evidence should do it IMO.
Can it? Sure. Will it? Nope.
I was almost fooled as well. His bad grammar is what convinced me that he couldn’t possibly be a birther.
“The case will go forward solely on the claim that Taitz was personally injured when she got sick after treating an undocumented patient.”
Golly, that could get all sciencey.
I note that Taitz is a listed Denti-Cal provider. I think that has been noted here before, and it does seem remarkable that such a wingnut would accept gummint money to treat icky poor people. So remarkable that I can’t help thinking that Denti-Cal patientts are for some reason a large fraction of the patients willing to put up with her, so that she has no choice.
So I don’t find it unlikely that she may have treated undocumented immigrants. But I too can think of no evidence she is likely to have that they are undocumented.
But eventually we will have the answer.
As soon as she even hints at some kind of probability argument (“x% of furrin lookin people are illegals so x% of my furry lookin patients must’ve been illegals”), she’s done.
Or will she claim some José Doe sneezed in her face and then told her “Lady, I have no papers but I voted for Obama”?
That reason probably being that people on Medicaid generally have access to only a small fraction of the providers available to those with commercial insurance.
Except that the undocumented can only get “emergency” services through Medi-Cal. Is dentistry included at all?
Maybe she has Susan Daniels run them through e-Verify’s self-check.
I have a hard time imagining/believing that Squirrely would even treat Denti-Cal patients, wouldn’t she like have to actually file proper paper work and follow rules and directions and things like that that she has shown a remarkable propensity for not being able to do in any other forum. I also have a hard time believing that she would even treat a patient that wasn’t covered by full dental insurance, and last time I checked, illegal aliens would be hard pressed to come up with insurance or the kinds of fees she would charge without it. Basically I can’t see any alternative but that she is flat out lying, big shock I know.
It’s only wrong when the other side does it. Wingnuts DESERVE that sweet, sweet guvmint money.
Totally unrelated question, but was there ever another Hawaiian Birth certificate found that also listed the father’s race as African?
It’s a long shot.. I don’t believe there were many black families living in Hawaii in 1961.
In OrlyWorld all brown-skinned people are probably “illegal” — whatever that means.
—-
. . . unless they go on Faux News and say they are Obama-hating patriots, at which point they are elevated as living proof that RWNJs aren’t racist…
—-
How timely!
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/yeah-right-sarcasm-poses-problem-for-computer-algorithms-in-u-s-election/
“Understanding how voters talk about issues on Facebook and Twitter is key to this effort. But increasingly, data gatherers find themselves tripped up by basic social media conventions like sarcasm and mockery. ”
There’s also the point that the father’s race was self-reported on the HI BCs. The father would probably have been in a position similar to BHO, Sr. where he was temporarily in the country, but still considered himself to be African. Why would someone in this case think of themselves as an African-American?
It would be highly unlikely since it would be equally unlikely that there would be another African “national” whose wife was pregnant and having a child about that time. I would suspect that statistically it would be astronomical against such, (I will let someone who is big into statistical probability work this one out)but if the father were an African “national” then it is entirely possible that it would be reported as such. Someone coming from Africa would think of themselves as African most likely, but certainly wouldn’t be using American descriptor terms in any event, any more than an American would be likely to use European or African terms to describe themselves.
And the term “African-American” was not widely used until the 1980s. If BHO Sr. had been an American he mostly likely would have listed his race as “negro” or “black,” but “negro” is not a descriptor which an African would have used.
An interesting piece on what the descendants of American slaves have called themselves over the years can be found here:
https://books.google.com/books?id=xoZ0POyF2YkC&pg=PA86&hl=en#v=onepage&q&f=false
The number of births to black parents in Hawaii in 1961 was so small that it didn’t even warrant its own category in state reports. They were lumped into “other race.” I would estimate the probability of a second African parent in Hawaii in 61 as vanishingly small. And in any case, there is no way for the public to search the records for one.
I suppose an open records request could be made for a modern statistical report, since the racial responses for parents are in their database. I could, given access and documentation, produce such a report in a few minutes. I don’t know how the Hawaii Department of Health would take such a request.
The same effect could be accomplished by looking at birth records from 1961 for an open record state like California. Finding another BC with the racial indicator of African even if it was from a state other than Hawaii should settle the already settled issue.
I was looking at Judge Hanen’s order. It is remarkably non-specific about the information which Orly has to give to the government.
Taitz shall provide to the Government a list of the illegal immigrant children she treated from June 6, 2014, to August 22, 2014. She shall include the name (or other identifier) of the patient, date of each treatment, and the reason for each visit. She shall do that by August 7, 2015.
That’s it? Just the names (or other identifier, whatever that might be) and dates of treatment? Even in the unlikely event that the government has records of any of Orly’s Hispanic patients, the records won’t be found with just names and the dates of Orly’s treatment. At the very least the government will need dates of birth to go with any names provided by Orly.
Not to mention the unlikelihood that Orly actually knows if any of her patients were undocumented.
If Taitz was paid by the state of California for treating a patient, she had to present them with an identifier uniquely identifying the patient, which would be a Medi-Cal number in this case, or an INS alien number or something like that.
Taitz claims that she learned that they were in the country without documents from taking their medical history. I personally think that Taitz will lie when necessary to get what she wants, and I wouldn’t put it past her to have lied about the undocumented children.
I had some sense that the judge was basically putting the burden back where it was supposed to be. He would love to torment the government some more, but, I have suspicions that he knows her claims of patients giving her some disease may well be bunk.
For him, if she actually comes up with something, he can continue to harass the government. If she does not, he can drop the case stating it was her fault for failing to provide any evidence. It’s a win win for the Hanen.
Black Americans maybe. Probably some in the military. But Black AFRICANS? Not likely.
Two of Judge Hanen’s comments caught my eye: “The Court has repeatedly warned Dr. Taitz that she must comply with the rules of procedure, including all local rules of this District and this Court. Despite this, Plaintiff persists in non-compliance. The Court, having failed to achieve compliance by asking Plaintiff to comply with these rules, must now resort to the more punitive step of denying any and all non-complying motions ” (p. 4), and “The Court denies pro hac vice status because of Dr. Taitz’s repeated refusal to abide the long-standing rules of procedure” (p. 7, fn. 6).
Turning to the merits of her remaining claim: Has Taitz ever identified the medical condition she claims to have acquired from an undocumented-alien patient? Judge Hanen refers to “persistent cough” and “upper respiratory infection.” Vera Dolan’s affidavit (relying on what Taitz said her internist said), states “persistent cough” and “oxygen insufficiency.” I’m not a physician, but I have litigated enough personal injury cases to know that persistent cough is a symptom and oxygen insufficiency is a sign; neither is a diagnosis. URI is a non-specific, catch-all diagnosis. She will need something more to establish legal causation: a specific diagnosis or identifiable pathogen, traceable to an identifiable patient. (It also seems to me that the leap from URI to a chronic condition requiring positive pressure treatment nightly is missing several connecting dots.)
My understanding is that Medi-Cal provides only emergency care for undocumented aliens, but it’s possible that Orly had to deal with a toothache or abscess.
That claim of hers has a bogus stink to it. What undocumented alien is going to freely admit to be undocumented, even if Orly actually asked the question?
And it’s even more unlikely that Orly ever treated an undocumented alien who came into the U.S. in Texas. It’s estimated that there are 2.45 million undocumented aliens in California, the vast majority of whom are from Mexico and entered the U.S.somewhere along the Mexico-California border.
At least Judge Hanen placed the burden of proof squarely on Orly’s shoulders.
These kids are in the custody of legal US foster parents, so the parents would reasonably answer truthfully. But as you say, the burden of proof is on Orly.
Taitz numerous malpractice cases are a good indication of just how thorough she is as a dental provider. I find it highly unlikely that she ever cared enough to sit and take a history of anyone who came into her office, especially someone she suspected of possibly being here in the country as an undocumented alien. If she were to inquire about their status, I’d think many of them would refuse to answer as it’s not something that would change her method of treatment.
As for her persistent cough and her C-Pap machine, I’d love to hear her family physician, or whoever prescribed the C-Pap for her, testify as to her diagnosis. Chances are she might have sleep apnea and that’s not something that occurs or is diagnosed overnight. Did she have a sleep study done? If so, when? The idea that her persistent cough led her to using a C-Pap MAY be true, however, this diagnosis and treatment would not likely occur as quickly as Taitz alleges without further studies being done. Does she have Congestive Heart Failure? Did she have a stroke? Those are two reasons why she might have sleep apnea and need the C-Pap but I still think she’s full of crap and it will be revealed if the case goes any further. It will depend on the list of patients Taitz comes up with. The fact that the physician who was treating her did not testify tells me that he/she was not willing to go along with whatever b.s. Taitz was trying to spew in court.
Dolan comes across as being primarily motivated by financial considerations due to her statement that Taitz likely became sick due to the allegedly illegal immigrants that she treated. Dolan has no way of knowing how she became ill or if she truly is sick, other than the obvious signs she presents whenever she opens her mouth.
I think the answer(s), to all of those burning questions is far simpler, she’s lying. I’m not convinced she’s capable of telling the truth to begin with, but in this/these instance(s), she’s just quite simply lying.
And the other question is: what is the likelihood that Orly has treated more than a handful of Latino children? Only 5.6% of the population in Rancho Santa Fe is Hispanic or Latino. Statewide Hispanics and Latinos make up 38.4% of the population.
It will be interesting to see if she actually produces a list of names.
Yeah, but its just ‘down the road’ from Solana Beach and Encinitas and Cardiff where there is more room for, um, “welfare patients”.
I still don’t see how she can file anything without violating HIPAA, although when did little things like laws and rules ever catch her attention before.
I would suspect that her record keeping is on par with her legal an dental skills and is so sloppy that she wouldn’t have any idea about patients to begin with. I wonder if she could open herself to perjury charges with the state for filing false dental claims?
An exception to HIPAA is expressly made for court orders.
45 CFR 164.512
https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/45/164.512
(e) Standard: Disclosures for judicial and administrative proceedings
(1) Permitted disclosures. A covered entity may disclose protected health information in the course of any judicial or administrative proceeding:
(i) In response to an order of a court or administrative tribunal, provided that the covered entity discloses only the protected health information expressly authorized by such order
The judge Order covers how the HIPAA violation is to be avoided (though it doesn’t explicitly mention HIPAA). Dollars to donuts she manages to Sternsig her end of the bargain and ends up violating HIPAA (this assumes she actually manages to provide something that the feds can respond to).
(ETA) Sorry Matt, I wrote that last night and it just now posted.
That was more in the realm of what I was getting at, she has never ever shown any ability to follow disclosure rules before and I really don’t see any prospect of her starting at this late date.
For the record, Taitz practices in Rancho Santa Margarita (Orange County,) not in Rancho Santa Fe (San Diego County.) They are very different municipalities.
Whoops, my mistake. Thanks for the correction.
Couldn’t the defendants have demanded that? I realize there’s a patient-doctor privilege but I don’t think that means a medical layman can just claim “I got this condition and I got it from this John Doe” without an expert actually backing up the claim that person even has that condition in the first place.
I’m sure they will if it goes any further but maybe they felt that to do so earlier was to give Taitz credibility that she doesn’t deserve. Dolan, the epidemiologist, claiming that she’s certain that Taitz received her illness from one of the illegal immigrants Taitz allegedly treated is just proof, IMO, that she found a fellow wingnut to testify for her. Nobody should have been willing to say anything of the sort, despite their accreditation
The defendants, in essence, did do this. The judge is bending over backwards to not dismiss Taitz’s case by granting her very limited discovery to “prove” what she should have alleged in her complaint.
If the lawsuit is allowed to proceed, the defendants will file a demand for HIPAA authorizations which will allow them to obtain Orly’s medical records, and Orly will have to comply.
This is now a personal injury lawsuit. To prevail Orly will have to prove the following:
1. That she caught a communicable disease.
2. That she caught the communicable disease from one of her patients.
3. That the patient who gave her the communicable disease was an undocumented alien who was released into the general population by the U.S. government.
4. That the undocumented alien showed signs of having the communicable disease when he or she was in the custody of the U.S. government.
5. Therefore, the act of releasing the undocumented alien was the proximate cause of Orly’s illness.
If the case ever got far enough, the government would probably demand to see all of Orly’s patient records (with names redacted) during the relevant time period to see if any other patients showed signs of illness when they were treated by Orly. Just for laughs, I would also demand to see the records of the patients who left her covered in blood.
The bottom line is that Orly has virtually no chance of winning this lawsuit.
It’s likely Orly believes that is not necessary.
She has proven herself to be incompetent in every lawsuit she has filed, so there is no reason to think that she will do any better in a personal injury case.
It’s all about proximate cause. She not only has to prove that she was injured, she also has to prove that she would not have been injured but for the negligent actions of the defendants. For example, if Orly was infected by an undocumented immigrant, but the immigrant got sick after being released into the general population, there is not an unbroken chain of events between the release of the immigrant and Orly’s illness. It could very well be negligent for the government release a diseased immigrant, but the government isn’t responsible if the immigrant gets sick after the release.
Of course, at this point there is no reason to believe that Orly had anything more than a common upper respiratory infection, if that.
She IS an infection.