276-281 P Msj Opp
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View 276-281 P Msj Opp as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 71,984
- Pages: 262
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 29
Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: mwasserialmarkwasser.com Bernard C. Barmann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected]
9
10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan, and Irwin Harris
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14 15
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
16 17 18 19
Plaintiff, vs. COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,
Defendants.
20
Case No.: I :07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG DEFENDANTS' MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Date: January 12,2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA
21 22
----------------
Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
23 24 25 26 27 28
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 1
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 29
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
11
3
INTRODUCTION
1
4
LEGAL STANDARD ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
1
5
ARGUMENT
1
6
A.
7
DEFENDANTS TOOK NO ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF 1.
8
2.
9
3. 4.
5.
10
11
B.
DEFENDANTS NEVER RETALIA TED AGAINST PLAINTIFF 1. 2. 3. 4.
12 13 14
C.
15 16
D.
17 18 19 20 21
E. F.
October 17,2005 Letter of Reprimand Full-Time Leave Removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology Paid Administrative Leave Nonrenewal of Employment Agreement
Oncology Conference Blood Product Chart Copies Skull Flaps Radical Prostatectomy
1
3 5 6 8
9 10
11 12 13 15
DEFENDANTS DID NOT VIOLATE PLAINTIFF'S RIGHTS UNDER FMLA AND CFRA
16
DEFENDANTS DID NOT DISCRIMINATE, DID NOT FAIL TO ACCOMMODATE AND DID NOT FAIL TO ENGAGE IN THE INTERACTIVE PROCESS
17
DEFENDANTS DID NOT VIOLATE PLAINTIFF'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS
20
DEFENDANTS DID NOT RETALIATE AGAINST PLAINTIFF FOR ASSERTING HIS RIGHTS UNDER FMLA, CFRA AND FEHA
24
CONCLUSION
25
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 3 of 29
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
2 United States Supreme Court Cases 3
4 5
Board ofRegents v. Roth (1972) 408 U.S. 564, 577 Gilbert v. Homar (1997) 520 U.S. 924 Matsushita Elec. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. (1986) 475 U.S. 574, 593 Perry v. Sindermann (1972) 408 U. S. 593 Circuit Court Cases
6
7 8
9
20,21,22,23 23 15 10,20,21,22,23
Freundv. Nycomed Amersham (9th Cir. 2003) 347 F.3d 752 Joseph v. Leavitt (2 nd Cir. 2006) 465 F.3d 87,91 Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc. (5 th Cir. 1996) 93 F.3d 155, Ulrich v. City and County ofSan Francisco (9th Cir. 2002) 308 F. 3d 968 Watkins v. Ameripride Services (9 th Cir. 2004) 375 F.3d 821,828. Wideman v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (11 th Cir. 1998) 141 F 3d 1453, 1456
14 8 19 2 19
2
10 District Court Cases
11
12
Gannon v. Potter (N.D.Cal. 2006) U. S. Dist. LEXIS 85995 Swonke v. Sprint, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2004) 327 F.Supp.2d 1128,1138 Tomczak v. Safeway, Inc. (N.D.Cal. 1997) LEXIS 13247
8
5 8
13 California Supreme Court Cases 14
15
Skelly v. State Personnel Bd. (1975) 15 Cal.3d 194,206-207 Yanowitz v. L'Oreal (2005) 36 Cal. 4 th 1028 ,1054-1055 California Appellate Court Cases
16
17 18
19 20 21
22 23
Colarossi v. Coty, Inc. (2002) 97 Cal.AppA th 1142. Daly v. Exxon (1997) 55 Cal.AppA th 39 Hammond v. County ofLos Angeles (2008) 160 Cal.AppA th 1579 Morgan v. Regents of University ofCal. (2000) 88 Cal.AppAth 52 Neisendorfv. Levi Strauss & Co. (2006) 143 Cal.AppA th 509 Patten v. Grant Joint Union High School Dist. \2005) 134 Cal.AppA th 1378 Raine v. City ofBurbank (2006) 135 Cal.App.4 h 1215 Shoemaker v. County ofLos Angeles (1995) 37 Cal. AppA'h 618 Tollefson v. Roman Catholic Bishop (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 843,854
26
24
9, 10 8 25 17,24 14, 16 19 7,21,22
9
United States CodelUnited States Code Annotated 17
29 U.S.C. §2612(a)(I)(D) Code of Federal Regulations
24 25
20 1,2,3
17,24
29 C.F.R. §825.214, subd. (b) California Statutes
27
California Government Code §12945.2(a)
28
California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d)
17 2,3 II
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY mDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 1 2 3
California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health &
Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
§1278.5(d)(l) §1278.5(d)(2) §1602.5 §l602.5(a) §1635.1 §1635 (d)
Page 4 of 29
3 3 12 12 13 14
4
5
California Labor Code §1102.5 California Labor Code §2924 California Labor Code §6400(a)
11 7,23 19
6
California Code of Regulations 7 22 C.C.R §7075l
12
CACI §2600 Restatement (Second) of Contracts §268
16 13
8
9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 111
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I 2
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 5 of 29
INTRODUCTION Defendants have filed a separate request that the Court take judicial notice of Defendants'
3
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and lor
4
Summary Adjudication On All Claims In The Second Amended Complaint ("Defendants'
5
Memo"), Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts in Support of Motion for Summary
6
Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication on all Claims in the Second Amended Complaint
7
("DSUF") and other documents, filed November 13,2008. Defendants will cite to both
8
documents, as well as Plaintiffs Memorandum of Point and Authorities in Support of Corrected
9
Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment Against Defendants ("Plaintiffs Memo") and
10
Plaintiffs Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of Plaintiffs Corrected Motion for
II
Partial or Full Summary Judgment Against Defendants ("PSUF"), throughout this memorandum.
12
Plaintiff s moving papers misstate and mischaracterize both the law and the facts relevant
13
to Plaintiffs claims. Most of the discussion that follows is focused on those misstatements and
14
mischaracterizations.
15 16 17
LEGAL STANDARD ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants incorporate herein the discussion from Defendants' Memo at pages 2:25-3:27 regarding the legal standards for summary judgment.
18
I
19
ARGUMENT Defendants Took No Adverse Employment Actions Against Plaintiff.
20
A.
21
Plaintiff correctly notes that California has adopted the "materiality" test for the purpose
22
of determining whether an employment action is adverse. Yanowitz v. L'Oreal (2005) 36
23
Cal.4 th 1028, 1036. However, Plaintiff attempts to connect the Yanowitz materiality test with
24
the "deterrence" test that the California Supreme Court has rejected for claims arising under
25
California statutes. Id. at 1036. (See, Plaintiffs Memo at pg. 5:2-4.)
26
Having erroneously expanded the test beyond what the California Supreme Court has
27
endorsed, Plaintiff asserts that a reprimand is an adverse employment action. (Plaintiffs Memo
28
at pg. 5:9.) But, under the accepted materiality test, an employment action is adverse only ifit -1-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 6 of 29
1
materially affects the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. Yanowitz, 36 Ca1.4 th at
2
1052. A reprimand, by itself, does not materially affect the terms, conditions or privileges of
3
employment and, consequently, is not an adverse employment action. Id. at 1055.
4
After the California Supreme Court outlined the contours of the materiality test, it
5
adopted a "totality of the circumstances" approach to determine when a series of employment
6
actions, taken together, will be construed as an adverse employment action. Id. at 1052, fh. 11.
7
In this context, thc Court cited Wideman v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
8
which held that written reprimands in conjunction with an employer's solicitation of negative
9
comments by coworkers coupled with a one-day suspension constituted an adverse employment
(lIth
Cir. 1998) 141 F.3d 1453,
10
action. Yanowitz, 36 CaI.4th at 1061, citing Wideman
11
Wideman stands for the proposition that courts should look at patterns of employment actions as
12
well as individual employment actions to determine what is truly adverse.
13 14
(lIth
Cir. 1998) 141 F.3d at 1456.
No authority supports Plaintiffs assertion that a written reprimand, by itself, is an adverse employment action.
15
Plaintiff improperly relies on Ulrich v. City and County ofSan Francisco (9th Cir. 2002)
16
308 FJd 968. Dr. Ulrich resigned his position knowing his hospital had begun an investigation
17
into his patient care practices. Id. at 972-973. Because the hospital had already begun its
18
investigation, it reported Dr. Ulrich's resignation to the National Practitioner Data Bank
19
(NPDB). Id. at 973. The NPDB is typically accessed by potential employers to perform
20
background checks on physicians. Id. at 974. So, the hospital's report to the NPDB presented a
21
threat to Dr. Ulrich's career.
22
Those facts are quite distinct from what happened to Plaintiff. The letters Plaintiff
23
complains of were confidential and were not distributed beyond the medical staff officers at
24
KMC. (Harris Depo., 8113/08, pgs. 113:14-16 and 116:4). They did not threaten Plaintiffs
25
career. In fact, Plaintiff was actively looking for a new job during much of the time he was on
26
leave and there is no evidence any prospective employer knew anything about what was gong on
27
with Plaintiff at KMC. (DSUF
28
~8).
Defendants never reported Plaintiff to NPDB.
Finally, Plaintiff asserts that California Health & Safety Code §l278.5(d) provides that -2DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 7 of 29
1
the threatened placement of letters of reprimand in Plaintiff s medical records file is sufficient to
2
support a retaliation claim. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 5:22-23.) That is not what the statute says.
3
There are two parts to California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d). The first part,
4
§1278.5(d)(l), contains the rebuttable presumption that an adverse employment action occurring
5
within 120 days of whistleblowing is retaliation. The second part, §1278.5(d)(2), describes what
6
constitutes an adverse employment action. Subdivision (d)(2) states:
7 8 9
10 11
[D]iscriminatory treatment of an employee, member of the medical staff, or any other health care worker includes, but is not limited to, discharge, demotion, suspension, or any unfavorable changes in, or breach of, the terms or conditions of a contract, employment, privileges of the employee, member of the medical staff, or any other health care worker of the health care facility, or the threat of any of these actions.
12
California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d)(2) is essentially a codification of the
13
"materiality" test that the California Supreme Court adopted in Yanowitz. See, Yanowitz at 1036.
14
Nothing in the statute supports Plaintiffs contention that an employment event that does not
15
materially effect an employee's status is sufficient to support a retaliation claim.
16 17
1.
October 17, 2005 Letter of Reprimand
In keeping with Plaintiff s habit of mischaracterizing the facts to try to make them fit his
18
unsupported theories, he has labeled the October l7'h, 2005 letter admonishing and counseling
19
him for his behavior at the October 12, 2005 oncology conference the "Credential Threat." This
20
is specious. There is no evidence that Plaintiff s credential was ever threatened. None of the
21
Defendants ever took any action to jeopardize or "threaten" Plaintiff s credentials as a physician
22
at KMC. As Plaintiff admits, the letter was confidential and was never even placed in his
23
medical records file. (Harris Depo., 8/13/08, pgs. 113:14-16 and 116:4). Plaintiffmakcs no
24
attempt to explain how a confidential letter that was never placed in his file constituted a threat
25
to his credential. The fact is, Plaintiff continued to enjoy all the privileges of a credentialed
26
physician at KMC until November 10,2008 -long after his employment contract expired.
27
(Letters to Jadwin, dated 8/14/01 to 9/12/08, attached to Defendants' response to Plaintiffs
28
Statement of Undisputed Facts). His privileges finally lapsed because Plaintiff never returned -3· DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 8 of 29
the requisite renewal application to KMC. Id.
2
Oncology conferences are held monthly. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 22:9-10. They are
3
an hour long and are routinely devoted to a discussion of two cases. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg.
4
24:7-8 and pg. 36:19-20. There are usually 70-80 people - mostly residents and medical students
5
- in attendance. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 32:8-9. There had been previous issues with
6
Plaintiffs presentations at the conferences. In 2003, Plaintiff was counseled to prioritize
7
information and present it succinctly. (DSUF ~I 0I). In 2004, he was warned that a presentation
8
he wanted to make, consisting of 52 slides, would take more time than was allotted. (DSUF
9
~102).
10
In May 2005, he was again requested to observe the time limits. (DSUF
~103).
Plaintiffs presentation at the October 12,2005 oncology conference was inappropriate.
II
It greatly exceeded the allotted time, contained too many slides, did not conform to the
12
instructional purpose of the conference, included unprofessional criticisms of both the University
13
of Southern California and Stanford University, deteriorated into an argument between Plaintiff
14
and Dr. Roy over a specific case and monopolized the conference to such an extent that no one
IS
else was able to make their presentations. (Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 14:19-21; pg. 15:1-4; pg.
16
27:16-17; pgs. 31:17-32:21; pg. 51:12-25; pg. 55:7-23; pg. 62:19-25; pg. 63:4-11; pg. 64:12-19;
17
68:9-17 and DSUF ~~104, 105, 106 and III and PSUF ~89). After Plaintiff finally relinquished
18
the podium and sat down, he continued to argue with Dr. Roy. (DSUF ~112).
19
Three physicians who attended the conference wrote confidential letters to the Chief
20
Medical Officer about Plaintiffs behavior. (DSUF ~107; PSUF ~91). They were not the only
21
attendees who complained. The chief of surgery also voiced a complaint. (DSUF ~I 08). The
22
past-president of the medical staff testified she was embarrassed by several things Plaintiff had
23
said - such as his criticisms of outside consultants. (DSUF ~III). Several residents and medical
24
students noted Plaintiff s unprofessional behavior on their performance evaluations. (DSUF
25
~109).
26
A few days after the conference, the Executive Board of the medical staff presented
27
Plaintiff with a confidential letter that both admonished and counseled him regarding his
28
behavior at the conference. The letter referenced Plaintiff s failure to observe the time limits, his -4DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 9 of 29
1
failure to cooperate with the conference coordinator's instructions regarding time and his use of
2
the conference as a platfonn from which to advance his personal agenda. (DSUF
3
~113).
Plaintiff s behavior during the oncology conference and afterwards eroded his
4
relationships with other members of the medical staff. In a meeting with KMC's Chief
5
Executive Officer about a week later, Plaintiff made loud, angry and derogatory comments about
6
other members of the medical staff. (DSUF ~116). He refused their conciliatory efforts to bring
7
resolution to the issue. (DSUF ~~166-174). Rather than accept the comments in the spirit in
8
which they were given, Plaintiff chose to become increasingly antagonistic and hostile. (DSUF
9
~~114;
166-174). He told Dr. Abraham she was nothing but a "fat doctor." (DSUF ~166). He ~173).
10
told Dr. Ragland, he was unfit to be president of the medical staff. (DSUF
11
ultimately destroyed the collegiality necessary to build professional trust and respect. (DSUF
12
~~133,
13
This
134). Without supporting legal authority, Plaintiff asserts his criticisms of virtually every
14
physician at KMC were all cloaked with a mysterious "protected" status but, when other
15
physicians complained about his behavior, they were motivated by malice and retaliation.
16 17 18 19
Defendants request a finding that the October 17, 2005 letter was not an adverse employment action.
2.
Full-Time Leave.
Plaintiff has chosen to characterize his full-time leave as "forced", apparently in an
20
attempt to transform the County's deferential and supportive decision into an act of retaliation.
21
This is also specious.
22
An employer may require an employee to stay at home and recuperate, regardless of the
23
employee's wishes. Swanke v. Sprint, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2004) 327 F.Supp.2d 1128, 1138. It is not
24
an adverse employment action to place an employee on a leave the employee did not request.
25
Here, the facts are not favorable to Plaintiff. Plaintiff s physician wrote that Plaintiff ~~14
26
should be restricted to part-time work or less. (DSUF
27
testified that he gave Plaintiff the option of taking full-time leave. (DSUF ~21). Plaintiff
28
obviously disputes that. However, the dispute does not defeat summary judgment because full-
and 21). Defendant Peter Bryan
-5DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 10 of 29
1
time leave represents a less demanding work schedule than part-time. Whether Plaintiff chose
2
full-time leave as Bryan says he did or the County decided to place Plaintiff on full-time leave,
3
the full-time leave was consistent with what Plaintiffs physician specified. And, importantly,
4
Plaintiff did not object to it. (DSUF
~21).
There is no basis for his contention it was adverse.
5
Plaintiff asserts the full-time leave, although paid, was an adverse employment action
6
because it deprived him of the opportunity to earn professional fees from April 28, 2006 until
7
June 17,2006. However, Plaintiff put himself on leave in December 2005. (DSUF ~15). And,
8
he decided which duties he would perform and which he would not. (Second Amended
9
Complaint ~80). The duties Plaintiff decided to not perform were his duties as a pathologist. Id.
10
It was Plaintiff s routine work as a pathologist that generated professional fees, not his
11
administrative work. Professional fees result from billable medical work. (Plaintiffs Memo,
12
pgs.6:27-7:2). Thus, Plaintiffs decision to stop working as a pathologist damaged his ability to
13
earn professional fees. The County's decision to follow his physician's directive and put him on
14
less than part-time work had no appreciable affect on his ability to earn professional fees. This is
15
borne out by a review of the professional fees Plaintiff billed. His fees declined substantially
16
after he put himself on leave in December, 2005.
17 18
The County's decision to place Plaintiff on full-time leave was reasonable and did not materially affect the terms, conditions or privileges of his employment.
19
Defendants request a finding that the County's decision to comply with Plaintiffs
20
physician's request that Plaintiff work part-time or less by placing Plaintiff on full-time leave
21
was not an adverse employment action.
22
3.
23
Removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology.
Plaintiff chooses to describe his removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology as a
24
"demotion." This, again, is misleading. Plaintiff was not "demoted" as that term is used in the
25
KMC Medical Staff Bylaws. (The Medical Staff Bylaws were submitted, in their entirety, as
26
Defendants' Undisputed Fact No.4 in support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment.) "Demotion" is referenced in Section 12.2 as one of several possible corrective actions.
27 28
(DSUF
~4,
pg. 71). It means moving a medical staff member to a "lower staff category or -6-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 11 of 29
1
membership status." Id. The categories of medical staff are also defined in the Bylaws (See,
2
Article V, "Categories of Membership." (DSUF
3
Courtesy, Consulting, Provisional, Honorary, Retired, Advisory, Administrative, and Associate.
4
(DSUF ~4, pgs. 18-28). Plaintiff was always in the "Active" category with full rights of
5
membership and clinical privileges. (KMC Letter to Jadwin, dated 8/14/01 to 9/12/08). He was
6
never "demoted" to any other category.
~4,
pgs.l8-28).) The categories are Active,
7
Plaintiff s removal from his position as Chair of the Department of Pathology is covered
8
by a different provision of the Bylaws. (DSUF ~4, Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319».
9
Peter Bryan recommended that Plaintiff be removed as department chair because of Plaintiffs
10
"continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing member of the
11
medical staff leadership group" and because Plaintiff "has provided no indication that he is
12
committed to return to work or resume his duties as chairman." (DSUF
13
subsequent removal were in accordance with the Bylaws. (DSUF
14
had no effect on Plaintiff s employment status or the term of his employment agreement.
15
~~31
~33).
The report and
and 37). The removal
Plaintiffs reason for wanting to treat his removal as a demotion is clear because, under ~4,
16
the Bylaws, demotions carry certain procedural rights whereas removal does not. (DSUF
17
Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319) versus Article XII, Section 12.2, pg. 66 (0000337».
18
Plaintiff also relies on Shoemaker v. County ofLos Angeles (1995) 37 Cal.AppA th 618 but it is
19
little application to this issue. The question in Shoemaker was whether the plaintiff was entitled
20
to pre-disciplinary procedures before he was relieved of his dual positions as chief of the county
21
medical center's emergency medicine services department and chair of the university's
22
department of emergency medicine. Shoemaker sheds no light on the question of what
23
constitutes a demotion.
24
0
The County's actions are further supported by California Labor Code §2924 which
25
authorizes an employer to rescind an employment contract under certain conditions. Section
26
2924 states "an employment for a specified term may be terminated at any time by the employer
27
in case of any willful breach of duty by the employee in the course of his employment, or in the
28
case of his habitual neglect of his duty or continued incapacity to perform it." -7-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 12 of 29
Plaintiff was not only physically absent from the hospital for over 7 months, he ignored ~23).
2
the County's inquiries about when he would return to work. (DSUF
3
termed "inability" or "unwillingness", Plaintiff was not doing the job he was hired to do.
4
Whether properly
Defendants request a finding that the County removed Plaintiff as Chair of the
5
Department of Pathology consistent with the terms of his employment agreement and the
6
removal was not an adverse employment action.
7
8
4.
Paid Administrative Leave
Plaintiff contents that his placement on paid administrative leave was an adverse
9
employment action. In Defendants' Memo, pg. 5:22-28, Defendants cited authority that paid
10
administrative leave is not an adverse employment action because it does not materially affect
II
the employment relationship. Gannon v. Potter (N.D. Cal. 2006) __F.3d_ _, 2006 U.S.
12
Dist. LEXIS 85995 at 13-14; Tomczakv. Safeway, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 1997) _ _F.3d~_, 1997
13
LEXIS 13247; Joseph v. Leavitt (2 nd Cir. 2006) 465 F.3d 87, 91. The employee retains the same
14
position at the same base pay and there is no negative evaluative comment. This rationale is
15
consistent with the Yanowitz "materiality" rule: An action is not adverse ifit does not materially
16
affect the terms, conditions and privileges of employment.
17
Plaintiff cites Hammond v. County ofLos Angeles (2008) 160 Cal.AppA th 1579 for the
18
proposition that "extended leave, even when paid, is an adverse action where it impairs an
19
employee's job performance or prospects for advancement or promotion." (Plaintiffs Memo, pg.
20
6: 17-18). Although the Hammond court mentioned adverse employment actions, the court was
21
referring to a passage out of Yanowitz, which it cited. Hammond, 160 Cal.AppA,h at 1599, citing
22
Yanowitz, 36 Cal.4th at 1054-1055. The Hammond opinion does not discuss extended leave, paid
23
or otherwise, because that was not relevant to the facts in Hammond. The plaintiff in Hammond
24
was never put on leave. She was a nursing instructor who sued because she was given less
25
teaching time and more curriculum-development time by her new supervisor. The case has no
26
application to the facts here and it does not support Plaintiffs position.
27 28
Plaintiff also argues that paid administrative leave is an adverse employment action because it caused him to be away from the workplace for months. Plaintiff produced an expert, -8-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 13 of 29
1
Regina Levison, who testified that a pathologist is at risk oflosing his or her skills within a few
2
months if not engaged in pathology work. (PSUF ~53). However, as mentioned above, Plaintiff
3
put himself on leave in December, 2005 and practiced no pathology until September, 2006,
4
during which time-ten months-he probably did suffer a self-induced erosion of his skills.
5
(DSUF
6 7 8 9
~~1 0,
15 and 19; Second Amended Complaint ~80).
If practicing pathology is important to maintaining one's skills, Plaintiff might have considered the consequences of his self-induced absence from the hospital. Plaintiff maintains that being placed on paid administrative leave denied him the opportunity to earn professional fees - which he alleges amounted to approximately $100,000 per
10
year. (PSUF ~57). In fact, Plaintiffs professional fees for 2004 were $131,709.58; for 2005,
11
they were $103,444.13; and for 2006, they were $28,596.64. (Bates Numbers 0018755-
12
0018917). Plaintiff s professional fees varied greatly according to his performance. They were
13
not guaranteed by his employment agreement. They were merely a potential. (DSUF
14
did not earn them if he did not work. Plaintiff s decision to stop practicing pathology in
15
December, 2005 substantially impacted his ability to earn professional fees.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
~6).
He
Administrative leave is expressly authorized by the County's policies, which are incorporated into Plaintiffs employment agreement. (DSUF ~6, Article V,
~7,
pg. 15).
Defendants request a finding that Plaintiff s paid administrative leave and was not an adverse employment action. 5.
Nonrenewal of Employment Agreement.
Finally, Plaintiff alleges that the "nonrenewal" of his employment contract was an adverse employment action because it was a form of retaliation. Plaintiff relies on Daly v. Exxon (1997) 55 Cal.App.4 th 39. At the beginning of the
24
opinion, the Daly court expressed its agreement with the result in Tollefson v. Roman Catholic
25
Bishop (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 843. Tollefson stands for the proposition that an employment
26
contract that expires on its own terms is not the basis for a claim. The court wrote, "Plaintiff
27
could not transmute an express, one-year employment contract into an implied contract for an
28
indefinite term, terminable only for good cause." Tollefson, 219 Cal.App.3d at 854. This -9DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 14 of 29
remains true even if one-year contracts have been renewed for successive terms. Id. at 849. In Daly, the plaintiff had her one-year "consulting agreement" renewed several times.
3
Daly, 55 Cal.AppA th at 42. When it was not renewed, she alleged retaliation for having reported
4
what she believed to be Cal-OSHA violations to her employer. Id. The Daly court reversed an
5
award of summary judgment in favor of the employer, holding that proof of retaliation by the
6
employer entitled her to statutory damages. However, nothing in the opinion holds that
7
nonrenewal of an employment contract is, by itself, an adverse employment action.
8 9
Plaintiff advances the novel argument that his employment agreement should have been renewed because there was a "mutually explicit understanding" that it would be. (Plaintiffs
10
Memo, pg. 8:12 and pg. 30:5). He bases this argument on language he extracted from Perry v.
11
Sindermann (1972) 408 U.S. 593,601. Perry does not support Plaintiff. (See, discussion below
12
at page 21 :8-17). There was no "mutually explicit understanding" that Plaintiffs employment
13
agreement would be renewed.
14 15 16 17
Contrary to what Plaintiff writes, in the last 7 years, the employment agreements for four physicians at KMC have not been renewed. (PSUF '\[71). Nonrenewal is not rare. Plaintiff asserts he was a "permanent" employee. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 30:6-7). He wa not permanent in the sense he tries to use the word. (See, discussion below at page 21: 11-17).
18
Plaintiff cannot establish that his contract was not renewed for retaliatory reasons.
19
Supervisor Ray Watson only remembered a discussion about removing Plaintiff from the
20
department chair position. (DSUF '\[34). He did not remember (and Plaintiff asked him three
21
times!) any discussion about Plaintiffs termination, resignation or denial of privileges. (DSUF
22
'\[34). He also did not recall a vote on the nonrenewal of the contract but he speculated there
23
must have been one. (DSUF '\[35). In fact, no vote was ever taken on whether to renew
24
Plaintiffs contract. (DSUF '\[36a).
25
There is no evidence to support Plaintiffs allegation of retaliation with regard to the
26
nonrenewal of his contract and Defendants request a finding that the County's nonrenewal of his
27
employment agreement was not an adverse employment action and was not retaliatory.
28
B.
Defendants Never Retaliated Against Plaintiff. ·10·
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 15 of 29
Plaintiffs First and Second Claims are commonly referred to as "whistleblower" claims.
2
Plaintiff was not a "whistleblower" or ever engaged in "whistleblowing" while employed at
3
KMC. (Def.'s Answer to Second Amended Complaint '\1'\117,41,74, and 78).
4
To be a "whistleblower," an employee must report information to a government or law
5
enforcement agency that the employee reasonably believes discloses a violation oflaw.
6
California Labor Code §11 02.5. Plaintiff claims he "blew the whistle" four times.
7 8 9
1.
Oncology Conference.
Plaintiff says the first incident of alleged whistleblowing occurred at the October 12, 2005 oncology conference. Plaintiff was one of three or four speakers at an instructional,
10
presentation about a medical case to an audience of approximately 70-80 members of the KMC
11
staff, who were mostly residents and medical students. (Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 24:6-18 and
12
pg. 32:8-9). This was the normal format for the oncology conferences. Id. A resident would
13
introduce the case and give a brief overview, a physician from radiology would report the
14
radiologic findings, a pathologist would report the pathology, the treating physician would
15
comment on treatment and there would be a few minutes of general discussion about the case.
16
Each presentation was limited to 30 minutes. (Taylor Depo., pg. 36:16-20). Otherthan
17
Plaintiffs behavior, the October, 2005 oncology conference followed the routine fOlmat.
18
Plaintiff asserts he "blew the whistle" on a plan of care for a patient that was "based on
19
inaccurate outside pathology reports." Those pathology reports were from the University of
20
Southern California and Stanford University. (PSUF '\189). Plaintiffs assertion that the outside
21
pathology reports were "inaccurate" is at odds with other statements Plaintiff made about the
22
nature of pathologic diagnoses. For example, in an e-mail to Dr. Dutt, (which Plaintiff wrote to
23
defend his own work) Plaintiff stated, "As you well know, there are frequent disagreements
24
between pathologists, even expert pathologists, about a given diagnosis. These are customarily
25
resolved by referee opinions by outside consultants and the results are widely published." (PSUF
26
'\1114). In a 2005 letter to Dr. Roy, Plaintiff wrote, "Pathology diagnoses are consensus based,
27
with few gold standards to affirm accuracy. Consultants offer opinions, not accurate diagnoses.
28
There is no universally agreed upon definition for what constitutes an 'accurate' diagnosis." -11DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 16 of 29
(DSUF -,r74).
2
Plaintiffs criticisms of the work done by USC and Stanford were no more than his
3
opinions of a diagnosis rendered by another pathologist. Disagreement between physicians over
4
diagnoses and patient care is not "blowing the whistle" because it lacks all the elements of
5
"whistleblowing." There is no violation oflaw and there is no enforcement agency to report to.
6
Plaintiff asserts he also "blew the whistle" during the conference regarding "unsafe
7
conditions created for other patients by the lack of a KMC policy requiring internal pathology
8
review of all outside pathology reports prior to treatment." Yet, again, there is no law that
9
requires the practice he was advocating. This is not "whistleblowing." It is disagreement.
I0 II
12 13
Defendants request a finding that Plaintiffs statements at the October oncology conference did not constitute whistleblowing.
2.
Blood Product Chart Copies
The second incident of Plaintiff s alleged whistleblowing concerns Blood Product Chart
14
Copies ("PCCs"). PCCs are the paper records of blood usage and cover such things as
15
transfusions. Plaintiff asserts he made a "protected" report to Peter Bryan, the Chief Executive
16
Officer ofKMC, on January 9, 2006, that Plaintiff "reasonably suspected" transfusion
17
documentation at KMC was not being processed in compliance with state regulations.
18
Although California Health and Safety Code §1602.5(a) applies to the preparation,
19
labeling and storage of blood products, violation of §1602.5 was not Plaintiffs original concern.
20
Instead, Plaintiff had argued aggressively with Toni Smith and others that the original copies of
21
all PCCs should be filed and stored in the Pathology Department. (DSUF -,r118).
22
However, 22 C.C.R. §70751 requires that patient medical record be maintained in an
23
easily accessible marmer and in accordance with policies that insure their integrity. Plaintiffs
24
desire to file PCCs in the Pathology Department would have fragmented medical records by
25
causing records of blood usage to be housed separate from the rest ofthe patient's medical
26
record. Toni Smith correctly vetoed Plaintiffs request, thereby insuring that KMC's medical
27
records continued to be maintained as required by law (and, of course, earning Plaintiffs enmity
28
in the process). (DSUF -,r129). -12DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY mDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 17 of 29
Plaintiffs campaign to force Toni Smith to change KMC policy and store the PCCs in
2
the Pathology Department was persistent and unpleasant. (DSUF nl17-131). Plaintiff refused
3
to acknowledge that there was an opposing viewpoint. (DSUF ~~117, 128, 130 and 131).
4
Plaintiff was so stubborn that, when he was confronted with the repmi from the Joint Committee
5
on Accreditation of Hospital Organizations ("JCAHO") that found no problem with KMC's
6
PCCs, Plaintiff dismissed the report as being based on too small a sample. (DSUF ~~123 and
7
124). While the California Department of Health found minor lapses in KMC's regulatory
8
compliance (for example, the blood usage committee did not meet often enough (PSUF
9
KMC was never found to be out of compliance with the legal requirements. (DSUF ~132).
10
~98»,
In sum, Plaintiffs concerns about pecs were not reasonable. No enforcement agency
II
ever found a basis for his complaints. His concerns were frivolous. Defendants request a findin
12
that Plaintiffs statements about PCCs did not constitute whistleblowing.
13 14
3.
Skull Flaps.
The third incident of alleged whistleblowing concerns the issue of "skull flaps." (A skull
15
flap is a piece of skull that is removed, usually to relieve swelling in the brain following head
16
trauma. (Wrobel Depo., 12/6/07, pg. 32: 14-20». Plaintiff alleges he "reasonably believed" skull
17
flaps were being stored in the freezer in the Pathology Department laboratory in violation of
18
California Health & Safety Code §1635.1, which imposes licensing standards on the storage of
19
tissue that will be reimplanted. Plaintiffs belief was not reasonable.
20
Dr. Charles Wrobel is the neurosurgeon at KMC responsible for brain surgery. (Wrobel
21
Depo., 12/6/07, pg. 10: 11-12). He is the physician who removes skull flaps from patients and he
22
is the surgeon who put the skull flaps in the freezer in the pathology laboratory. (Wrobel Depo.,
23
12/6/07, pg. 18:7-24).
24
Plaintiff deposed Dr. Wrobel but, curiously, omitted reference to Dr. Wrobel's testimony
25
from his Statement of Undisputed Facts. Dr. Wrobel testified that he put the skull flaps in the
26
freezer, that the skull flaps were not reimplanted into patients, and that he stored the skull flaps
27
in the freezer to preserve them so he could use them as molds for titanium mesh patches that are
28
fabricated to close the skull if the patient recovers or, if the patient dies, for cosmetic purposes in -13DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 18 of 29
the event of an open-casket funeral. (Wrobel Depo., 12/6/07, pgs. 39:5-41 :6). California Health & Safety Code §1635(d) only imposes a licensing requirement on "any
3
place, establishment, or institution that collects, processes, stores, or distributes tissue for
4
transplantation into human beings." Since the undisputed evidence is that the skull flaps stored
5
in the KMC freezer were not stored for "transplantation into human beings", the freezer was not
6
a "tissue bank" and no license was required.
7
Defendants acknowledge that proof of an actual violation is not required in order for a
8
person to be a whist1eblower because he only needs to show that he had a good faith belief that
9
the reported activity was in violation oflaw. Freund v. Nycomed Amersham (9 th Cir. 2003) 347
10
F.3d 752. However, the undisputed facts show that Plaintiff could not have had a reasonable,
11
good faith belief that KMC was storing skull flaps in violation of the statute.
12
As Chair of the Department of Pathology, Plaintiff supervised the pathology laboratory ~6a).
13
where the freezer was located. (DSUF
14
because Gilbert Martinez, the laboratory manager and one of Plaintiffs subordinates, told
15
Plaintiff on three different occasions, beginning in 2004, that skull flaps were being stored in the
16
laboratory freezer. (PSUF
17
charge of the laboratory that there were skull flaps in the freezer in his Department.
18
~1 02).
He knew skull flaps were being stored in the freezer
Thus, Plaintiff knew, for over two years while he was in
Plaintiff has acknowledged he did not report any concerns about the skull flaps during
19
those years. After all, reporting a suspected violation while he was Chair of the Department
20
might have reflected badly on him. He did not report any concerns until November 28, 2006 -
21
after he had been removed as Chair. (PSUF
22
~11 0).
In reporting what he had known and ignored for over two years and alleging it was a
23
violation oflaw, Plaintiff was not blowing the whistle, he was seeking revenge. He had no good
24
faith belief there was a violation. He knew exactly what Dr. Wrobel was using the skull flaps for
25
and he knew they were not being reimplanted. He falsely alleged they were being stored in
26
violation oflaw just to get back at the County for removing him from his chairmanship.
27 28
However, even if the Court does not grant summary adjudication of this fact, Plaintiff must prove the County subjected him to an adverse employment action and that his -14DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 19 of 29
I
"whistleblowing" was the reason for it. Pat/en v. Grant Joint Union High School Dist. (2005)
2
134 Ca1.App.4th 1378,1384. (See, Defendants' Memo, pg. 6:21-27.)
3
It is impossible for Defendants to have subjected Plaintiff to an adverse employment
4
action as a result of his alleged "whistleblowing" because Defendants did not know about it until
5
December 13, 2006 - after Plaintiff was placed on paid administrative leave. (DSUF ~41). No
6
other employment actions occurred until October 4, 2007, when Plaintiffs employment
7
agreement expired. It is not possible for Defendants to have "retaliated" against Plaintiff for
8
complaints they did not know he had made. As the Supreme Court has written, "If the factual
9
inference sought by the nonmoving party is objectively impossible, the proffered facts do not
10
create a factual dispute." Matsushita Elec. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. (1986) 475 U.S. 574, 593.
II
Plaintiff asserts he informed Gilbert Martinez, the manager of the pathology laboratory,
12
that he intended to blow the whistle on the County (Second Amended Complaint ~20) but there
13
are three problems with that argument. First, Mr. Martinez was not in management. He was, in
14
fact, one of Plaintiffs subordinates. (DSUF ~6a).
15
Second, that is not actually what Plaintiff told Mr. Martinez. Plaintiff told Mr. Martinez
16
to be prepared for an inspection (DSUF ~55) and Mr. Martinez had no idea why Plaintiff told
17
that. (DSUF
18
"blowing the whistle" to either management or an outside enforcement agency.
~55).
Instructing a subordinate to be prepared for an inspection is not the same as
19
Third, there is no evidence Plaintiff ever told anyone about the skull flap issue.
20
Defendants request that the Court find the storage of skull flaps in the pathology
21
department freezer did not violate the law, that Plaintiff had no good faith belief that it did and
22
that Defendants did not take any adverse employment action against Plaintiff in response to his
23
alleged "whistleblowing" regarding the skull flaps.
24 25
4.
Radical Prostatectomy
The fourth incident of Plaintiffs alleged "whistleblowing" concerns a radical
26
prostatectomy. Plaintiff asserts that "at 12:54 p.m. on December 6,2006," he "formally"
27
reported his concerns on this issue to the County. (Plaintiff's Memo, pg. 12:11-13). The
28
"report" Plaintiff refers to is an e-mail between himself and Dr. Philip Dutt, the interim chair of -15DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
~114).
Page 20 of 29
1
the Department of Pathology, covering a wide range of topics. (PSUF
2
the radical prostatectomy in the third paragraph of the e-mail and admits he and Dr. Dutt had
3
discussed it before. Id. Discussions between physicians about the care and treatment of a patient
4
are not "whistleblowing"- even if they involve disagreement. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 62:13-
5
14. More importantly, Plaintiff has never identified the law that was violated by this incident.
6 7 8
Plaintiff discusses
Without a law to be violated, Plaintiff cannot have the requisite good faith belief that there was a violation to blow the whistle on. Even if Plaintiff could malce his prima facie case, the Defendants may still prevail by
9
showing a legitimate, non-retaliatory business reason for any adverse employment action that
10
was taken. Patten, 134 Cal.App.4th at 1384. The County's extensive non-retaliatory business
11
reasons for getting Plaintiff out of the hospital before he could further damage the working
12
enviromnent are described in the Defendants' Memo at pages 18:10-22;12. That discussion is
13
incorporated herein. (See, also, DSUF ~~80, 82-86, and 176-190).
14 15 16 17 18
Defendants request the Court find that the radical prostatectomy incident did not qualify as "whistleblowing" because it did not involve the violation of any law. Defendants request the Court grant summary judgment in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs First and Second Claims.
c.
Defendants Did Not Violate Plaintiffs Rights Under FMLA and CFRA.
19 Defendants addressed these claims in Defendants' Memo on pages 9: 17-12: 13, which are 20 incorporated herein. Plaintiff makes several material misstatements in his memorandum and 21 those misstatements will be addressed here. 22 To state a prima facie case of interference with medical leave rights under FMLA and 23 CFRA, Plaintiff must show that he provided reasonable notice of his need for medical leave and 24 some estimate of the length of leave. See, California Civil Jury Instruction, CACI 2600, which 25 enumerates the elements of the claim. 26 Plaintiff alleges his notice was timely. He bases his argument on his request for medical 27 leave in March, 2006. However, this was not his first request for leave. Plaintiff went out on 28 -16-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 21 of 29
1
leave on December 16, 2005. (DSUF ~15). He notified the County of this leave in January,
2
2006, while he was already out. (DSUF ~7). He did not submit a request for leave or inform the
3
County of the expected length of his leave until over a month after he took leave. (DSUF ~13).
4
The County's Human Resources department had to prompt Plaintiff to submit this paperwork.
5
(DSUF
6
~~11
and 12).
Because Plaintiff s notice of his need for medical leave was not timely, Plaintiff cannot
7
establish the first element of his prima facie case. For this reason alone, Defendants submit they
8
are entitled to summary judgment on both the Fourth and Fifth Claims.
9
Plaintiff also misstates when he was granted personal necessity leave. FMLA and CFRA
10
grant 12 workweeks' leave in a 12-month period. 29 U.S.C. §2612(a)(l)(D); Gov't Code
II
§12945.2(a). Once the 12 weeks ofleave have been taken, an employee's rights under FMLA
12
expire. Neisendorfv. Levi Strauss & Co., (App. 1 Dist. 2006) 143 Cal.AppA th 509, 518; 29
13
C.F.R. §825.214, subd.(b)(2003). All parties agree that Plaintiff had exhausted his 12 weeks by
14
Jtme 2006. (DSUF ~~30, 32, and 38). Personal necessity leave did not begin until June 14,
15
2006. (DSUF ~24).
16
There is no evidence that Plaintiffs rights under either FMLA or CFRA were violated.
17
Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiffs Fourth and Fifth Claims.
18
D.
19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Defendants Did Not Discriminate, Did Not Fail to Accommodate and Did Not Fail to Engage in the Interactive Process.
Defendants addressed these claims in Defendants' Memo on pages 12:15-29:7. That discussion is incorporated herein. Plaintiff alleges the County knew Plaintiff was "an individual with disabilities" when he was hired. He bases this assertion on a two-page medical report that was sent to the COlmty's Human Resources Department on November 30,2000. (PSUF ~144). However, this allegation i contradicted by Plaintiff s own forensic psychiatrist who confidently testified, "it is unequivocal that he was asymptomatic when starting work at Kern and so did not bring with him to the job any nascent depressive vulnerability." Reading Decl., pg. 59. Dr. Reading's opinion supports Defendants' position that Plaintiff is not "disabled" -17DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 22 of 29
I
within the meaning of either the ADA or FEHA; that he is not substantially limited in the major
2
life function of work; that he is not a qualified person because he cannot perform the essential
3
functions ofajob at KMC; and that the California's Workers Compensation system is his
4
exclusive remedy. (See, discussion in Defendants' Memo at pgs. 15:21-17:7.)
5
Plaintiff argues that he could have performed the essential functions of his job and that
6
his "unavailability was largely manufactured" by Defendant Peter Bryan. This is unsupported.
7
Plaintiffw1ilaterally put himself on leave beginning in December, 2005. (DSUF
8
unilaterally decided what part of his job he would continue to do and what part he would not do.
9
(Second Amended Complaint ~80). He continued to perform administrative duties but he
10
~15).
He
stopped practicing pathology. Jd.
II
Although his position is inconsistent with the clear provisions of his employment
12
agreement, Plaintiff asserts that his duties as Chair comprised only 10-20% of his job. (Plaintiffs
13
Memo, pg. 23: 11-12). Accepting this for the sake of argument, this means Plaintiff stopped
14
doing 80% to 90% of this job when he put himself on leave.
15
Plaintiff offers no evidence to support his assertion that the essential functions of his job
16
took only 10-20% of his time. Thus, Plaintiff offers no evidence that he could do the essential
17
functions of his job. Even if his duties as Chair were the only essential functions of his job,
18
Plaintiff has admitted he was not able to do them. For example, he notes Dr. Dutt had to cover
19
for him when Plaintiff could not perform his administrative duties. (Plaintiff s Memo, pg. 23: 12-
20
14).
21
The fact is that Plaintiff could not perform the essential functions of even the limited
22
administrative duties he kept. In April, 2006, the Chief Executive Officer counseled Plaintiff
23
that he must improve his relationships with staff or step down as Chair of the Department of
24
Pathology. The CEO wrote to Plaintiff, "this apparent lack of insight on your part is at the heart
25
of your inability to meaningfully contribute as a member of the medical staff leadership group."
26
(DSUF
27 28
~~
25, 136 and 160).
The recommendation that Plaintiff be removed from his Chair position was based on his "continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary" and his failure to provide and -18DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 23 of 29
1
"indication that he is committed to return to work or resume his duties as chairman." (DSDF
2
'\133). This was manifestly a legitimate business reason.
3
Likewise, Defendants had legitimate business reasons for putting Plaintiff on paid
4
administrative leave. After finally returning to work in October, 2006, Plaintiffs behavior
5
toward his co-workers substantially deteriorated. Because the employer is responsible for the
6
work environment (California Labor Code §6400(a).), Plaintiff left the County no choice but to
7
remove him from the hospital.
8 9
Plaintiff quotes Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc. (5 th Cir. 1996) 93 F.3d 155, that"...the ADA requires employers to reasonably accommodate limitations, not disabilities."
10
But Plaintiff argues his limitation is that he can only work part-time. Thus, the real issue is
II
whether KMC could reasonably accommodate his limitation.
12
An employer is not obligated to make turn a full-time job into a part-time job, if the part-
13
time position did not exist before. Raine v. City ofBurbank (2006) 135 Cal.App.4 th 1215, 1223-
14
1228, citing Watkins v. Ameripride Services (9 th Cir. 2004) 375 F.3d 821, 828. Plaintiffs
15
position was full-time. 11 required 48 hours (on average) of work in a week and 2112 hours per
16
year. (DSDF '\I'\I6a and 6b). Plaintiff s unilateral reduction of this work by 80% to 90% is an
17
unnecessary and unreasonable accommodation.
18
Plaintiff asserts Defendants failed to engage in a good faith interactive process with him
19
to reach an accommodation of his disability. But the evidence shows it was Plaintiff who
20
obstructed the interactive process. Plaintiff, without informing either KMC management or the
21
County's Human Resources department, unilaterally put himself on part-time leave in December
22
2005. (DSDF '\115). Without any input from his employer, Plaintiff unilaterally chose which
23
duties he would continue to perform and which he would not while he was on part-time leave.
24
(Second Amended Complaint '\180). Plaintiff never broached the subject with his employer.
25
KMC did its best to accommodate Plaintiffs unilateral determination of his schedule and
26
work duties. However, Plaintiff clearly intended for his self-imposed schedule to continue
27
indefinitely. He had already been on leave for seven months when he requested more even more
28
leave to consider when, or if, he would return to work. (DSDF '\123). Defendants made an effort -19DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 24 of 29
to work with Plaintiff but he did not reciprocate.
2 3
Document 276
Defendants request findings they did not discriminate, did not fail to accommodate Plaintiff and did not fail to engage in the interactive process.
4
E.
5
In determining whether procedural safeguards are required in response to a particular
Defendants Did Not Violate Plaintifrs Dne Process Rights.
6
employment action, a court must first determine whether the employee had a property interest
7
that was adversely affected by the employer's action. Skelly v. State Personnel Bd (1975) 15
8
Cal.3d 194, 206-207. Although Plaintiff acknowledges Board ofRegents v. Roth, (1972) 408 U.S. 564, he
9 10
relies on the "mutually exclusive understanding" language in Perry v. Sindermann (1972) 408
11
U.S. 593. Roth and Perry were both decided by the Supreme Court on June 29, 1972. Both
12
cases involved teachers at state institutions of higher learning. Both teachers did not have tenure.
13
Both state schools had a policy that nonrenewal of a nontenured teacher's employment contract
14
required neither a hearing nor an explanation. Both teachers were notified, without explanation,
15
that their employment contracts would not be renewed. Both teachers believed that their
16
employment contracts were not renewed because they had criticized their respective school
17
administrations. Both teachers sued, asserting violation of their 14th Amendment rights to
18
procedural due process and alleging a violation of their 1st Amendment rights. Yet, the outcomes
19
were different. The plaintiff in Roth was found to have no 14th Amendment right to procedural
20
due process while the plaintiff in Perry was found to have had his 14th Amendment right to
21
procedural due process violated. The different outcomes were driven by slight difference in the
22
facts.
23
The plaintiff in Perry had worked in the Texas university system for ten years, the last
24
four under a series of one-year contracts at the same school. He alleged he had de facto tenure
25
based on two documents. The first document was the school's Faculty Guide which stated that
26
the college wanted each faculty member to "feel that he has permanent tenure as long as his
27
teaching services are satisfactory ... " The second document was a set of guidelines adopted by
28
the Coordinating Board of the Texas College and University System which stated that a teacher -20-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 1
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 25 of 29
who worked in the system for seven years or more had some form of tenure.
2 3
Document 276
The Supreme Court found these documents showed a "mutually explicit understanding" that could support the plaintiff's claim of tenure. Perry, 408 U.S. at 601.
4
The plaintiff in Roth did not have similarly helpful evidence. He had only an
5
employment agreement that expired according to its terms. Without more, he could not establish
6
his claim that its nonrenewal had deprived him of a property interest.
7
The Supreme Court wrote that property interests are not created by the Constitution.
8
Rather, they are created and defined by independent sources, such as state law. Roth, 408 U.S. at
9
577. A plaintiff must have more than a unilateral expectation. He must have a legitimate
10
entitlement based on an independent source. Id.
11
Although he invokes it frequently, Perry's "mutually explicit understanding" does not aid
12
Plaintiff. Plaintiffs employment contract clearly explains when due process applies and when it
13
does not. (DSUF ~~4 and 6; Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319); Article XII, Section
14
12.2, pg. 66 (0000337». There is no evidence of other understandings, explicit or implicit.
15
Plaintiff attempts to use Peter Bryan's testimony that a core physician is a "permanent"
16
employee and the fact that KMC has allowed only one other physician's contract to expire to
17
establish an understanding that is contrary to his employment agreement. The concept of
18
"permanent" status means only that the employee was not "temporary." It does not mean the
19
employee has life tenure. The fact that another physician's contract expired without renewal
20
simply proves it happens. Neither argument established the kind of "understanding" Plaintiff
21
asserts.
22
Plaintiff does not cite Shoemaker, 37 Cal.AppAth 618. Shoemaker discussed both Roth
23
and Perry in determining the due process rights of an employee who was removed from a
24
position but not discharged from his employment. Shoemaker, 37 Cal.AppA th at 630, fn. 12.
25
In addition to being employed at two facilities as an emergency room physician, the
26
plaintiff in Shoemaker held two positions. He was Chief of Emergency Medicine Services at the
27
county medical center and Chair of a university Department of Emergency Medicine. After
28
several years of service, he was removed from both positions. However, he was not discharged -21-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSlTlON TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 26 of 29
I
from either institution and remained employed as an emergency room physician at both. He sue
2
to restrain his removal and alleged that his due process rights had been violated.
3
The county medical center personnel were, by contract, part of the county civil service
4
system. Pursuant to those rules, if an employee was demoted or discharged, the employee was
5
entitled to notice and a pre-deprivation hearing. However, the plaintiff had not been discharged.
6
The Court determined that his removal as Chief of Emergency Services was a mere reassignment
7
or transfer - actions that did not trigger the requirement of notice and a pre-deprivation hearing.
8
Id. at 627.
9
His position at the university, on the other hand, was not included in a civil service
10
system. The university had bylaws and the bylaws gave the university president "full power of
II
appointment, direction and supervision of the Faculty." The Court found the plaintiff was not
12
entitled to notice or a pre-deprivation hearing under the bylaws.
13
Plaintiffs position at KMC combined elements of both positions in Shoemaker. Like
14
Shoemaker's county medical center, KMC is a department of County government. Like
15
Shoemaker's university, civil services rules do not apply to core physicians at KMC. (DSUF
16
~6b).
17
vest the KMC Chief Executive Officer with the power to recommend removal of a department
18
chair, with or without cause, subject to approval by the KMC Joint Conference Committee.
19
(DSUF
Plaintiff's employment was governed by the KMC Medical Staff Bylaws (Id.) and they
20
~~4
and 37).
From a constitutional standpoint, the analysis in Roth, Perry and Shoemaker supports the
21
conclusion that Plaintiff was not entitled to notice or a hearing on his removal from the Chair
22
position. That conclusion is equally supported by simple contract law. Plaintiff s employment
23
agreement was subject to the Bylaws and they provided he could be removed without cause.
24
(DSUF ~4, Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319».
25
The KMC Bylaws do afford due process for certain types of employment actions. (See,
26
e.g., PSUF ~167.) For example, demotion to a lower staff category triggers a right to a hearing.
27
(DSUF
28
demoted, he was not. Under the Bylaws, staff categories are defined by the employee's clinical
~4,
Article XII, Section 12.2, pg. 66 (0000337». Although Plaintiff alleges he was
-22DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 27 of 29
I
privileges or staff membership. The highest staff category - Active - carries full clinical
2
privileges and staff membership. (DSUF ~4). Plaintiff was always a core pathologist in the
3
Active staff category. (KMC Letter to Jadwin, dated 8114/01 to 9112/08). He was not demoted.
4
Plaintiff quotes Gilbert v. Homar (1997) 520 U.S. 924, for the proposition that an
5
employee has a "significant private interest in the uninterrupted receipt of his paycheck" and,
6
therefore, is entitled to procedural due process. Gilbert, 520 U.S. at 931. However, in Gilbert, the
7
employee lost. While the Supreme Court acknowledged the obvious - that a paycheck is
8
important - it ruled against Gilbert, finding a pre-suspension hearing would have been futile
9
because the evidence Gilbert had been arrested on drug charges was so compelling. Id.
10
Plaintiffs absence from the hospital and unavailability for over 8 months is as
II
compelling as the evidence in Gilbert. KMC needed - and was entitled to have - someone who
12
could provide on-site leadership and administrative support. What would a hearing have
13
established even if one had been required? Plaintiff would have probably used it as another
14
opportunity to attack the medical staff and hospital management. (DSUF ~~166-174).
15
Plaintiff asserts he had a property interest in his base compensation that was independent
16
from his position as Chair. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 27:7-10). This argument does not survive thc
17
application of basic principles of contract. (Which is appropriate. In Perry, the Supreme Court
18
cited Corbin on Contracts when it discussed implied contract terms. Perry, 408 U.S. at 602.)
19
The purpose of Plaintiff s employment contract was to pay him a salary in return for his
20
performance of specified duties. Nothing in Plaintiffs contract guaranteed him a specific salary
21
even ifhe did not do his job.
22
Since Plaintiff stopped performing his specified duties, the purpose of the contract was
23
frustrated and the County's duty to pay him the contract price was discharged. Restatement
24
(Second) of Contracts, §268. This rule is incorporated in California Labor Code §2924 which
25
allows an employer to rescind a written employment contract for, among other reasons,
26
continued nonperformance. Again, as the Supreme Court wrote in Roth, property rights do not
27
spring from the Constitution. They are based in state law. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577. California law
28
does not protect the compensation of employees who do not do their jobs. -23DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3
6
7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 28 of 29
Defendants request the Court grant swnmary judgment for the Defendants on Plaintiff s Ninth Claim.
F.
4 5
Document 276
Defendants Did Not Retaliate Against Plaintiff For Asserting His Rights Under FMLA, CFRA and FEHA.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants retaliated against him for asserting his rights under FMLA, CFRA and FEHA. Plaintiff cites Colarossi v. Coty, Inc. (2002) 97 Ca1.App.4 th 1142 for the proposition that retaliatory remarks made by decision makers are direct evidence of retaliation. He asserts he has direct evidence of retaliation. In fact, he does not. Plaintiff alleges that comments made by Chief Executive Officer Peter Bryan to the Joint Conference Committee show retaliatory bias. In his recommendation to remove Plaintiff as Chair of the Department of Pathology, Peter Bryan stated, 'This recommendation to rescind Dr. Jadwin's appointment as Chairman, Department of Pathology, is based solely on his continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing member of the medical staffleadership group." [emphasis added] (DSUF
~33).
This recommendation was made on July 10,2006 - after Plaintiffs leave entitlement under FMLA and CFRA had been exhausted. (DSUF
~~30,
32, and 38). Defendant Bryan's use
of the word "continued" shows that his recommendation was based on Plaintiffs long-term unavailability. Once the 12 weeks ofleave have been taken, an employee's rights to their position expire. Neisendorf, 143 Ca1.App.4th at 518; 29 C.F.R. §825.2l4, subd. (b) (2003). Supervisor Ray Watson's deposition testimony does not aid Plaintiff. Watson said, "My understanding was the [Plaintiff]
had~he had
been on medical leave, family leave, and had
requested even more leave ... " (PSUF ~124). This, again, only references Plaintiffs long-term unavailability and has nothing to do with punishing Plaintiff for taking leave. Further, as mentioned above, Watson's vote as member of the JCC came after Plaintiff had exhausted all his leave rights. Plaintiff also claims a retaliatory motive in the nomenewal of his contract. In his deposition on August 25,2008, Supervisor Ray Watson, testified quite clearly he did not recall any discussions about termination, resignation, or denial of Plaintiffs privileges. (DSUF
~34).
-24-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY mDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 29 of 29
1
In addition, he testified that he was unable to recall whether a vote was taken on the nonrenewal
2
of Plaintiffs contract, although he guessed that there must have been a vote. (DSUF '\[35). In
3
fact, neither the JCC nor the Board of Supervisors decided to let Plaintiffs contract expire.
4
(DSUF '\[36a).
5
When asked about the reasons for the nonrenewal, Supervisor Watson speculated that it
6
might have been because of Plaintiffs continued absence from his job and the fact that he was
7
suing the County. (DSUF '\[36; PSUF '(124). Since Supervisor Watson was not a decision maker
8
on the nonrenewal of Plaintiffs contract, his after-the-fact speculation is not evidence of
9
retaliatory motive. No law requires employers to renew contracts of employees who are suing
10 II
them. Without evidence of a link between the protected activity and the allegedly adverse
12
employment action, Plaintiffs claims of retaliation fail. Morgan v. Regents of University ofCal.
13
(2000) 88 Cal.App.4 th 52, 69.
14 15
Defendants request that the Court grant summary judgment for the Defendants on Plaintiff s Third, Tenth and Eleventh Claims.
16
II
17
CONCLUSION
18
Defendants went out of their way in an attempt to tolerate, counsel and assist Plaintiff in
19
adapting to the KMC medical community. Plaintiff resisted every effort and, oblivious to his
20
own behavior and the ways it contributed to his problems, decided everyone was out to get him.
21
They were not. Plaintiff was simply not able to work productively at KMC. Defendants never
22
retaliated against Plaintiff or denied him any rights and they are entitled to summary judgment.
23
Respectfully submitted,
24
Dated: December 1,2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
25 26 27
By :._---'-"/s'!.../~M:!
28 ·25· DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 38
Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: [email protected] Bernard C. Barrnann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected]
9 10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris
11 12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14 15
18 19
DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Plaintiff,
16 17
Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
vs.
COUNTY OF KERN, et aI., Defendants.
Date: January 12,2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA
20 21
Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
22 23 24
Defendants submit this Response to Plaintiffs Statement of Undisputed Facts in
25
Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication
26
pursuant to LR 56-260(a).
27 28 -1DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 38
1
2
Disputed Facts
Supporting Evidence
3
1.
4
2.
5
3.
6
4.
7
5. Plaintiff is the former Chief of Pathology at Kern Medical
Deny. Plaintiff is the former
8
Center ("KMC" or "the hospital"), an acute care teaching
Chair of the Department of
9
hospital and health care facility that is owned and operated
Pathology. See Defendants'
10
by Defendant County of Kern ("Defendant County" or "the
Statement of Undisputed Facts
11
County").
(hereinafter "DSUF") 1a,
12
(DFJOO043-46).
13
6.
14
7.
15
8. In October 2000, Dr. Jadwin began full-time employment
16
at KMC as chair of the pathology department. Plaintiff was
17
an employee of Defendant County from October 24, 2000 to
18
October 4,2007.
19
9. Throughout the course of his employment at KMC, Dr.
Deny. See DSUF 152b
20
Jadwin tried to ensure that patient care was based on
(DFJ00592), 74 (DFJ00364-
21
adequate and accurate pathology.
366),76 (0027069-27070), 78
Admit.
22
(0000506), 80 (Dutt
23
Deposition, 8/20108, pg. 285 :6-
24
23).
25
10. In May 2005, Dr. Jadwin began formally expressing his
Deny. See DSUF 118
26
concerns that KMC was not complying with state regulations
(DFJ00408-409).
27
regarding blood transfusion documentation.
28 -2DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY WDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADWDICATlON
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 3 of 38
I
II. In October 2005, Dr. Jadwin presented at an intra-
Deny. See DSUF 107
2
hospital conference where he reported on uncaught
(DFJ00580), 74 (DFJ00364-
3
pathology report errors that potentially jeopardized the care
366) and Plaintiffs Statement
4
of a hysterectomy patient and the need for a policy to address of Undisputed Facts
5
the problem.
(hereinafter "PSUF") 114
6
(Jadwin Dec!., Exh. 10
7
(Jadwin's email to Dutt,
8
Culberson et a!. of 12/6/06 at
9
DFJ1479; Lee Supp. Dec!.,
10
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at 13:19-
11
25); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 24
12
(Rog 67 at 14:22-23 (noting
13
difficulties outside reviewers
14
had reaching conclusions about
15
the diagnosis)).
16
12. Defendants responded by calling him into a meeting,
Deny. See DSUF 113
17
severely reprimanding him, and informing him that letters of
(DFJ00588), 114 (0000094).
18
reprimand would be placed in his physician credentials file.
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
19
8114/01 - 9112/08.
20
13. Defendants retaliatory conduct exacerbated Dr. Jadwin's
21
chronic depression and proved so disabling that, at the end of was not retaliatory. See DSUF
22
2005, he was forced to take a reduced work schedule medical 62 (Jadwin Deposition, 1/9/08,
23
leave as an accommodation and seek psychiatric therapy.
pgs.414:24-418:12).
24
14. In April 2006, Dr. Jadwin requested an extension of his
Deny. Plaintiff requested an
25
reduced work schedule leave.
extension of his Leave of
Deny. Defendants' conduct
26
Absence. See DSUF 19
27
(DFJOI158).
28
-3DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 4 of 38
1
15. On April 28, 2006, Defendant Bryan responded by
Deny. See DSUF 20
2
placing him on full-time "personal necessity leave" under the
(DFJOI121), 24 (DFJOI141),
3
County's leave policy and, a few months later, ordered him
27 (0001424), 29 (Bryan
4
not to contact anybody at KMC or he would be fired
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 244:6-
5
("Forced FT Leave").
16),30 (Bryan Deposition,
6
8/14/08, pgs. 280:21-281 :4).
7
See Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21,
8
Interrogatory 36.
9
16. On June 4, 2006, Defendant Bryan told Dr. Jadwin that
Deny. See DSUF 24
10
he had decided to "rescind your appointment at chairman"
(DFJOI141), 28 (Bryan
11
and that "this decision is effective June 17,2006."
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 257:9-
12
15).
13
17. On July 10,2006, Defendant Bryan recommended to
Deny. The quoted material is
14
KMC's Joint Conference Committee ("JCC") that Plaintiff
not an accurate quotation; see
15
be removed from his position as Chair of the pathology
DSUF 33 (0001476-1565,
16
department "based on Dr. Jadwin's unavailability for service
0000073-75).
17
because of extended medical leaves for non-work related
18
ailments" and "solely based on his continued non-availability
19
to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing
20
member of the medical staffleadership group....Dr. Jadwin
21
has provided no indication that he is committed to return to
22
work or resume his duties as chair. Other than his latest
23
written communication requesting an extension of his
24
medical leave, Dr. Jadwin has made no attempt in the last
25
two months to contact me concerning his employment status
26
or how the Department of Pathology should be managed
27
during his absence."
28
-4DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 5 of 38
1
2
18. At a meeting of the JCC on July 10,2006, Defendant
Deny. Plaintiff was not
3
County approved the demotion ofPlaintifffrom chair of the
demoted. See DSUF 33
4
pathology department for "unavailability." Members of the
(0001476-1565,0000073-75).
5
JCC based their vote on his unavailability due in part to his
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
6
medical leave.
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
7
19. Defendant County then conditioned Dr. Jadwin's return
Deny. See DSUF 44 (Jadwin
8
to work as a regular pathologist on his medical release to
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
9
full time work and entry into an amendment to his contract
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
10
that contained restrictive terms and conditions and reduced
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
11
Dr. Jadwin's base pay from roughly $300,000 to $200,000.
3/12/08,974:3-976:12).
12
20. When demoting Dr. Jadwin, Defendants Bryan and the
Deny. Plaintiff was not
13
County did not notify Dr. Jadwin of the hospital committee
demoted. See DSUF 28
14
vote to demote him or give him a chance to defend himself
(Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08,
15
prior to, at or after the vote.
pg. 257:9-15), 31 (Bryan
16
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 258:7-
17
16). KMC letters to Jadwin
18
dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
19
21. On his return to work as a demoted pathologist in late
Deny. Plaintiff was not
20
2006, Dr. Jadwin was placed beneath a former subordinate
demoted. See DSUF 4
21
whom he had hired and trained the year before.
(0000272-358, specifically
22
0000319). KMC letters to
23
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
24
9/12/08.
25
22. After about two months, Dr. Jadwin decided to go
Deny. See DSUF 56
26
outside the hospital and report his ongoing suspicions of
(DFJ02540-2541, DFJ01454,
27
legal noncompliance and illegal and/or unsafe care and
DFJ01459), 57 (DFJ02538-
28
-5DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 6 of 38
1
conditions of patients at KMC to regulatory and
2
accreditation agencies, as well as KMC senior management.
3
23. Plaintiff also complained to KMC's senior management
Deny. See PSUF 114 ((Jadwin
4
about the harsh treatment he was receiving.
Dec!., Exh. 10 (Jadwin's email
2539).
5
to Dutt, Culberson et a!. of
6
12/6/06 at DFJ1479; Lee Supp.
7
Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at
8
13:19-25); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
9
Exh. 24 (Rog 67 at 14:22-23
10
(noting difficulties outside
11
reviewers had reaching
12
conclusions about the
13
diagnosis).
14
24. The following day, on December 7, 2006, Defendant
15
County placed Dr. Jadwin on administrative leave "pending
16
resolution of a personnel matter."
17
25. The leave denied Plaintiff the opportunity to ear patient-
18
based professional fees, which had amounted to roughly
19
$100,000 per year ("Professional Fees") prior to his taking
20
of reduced work schedule leave.
21
26. Dr. Jadwin formally notified KMC of his whistle-
22
blowing reports to the outside regulatory and accreditation
23
agencIes.
24
27. Dr. Jadwin remained on administrative leave for another
25
ten months until his contract expired on October 4,2007.
26
28. During six of those months, Dr. Jadwin was physically
Deny. Plaintiff was required
27
restricted to his home during work hours.
by County policy to be
Admit.
Deny. 0018755-0018917.
Admit.
Admit.
28 -6DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY WDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 7 of 38
1
"available by telephone." See
2
DSUF 41a (0016941).
3
29. The county decided not to renew Dr. Jadwin's contract,
4
which expired on October 4,2007.
5
30. From October 2000 to the present, KMC - a hospital
Deny. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh.
6
with roughly 60 full-time faculty physicians - had failed to
22, Interrogatory #28.
7
renew the contract of only 1 other KMC physician.
8
31. Plaintiff s position had been that of a permanent, core
Deny. See Response to #30
9
physician, whose contracts are customarily renewed.
above.
10
32. Defendant County based its nonrenewal decision on Dr.
Deny. See DSUF 36a
11
Jadwin's medical and recuperative leave, and the fact he had
(Declaration of Michael Rubio,
12
brought a lawsuit opposing employment practiced prohibited
11110/08, '12; Declaration of
13
by the Family & Medical Leave Act ("MFLA"), and the
Raymond Watson, 11110/98,
14
California Family Rights Act ("CFRA"), and the Fair
'1'13, 4 and 5; Declaration of
15
Employment & Housing Act ("FEHA").
Mike Maggard, 11110108, '12;
Admit.
16
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
17
11110108, '12; Declaration of
18
Don Maben, 11/10108, '12).
19
33. To this day, Dr. Jadwin has not personally received an
Admit. There were no charges
20
explanation from Defendants as to why he was placed on
against Plaintiff.
21
administrative leave or why his contract was not renewed,
22
despite repeated requests for an explanation. Defendants
23
never notified Dr. Jadwin of the charges against him or
24
permitted him to defend himself.
25
34.
26
35.
27
36. During the entire tenure of Plaintiffs employment,
28
Admit.
-7DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
I
Defendant County was continuously an employer within the
2
meaning ofFMLA [29 C.F.R. § 825.105©], CFRA [Gov't C
3
§ 12945.2(b)(2)], and FEHA [Gov't C § 12926(d)] engaged
4
in interstate commerce, and regularly employing more than
5
fifty employees within seventy-five miles of Plaintiffs
6
regular workplace at KMC.
7
37. Defendant County is a government agency.
8
38.
9
39.
Page 8 of 38
Admit.
10
40. On October 12,2005, Defendant Harris solicited and
Deny. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh.
11
received letters of dissatisfaction from three KMC core
21, Interrogatory #34. (Harris
12
physicians, criticizing Dr. Jadwin's presentation at a KMC
Deposition, 8/13/08, pgs.
13
monthly Oncology Conference.
113:14-16,116:4).
14
41. On October 17, 2005, KMC's senior medical staff wrote
Deny. Plaintiff s Corrected
IS
to Dr. Jadwin notifying him that these letters of
Motion for Partial or Full
16
dissatisfaction would be placed in his credentialing file
Summary Judgment Against
17
("Credential Threat").
Defendants, pg. 6:1. KMC
18
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
19
- 9112/08.
20
42. Some of the medical staff involved later apologized to
Deny. 166 (Abraham
21
Dr. Jadwin.
Deposition, 8/18/08, pgs.
22
198:24-207:17), 167 (Bryan
23
Deposition, 8114/08, pgs.
24
109:12-111:10),168 (Bryan
25
Deposition, 8114/08, pgs.
26
156:22-157:12),169 (Harris
27
Deposition, 8/13/08, pg. 159:2-
28
-8DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 9 of 38
1
13), 170 (Harris Deposition,
2
8113/08, pg. 196:7-20), 171
3
(Harris Deposition, 8113/08
4
pgs. 230:4-232:13),172
5
(Harris Deposition, 8113/08,
6
pgs. 234:24-235:23 and
7
305:20-308:22), 173 (Ragland
8
Deposition, 8/22/08, pg. 16:12-
9
16), 174 (0000507).
10 11
43.
1--------------------+------------1 44.
1--------------------+------------1
12
45. Dr. Jadwin's employment contract expressly provided
13
that Dr. Jadwin would be chair of the KMC pathology
14
department and paid base compensation of$287,529 ("Base
15
Pay").
16
46. On July 10,2006, Bryan recommended and the JCC
Deny. Plaintiff was not
17
approved Jadwin's demotion from department chair to staff
demoted. See DSUF 4
18
pathologist ("Demotion").
(0000272-358, specifically
Admit.
19
0000319). KMC letters to
20
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
21
9/12108.
22
47. 1t is uncontested that Defendants considered a portion of
Deny. Plaintiff was not
23
Dr. Jadwin's pay to be tied to his chair position, and that the
demoted. See DSUF 4
24
demotion therefore made the paycut a foregone conclusion.
(0000272-358, specifically
25
The JCC vote to demote Plaintiff was effectively a vote to
0000319), 44 (Jadwin
26
reduce his Base Pay as well.
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
27 28
969: 1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and -9DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICAnON
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 10 of 38
1
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
2
3/12/08,974:3-976:12). KMC
3
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
4
- 9/12/08.
5
48. Defendants County and Harris informed Dr. Jadwin that
Deny. See DSUF 44 (Jadwin
6
his return to work at KMC was conditioned on his entry into
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
7
an amendment to his employment contract, instituting a
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
8
reduction in Base Pay from $287,529 to $186,687
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
9
("Paycut").
3/12/08,974:3-976: 12).
10
49. On October 3, 2006, Plaintiff executed the amendment
Admit.
11
to his employment contract.
12
50.
13
51.
14
52. A pathologist is valued according to the efficacy of his
Deny. This is not a fact; it is
15
"eye," i.e., the training and experience that allows him to
an expression of opinion. The
16
spot minute patterns and telltale abnormalities in
opinion is not relevant to
17
microscopic and gross tissue samples.
Plaintiffs administrative
18
duties as Chair.
19
53. Developing and maintaining the pathologist "eye"
Deny. This is not a fact; it is
20
requires years of daily pathology work; however, it takes
an expression of opinion. The
21
only a few months of being away from work to lose enough
opinion is not relevant to
22
efficacy to threaten a pathologist's career.
Plaintiffs administrative
23
duties as Chair.
24
54. Moreover, Dr. Jadwin's contract expressly provided that
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
25
he was to earn patient billing-based professional fees,
1499).
26
separate and apart from his fixed Base Pay.
27
55. In order to earn Professional Fees, Dr. Jadwin needed to
28
Admit.
-10DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 11 of 38
1
process and bill patient cases.
2
56. Restriction to his workplace at KMC by placement on
Deny. Defendants do not
3
leave denied him the opportunity to earn such fees.
know what "restriction to his
4
workplace at KMC" means.
5
57. Dr. Jadwin's professional fee income amounted to
6
approximately $100,000 per year.
7
58. On December 7, 2007, Defendant County placed
8
Plaintiff on paid administrative leave "pending resolution of
9
a personnel matter" ("Admin Leave").
Deny. 0018755-0018917.
Admit.
10 11
59. Defendant County further ordered Plaintiff to "remain at
Deny. See DSUF 41
12
horne and available by telephone during normal business
(DFJOI482,0016941).
13
hours" and not to contact anyone at KMC, else he could be
14
terminated. There was no further indication of what Plaintiff
15
was being charged with, whether he would be permitted to
16
respond to charges, or when the leave would end.
17
60. No investigation, explanation or resolution ensued.
Deny. Defendants deny there
18
was anything to investigate,
19
explain or resolve.
20
61. On April 4, 2007, Plaintiff notified Defendant County
21
that the long leave was exacerbating his depression, eroding
22
his pathology skills and employability, and denying him the
23
opportunity to earn professional fees.
24
62. On April 30, 2007, Defendant County informed Dr.
Deny. Defendants informed
25
Jadwin that he remained on administrative leave but
Plaintiff that he was relieved of
26
removed the home restriction.
the obligation to be available
27 28
Admit.
for daily work. -11DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 12 of 38
1
63. On May 1,2007, Defendant County informed Dr.
Deny. Defendants tried to
2
Jadwin that they intended to keep Dr. Jadwin on leave and
negotiate a settlement by
3
"let his contract run out."
buying out Plaintiff s contract
4
and lifting restrictions on
5
Plaintiffs leave. See PSUF 63
6
(Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21
7
(Rog No. 43 at 53:3-9); Lee
8
Supp. Decl., Exh. 22 (Rog No.
9
44,28: 17-22); Lee Supp.
10
Decl., Exh. 6 (Wasser Email to
11
Lee of 5/1/07 at DFJOI705)).
12
64. Dr. Jadwin remained on administrative leave until his
13
employment contract expired on October, [sic]4, 2007.
14 15
Admit.
65.
f------------------+-------------1
1-6:...::6~.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f - - - - - - - - - -
16
67. Supervisor Ray Watson, then-Chair of the Board of
Deny. See DSUF 36a
17
Supervisors, voted as a member of the JCC to demote Dr.
(Declaration of Michael Rubio,
18
Jadwin and effectively cut his pay, and also participated in
11/1 0/08,
19
the decision not to renew Plaintiff s employment contract.
Raymond Watson, 11/1 0/98,
~2;
Declaration of
20
~~3,
21
Mike Maggard, 11/1 0/08,
22
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
23
11/1 0/08,
24
Don Maben, 11/1 0/08,
25
Plaintiff was not demoted.
26
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
27
8/14/0 I - 9/12/08.
4 and 5; Declaration of
~2;
~2;
Declaration of
28 -12DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
~2).
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 13 of 38
1
68. Ray Watson, Chair of the Board Supervisors [sic] at the
2
time of the Nonrenewa1, testified in deposition: "My
3
understanding was that [Plaintiff] had - he had been on
4
medical leave, family leave, and had requested even more
5
leave, and that for that reason and the fact that he was suing
6
us, that we decided not to renew his contract."
7
C'Nonrenewal")
8
69. Moreover, Dr. Jadwin was a "core physician" at KMC, a
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
9
permanent position.
1499).
10
70. There was a mutually explicit understanding that, as a
Deny. This is not a fact;
11
core physician, Plaintiff s contract would be continuously
"mutually explicit
12
renewed.
understanding" is one of
13
Admit.
Plaintiff s legal arguments.
14
71. In fact, from October 2000 to present, only one other
Deny. See Response to #30
15
physician besides Dr. Jadwin has not had his contract
above.
16
renewed.
17
72.
18
73.
19
74. Credential Threat was a substantial cause of Dr.
Deny. Plaintiff s credential
20
Jadwin's emotional distress leading to recurrence of his
was never threatened. See
21
chronic major depressive disorder.
DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition,
22
8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-53:18).
23
~'Substantial
24
and "major" are subj ective
25
terms. KMC letters to Jadwin
26
dated 8/14/01- 9/12/08.
27 28
75. Credential Threat was a substantial cause of Dr.
cause," "chronic"
Deny. Plaintiff s credential
-13DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 14 of 38
1
Jadwin's reduced work schedule medical/recuperative leave
was never threatened. See
2
and loss of opportunity to earn Professional Fees from
DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition,
3
December 16,2005 to on or around April 28, 2006.
8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-53:18).
4
Plaintiff s Second Amended
5
Complaint '80. "Substantial
6
cause" is a subjective term.
7
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
8
8/14/01-9/12/08.
9
76. Forced FT Leave was a was a substantial cause of Dr.
Deny. See DSUF 7A (Dutt
10
Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr.
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-
11
Jadwin's major depression.
53: 18), 21 (Bryan Deposition,
12
8/14/08, pgs. 250:15-251 :6,
13
Exhibit 303). "Substantial
14
cause" and "major" are
15
subjective terms. Lee Supp.
16
Decl., Exh. 21, Rog #36.
17
77. Forced FT Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 7A (Dutt
18
loss of opportunity to earn Professional Fees as provided for
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-
19
in his employment contract from on or around April 28, 2006
53:18),21 (Bryan Deposition,
20
to June 17, 2006.
8/14/08, pgs. 250: 15-251 :6,
21
Exhibit 303). Second
22
Amended Complaint '80.
23
"Substantial cause" is a
24
subjective term. Lee Supp.
25
Decl., Exh. 21, Rog #36.
26
78. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of Dr.
Deny. Plaintiff was not
27
Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr.
demoted. See DSUF 4
28
-14DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Jadwin's major depression.
Page 15 of 38
(0000272-358, specifically
2
0000319). "Substantial cause"
3
and "major" are subjective
4
terms. KMC letters to Jadwin
5
dated 8/14/01 - 9/12108.
6
79. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of Base
Deny. Plaintiff was not
7
Pay reduction from $287,529 to $186,687 from October 3,
demoted. See DSUF 4
8
2006 onward.
(0000272-358, specifically
9
0000319), Lee Supp. Decl.,
10
Exh. 21, Rog #41.
11
"Substantial causes" is a
12
subjective term. KMC letters
13
to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
14
9/12108.
15
80. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of
Deny. Plaintiff was not
16
termination of Plaintiffs career as a pathology department
demoted. See DSUF 4
17
chair due to unemployability.
(0000272-358, specifically
18
0000319), 8 (DFJ02422-2459).
19
See Levison Decl., pg. 6, ~6.
20
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
21
8/14/01 - 9/12108.
22
81. Admin Leave, during 5 months of which Plaintiff was
Deny. See DSUF 41
23
restricted full-time to his home, was a substantial cause of
(DFJ01482,0016941).
24
Dr. Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr.
"Substantial cause" and
25
Jadwin's major depression.
"major" are subjective terms.
26
82. Admin Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs loss
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
27
ofopportnnity to earn Professional Fees as provided for in
1499). "Substantial cause" is a
28
-15DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 16 of 38
I
his employment contract from on or around December 7,
2
2006 to October 4, 2007.
3
83. Admin Leave was a substantial cause ofloss of
Deny. See DSDF 10
4
Plaintiffs pathologist "eye," causing him to become
(DFJ00726), 15 (DFJ00746).
5
unemployable as a pathologist.
Plaintiffs Second Amended
6
subjective term.
Complaint ~80.
7
84. Nonrenewal was a substantial cause of Dr. Jadwin's
Deny. "Substantial cause" is a
8
emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr. Jadwin's
subjective term.
9
major depression.
10
85. Admin Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs lost
Deny. Admin Leave was paid.
11
Base Pay of$186,687 and Professional Fees of roughly
See DSDF 41 (DFJOI482).
12
$100,000 per year, as provided for in his employment
"Substantial cause" is a
13
contract, from on or around October 4, 2007 onward.
subjective term.
14
86.
15
87.
16
88.
17
89. Dr. Jadwin made a protected report to KMC's medical
Deny. Nothing about
18
staffleadership about (a) the medical appropriateness of a
Plaintiff s statements was
19
radical hysterectomy for a KMC patient (Patient No.
"protected." See DSDF 105
20
1142693) based on inaccurate outside pathology reports-
(DFJ00508-574), 106
21
which case was the subject of Plaintiff s presentation at the
(DFJ00578), 107 (DFJ00580),
22
monthly KMC oncology conference held on October 12,
108 (Harris Deposition,
23
2005 ("October Conference") - and (b) the unsafe conditions
8/13/08, pgs. 126:8-127: 19),
24
created for other patients by the lack of a KMC policy
109 (Exhibit 190), 110
25
requiring internal pathology review of all outside pathology
(Ragland Deposition, 8/22/08,
26
reports prior to treatment ("IPR").
pgs. 106:18-109:14 and
27
156:14-25), III (Abraham
28 -16DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 17 of 38
1
Deposition, 8/18/08, pgs.
2
14:10-21:17 and 131:5-133:23
3
and 135:24-138:22), 112 (Dutt
4
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs.
5
292:25-293:20),74
6
(DFJ00364-366). See PSUF
7
114 (Jadwin Decl., Exh. 10
8
(Jadwin's email to Dutt,
9
Culberson et al. of 12/6/06 at
10
DFJl479); Lee Supp. Decl.,
11
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at 13:19-
12
25); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 24
13
(Rog 67 at 14:22-23 (noting
14
difficulties outside reviewers
15
had reaching conclusions about
16
the diagnosis)). Taylor Depo.,
17
12/5/07 pgs. 14:19-21, 15:1-4,
18
22:9-10; 24:7-8, 27:16-17,
19
31:17-32:21,36:19-20,51:12-
20
25,55:7-23,62:19-25,63:4-11,
21
64:12-19,68:9-17.
22
90. Defendant County knew of Dr. Jadwin's whistleblowing
Deny. See DSUF 113
23
report at the October Conference since Defendant Harris,
(DFJ00588). Plaintiffs
24
then CMO ofKMC, and Jennifer Abraham, then-Immediate
presentation at the October
25
Past President, were in attendance.
Oncology Conference was not
26 27
"whistleblowing." 91. Each of the letters of reprimand which Defendant
Deny. Plaintiff's Corrected
28 -17DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 18 of 38
1
County decided to place into Plaintiff s medical credential
Motion for Partial or Full
2
file specifically reference Dr. Jadwin's presentation at the
Summary Judgment, pg. 6:1.
3
October Conference.
KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
4
~
9/12/08.
5
92.
6
93.
7
94. On January 9, 2006, Dr. Jadwin made a protected report
Deny. Nothing about
8
to Bryan regarding KMC's noncompliance with state
Plaintiff s statements was
9
regulations regarding blood transfusion related
"protected." See DSUF 7
10
documentation called product chart copies ("PCCs"),
(DFJOO723).
11
jeopardizing patient safety.
12
95. Improper documentation of blood transfusions creates
13
patient risk of morbidity and mortality.
14
96. Dr. Jadwin reasonably suspected that KMC's ongoing
Deny. See DSUF 118
15
failure to maintain accurate and complete records of patient
(DFJ00408-409), 121
16
blood transfusions did not comply with H&S § 1602.5,
(0000572), 123 (DFJOO788),
17
which requires PCC documentation to conform to AABB
124 (DFJ00793), 126 (Harris
18
accreditation standards.
Deposition, 8/13/08, pgs.
Admit.
19
268:8-23), 127 (Smith
20
Deposition, 8/19/08, pgs. 59:4-
21
60: 13), 129 (Smith Deposition,
22
8/19/08, pg. 71 :2-21).
23
97. During his reduced work schedule medical leave, Dr.
Deny. See DSDF 117 (Bryan
24
Jadwin audited PCCs, and continued to report noncompliant
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
25
incomplete or missing PCCs to Defendant Bryan, Toni
205:6-206:25 (Exhibit 291»,
26
Smith, KMC Nurse Executive, and Risk Management and
124a (Bryan Deposition,
27
Quality Assurance through at least April 17, 2006, when
8/14/08, pg. 226:10-16).
28
-18DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDlSPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 19 of 38
Plaintiff asked Defendant Bryan to set up a meeting with
2
Bernard Barmann, County Counsel, to discuss his concerns
3
regarding PCC noncompliance.
4
98. The California Department of Health Services later
Deny. See DSUF 132 (Smith
5
determined during the course of an inspection that KMC was
Deposition, 8/19/08, pgs.
6
indeed failing to comply with PCC-re1ated regulations.
84: 11-85:7).
7
99. On April17, 2006, Defendant Bryan threatened to
Deny. Plaintiff was not
8
demote Plaintiff.
demoted. See DSUF 160
9
(DFJ00794-795; Bryan
10
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
11
231 :9-237:25). KMC letters to
12
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
13
9/12/08.
14
100.
15
101.
16
102. Dr. Jadwin reasonably believed that storage of patient
Deny. No License was
17
skull caps occurring in an unlicensed laboratory freezer at
required for the freezer and
18
KMC violated H&S § 1635.1.
Plaintiff knew it. Wrobel
19
Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12,
20
18:7-24,25: 13-26:20,30:4-
21
31:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6.
22
See PSUF 102 (Lee Supp.
23
Dec!. Exh. 9 (Martinez Depo at
24
14:2-22); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
25
Exh. 12 (Dutt Depo at 244:6-
26
9».
27 28
103. Unlicensed skull flap storage could give rise to a risk of
Deny. Storage is not a risk.
-19DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
patient morbidity or mortality.
Page 20 of 38
Reimp1antation of improperly
2
stored tissue is the risk.
3
104. Gilbert Martinez, the Manager of Laboratory Services
Deny. KMC's freezer did not
4
at KMC ("Martinez") confirmed that there were typically
need a license. Wrobel
5
seven to nine skull flaps being stored in the lunlicensed [sic]
Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12,
6
aboratory [sic] freezer.
18:7-24,25:13-26:20,30:4-
7
31 :21,32:14-20,39:5-41 :6.
8
105. At times, upwards of 15 to 20 skull flaps were being
Deny. KMC's freezer did not
9
stored in KMC's unlicensed freezer.
need a license. Wrobel
10
Deposition, pgs. 10: 11-12,
11
18:7-24,25:13-26:20,30:4-
12
31:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6.
13
106. Martinez shared Plaintiff s concerns about unlicensed
Deny. KMC's freezer did not
14
skull flap storage in the laboratory freezer.
need a license. Wrobel
15
Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12,
16
18:7-24,25: 13-26:20, 30:4-
17
31:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6.
18
107. When Dr. Jadwin discovered skull flaps being illegally
Deny. The storage was not
19
stored in the laboratory freezer, he discussed the problem
illegal. Wrobel Deposition,
20
with Gilbert Martinez, the Manager of Laboratory Services
pgs. 10:11-12, 18:7-24,25:13-
21
atKMC ("Martinez").
26:20,30:4-31:21,32:14-20,
22
39:5-41 :6. Plaintiff supervised
23
the pathology laboratory and
24
was in charge of the freezers.
25
See DSUF 6a (0001479-1499).
26
108. Around Thanksgiving 2006, Dr. Jadwin tipped Martinez Deny. The storage did not
27
off that he intended to blow the whistle about his unresolved
28
need a license. See DSUF 55
-20DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 21 of 38
1
complaints about unsafe patient care and conditions,
(Martinez Deposition, 4/16/08,
2
including unlicensed skull flap storage, and that inspections
pgs. 111: 12-118:22). Plaintiff
3
ofKMC by regulatory and accreditation agencies was likely.
only told Martinez to expect
4
inspections.
5
109. Within a few days, Martinez relayed this information to
Deny. There is no evidence
6
his supervisor, David Hill, the Director of Ambulatory Care;
that David Hill communicated
7
who in turn relayed it to a pathologist, Philip Dutt, and/or
with either Dr. Dutt or Dr.
8
Defendant Harris.
Harris.
9
110. Beginning November 28,2006, Dr. Jadwin formally
Deny. Plaintiff has not
10
reported his suspicions of illegal and/or unsafe care and
produced his alleged letters to
11
conditions of patients at KMC - including unlicensed skull
CAP or DHS. Defendants
12
flap storage, noncompliance PCCs, and an inappropriate
have never seen them. See
13
radical prostatectomy (see below) - to the Joint Commission
DSUF 56a (DFJ02540-2541).
14
on Accreditation of Hospital Organizations ("JCAHO"), the
See PSUF 110 (Lee Supp.
15
College of American Pathologists ("CAP"), and the
Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 35 at
16
California Department of Health Services ("DHS").
8:10-14)); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
17
("Outside WB Reports).
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 21 at 5:22-
18
24 (DHS)); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
19
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 22 at 5:25-
20
6:2 (JCAHO)); Lee Supp!.
21
Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 23 at
22
6:3-6 (CAP)).
23
111. On January 4,2007, Dr. Dutt received confirmation that
Deny. See PSUF 111 (Jadwin
24
Dr. Jadwin had in fact complained to CAP about the
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 2 (Dutt's
25
unlicensed tissue storage and noncompliant PCCs, and
Email to Culberson of 1/4/07
26
shared this with then-CEO Mr. Culberson.
at 0001330)).
27
112.
28
-21DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 22 of 38
1
113.
2
114. At 12:54 p.m. on December 6, 2006, Dr. Jadwin
Deny. See DSUF 190
3
formally reported to KMC leadership his concerns regarding
(DFJ01479-1480). See Jadwin
4
a KMC patient who was scheduled for immediate radical
Dec., Exh. 10.
5
prostatectomy to treat possible cancer. Plaintiff had
6
recommended the attending physician delay the
7
prostatectomy because he believed the pathologic findings of
8
cancer were inconclusive. Instead, Plaintiff had
9
recommended the findings be validated by outside experts.
10
115. Radical prostatectomies pose numerous risks to patient
11
care, including incontinence, impotence and other morbid
12
factors.
13
116. In his report to KMC leadership, Dr. Jadwin also
Deny. See DSUF 189 (Dutt
14
complained of a pattern of non-transparent "peer review"
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs.
15
being conducted against him and asked that the Board of
296:20-297: 13). See Jadwin
16
Supervisors be apprised of his concerns and initiate a formal
Dec!., Exh. 10.
17
reVIew.
18
117. Four minutes later, at 12:58 p.m., Dr. Dutt emailed Mr.
Dcny. Dutt's e-mail to
19
Culberson complaining about Dr. Jadwin's competency, and
Culberson does not refer to
20
insistence on outside review of numerous cases after Dr.
Plaintiffs "competency." See
21
Dutt had counseled him on failing to send a case out for
Lee Dec!., Exh. 23.
22
consultation. Dr. Dutt also complained about alleged "other
23
Problems" involving Dr. Jadwin which he worried might
24
lead to loss of staff and the pathology department's ability to
25
serve patients and doctors in a timely manner.
26
118.
27
119.
28
Admit.
-22DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 23 of 38
1
120. Plaintiff was eligible to take medical leave as of
Deny. Plaintiff was eligible on
2
December 16,2006. [sic]
December 15, 2005.
3
121. Plaintiff requested and took reduced work schedule
Admit.
4
CFRA medical leave from December 16, 2005 to at least
5
March 15, 2006.
6
122. Members of the JCC subsequently voted to demote
Deny. Plaintiff was not
7
Plaintiff, basing their decision on his unavailability due in
demoted. See DSUF 4
8
part to his medical leave. Mr. Bryan told the JCC at the
(0000272-358, specifically
9
removal vote: "This recommendation [for removal] is based
0000319). KMC letters to
10
on Dr. Jadwin's unavailability for service because of
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
11
extended medical leaves ...."
9112/08.
12
123. Previously on April 17, 2006, 4 months into Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 160
13
reduced work schedule medical leave, Bryan admitted to Dr.
(DFJ00794-795; Bryan
14
Jadwin, "Yes the Department of Pathology continues to
Deposition, 8114/08, pgs.
15
function well as it has for many years, and yes, you have
231 :9-237:25).
16
made many positive changes in the department."
17
124. Plaintiff also has direct evidence that Plaintiffs medical
Deny. See DSUF 36a
18
leave was a negative factor in the Nonrenewal.
(Declaration of Michael Rubio,
19
11110/08, ~2; Declaration of
20
Raymond Watson, 11110/98,
21
~~3,
22
Mike Maggard, 11/1 0/08,
23
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
24
1111 0/08,
25
Don Maben, 1111 0/08,
26
125.
27
126.
28
4 and 5; Declaration of
~2;
~2;
Declaration of
-23DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
~2).
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 24 of 38
1
127. On April 28, 2006, Defendant Bryan represented to Dr.
Admit.
2
Jadwin that he was still entitled to 137 hours of medical
3
leave.
4
128. Sandra Chester, Defendant County's Director of Human
Deny. See DSUF 9 (Chester
5
Resources, testified in deposition that Plaintiffs request for
Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs.
6
medical leave in his email to Bryan and herself on March 16,
135: 12-137:6), 11 (Chester
7
2006; and provision by Dr. Jadwin's treating therapist, Dr.
Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs.
8
Riskin, ofleave certification on April 29, 2006 was timely
75:19-76:10),12 (Bryan
9
under Defendant County's customary practice.
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
10
195:9-196:14),13 (Chester
11
Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs.
12
113:23-114:12).
13
129. Dr. Riskin's certifications notified it that Plaintiff s
14
depression was serious enough to require a reduced work
15
schedule leave and regular treatment from December 16,
16
2006 to September 15,2006.
17
130. Nonetheless, Defendant Bryan denied Plaintiff reduced
Deny. Peter Bryan gave
18
work schedule medical leave, and forced him to take full-
Plaintiffthe option to take full-
19
time "personal necessity leave" under the County's leave
time leave. See DSUF 20
20
policy.
(DFJOI121), 21 (Bryan
Admit.
21
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
22
250: 15-251 :6, Exhibit 303), 24
23
(DFJOI141), 29 (Bryan
24
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 244:6-
25
16), 30 (Bryan Deposition,
26
8/14/08, pgs. 280:21-281 :4).
27 28
131. -24DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS iN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 25 of 38
1
132.
2
133.
3
134. Dr. Jadwin was an individual with a mental disability
Deny. Dr. Reading never used
4
because of his chronic major depressive disorder. Dr.
the word "chronic." See PSUF
5
Reading, Plaintiff's forensic psychologist, diagnosed Dr.
134 (Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at
6
Jadwin as having Major Depressive Disorder. Dr. Reading
"Diagnostic Impressions" on p.
7
also noted Dr. Jadwin reported developing depressed mood,
58; Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at
8
pervasive anhedonia, suicidal ideation, sleep disturbance,
"Structured Clinical Interview"
9
and other symptoms while working at KMC.
at p. 57-58.).
10
135. Dr. Jadwin's depression limited his ability to take
Deny. See PSUF 135
11
pleasure from life, and to engage full-time in, and take
(Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at
12
pleasure from, the medical work to which he had devoted his
"Structured Clinical Interview"
13
life.
at p. 57-58). Dr. Reading does
14
not comment on the effect
15
Plaintiff's depression had on
16
his life.
17
136. Likewise, Defendant County has admitted, by and
Deny. See PSUF 136 (Lee
18
through the PMK deposition testimony of its representative,
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 17 (Kercher
19
Eugene Kercher, a psychiatrist, that it was familiar with the
Depo at 95:13-22, 96:3-8».
20
symptoms of depression and believed that Dr. Jadwin was
Dr. Kercher never diagnosed
21
depressed over several years during his tenure of his
Plaintiff. (Kercher Depo
22
employment at KMC.
9/4/08, atpg. 51:1-16).
23
137. Plaintiff also required sinus surgery and required a few
Admit.
24
weeks to recover from it during May of 1005.
25
138. Further, Plaintiff suffered an avulsed ankle at the end of
26
May of 2005 that limited his ability to walk.
Admit.
27 28
-25DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 26 of 38
1
139. The limitations from these physical conditions
Deny. See PSUF 139 (Riskin
2
contributed to Plaintiff s limitations from his chronic
Dec., Exh. 3 atDFJl814.).
3
depression during May through the first part of June of 2005.
There is no evidence that
4
Plaintiff s sinus surgery and
5
broken ankle contributed to his
6
depression.
7
140.
8
141. 2. Plaintiff Was "Otherwise Qualified"
9
Deny. See PSUF 141 (Lee Dec!., Exh. 19 (Bryan's Letter
10
to DHS of?/25/06 at
11
0001619); Exh. 18 (Bryan's
12
Letter to JCC of 7/10/06 at top
13
of 001476 and end of 001457
14
[sic. Should be 001477]); Exh.
15
14 (Bryan's Memo to Jadwin
16
of 4/28/06 at DFJ01152,
17
DFJOl155-1159, DFJOll64);
18
Exh. 16 (Nunn's Cover Email
19
to Jadwin of 6/26/06 at
20
DFJ01346); Exh. 10 (Bryan's
21
Letter to Supervisors of
22
1/17/06 at No. 10 on
23
0001567)). None of Plaintiffs
24
evidence establishes that he
25
was a qualified person under
26
either the ADA or FEHA.
27
142.
28 -26DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 27 of 38
1
143.
2
144. Plaintiffs physician, Dr. Lempel, disclosed Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 65 (Jadwin
3
depression when he faxed his medical report to KMC's HR
Deposition, 1/9/08, pgs. 452:4-
4
Department on November 30, 2000, around the time of
455:19). See Reading Dec!.,
5
Plaintiff shire.
pg. 59, ~3, last two lines.
6
145. Defendant Bryan admitted knowing that Dr. Jadwin
Admit.
7
needed leave because of his depression.
8
146. Dr. Riskin's certifications stated that Plaintiff needed
9
medical/recuperative leave for depression from
Admit.
10
December 16, 2005 to September 16, 2006.
11
147. Supervisor Watson testified in deposition that he knew
Deny. See PSUF 147 (Lee
12
Dr. Jadwin was in continuous need of extensions of his
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 14 (Watson
13
medical leave.
Depo. at 80:22-81 :2)). The
14
page numbers are incorrect and
15
Supervisor Watson did not
16
express an opinion about
17
Plaintiff s need for continuous
18
extensions of his leave.
19
148. On April 4, 2007, during Plaintiff s Admin Leave,
20
Plaintiff expressly notified Defendant County in writing that
21
Plaintiff was depressed and that the Admin Leave was
22
exacerbating his chronic depression.
23
149.
24
150. 4. Disability Was A Motivating Factor in Demotion,
Deny. Plaintiff was not
25
Pay Cut & Nonrenewal.
demoted. See DSUF 33
Admit.
26
(0001476-1565,0000073-75),
27
36a (Declaration of Michael
28
-27DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 28 of 38
1
Rubio, 11110/08, '12;
2
Declaration of Raymond
3
Watson, 11/10/98, '1'13, 4 and
4
5; Declaration of Mike
5
Maggard, 11/10/08, '12;
6
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
7
11/10/08, '12; Declaration of
8
Don Maben, 11/1 0/08, '12).
9
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
10
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
11
151.
12
152.
13
153. On January 9, 2006, Dr. Jadwin asked Defendant Bryan
14
to allow him to work part-time and at home while he was
15
recovering from his disabling depression.
16
154. Dr. Riskin, Plaintiff s psychiatrist, certified that part-
Deny. See DSUF 14
17
time work was medically necessary.
(DFJOl150).
18
155. KMC accommodated Jadwin's disability from
Deny. See DSUF 7
19
December 16, 2005 to April 16, 2006 by providing him with
(DFJOO723).
20
the reduced work schedule medical/recuperative leave and
21
ability to perform work at home that he requested during his
22
meeting with Defendant Bryan on January 9, 2006.
23
156. As customary, a Locum Tenens pathologist covered
Deny. There is no evidence to
24
Plaintiff s clinical pathologist duties, while plaintiff
support this fact.
25
performed the remaining 10-20% of his administrative duties
26
as Chair of Pathology.
27
157. As usual, if Dr. Jadwin was unable to attend to an
28
Admit.
Deny. There is no evidence to
-28DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSlTION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 29 of 38
1
administrative duty at a particular time, then Dr. Dutt filled
2
in for him.
3
158. On March 16, 2006, Dr. Jadwin requested an extension
Deny. See DSUF 14
4
of his reduced work schedule leave. Dr. Jadwin submitted
(DFJO 1150).
5
Dr. Riskin's certification of his continuing need for a
6
reduced work schedule within three days of learning that
7
Defendant County required it.
8
159. On April 28, 2006, Bryan refused to accommodate
Deny. See DSUF 21 (Bryan
9
Jadwin's disability. Instead he forced him to take full-time
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
10
leave, and refused to hold his job open for him any longer
250:15-251:6, Exhibit 303).
11
while he was on recuperative leave, and refused to allow Dr.
There is no evidence to support
12
Jadwin to return to work until he could work full-time. As a
this fact.
13
result, Dr. Jadwin was prevented continuing to carry out his
14
duties as Chair of Pathology.
15
160.
16
161.
17
162. Defendant Bryan acted in bad faith when he tmilaterally
Deny. See DSUF 14
18
denied Dr. Jadwin's request for continuing accommodation
(DFJOlI50). There is no
19
in the form of part-time work, and refused to allow him to
evidence to support this fact.
20
return to work until he could work full time.
21
163. Defendant Bryan also acted in bad faith when he
Deny. See DSUF 33
22
represented to the JCC that Dr. Jadwin's lack of
(0001476-1565,0000073-75).
23
communication with him led him to believe that Dr. Jadwin
There is no evidence to support
24
had essentially abandoned his job.
this fact.
25
164.
26
165.
27
166.
28
support this fact.
-29DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 30 of 38
I
167. The Bylaws of Kern County Medical Center as in effect
Deny. See DSUF 37
2
between June 13,2006 and October 4,2007 ("Bylaws")
(DFJ01359-1361).
3
provided for due process for core physicians in numerous
4
scenarios like loss of hospital privileges, but not for (i)
5
removal of physicians from department chairmanship, (ii)
6
placement of physicians on administrative leave, or (iii)
7
nonrenewal of physician employment contracts with
8
Defendant County.
9
According to Bylaws Section 12.2 GROUNDS FOR
10
HEARING, due process is provided in the following
II
situations:
12
"A. Denial of medical staff membership.
13
B. Denial of requested advancement in staff membership
14
status, or category.
15
C. Denial of medical staff reappointment.
16
D. Suspension of staff membership or clinical privileges for
17
more than thirty (30) days in any twelve (12) month period.
18
E. Demotion to lower staff category or membership status.
19
F. Summary suspension of staff membership or clinical
20
privileges for more than fourteen (14) days.
21
G. Revocation of medical staff membership.
22
H. Denial of requested clinical privileges.
23
1. Involuntary reduction of current clinical privileges.
24
1. Termination of all clinical privileges.
25
K. Involuntary imposition of significant consultation or
26
monitory requirements excluding monitoring incidental to
27
provisional status and Section 7.3)."
28 -30DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 31 of 38
1
The due process afforded by the Bylaws in the above cases is
2
robust, as contained in Bylaws Section 12.3-1 NOTICE OF
3
ACTION OR PROPOSED ACTION:
4
"In all cases in which action has been taken or a
5
recommendation made as set forth in Section 12.2, the
6
president of staff or designee on behalf of the medical
7
executive committee shall give the member prompt written
8
notice of (1) the recommendation or final proposed action
9
and that such action, if adopted, shall be taken and reported
10
to the applicable licensing or certifying authority and/or the
11
National Practitioner Data Bank if required; (2) the reasons
12
for the proposed action including the acts or omissions with
13
which the member is charged; (3) the right to request a
14
hearing pursuant to Section 12.3-2."
15
168. The Board of Supervisors of Defendant County ratified
16
the Bylaws on December 13,2004.
17
169. When the defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with
Deny. Plaintiff was not
18
adequate due process in connection with the Demotion,
demoted. See DSUF 4
19
Admin Leave and Nonrenewal, they were acting pursuant to
(0000272-358), 31 (Bryan
20
the Bylaws.
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 258:7-
Admit.
21
16). There is no evidence
22
Defendants failed to comply
23
with the By-Laws. KMC
24
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
25
- 9/12/08.
26
170.
27
171.
28 -31DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 32 of 38
I
172. It is incontrovertibly established that "Any acts or
2
omissions of the individual Defendants were under color of
3
law." See Scheduling Order, 9:22-23.
4
173.
5
174.
6
175.
7
176. Plaintiffs employment contract expressly set forth a
Deny. See DSDF 6 (0001479-
8
mutually explicit understanding with Defendant County that
1499).
9
Plaintiff would receive Base Pay of$287,529, and that
Admit.
10
Plaintiff would be chair ofKMC's pathology department.
11
177. Moreover, the employment contract barred Defendant
Deny. See DSDF 6 (0001479-
12
County from reducing Plaintiffs Base Pay, removing
1499).
13
Plaintifffrom chair or terminating or otherwise modifying
14
the Contract at will, without cause, or without Plaintiffs
15
consent.
16
178. Defendant COlmty has not removed a department chair
17
without cause since at least October 2000.
18
179. Defendants County and Harris told Plaintiff several
Deny. See DSDF 44 (Jadwin
19
times that the Demotion "necessitated" the Paycut, and that
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
20
he would have to agree to it to continue working at KMC.
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
Admit.
21
581)),45 (Jadwin Deposition,
22
3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12).
23
Plaintiff was not demoted.
24
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
25
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
26
180. Having no other choice, Plaintiff executed the Paycut
Deny. See DSDF 44 (Jadwin
27
amendment to his employment contract.
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
28
-32DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADmDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 33 of 38
1
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
2
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
3
3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12).
4
181. Defendant County was subjectively aware of Plaintiff's
Deny. Plaintiff was not
5
contractual interest in Base Pay, as evidenced by the
demoted. See DSUF 4
6
numerous reminders by Defendants Bryan and County that
(0000272-358, specifically
7
Plaintiff would have to expressly amend his employment
0000319), 44 (Jadwin
8
contract to implement the Paycut resulting from his
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
9
Demotion.
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
10
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
11
3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12).
12
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
13
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
14
182. There was nearly a month gap between the time
Deny. Plaintiff was not
15
Defendant Bryan informed Plaintiff he was initiating
demoted. See DSUF 4
16
demotion procedures to the time the JCC voted to demote
(0000272-358, specifically
17
Plaintiff.
0000319). KMC letters to
18
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
19
9/12/08.
20
183. Defendants never notified Plaintiff of the time or place
Deny. Plaintiff was not
21
of the JCC vote to demote Plaintiff gave him an explanation
demoted. See DSUF 4
22
of the evidence against him, or provided him an opportunity
(0000272-358, specifically
23
to tell his side ofthe story.
0000319). KMC letters to
24
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
25
9/12/08.
26
184. Before the JCC vote occurred, Plaintiff sent a letter to
Deny. Plaintiff was not
27
Defendant County legally challenging the Demotion.
demoted. See DSUF 4
28
-33DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 34 of 38
I
(0000272-358, specifically
2
0000319). See PSUF 184 (Lee
3
Supp. Decl., Exh. 2 (Lee Letter
4
to Barnes of 6/29/06 at
5
DFJl349). There is no
6
evidence to support this. KMC
7
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
8
- 9/12/08.
9
185. Nor did Defendant County ever offer Plaintiff a post-
Deny. See DSUF 4 (0000272-
10
deprivation hearing.
358, specifically 0000319).
11
186. More importantly, the JCC did not constitute an
Deny. See Lee Decl., Exh. 17.
12
impartial tribunal since it comprised individuals who had
13
been harassing and retaliating against Dr. Jadwin and/or
14
individuals on whom Dr. Jadwin was blowing the whistle.
15
187. Nor was Defendant Bryan - who invited Plaintiff to
Deny. Plaintiff was not
16
contact him, and only, him regarding the Demotion he
demoted. See DSUF 4
17
himself had instigated - an impartial adjudicator given his
(0000272-358, specifically
18
demonstrated bias against Plaintiff.
0000319). KMC letters to
19
Jadwin dated 8/14/0 I -
20
9/12/08.
21
188.
22
189.
23
190. Plaintiffs employment contract expressly set forth a
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
24
mutually explicit understanding with Defendant County that
1499).
25
Plaintiff would be paid Professional Fees.
26
191. Defendant County was subjectively aware of Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
27
contractual interest in Professional Fees as evidenced by the
1499). Plaintiff was not
28
-34DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 35 of 38
1
then-CEQ's letter to Plaintiff regarding the Paycut. Mr.
demoted. KMC letters to
2
Culberson explained that, as a demoted staff pathologist with
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
3
a drastically reduced base salary, Plaintiff would
9/12/08.
4
nevertheless be able to take advantage of his reduced
5
administrative duties in order to increase his Professional
6
Fees-based income.
7
192. Mr. Culberson participated in the decision to place
Deny. See DSUF 41
8
Plaintiff on Admin Leave, which denied Plaintiff the
(DFJO 1482).
9
opportunity to earn Professional Fees.
10
193. Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff any pre- or post-
Deny. See DSUF 4 (0000272-
11
deprivation procedure when placing him on Admin Leave.
358).6(0001479-1499).
12
194. When Defendant County sent a letter to Plaintiff
Deny. See DSUF 41
13
placing him on Admin Leave, the letter stated only that the
(DFJ01482).
14
Admin Leave was "pending resolution of a personnel
15
matter."
16
195. At no time did Defendants County or Harris inform
Deny. There was no "charge"
17
Plaintiff of the nature of the charges against him, give him
against Plaintiff.
18
and explanation of the evidence against him, or provide him
19
an opportunity to tell his side of the story.
20
196. Even when Plaintiff protested the lack of due process,
Deny. See PSUF 196 (Lee
21
Defendant County refused to respond.
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 4 (Lee Letter
22
to Barnes of 4/4/07 at
23
DFJ01619». There is no
24
evidence to support this.
25
197. Since 1995, only one other department chair had ever
26
been placed on administrative leave in excess of 1 month.
27
198.
28
Admit.
-35DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 36 of 38
1
199.
2
200. Defendant County customarily renews the contracts of
Deny. See Response to #30
3
all of its KMC medical staff.
above.
4
201. When Plaintiff asked Defendant County to identify all
Admit.
5
members of the KC medical staff - which comprises roughly
6
60 full-time faculty physicians at any given time - who had
7
employment contracts which were not renewed during the
8
period from October 24, 2000 to the present, Defendant
9
County was able to name only one doctor.
10
202. At no time did Defendant County inform Plaintiff of the
Deny. See Response to #195
11
nature of the charges against him, give him an explanation of
above.
12
the evidence against him, or provide him an opportunity to
13
tell his side of the story.
14
203. Defendant County denies that anyone even participated
Deny. See PSUF 203 (Lee
15
in a decision not to renew Plaintiff's employment contract.
Supp. Decl., Exh. 21 (Rog No.
16
45,53:16-20)).
17
204. Even when Plaintiff protested the lack of due process,
This is the same as #196. See
18
Defendant County refused to respond.
Response to #196 above.
19
205.
20
206.
21
207. Defendant County itself admits that no relevant event
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
22
occurred on or before January 6, 2005.
1499), 48 (0000623-630), 65
23
(Jadwin Deposition, 119/08,
24
pgs. 452:4-455:19), 71
25
(0001059-1072), 90 (0000260
26
(Exhibit 560)), 91 (0000031-
27
70),92 (DFJ00246), 97
28
-36DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 37 of 38
I
(DFJ0025 1-270), 98
2
(DFJ00289-290), 101
3
(DFJ00241-242),102
4
(DFJ00248), 147 (DFJ00243-
5
245).
6
208.
7
209.
8
210. Defendant County admits that Plaintiff has exhausted
9
his administrative remedies as to all claims except for the
10
new FMLAlCFRAlFEHA retaliation claim added via the
11
Second Amended Complaint, filed on October 7, 2008 (Doc.
12
241).
13
211. Plaintiff exhausted his CRFA & FEHA
14
oppositional/participation retaliation claims by filing a
15
timely complaint with the California Department of Fair
16
Employment & Housing ("DFEH") on September 3, 2008,
17
and obtaining a right to sue letter that same day.
18
212.
19
213.
20
214. Defendant Bryan was the Chief Executive Officer at
21
KMC from September of 2004 until September of 2006.
22
215. Eugene Kercher, M.D. was the President ofKMC
23
Medical Staff from July 2004 to July 2006, and a member of
24
the JCC.
25
216. Defendant Irwin Harris, M.D., was Chief Medical
26
Officer at KMC from July of2005 to September of2007,
27
and a non-voting member of the JCC.
28
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
-37DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
1
217. Jennifer Abraham, M.D. was Immediate Past President
2
ofKMC Medical Staff during 2004-2006, and President
3
Elect in July 2006 to December of 2007.
4
218. Scott Ragland, D.O. was President-Elect of the KMC
5
Medical Stafffrom 2004-2006, Chair of the Quality
6
Management Committee, and a member of the JCC.
7
219. Toni Smith was the Chief Nurse Executive ofKMC,
8
and a member of the Jec.
9
220. William Roy, M.D., was Chief of the Division of
Page 38 of 38
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
10
Gynecologic Oncology at KMC.
11
221. Marvin Kolb, M.D. was former Chief Medical Officer
12
at KMC who left in September of 2004.
13
222. Phillip Dutt, MD., became Chair of Pathology at KMC
Deny. Dr. Dutt was the
14
in August of2006.
interim Chair.
15
223. David Culberson was Interim Chief Executive Officer
Admit.
16
from September of2006 to May of2007.
17
224. Paul Hensler became Chief Executive Officer at in [sic]
18
May of2007.
19
225. Gilbert Martinez was and is the Manager of Laboratory
Deny. Gilbert Martinez retired
20
Services at KMC.
on September 27,2008.
21
22
Admit.
Admit.
Change of Employee Status. Respectfully submitted,
23 24
Dated: December 1, 2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
25 26 27 28
By: lsi Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al -38DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICAnON
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG · ~ • KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 189
AFFIUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
August 14,2001
David F Jadwin, DO Kern Medical Center 1830 Flower Street Bakersfield CA 93305 Dear Doctor Jadwin:
I
~
I am pleased to infonn you that your request for medical staff membership at Kern Medical Center was approved by the Kern County Board of Supervisors. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions. if applicable). Your appointment is as follows: Department: Specialty: Status: Fromffo:
\
~
Pathology Pathology ProvisionallActive 0312012001 to 10/3112002
According to KMC's Bylaws (a copy is attached), it will be necessary for you to serve a provisional appointment for at least six months or for a period sufficient for your Department Chair to evaluate your skills, competency and privilege requests accurately. Proctoring is required for a minimum of six cases, unless your clinical department has established a greater number of cases. Please contact your Department Chair to discuss available proctoring physicians. You should keep a list of these cases and note the physicians who proctored you for each. The purpose of this process is to satisfY the department's obligation to assure the medical community that you are proficient in your specialty. You should discuss the care plans with the proctoring physician before or upon admission, at intervals through the patient's length of stay/course of treatment and discharge. .
~
Our hospital policies require that prior to a physician initiating any practice at Kern Medical Center, the physician must first meet certain health screening documentation rquirements. After these requirements have been satisfied, our Human Resources Department will authorize the issuance of a hospital identification badge. All persons providing services at Kern Medical Center, in whatever capacity, are required to wear this identification badge. Please contact our Human Resources Department at (661) 326-2640 for infonnation and assistance with this process. After Human Resources requirements are met, please report to the Medical Director's Office - Room 124I, to sign the Employee
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN
1830 FLOWER STREET' BAKERSFIELD. CAUFORNIA ~197 • TELEPHONE (661) 326-2000
•
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 189
Confidentiality Statement and User Access Code Agreement at which time you will be issued an HBO number for dictation purposes. You have been provided a copy of Kern Medical Center's booklet entitled, "Health Care That's Here for Good" which contains valuable information. Please read the booklet at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact the Medical Staff Office at (661) 326-2218. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely,
I
~
Enclosures cc:
Department Chair KMC Human Resources Department
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~ • MEDICAL CENTER .KERN
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 3 of 189
AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
September 28,2001
David Jadwin, DO Pathology Department 1830 Flower Street Bakersfield, CA 93305 Dear Doctor Jadwin: RE:
Release of Proctoring RequirementIModification of Staff Category
Congratulations on successfully completing the required credentials proctoring process for staff privileges at Kern Medical Center. As a result, on September 18, 2001, the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved the release of these conditions and modified your medical staff category from Provisional to Active. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact the Medical Staff Office at (661) 326-2218.
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET· BAKERSFIELD. CALlFOANlA933054197 '" TELEPHONE (661) 326·2000
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
• KERN MEDICAL - . : • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 4 of 189
AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
October 31, 2002
David Jadwin, DO Kern Medical Center Department of Pathology 1830 Flower Street Bakersfield, CA 93305
l
Dear Doctor Jadwin:
I am pleased to inform you that the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved your request for reappointment to Kern Medical Center on October 31, 2002. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions. if applicable). Your reappointment is as follows: Department: Specialty: Status: Period:
Pathology Pathology Active October 31,2002 to October 31, 2004
It is essential that your credential file remains current, so as you receive renewals of your medical license, DEA Registration, and malpractice insurance, please forward copies to Kern Medical Center's Medical Staff Office. Your continuing contributions to the standards of excellence at Kern Medical Center are greatly appreciated, and I look forward to seeing you in the hospital.
lef Medical Officer
-----_. --
cc: Departmenl Chair Enclosure: Current Privileges
OWNEO AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET· BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA 93305·4197 • TELEPHONE (661) 326·2COO
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 5 of 189
~ • MEDICAL CENTER .KERN
AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
November 1. 2004
David Jadwin, DO Department of Pathology Dear Doctor Jadwin: I am please to inform you that the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved your request for reappointment to Kern Medical Center. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions, if applicable). Your reappointment is as follows:
Department: Specialty: Status:
Pathology Pathology Active
Period:
11/1/2004 to 10/31/2006
It is essential that your credential file remains current, so as you receive renewals of your medical license, DEA Registration, and malpractice insurance. please forward copies to Kern Medical Center's Medical Staff Office.
~
Your continuing contributions to the standards of excellence at Kern Medical Center are greatly appreciated, and I look forward to seeing you in the hospital. Sincerely,
fJ~lvDt:)RJfl~ rM
Peter K. Bryan f Chief Executive Officer Enclosure:
Current Privileges
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET· BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (66') 326·2000
.
~
• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 6 of 189
AFAUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
September 4, 2008 SECOND REQUEST
David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
RE:
MEDICAL STAFF REAPPOINTMENT
Dear Dr. Jadwin: On July 28, 2008 you were requested to complete your application for reappointment to the Medical Staff of Kem Medical Center. This letter serves as your SECOND REQUEST that your reappointment application and associated documents are needed to complete your credential file. Your cooperation in returning this information is essential for you to maintain medical staff membership and privileges. Failure to acknOWledge this request by FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2008 may result in termination of staff privileges according to the hospital bylaws. According to Article VI, Section 6.15-4 of the Medical Staff Bylaws: "Failure without good cause to timely submit a completed application for reappointment shall result in the automatic termination of the member's membership and clinical privileges and prerogatives at the end of the current staff appointment, and the member shall be deemed to have resigned membership in the medical staff. In the event membership terminates for the reasons set forth herein, the procedures set forth in Article XII shall not apply." Please contact the Medical Staff Office at 661-326-2718 if you have any questions about the reappointment process. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. Sincerely,
Tracy L. Subriar. CPCS Medical Staff Services Coordinator OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FlOWER STREET' BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (661) 326-2000
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 7 of 189
~ • MEDICAL CENTER .KERN
AFFlUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
November 1, 2006
David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 91207 Dear Doctor Jadwin:
I am pleased to inform you that the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved your request for reappointment to Kern Medical Center. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions, if applicable). Your reappointment is as follows: Department: Specialty: Status: Period:
Pathology Pathology Active 11/112006 to 10/31/2008
It is essential that your credential file remains current, so as you receive renewals of your medical license, DEA Registration, and malpractice insurance, please forward copies to Kern Medical Center's Medical Staff Office. Your continuing contributions to the standards of excellence at Kern Medical Center are greatly appreciated, and I look forward to seeing you in the hospital. Sincerely,
~~~I&s , Irwin E. Harris, MD Chief Medical Officer Enclosure:
Current Privileges
OWNEO AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET. BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (56l) 326·2000
•
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 8 of 189
Confidentiality Statement and User Access Code Agreement at which time you will be issued an HBO number for dictation pwposes. You have been provided a copy of Kern Medical Center's booklet entitled, "Health Care That's Here for Good" which contains valuable information. Please read the booklet at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact the Medical Staff Office at (661) 326-2218. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely,
ve Officer Enclosures cc:
Department Chair KMC Human Resources Department
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 9 of 189
AFAUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGElES, SAN DIEGO, AND IRVINE
September 12, 2008 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
RE:
MEDICAL STAFF REAPPOINTMENT
Dear Dr. Jadwin: Your current staff appointment and clinical privileges will expire on OCTOBER 31, 2008. We have previously informed you of your responsibility to re-apply for medical staff membership and clinical privileges if you wish to continue to practice at Kem Medical Center. If the Medical Staff Office does not receive your reappointment application by SEPTEMBER 19,2008, your membership and all clinical privileges may be automatically terminated on October 31, 2008 In accordance with the Medical Staff Bylaws, Article VI, Section 6.15-4 of the Medical Staff Bylaws: "Failure without good cause to timely submit a completed application for reappointment shall result in the automatic termination of the member's membership and clinical privileges and prerogatives at the end of the current staff appointment, and the member shall be deemed to have resigned membership In the medical staff. In the event membership terminates for the reasons set forth herein, the procedures set forth In Article XII shall not apply." If you wish to voluntarily resign your medical staff membership and privileges or have any questions, please contact Tracy Subriar in the Medical Staff Office at (661) 3262718. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. Sincerely,
Tracy l. Subriar, CPCS Medical Staff Services Coordinator OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNlY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET' BAKERSFIELO, CAUFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (56') 32"2000
Complete IIems 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Rem 4 If Restricted ,Delivery Is desired.
-. PrInt your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card 10 you. • Attach this card to the back of the maIIplece, or on the front If space pem1fts.
A.SIgnatwe
CJ Agent CJ Addressee
X B.
-b)'(--J
'IfYES,.-delMHy_below:
3.
llejb l\'P8 cenIlled Mall
CJ RegIstwecI C11nswed Mall
CI El<presa Moll CI R..... _ p l f o r _ CI C.O.D.
4. _lloIloery'I (Em8 Fes) (IIansfer ""'" setvlce_
i PS Fenn 3811. February 2004
~
CI Yes
7005 3110 0001 7095 7501 llomostJc Return RsceJpl
'lJ2595
I
Document 278-2
David Jadwin. DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
I
C. Dale of DelIvery
D.lsdellwry _ _ 1Icm_l?
1. Miele Addl1lS!llld to:
2. ArtIcle Number
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
! •
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 10 of 189
Page 11 of 189
--.~--.
__
.,.,..,,-
..
-.~,--_._._-,-~._-
...
_--_._-~_.
-_.._-_.__ ..-
Filed 12/01/2008
t05L 5bOL tooo DttE 500L
. . . . KERN
, II
~1.fSPo.s1:
~
. . . . ~~L
... . f/!!
.
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUI
MEDICAL STAFF OFFICE
"'7/fJW 01/://1H13
-------3;no3uoa~~o;~3~~;~nu~3~~-------
':)
~r'"'"·~?j~~'::'_~l~.~~:~~_~~ :<;:."t1"""""I"'"!~"'~''''' 4
•..-: 0004 02 '"
~
•
1830 Flower Street Bakersfield. CA 93305-4197
~
0';-
~,""T."""~'
l .. ''''trlll ...........
$ 05.320
232550 SEP,; 2DG6 MAltED FROM ZIPCOOE 9330.5
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
LH!)fli 31il. Qt 3dOHIIN;J:lO dOl. l" ti:i)t:)Us 3~"'d
",. ,~ ~11'"' rel="nofollow"> f" 'J" .--<:",0,.... : -__ r.J
cpa,at' 1s1 NO"S!:
•.".
~r",,.,
,
Y/~~/@ 1l: 4." 0
._-
1:(\' .. :.:}-'-h"~\:
'.
David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
~
;;:-:·U~:-! - - -
q'2.J_ If) -(),i ::i i 2CY7$ i 0:::15
eCl();
11,1,,,,,II.,1,1ll",I,,, I",] Iii" '" II" 1,1", 11,,1,1,,1,,II
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 12 of 189
U.S. Postal Service""
CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT (Domestic Mo1fJ Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided)
-
0 IF IF ~ C ~ fA. l •
•
-
C4n\lIlodFeo
.-
Retum Rocelpt Fv8 (Endarsa.tmd Required) ~D_F" orsam81lt Roqulmd)
1blllI_..... $
U1
l:l _ro l:l r'-
~ddW\~
~.1jji"lWii""""-""'''-''''''
U S IE
f1·h2.1~
_.-...................................-._.
tJT PO BoJr No.
CiIji,·sWO:JIj,;;;;..••..__..••..••..........•....__•..••..·····_·..•..•••••••••.. PS FOfm 3600. June 2002
Sec Ro.:y,:r:;c 101 InSlrl,lclloos
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 13 of 189
','
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis January 2006 Fee Distribution Professional Fees Dull Jadwin Beginning Balance (4,000.00) February, 2006 Normal Guaranteed Subtotal
Total
$
3,668,63 3,668,63
$
3,668.63
$
(4,000,00)
$ 4,825,08 4,825,08
Subtotal
Shertukde
$
3,668,63 9,650.16 13,318.79
$
13,318.79
4,825,08 4,825,08
$ 4,825,08 $ 4,825.08
Less: Medrium Billing Cos Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future -10% TotalOH
366.86
366.86
366.86
366.86
Net Available Amount Distributed
(698.23)
Ending Balance
(698,23)
4,825,08 4,825,08
4,825,08 4,825.08
8,951,93 9,650,16 (698.23)
0018755
l'manClai
1'iummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countID: _ _ _ I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
=mm
XG1485 User ID: JACKK
Appointments
1 Claims
I
Page 14 of 189
Pallent!<
1
I
Fillancials I
Malumnance
I
,,-Records
I
Communlcation Center
I Log Out I Help I Cont~ct I
I
Daysheet I Dayshel't Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Agirlg I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary FiMncial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient smtements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Anancial Summary All Provide .... BlUing
Reudering Provider
location: All
Po
Location~
WritoOff.,
Payments
!'lise Charges
Insorance
Patient
Insurance
9555.00
0,00
24B9.66
134;00
11054.76
4421.04
Teopllngco
0.00
0.00
162.00
0.00
660.2.0
991>.00
0
Jadwin l A
3419.00
0.00
971.20
63.75
1746.00
465.13
DaVid F JadWin
453.00
N/A
0.00
10.00
0.00
1197.00
"5
Total For Jadwin L A
3012.00
0.00
971.2.0
73.75
174&.00
166-2.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2&.2.0
"
Provider
DaVid F jadWin
Teopengco
Charges
Patillo.
#Pmc
# Mise Charges
m
0
0
0
LA Upschult;r.
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.5.00
276.00
0.00
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
22.9.97
0
c~~
Shertukde Shertukde
0.00
0.00
252..60
0.00
911.65
2.86.13
0
49101.00
0.00
9677048
25.00
33501.32
2.4]0.00
1]8.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
138.00
0.00
""
0
LA Total For Shertukde
49239.00
0.00
96nA8
25.00
33639.32
2430.00
Shertukde
14113.00
0.00
4639.18
0.00
645tl.07
16ROO
LA Shertukd..
'" '"
4tlB1.00
N/A
0.00
95.00
0.00
998.00
37
16194.00
0.00
4639.18
95.00
6458.07
1166.00
'64
",
0.00
106.14
144.60
106.14
1084.20
1993.21
0
Liu LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
25550.00
0.00
6535.17
0.00
18691.09
334.07
7146.70
0.00
3013.90
180.00
4062.88
:ZOO.OO
1433.00
N/A
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
8579.70
0.00
3013.90
205.00
4062.88
:Z00.00
Total For Shertllkde L
A
Dott
DI.lttLA Dott
Total For Dutt L A Elilling Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for pr'
Payments Ch;
$114989.70
Hi.." Cbarge.. In"uranc"
Patient
WriteOffs Insoran""
Patient
$106.14 $27885.81 $663.89 $78584.17 $13769.75
0
m
" " "
0 0 #
# Pro"
Mi!l~
C~"rges
1045
2'489-68+
13i,-00+ 971
20+
63 75+ 1 0 . 00+ 005 3' 668 . 6:0":"
https://www.medrium.com/practice101/1 XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018756
·
" Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 15 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis February 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Beginning Balance February, 2006 Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Jadwin Dull (698.23)
$
$
Shertukde
Total (698.23)
6,057.75
$ 5,528.80 $ 11,280.95 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 6,057.75 10,353.88 16,106.03 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 5,334.79 13,591.43 13,591.43 7,316.03 32,862.19 5,334.79 $46,453.62 $ 20,907.46 $
22,867.50 9,650.16 32,517.66 100.000% 32,517.65 40,178.22 72,695.87
Less: Medrium Billing Cos Overhead
541.96
1,354.91
1,354.91
3,251.78
3,301.33
1,500.00 2,000.00 4,854.91
7,301.33 4,000.00 14,553.11
58,142.76
Current Future - 10% TotalOH
3,843.29
2,500.00 2,000.00 5,854.91
Net Available
793.27
40,598.71
16,052.55
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Ending Balance
$
$
4,000.00
0018757
rluam.llat ';'UllUlli.11Y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countlD' XG1486 Us~r!O' JACKI( ~ I Appolntm"nts I Oalms I Patients
Document 278-2 I. Finandal" I
Mainllman<:e
oayshalilt I oaysh
I
Filed 12/01/2008
e-R<:corns
Q>mm""lcation Center
I
mzr ,
Page 16 of 189 I Log Out I Heip I Contact I
I Procedure summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date flnan"i,,1 Summary All Provider" Silling Provider
Rendenn!! Provider
Payments MIlOI' Charges
Illsu.""ee
7462.00
62.00
3543.08
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
Jadwin LA
1756.00 David F Jadwin
476.00
Total For Jadwin LA
WrlteOfls Pallent
245.00
10984.98
17S4.00
5.34
0.00
1581.oCl
25.00
0.00
2044;67
200.00
3283.13
0.00
NfA
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
"
2232.00
0.00
2044.67
lZ5.00
3183.13
0.00
17
0.00
0.00
31.92
0.00
4B1.08
259.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
241.76
0.00
0
0
Lipsehultz LA
0.00
0.00
44.10
0.00
4.90
0.00
0
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
259.00
0.00
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.00
140.2Z
0.00
866.53
0.00
Shertukde
35975:00
0.00
9784.86
0.00
29424.72
553.00
,eo
0
SlIertukde LA
1292.7.00
0.00
55B.17
75.00
8080.06
0.00
m
Toaopengco
Patienl
# Mise #Proc Charge"
Insllran.:.e
D
Charges
location, AlIl
f'erlod for 01/01/1Q06_ 01/31/2006
" 0 0 0
0
O·
CA
2121.00
NfA
0.00
733.00
0.00
0.00
5513.17
B08.00
BOBO.06
0.00
"
0
0.00
0
c,
'"
0.00
0.00
153.39
BB.OO
3377.07
0.00
0
0
Uu LA
0.00
0.00
49.00
0.00
163.00
0.00
23002.00
0.00
6390.28
0.00
12947.41
0.00
7519.00
0.00
3737.60
25.00
SZSBAl
0.00
1918.00
NfA
0.00
201.00
0.00
0.00
9437.00
0.00
3737.60
226.00
528B.41
0.00
Dott
Dutt LA
O,tt Total For Dutt L A lIilling Provider
RenderIng Provider
Grand Total for practice
Paymenls Cllargeg $93156.00
Mise Charges Illsuran.:.e
Patient
Writ"Ofls Inf/lIrunee
Patient
$62.00 $31437.63 $1667.00 $76983.05 $2.621.00
3J 5A·3- 08+
245-00+ 67+ 200'00, 25'00+
0
15048.00
She.rtukde Tot
0
'" "18 "
,', "'i'
2,OAI,
005 6'057 . 75';'
0
0 # His.:.
# Proe Charge"
763
Powered by Medrlum
https://www.medrium.com/practice10111_XG1486/Reports/finSummaty
12111/2007
0018758
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 17 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis March 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Shertukde Dult 2,000.00 2,000.00
Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
4,253.34 4,253.34 16.667% 5,063.92
$
$ 4,197.59 4,825.08 9,022.67 41.66667% 12,659.81
Total 4,000.00
$ 12,282.45 $ 4,825.08 17,107.53 41.66667% 12,659.81
5,063.92
$12,659.81
$ 12,659.81
506.39
1,265.98
1,265.98
$
20,733.38 9,650.16 30,383.54 100.000% 30,383.54 30,383.54
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
1,506.39
1,265.98
1,265.98
4,038.35
Net Avaiiable(Current
3,557.53
11,393.83
11,393.83
26,345.19
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Ending Balance
3,038.35
1,000.00
$
1,000.00
$
4,000.00
0018759
1" llli:UlvI(U .:JUllUl1(l.1 y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
m:r
~c"untID: XG14B6 User 10: lACKK
_ _ _ _ ! Ap~ointm""ts
I Claims
I
Patients
I ' Flnancials]
Maintenance
I
,,~Recorns
I
Comml,lllk"tkln Center
Page 18 of 189 I Leg Out I Help I ecntaet I
I
Dal'sh""t I Dal'shMt Summary I Insurance Summary I Plltl"nt Aging I Insur"nce Aging I Acijustrt1ents I Procedure Summary Anand,,1 Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Repents I Run Last Report
Finandal Summary By Posting Date financial Billing Provid.. r
Summ~1Y
R"nd"dng Provld"r
David F Jadwin Teopengw
All Providers
Payments charges
location: All LoeatlQM
Period for 02/01/2006- 02/28/2006 Mise Charges [nsuranee
WriteOfis
Patient
[usura"e,",
Patient
4926.00
n.oo
3156.02
15B.00
12476.45
0.00
"
0.00
0.00
86.76
0.00
707.24
0.00
,.
0
0
1999.00
0.00
528.97
197.35
916.63
0.00
David F Jadwin
75.00
N/A
65.00
148.00
0.00
0.00
Total for JadWin LA
JadWin LA
# Mise # Proe Charges
,
L074.00
0.00
593.97
345.35
916.63
O.Co
Teopengco CA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
0.00
"
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
133.67
0.00
606.33
0.00
0
Co>~
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
2266.00
0.00
0
0
Shertukde
35425.00
0.00
10335.60
410.00
29953.93
0.00
'69
0
Shertukde CA
11134.00
0.00
5409.93
496.00
5754.17
0.00
"
0
0
1126.00
'IA
0.00
456.00
0.00
103.50
10
122.60.00
0.00
5409.93
5754.17
10350
A LI,
952.00
"
0.00
0.00
4B.20
0.00
34B.BO
0.00
Lill LA
0.00
0.00
132.87
0.00
1107.00
0.00
0
0
16712.00
0.00
7374.13
115.00
2.0553.03
0.00
129
0
52.86.00
0.00
110B.54
90.00
12B4.37
25.00
",
0
Shertukde Total For Sherwkde L
D,tt Putt LA
D,tt Total for Dlltt L A BlJ1ing Pro\lider
Rendering Provid ..r
Grand Total for prnctic
B89.00
'/A
0.00
335.00
0.00
0.00
6175.00
0.00
110B.54
425.00
lZS4.37
25.00
Paymeot$ Chargolls
$77572.00
Patient
Insurance
0
"
Patient
# Proe
$72.00 $28379.69 $2425.35 $76173.95 $12850
630
Mise Ch at!!""
Insurance
WrlteOfls
0
0 # Mise Charge"
,
Powered by Medl
006
https://www.medrium.comJpracticel0111_XG1486/ReportsifinSummary
3'"156'02+ 158-00+ 528-97+ "197· 35+ 65 - 00+ 11,8-00+
12/11/2007
0018760
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 19 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis April 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin
Dut! Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Total 4,000.00
$
3,331.21
$11,762.21 $ 3,546.55 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 3,331.21 16,587.29 8,371.63 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 4,715.02 11,787.55 11,787.55
18,639.97 9,650.16 28,290.13 100.000% 28,290.12
$
4,715.02
$11,787.55
$ 11,787.55
28,290.12
471.50
1,178.76
1,178.76
$
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
5,000.00
Net Avaiiable(Current
Ending Balance
2,829.02 5,000.00
471.50
6,178.76
1,178.76
7,829.02
4,243.52
5,608.79
10,608.79
20,461.10
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
$
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation
12/11/2007
0018761
Financial Summary
-' ~
II:IilIIIL
Account ID: XG1486 User m: JACKK
Appointments
Claims
~ Flnancials
Patients
Daysheet I DaysfJ6et Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging 1 Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary j Capitatlon Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
I
Maintenance
a-Records
CommunIcation C
W
Cu.
I PrccedUl'e Summary
Penod fOr
\
I/01I2006~ 03/31[2006
Billing
Rendering
Provider
" :d~$i\:I't-F'-
30-003'331~21~d"
Location: All Locations
# Mise Mise Charges
Charges
4055.00
Insurance
2.48%1
Jadwirt~;,
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
·~·1'643,93·'"
- '291'.;'2:311
Charges
4456.34
1629.84
34
0.00
17.67
397.00
372,00
o
o o
_co.
~;',1426.0_5
2167.75
718.00
8
0,00
0,00
225,00
4
1926.00
0.00
1426.05
-30.00
2167.75
943.00
12
0,00
0.00
0.00
-42.00
0.00
226.00
o
625,00
Teopengco L A
0.00 !
'7,;,
o o
0.00
0.00
55.00
0,00
0.00
o
o
0.00
0.00
0.00
51.80
0.00
0.00
o
o
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
Costa
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
441.00
0.00
o o
Shertukde
44645.00
0.00
8828,81
202,37
37651.06
1572,18
362
Shertukde L A
19913.00
0.00
7255.11
0.00
8809.20
38.00
153
o o o o
0.00
301.00
0.00
1129,00
51
7255.11
301.00
8809.20
1167.00
204
Liu
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
455.60
50.00
o
Uu LA
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
178.00
o
- '3'3"f¥'i¥
15659.49
422.00
232
J/3iii'1iM'f
4982.53
138.00
140
o o
0.00
908.00
50
o
4982.53
1046.00
190
o
I; l4AiI
Dutt
31580.00
0.00
17183.00
0.00
5841.00
NfA
0.00
23024.00
0.00
3248.34
Dutt Total For Dutt l A
o
~5248.34
ifft?'tP9n 223.00
Billing
Rendering ProvideI'
Charges
Mise Charges
;Insurance
Patient
8'371 -S3+ 1 07 - I; 7 + 28' 397 - 60'd
WrlteOffs
Payments Provider
301 -00+
,IS'587.29'd
Page 20 of 189
NfA 0.00
Dutt L A
t~
7' 255·11 +
o o o o
5963.00 25876.00
Shertukde Total For Shertukde LA
X
8,828·81+ 202-37+
Filed 12/01/2008
0,00
Lipschultz L A
lipschUltz
~/
Document 278-2
Total For Jadwin LA
# Proc
NfA
1301.00 David F Jadwin
PatIent
i
I
I
Insurance
Patient
I
Jadwin LA
29c1'23+
WriteOffs
Payments ProVider
1 '6.4.. 3'93+
'426"05+
Financial Summary By Posting Date finanCial Summary All Providers
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
/
o .....
0·*
~~
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
00
......
0)
N
~t3'f(,bQ, https:llwww.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486IReports/finSummary
4/312006
Page 2 of2
$131106.00
$2.48
$27144.33
$1253.27
$75019.97
$7606.02
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Grand Total for practice
1034
Powered by Medrlum
Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 21 of 189
o
o ...... (Xl
......
O'l W
https:llwww.medrium.comlpracticel 0 1/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
4/3/2006
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 22 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis May 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Shertukde DUll 2,000.00 2,000.00
Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Total 4,000.00
$
$ 7,849.38 $ 11,223.22 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 1,885.00 12,674.46 16,048.30 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 5,101.30 12,753.23 12,753.23
20,957.60 9,650.16 30,607.76 100.000% 30,607.76
$
5,101.30
$12,753.23
$ 12,753.23 $
30,607.76
510.13
1,275.32
1,275.32
3,060.77
510.13
1,275.32
1,275.32
3,060.77
4,591-17
11,477.91
11,477.91
27,546.99
1,885.00
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current
Ending Balance
$
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00 $
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018764
r
llU1l1\,:i1i:1l OWlllUtu y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~countID: XG1486 U~er lD: JACKK ~ I A/>pclnbnenls I Claims I Patlen!l;
Filed 12/01/2008 ="ft"
I. Finandal$ I
MillnlImanCf'l
Pavsheet I Daysh""t summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insur""c" Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I P"tient St
I
a_Records
1
Comrnunko"tion Center
Page 23 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
I Procedure summary
Financial Summary BV Posting Date financial Summary All Providers Billing Proyider
Rendering ProvIder
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
62.00
Location: All U1eations Writ"Offs
Pay.""nls
2040.00
David F Jadwin
Period for 04{01/2006· 04{30/2006
Patient
1490.54
-188.07
Insoranc"
6275.12
Patient
# Mise # Proc Charges
3557.63
17
Tecpengco
0.00
0.00
25.00
138.00
,
90.00
0.00
'"'
138.00
Jadwin LA
482.53
100.00
910.47
2199.93
2
DB~ld F Jadwin
0.00
NIA
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
Tot.
90.00
0.00
482.53
100.00
910.47
2399.93
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
a4.00
0.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
0.00
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
276-.00
Teopengco
,
,
0.00
0.00
0.00
3&.58
294.00
0.00
Shertukde
34727.00
0.00
7941.64
0.00
33&25.16
3231.98
Shertukde
12415.00
0.00
6391.86
182.80
5788.31
199.21
6622.00
NIA
200.00
1332.00
0.00
3816.00
19037.00
0.00
6591.86
1514.80
5788.31
4015.21
'"
,
LA Shertukde Total Fer Shertl.lkde L
A Uo
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
129.75
570,44
Liu L A
0.00
0.00
25.62
0.00
112.38
598.13
29307.00
0.00
8677.79
133.73
24071.69
824.13
12751.00
0.00
3599.94
20.00
2650.57
325.00
3515.00
NIA
0.00
43.00
0.00
602.00
16266.00
0.00
3599.94
63.00
2650.57
92.7.00
Dott
Dutt LA Dott
Total for Dutt L A Siliing PrOllider
Rend"rlng Prnllider
Pav menl1i Chuges
Grand Total fer $101467.00 practice
Hi",,,, Charg.... In50ran<;e
", '"
"
0
Insurance
Patient
$62.00 $29009.92 $1823.04 $74104.45 $16538.45
, , , , , ,
,
, ,
m
"
"
,
m
WriteOff$
Patient
,
,
CA
""~
, ,
It Mise
# Pro" t:1t:HfJCS
837
Powered by Medrium
1 ' 4·90 - 54+ 1138,0711.82-53+ 100-00+ Cl02
.https://www.medrium.comlpractice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
1211112007
0018765
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 24 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis June, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Shertukde Dult 2,000.00 2,000.00
Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Total 4,000.00
$
3,168.50
$13,907.02 $ 15,278.84 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 3,168.50 18,732.10 20,103.92 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 7,000.73 17,501.88 17,501.88
32,354.36 9,650.16 42,004.52 100.000% 42,004.49
$
7,000.73
$17,501.88
$ 17,501.88
42,004.49
700.07
1,750.19
1,750.19
4,200.45 0
700.07
1,750.19
1,750.19
4,200.45
6,300.66
15,751.69
15,751.69
37,804,04
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
$
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current
Ending Balance
$
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018766
.1.' U.1U.llV1(W. lJLUU.ll1u,1
J
-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
=z=m
~count 10: XG1486 User 10: jACKK
_ _ I
Al'1'''intmomt§
I aalms I Pati~N"
I ~
FIQand"ls
I
Malnb,manc,e
I e_Reoords
I
C<Jmmunkation C
--0-
-
Page 25 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Cont<'lct I
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I !nsuriltlCe Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitatim, Summary I Patient SlDtements I Custom Re(Xlrts I Run Last Report
Financial SummalY By posting Date PIOandal Summary All Providers Billing
Provider
Rendering Providllr
203.00
David f Jadwin
WriteOlfs
Pavrn.",ts Charges
Ln,.tinn: An l
Period for 05/01/2006- 05/31/1006 Mise Charges Insurance
0.00
Patient
1,964.84
0.00
Insurance
Paticnt
# Mlllc # Proc Charges
5040.16
128.00
0
0.00
Tl!opengco
0.00
0.00
10.33
138.00
704.67
Jadwin LA
425.00
0.00
'},7A:.66
729.00
1361.89
0.00
0
David f' Jadwin
65.00
NIA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
Total For Jadwin L A
490.00
0.00
774.66
729.00
1361.89
0.00
4
0
Ups<;hultt
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
50.61
0.00
-50.61
0.00
Costa
0.00
0.00
153.05
0.00
105.95
0.00
0
0
Shertukde
23922.00
0.00
11209.87
112.00
27404.69
49.00
204
0
Shatukde
11359.00
0.00
8550.05
0.00
11919.70
0.00
9S
0
LA
Shertukde Total For Shertukde L
2633.00
NIA
0.00
232.00
52.04
6g.00
0.00
asso.os
232.00
11971.74
69.00
"
0
139Sl2.00
121
A
U, Dutt
Dutt LA 0",
Total For Dutt L A Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Gnmd Total for practlee
0.00
0.00
0.00
43.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
279'19.33
0.00
9302.56
0.00
22689.27
0.00
0.00
a93a.5'1
38.00
10198.95
0.00
'"
0
1319.00 1149.00
NIA
0.00
453.00
0.00
0.00
8468.00
0.00
8938.54
491.00
10198.95
0_00
Payments Charges
$75024.33
Mise Chargcs IlTsnrilPCC
Patient
WriteOfis Insu.... nce
Patient
$0.00 $40654.51 $1770.00 $79426.71 $246.00
" "
0
"
# Mis" # Pro" Charges
'" Powered by Medrium
003
1 , 66 II· • 81H. 774-66+ 729'00+ 3'168-50*
https:/Iwww.medrium.com/practice101Il_XG1486/Reports/finSummm)'
12/1112007
0018767
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 26 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis July, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
1,621.61 1,621.61 0.000%
$
Total 4,000.00
Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
$ 8,255.13 8,255.13 50.00000% 9,463.74
$ 4,225.65
$
14,102.39 4,825.08 18,927.47 100.000% 18,927.48
$
18,927.48
4,825.08 9,050.73 50.00000% 9,463.74
$ 9,463.74
$ 9,463.74
946.37
946.37
1,892.74
52.50
52.50
105.00
998.87
998.87
1,997.74
8,464.87
8,464.87
16,929.74
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credenlialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current
Ending Balance
$
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018768
.r UUllllilill
0UllUU<:u y
~
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 =r"
~countID: XG1486 User!D: JACKK _ _ I
Appolotmeo13
I ClaimS"
I
p"tleols
I
I
Fioiloclills I
Maintenance
D~ysheQt I DaY$heet Summary I In5ur~oce Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial summary I Capitatiorl Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
I ..·Records
I
Communlc:al:ion c..nter
-0- -
-- -
Page 27 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
I procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date financial Summary All pnwillers Billing Provider
!tendering Provider
David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava Loc Ten Tot'll F
Period for 06/01/Z006- 06/30/Z006 Payments
ChargeS"
MiS"c Charges InS"urance
Locat,on: All Locations
Writeofts
Patlellt
Insurance
Patient
# Mise #Proc Charges
491.00
0.00
1004.81
89.00
723.22
74B.92
10216.00
"IA
70.11
0.00
932.89
0.00
"
10707.00
0.00
1074.92
89.00
1656.11
748.92
" 0
0
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
167.00
0.00
-167.00
226.00
Jadwin LA
0.00
0.00
355.80
162.00
514.20
0.00
0
0.00
"IA
0.00
0.00
0.00
664.00
0
5751.50
"IA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
" "
0
0
0
David f Jadwin Vivek Bhllrgava LocTen Toml For JlIdwln L A
5751.50
0.00
365.80
162.00
514.20
664.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
117.84
0.00
-117.84
259.00
Lipschultz
0.00
MO
8.38
0.00
-8.38
0.00
0
0
LA 0.00
0.00
165.70
0.00
-165.70
0.00
Shertukdl!
371377.50
0.00
3553.21
49.00
13035.29
683.66
30.~
SheltuKde
11303.00
0.00
4980.52
200.00
5426.79
611.130
"
1818.00
"IA
0.00
268.00
0.00
1160.00
13121.00
0.00
4980.52
468.00
5426.79
1771.80
Costa
LA Shert.1Jkde Toml For ShertuKde L
"
117
0
A U,
Dott Dutt LA
D,. Toml For OUtt L A SlUinll Provider
Renderinll P"lVider
Grand Total for pra~tke
0.00
0.00
215.78
18.75
-215.78
49.00
1889650
0.00
2934.88
--'10.00
14435.98
278.00
8301.50
MO
5190.25
105.00
6985.75
6.25
3154.00
'IA
0.00
65.00
0.00
1528.00
11455.50
0.00
5190.25
170.00
6985.75
1534.25
Mille Charges
IOllurance
PaV'Ili'",ts Char!les
$97609.00
WriteOlts
Patient
InsuranCe
Patient
$0.00 $18774.1.8 $916.75 $41379.42 $6214.63
0
'" "
76
0
C04
0
0
'# Mise '# PrDe Charges
811
POWl!red by Medrium
0-* 1 '004-81+ 89·00+ 365 - 80'162-00+ OO~L
l ' 62'1 -6'1'"
https://wwwmedrium.com/I
12/11/2007
0018769
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ",.~.
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 28 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis August, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
Dult Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
331.29 331.29 0.000%
$
$ 6,773.75 6,773.75 50.00000% 7,663.73
$ 3,397.34
$
4,825.08 8,222.42 50.00000% 7,663.73
10,502.38 $ 4,825.08 15,327.46 100.000% 15,327.46
$ 7,663.73
$ 7,663.73
766.37
766.37
1,532.74
210.00
140.00
350.00
976.37
906.37
1,882.74
6,687.36
6,757.36
13,444.72
$
15,327.46
Medruim Total
1,162.73 1,162.73
16,490.19
$ 1,162.73
16,490.19
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Nel Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018770
J:lIOanClW
~ulllImuy
--0-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
#
«f
~count lD: XG1486 UserlD: JACKK I
Appalntm
I Claim. I Pati!!f1t:s
I • Finandals I
Malnten'lI'loe
I e-Recortls I
- -- -
Page 29 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communkation Cent",r
Day$heet I Daysheet Summary I InsuranCe Summary 1 Patient Aging 1 lnsuranc" Alling I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Finandal Summary I Capimtio'l Summary I Patler
Financial Summary By Posting Date Rnand,,1 Summary All Provld"rs Billln!! Provider
Rend..rin!! Provider
David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava l.oc Tom Toml For DaVid F JadwIn Jadwin LA DavId F JadwIn Vivek Bhargava LocTen Total For jadwIn LA Teopenge.o
PaymentB Charges
Location, All Locations
Period for 07/01/2006- 07/31/2006
Mhl: Chug"" Ins"ra"""
WriteOfls
Patient
I"'illra"~ll
Pdieltt
#Pro~
#MiBc Charge"
0
0.00
0.00
115.44
20.00
1629.20
422.00
0
16140.50
N/A
669.45
0.00
6016.94
0.00
110
16140.50
0.00
784.89
20.00
7646.14
422.00
110
0.00
0.00
195.85
0.00
116.15
462.00
0
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
214.00
0
10511.17
N/A
423.28
0.00
412.22
0.00
"
0
10511.17
0.00
619.1:3
0.00
528.37
676.00
73
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
494.13
0.00
0
CA
Upschult>:
0.00
0.00
0.00
70.00
0.00
0.00
0
Shertukde
13289.67
0.00
3263.22
+92.37
7530.04
183.43
no
Shertukda
5421.00
0.00
4713.61
0.00
5413.39
25.00
"
0
LA
997.00
NfA
0.00
337.96
0.00
2471.01
6418.00
0.00
4713.61
337.96
5413.39
2496.01
52
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
0
0
25311.11
0.00
2593.92
0.00
9239.56
1064.00
'41
0
65.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tolal For Dutt
25376.11
0.00
2593.92
0.00
92.39.56
1064.00
Dutt LA
13078.50
0.00
4104.83
10.00
4126.17
0.00
322.8.00
'!A
0.00
65.00
0.00
2108.00
200.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16506.50
0.00
4104.83
75.00
'1126.17
2108.00
Shertukde Total For Shertllkde L
A UO Dott Vlvek Bhargava Loc. Ten
Dott Vivek 8hargava Loe. Ten Total For Dutt L A Billing Pruvid
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for pradice
Payments Charges
$88241.95
Misc Charges !nsurilnl:e
PatIent
0
Patient
$0.00 $16079.60 $410.59 $34977.60 $7087.44
~;<
0
'4Z
0
0,,*
m
" W
Writ... ou~ Insurance
U"
#
Pro~
0
11 5 ·L~{~+ 20 -00+ 1 95-85+
0 # M~c ct'ilrglls
0'03
,<0
33'1 . 29",
Poworecl by Medrll
https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 0111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018771
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 30 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis September, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin
Dut! Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subt01al Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
256.14 256.14 0.000%
$
$ 5,853.94 $ 5,853.94 50.00000% 5,762.32
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
589.48 $ 4,825.08 5,414.56 50.00000% 5,762.32
$ 5,762.32 $ 5,762.32 $
6,699.56 $ 4,825.08 11,524.64 100.000% 11,524.64 11,524.64
Medruim Total
2,370.37 2,370.37
13,895.01
$ 2,370.37
13,895.01
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
576.23
576.23
1,152.46
576.23
576.23
1,152.46
5,186.09
5,186.09
10,372.18
$ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation
12/11/2007
0018772
.t'lnanCHl1 ;:'Uffiluary
~-o-----
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~<;
Main12n""~e
Filed 12/01/2008
m I e_ReCQrds
r
Page 31 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communkatilln Cent.
Daysheet I DaysheetSummary I Insurance Summary I patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjl.lsbnenl:s I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Rep<>rt
Financial Summary By Posting Date Finanoi.1 Summary All Provide",; Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
David F JadWin Vivek Bhargavil Lac Ten Total For David F Jadwin Jadwin LA Vivek Bhargavl; loc Ten
Payments Charges
loc.tlon: AIll.
Period for OS{1l1!2006- OS{31{ZOO6
Mi.c Charges Insurance
Writ
#
Patient
tnslIranCtl
Patknt
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
393.00
0.00
0
3372.00
"fA
705.57
0.00
2289.38
0.00
22
337Z.00
0.00
705.57
25.00
2682.38
0.00
22
0.00
0.00
116.14
115.00
108.86
0.011
0
"fA
1639.80
0.00
2038.87
0.00
0
0
374.00
0.00
1755.94
115.00
2147.73
0.00
20985.00
0.00
2057.79
0.00
15525.62-
0.00
Shertl.lkde
12804.50
0.00
3211.21
68.56
3113.49
0.00
LA Shertukde Total for ShertLlkde LA Liu LA Dott
Vivek Bhargllva Loc Ten
'" "
4424.00
"fA
52.00
25.00
0.00
200.00
36
0.00
3263.21
93.56
3113.49
200.00
121
0
0.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
17817.88
0.00
2250.92
69.00
9581.41
0.00
CO,
0
0.00
"fA
0.00
0.00
65.00
0.00
0
0
17817.88
0.00
1.250.92
69.00
9645.41
0.00
CO,
DllttLA
10660.00
0.00
3157.41
80.00
4181.38
0.00
5151.00
"fA
50.61
2<16.00
152.39
0.00
"
15811.00
0.00
:;1208.02
326.00
4333.77
0.00
Total For DuttL A Billing Provider
Rendering provider
Grand Total for practice
0
17228.50
Total For Dutt
Dott
0
374.00
Shertukcle
Total For Jadwin L A
Mis~
# Proc Charg".
PaYlnanl8 CIJarg~s
$75538.38
Misc Char!!a" Insurance
Patient
"
m
WriteOfis Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $13266.45 $628.56 $37449.40 $200.00
# Misc # Proc Cl,arges
'"
0
Powarnct by Medrillm
25'00+ 116'1if+ 115-00+ 003 256-1 If'"
https://www.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486lR.eports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018773
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
·
-
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 32 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis October, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees
Dull
Jadwin
Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total
$
30.00
$
30.00
$
30.00
9,186.33
$
9,186.33
$
9,186.33
$
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
4,158.44 4,825.08 8,983.52
$
8,983.52
$
13,374.77 4,825.08 18,199.85
$
18,199.85
$
Medruim Total
2,951.80 2,951.80
21,151.65
2,951.80
$21,151.65
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
3.00
918.63
898.35
1,819.99
3.00
918.63
898.35
1,819.99
27.00
8,267.70
8,085.17
16,379.86
$
$
2,000.00
$
2,000.00
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/1112007
0018774
J:<manC131
~ummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countID: _ _ _ I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
I Log out I Help I Contact 1
XG1486 User 10: JACKK
J\4>polnrtnents
J Claims
I
Page 33 of 189
P"~,,nl5
r, financial.. I
Malnb!nante
1 a-R<:<artls
I
Communloatlon Genter
Day,heet I Dayshaet Summ~ry I Insurante Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustrnants I Procedure Summ
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing
Provider
Rende.ring Provider
P"dod
r"r
Wrlte.Off.
Payments Charges
Lc,,,tion: AUl..
(I9/01/20ll6- 09j30/200fi
Mise Charges Inllnrance
Patient
Insurance
'# Mise
Patient
# Proc Charllll,.
0.00
0.00
0.00
.30.00
SOLDO
273.78
0.00
"fA
206.71
0.00
1455.09
0.00
Total For David F JadwIn
0.00
0.00
206.71
:!D.OO
1956.09
273.78
0
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.76.00
0.00
0
JadWin LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
203.80
David F Jadwin
0.00
"fA
0.00
0.00
0.00
676.00
Viv"k Bhargllva l.oc Ten
0.00
"fA
2545.09
0.00
3348.91
804.00
Total For JadWin LA
0.00
0.00
2545.09
0.00
3348.91
168).80
Lip5chultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
Shertukde
12.477.34
0.00
3836.74
0.00
8172.09
202.64
H7
Shartukde
7775.50
0.00
4659.68
116.00
7499.60
1261.50
6712..00
"fA
67.10
344.99
110.53
2905.75
144ll'7.50
0.00
4726.78
460.99
7610.13
4167.25
" "
U,
1573.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
UU LA
1687.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
834.67
"fA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
DaVid F JadWin
Vlvek Bhargava Loc Ten
0
0 0
0
0
LA
LA Shertllkde Total For Shemtkde L
0
0
130
A
Lill
Total For Liu L A Cott DuttLA Oott Vivek Bhargava Loc Ten
Total For D\.Itt L A Bimug Provid..r
Reudering Provider
Grand Tot
practlce
u
0
2521.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
!la86A4
0.00
2261.56
0.00
9889.25
8.52
113
4224.00
0.00
5338.77
10.00
7930.71
959.00
1545.00
"fA
0.00
1535.01
262..00
2623.00
"fA
200.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
" "
0
0.00
5769.00
0.00
5538.77
1545.01
8200.71
3582.00
49
0
# Proc
# Misc Cllnge"
Paymeobi ChMges $50714.95
Mise Charge",
IU80"'nc"
Patient
"
0
WriteOffs Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $19115.65 $2.036.00 $39453.18 $10042..99
434
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comJpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018775
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 34 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis November, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total
$
62.00
$
5,814.13
1,895.94 4,825.08 6,721.02
5,814.13
$ 6,721.02
$
6.20
581.41
672.10
1,259.72
6.20
581.41
672.10
1,259.72
55.80
5,232.72
6,048.92
11,337.43
$
62.00
$
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
62.00
$
5,814.13
$
7,772.07 4,825.08 12,597.15
$
12,597.15
$
Medruim Total
295.42 295.42
12,892.57
295.42
$12,892.57
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
2,000.00
$
2,000.00
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation
12/1112007
0018776
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Pal,
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 35 of 189
Account 10: XG1486 User ID: JACKK
Appointments
Claims
~ Finandals
Patients
I
Maintenance
,A t,1 Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary )al Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run last Report financial Summary By Posting Date
...
Financial Summary AU Providers
Billing Provider
location: All Locations
PerIod for 10/01/2006- 10/31/2006 Payments
WriteOffs
# Mise Charges
Rendering
Provider
Vlvek
Charges
MlscCharges
6760.00
0.00
0.00
N/A
Bhargava lee
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Prot
0.00
196,.00
0.00
42
0
0.00
564.29
0.00
0
0
0.00
Ten
Total For David F Jadwin
6760.00
0.00
131.54
0.00
760.29
0.00
42
0
Ja:dwin L A
6999.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
48
0
1440.00
N/A
0.00
llllIl!iIIlI
0.00
-62.00
12
0
0.00
N/A
i~
.~'"
10.12
0,00
0
0
8439.50
0.00
25.88
200.00
10.12
-62.00
60
0
Sh~!it.lilkEle
15558.84
0,00
'11242;'1'4
0.00
9622.59
276.00
131
0
Shertukde L
10366.00
0.00
4'363.13
SO~'OO
6068.12
0.00
74
0
David F
Jadwin Vivek
Bhargava Loc Ten Total For JadwIn LA
'
A Shertukde Total For Shertukde LA
8908,00
N/A
0.00
' H165?75
0.00
65,50
74
0
19274.00
0,00
4363.13
1115,75
6068.12
65.50
148
0 0
Liu
p<JJt Dutt L A Outt Total For Dutt L A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
528.00
0.00
0
9872,50
0,00
\j;f7c4'f;1$ll
~tiSWO
10410.87
0.00
82
0
13513.50
0.00
ttr:M'
4665.20
0.00
100
0
7190.00
N/A
0.00
20703.50
0.00
3531.31
'3831'811' <>
!600nlG. ,. 610.00
Payments Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
$80608,34
MIse Charges
$0.00
Insurance
Patient
$11035.82
$1856.75
/
0.00
62.00
53
0
4665.20
62,00
153
0
WriteOffs Insurance
$32265.19
Patient
$341.50
# Mise Charges
# Proe
616
0
0< ~ 51
c\~>
https://www.medrium.comlpraclicel01/IJ(G1486/Reports/finSummary
Powered by Medrium
11/6/2006
0018777
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 36 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1Guarantee Fee Analysis December, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin
Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total
$
$
807.07
$ 2,493.64
807.07
2,493.64
807.07
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
$ 4,081.15 $
7,381.86
4,081.15
7,381.86
$ 2,493.64 $ 4,081.15 $
7,381.86
$
$
Medruim Total
723.60 723.60
8,105.46
723.60
$ 8,105.46
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Pnor Credentialing Cost Future - to% TotalOH
80.71 50.61
249.36
408.12
738.19 50.61
131.32
249.36
408.12
788.80
Net Available(Current Mo.)
675.75
2,244.28
3,673.03
6,593.06
$ 2,000.00 $
4,000.00
Ending Balance
$
$ 2,000.00
KMc Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/1112007
0018778
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 37 of 189
~
Account ID; XG1486 User ID; JACKK
Appointments
~ Financ;lars
Patients
Claims
I
Maintenance
I
e-Records
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments 1 Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary j Patient Statements I Custom Reports 1 Run Last Report
"Financial Summary By Posting Date Finandal Summary All PrOViders
Location: All Locations
Period for 11/01/2006 11/30/2006 w
Payments
BIlUng Provider
WriteOffs
# Mise Charges
Rendering
Provider
I~.
Charges
Mise Charges
Insurance
Insurance
Patient
# Prot:
4707.68
130.46
22
1
0,00
0.00
0.00
IS
0
20.66
274.56
4707.68
130.46
37
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
19.66
0
0
0.00
~.
0.00
20.00
69
0
2805.00
NfA
~
21
0
49.00
NfA
13066.50
0,00
-
0.00
0.00
~ ~
2435.00
85.56
2693.00
NfA
0.00
5128.00
85,56
Teopengco
0.00
Jadwin l A
10212.50
V)vek Bhargavo Loc
Patient
Tt:ih
Total For David F Jadwin
David F Jadwin Vivek Bhargava Lac
0.00
714.75
0,00
185.70
49.00
411.90
172.25
185.70
783.75
91
0
0.00
0.00
0,00
49.00
0.00
0
0
10683.00
0.00
't24S72'5
259(00
10370.61
988.63
96
0
6820.00
0.00
'24145'9U
",,);69,,'0('1
3173,17
1436.00
46
0
Ten Total For JadwIn l A Costa
:..Sh'ertlJkd.e Shertukde LA Shertukde
Total For Shertukde L A
U, UU LA
"'A?,ill:J1!;e'
n,tt Total For Dutt L A
~
2887.00
NfA
0.00
<299;'99
0.00
3318.51
20
0
9707.00
0.00
2445.90
130.99
3173.17
4754.51
66
0
0.00
436.14
0.00
2
0
0.00
1238.56
0.00
0
0
8398.24
287.40
49
0
1511.72
1204.00
20
1
3046.99
23
0
4250,99
43
1
203.00
0.00
~&
0.00
0.00
5582,00
0.00
2373.50
15,50
2943.00
NfA
0.00
~"~,~'6~}.'
0.00
5316.50
15.50
1258.68
514.31
1511.72
d¥4'l
"''''69'B~
i:,\2$WQ:lif,'
';!,i'~&'6i3 ' "'!<;1'(J8i'8'6
e
'
Payments Billing Provider
Rendering Provider Grand Total for practice
0
Charges
$49686.00
Mise Charges
$101.06
Insuri'lnce
WriteOffs Insurance
PatIent
$30[1"'''' R")
'l:'l1?1'i·4(l
Patient
$6729.35 $1376.11
# Proe
'84
# Mise Charges
>
20·6fi+ 27l>"56+
339-00+ 172-25+ 807-07*
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/4/2006
0018779
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 38 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis January, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Shertukde
Dull
Mid level Fees
Total
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
1,319.39 $ 4,726.12 0 6,566.00 1,319.39 11,292.12
$
6,929.68 5,047.77 11,977.45
$
1,319.39
$ 11,292.12
$ 11,977.45
$
131.94
1,129.21
1,197.75
2,458.90
131.94
1,129.21
1,197.75
2,458.90
1,187.45
10,162.91
10,779.70
22,130.06
12,975.19 11,613.77 24,588.96
$
24,588.96
$
289.20
$13,264.39 $11,613.77 24,878.16
289.20
$24,878.16
289.20
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 1211112007
0018780
.... ·.l.l.lUJ.l"'laJ, U'.UUl1.i.
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~countlD;XG1486 User lD: jACKl< ~ I Appnlntments ! Clalm~ I Patients
I
Finandals I
f
MaIntenance
I
Filed 12/01/2008
,,"Records
I
Communloatkln Genter
Page 39 of 189
==
I Lag Out I Help! Contact I
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summ~ry I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Stctements I Custom RepOrts I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Finanoial Summary All Providers BiIIi,,!! Prllvider
Rende.in!! Provider
Dallid F Jadwin Vivek Bhargava LQC Ten Total For David F jadwin Jadwin LA David F Jadwin
Payments Chugeg
Location' All
Peri<>d for 12/01/2006· 12/31/2006
# Mise Patient # Proc Charges
Hisc Ctn'l1Ies
Insurance
Patient
In"urance
163.00
0.00
163.23
70.00
1278.76
0.00
0.00
N/A
289.20
G.OO
31S1.80
0.00
163.00
0.00
452.43
70.00
4430.56
0.00
0.00
0,00
1018.66
0.00
2398.84
0.00
0
0.00
N/A
67.50
0.00
7.50
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
1086.16
0.00
240634
0.00
Shertukde
1768.84
0.00
3142.77
0.00
8740.59
0.00
SheJt\Jkde
0.00
0.00
3325.55
0.00
5137.45
0.00
Total for Jadwin LA
LA Shertukde Total for Sher1:llkde L A
D" DUt! LA
loC2tion~
WrireOff>;
,
0
4
0
0 22
0 0
0.00
'/A
135.36
326.00
154.64
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
3460.91
326.00
52.92.09
0.00
0
340.00
0.00
1086.85
0.00
6599.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
3490.27
0.00
6994.19
0.00
4
0
D""
0.00
NfA
0.00
149.00
0.00
0.00
0
Total For Dutt L A
0.00
0.00
3490.27
149.00
6994.19
0.00
0
Mise Charges
Insurance
8illillg Provider
Rt.
Grand Total for practice
Payment!l Charg""
$2271.84
Patient
WriteOffs Insurance
-$0.00 $12719.39 $545.00 $34463.71
# Mise Patient # Proc Charges
$0.00
30
PowElred by Medrlum
163-23+ 70-00+ '0'1866+ 67 50+ 004 1'3<19-39*
https:llwww.rnedriurn.comlpractice10111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018781
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 40 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis February, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Dult
Total
Shertukde
Mid level Fees
Medruim Total
175.00 175.00
$10,176.83 $ 1,898.03 12,074.86
175.00
$12,074.86
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
4,008.90 1,093.03 5,101.93
$
5,101.93
$
10,001.83 1,898.03 11,899.86
$
11,899.86
$
3,512.42 $ 2,480.51 489.2 315.80 4,001.62 2,796.31
$
4,001.62
$ 2,796.31
$
400.16
279.63
510.19
1,189.99
400.16
279.63
510.19
1,189.99
3,601.46
2,516.68
4,591.74
10,709.87
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current
Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 12/11/2007
0018782
- -0- -
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~count!D: _ _ I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
I
ClaIms
1
Page 41 of 189 I Log Olit I Help I Contact!
XG1486 User!D: JACKK
Ap~olntmenl:s
-- -
r ~
Pali.mw
Financial9 j
Maintenanc",
I
,,-Records
I
C
Oaysheot 1 Daysoeet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary 1 capitation Summary I Patient srntements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Pr4llljders Bming Provider
Paymelll/l
Rendering
Provider
Charges
Location: All Locations
Period far 01/01/2007_ 01/31/2007
WrileOffs
Mlse Charge" InsDJilnce
Patient
Iosurance
Pati<ml
#MiGc # Proc Charge"
0.00
0.00
194,17
0.00
842..71
15.57
,
"1283.00
NfA
126.80
0.00
214.20
0,00
27
,
4283.00
0.00
320.97
0.00
1056.91
15".57
27
,
0.00
0.00
3318.25
0.00
7331.37
0.00
,
,
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
671.00
0
200.00
N/'
0.00
0.00
0.00
755.00
,
Total For Jadwlfl LA
200.00
0.00
3318.25
0.00
7331.37
1426.00
Silertukde
922.50
0.00
657.90
0.00
3834.69
39.82
Silertukde
0.00
0.00
2965.00
75.00
5256.00
819.00
David F Jadwin Vivak BhargaVil
loe Ten Total For David F Jadwin Jadwin L A David F J"'dwin Vivak Shargava Loc Ten
CA
Shertukde
0.00
N/A
27.00
284.00
35.00
6101.00
Total For Sherlllkde L A
0.00
0.00
2992.00
359.00
5291.00
6920.00
2125.00
0.00
'18.20
0.00
89.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
276.00
115.00
0.00
713.97
0.00
3239.32
1'19.20
0.00
0.00
1'108.21
20.00
2893.81
741.'15
0.00
NfA
10.33
328.00
39.67
3583.00
0.00
0.00
1'118.5'1
3'18.00
2933.'18
'132'1.'15
Uu
LluLA Dott
DuttLA Dott
Total For Dlitt L A Billing Provide.
Rendering Provider
Grand Toml for practle!!
Payltlents Charges $7645.50
Mi"e Charg"" Ing'm"lce $0.00
Patiant
,
, , ,
", , , ,
Wr~teOff"
Insurance
Patic!lt
$9'159.83 $707.00 $23776.57 $13151.0'1
,
, , , , , ,
, 0
,
# Mise # Proe Charye"
51
powered by Medrilim
0°* 194-'17+ 3'318'25·'
002
https://www.medrium.com/practice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018783
l' lIUlllCHU
y
~UllHmU
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~'O
1
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
=zm
TLl487Us.,rlD: JACKK
Appointmellts
I Claims
I
Page 42 of 189
Pa~"nts
J I Finndals I
Malntenanoe
I
"·Re~otds !
Communication Center
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Daysheet I Oeysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient AQin~ !Insuranc.. A~lng I AdjlJstm"nts I Proc",dlJre Summary Financial Summilry I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom REports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary BV Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider
Rendering Provld"r
Period for 01{01/2007·01/31/20117 PayRlents
Charges
LQOltion: All Locations WriteOffs
#His<: Hi"c Charll"" Insunmcc Patlent Insurance Pati"ml # Proe Ch ... rg"s
PhJlip Dill;!;
60453.00
0.00
315.80
0.00
453.60
0.00
<S,
S ..vltil
75160.00
0.00
1093.03
0.00
3409.97
0.00
541
18359.00
0.00
489.20
0.00
1228.80
0.00
141
Sh"rtukde David F Jadwin Billing Provider
R.endering ProvIder
Gl1lnd Total for practice
Paym,,,,ts
Charges $lS3972.00
WriteOffs
# Mise MIse Charges Insuran"e Patillnt Insurance Patient 11 Proe ellargas
$0.00
$189B.03
$0.00
$5092.37
$0.00
1132
,
P"oWf!N!d by Me.:hium
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01I1_lL1487/Reports/finSummary
12/ll/2007
0018784
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 43 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis March, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees Mid level Jadwin
Dutt
Shertukde
Fees
Total
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
735.23 $ 72.21 118.31 1,178.02 853.54 1,250.23
853.54
$ 1,425.91
$
1,426.34 2,852.25
$ 1,250.23 $ 2,852.25 $
2,233.35 2,722.67 4,956.02
$
4,956.02
$
180.11
$ 2,413.46 $ 2,722.67
180.11
5,136.13
180.11
$ 5,136.13
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund
85.35 186.52
125.02
285.23
495.60 186.52
Current
Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
271.87
125.02
285.23
682.12
Net Available(Current Mo.)
581.67
1,125.21
2,567.02
4,273.90
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
12111/2007
0018785
L'11li1l1vli1l 0UllUIUUY
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countID:XG1486 _
I
Appointments
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
" . , . . I Log Out I Help I Contact I
UserID; JACKK
J
Claims
I
Page 44 of 189
Patients
I . Financials I
Malnlena"""
!
,,·Records
Ct>mmunlcatIDn C"nter
I
I
Daysh"Bt I OayshBBt Summary Ilm;urance Summary I Patient Aging 1InsuranCe Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Ananeial Summary I Capi!:
Financial SummalY By Posting Date Financial Summary All Provlflers Billing Provider
Re.ndering Provider
oavld F Jadwin Jadwin LA Vivek Bhargavll Loe Too
Location: All locations
Period for 02/01{2001- 02/28/2001
WrlteOlfs
Pavmenr
Mise Charge" Insurance
# Mise Patient ImiUranc" Patient #Proc Charges
0.00
0.00
686.7.1
0.00
1907.87
0.00
0.00
0.00
48.5"2.
0.00
85.48
0.00
0
0.00
NfA
32..50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
81.02
0.00
85.48
Upschultz
200.00
77.50
0.00
77.50
0.00
0_00
Upschult<:
400.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
,
shertukde
1409.34
0.00
1312.96
0.00
2.93132
0.00
15
0
Shertukde LA
C.CO
C.CC
112.95
0.00
79.C5
0.00
0
0
Totsl For JadWin LA
cA
O.CO
0.00
70.11
0.00
129.69
0.00
0
446.50
0.00
496.2.1
0.00
105S.55
0.00
4
0.00
0.00
-454.00
0.00
-25.00
0.00
0
0
Do.
0.00
NfA
0.00
30.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
Total For Dutt L A
0.00
0.00
-454.00
30.00
-2.5.00
0.00
0
0
Uo
Dott
DuttLA
8lUing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand TCltlll for pr,,-ctke
Payments ChaTllea
$2.455.64
Mise Chuges Iusurance
$77.50
P~tlent
$2305.96 $107.50
WrlteOffa
# Miac Insur"nce Patil!nt #- Proc C!larges
$6164.16
$0.00
" Powared by Medrium
686''71+
002
https:llwww.medrium.comJpractice10111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
48· 52+
12/1112007
0018786
r 1l1
y
~Ulll1lla.l
-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 8'
~cuuntID: TL1487 UserID: JACf<:K _ _ I
Appoll'ltments
I
ail;mS
I
P>o!ianls-
I . Financlal'" I
Millnll!rl
!
,,_Ril.(on!s
-0-
-
--
Page 45 of 189 I log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
I
Daysh.""t I Daysh.""-t Summary I lnstira"c,,- Summary I Patient Aging 1 r"suranc" Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Fin
Financial Summary By Posting Date Finan~lal Summary
Bining Pr"vider
All Pmviders
RenderIng Pmvider
PaymenlB Charye",
Looation: AlIl<>cations
Period for 02/01/2007- 02/28/2007
WriteOUs
MIse Charges Insurance Patient Insurance Patient
Phlllp Dutt
3471.00
0.00
1176.02
0.00
1140.10
0.00
5avlt!l Shertukdll
162'18.00
0.00
1426.34
0.00
2710.37
0.00
12405.00
0.00
'rIF.'J'1'
",,",0
219.69
0.00
David F Jl'Idwin BillIng Provider
Rendering Provider
Gr.;m
Payn,ents
Charges
$32124.00
WriteOff"
# Mise # Proc charges
"
'"
0
"
# Mise MIse Charge.. Insurance PatIent Ins"rance Patient # Proc Charges
$0.00
$2722.67
$0.00
$4070.16
$0.00
>S,
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01/1_1L1487IReportslfinSummary
12/11/2007
0018787
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 46 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis April, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees Mid level Jadwin
Dull
Sheriukde
Fees
Total
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL 1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
395.45 $ 1366.91 1,762.36
1,762.36
732.34 423.36 1,155.70
$ 1,300.50 2,744.55 4,045.05
$ 1,155.70 $ 4,045.05 $
2,428.29 4,534.82 6,963.11
$
6,963.11
$
836.98
$ 3,265.27 $ 4,534.82
836.98
7,800.09
836.98
$ 7,800.09
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH
176.24
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
115.57
404.51
696.31
1,000.00
2,000.00
3,000.00
176.24
1,115.57
2,404.51
3,696.31
1,586.12
40.13
1,640.54
3,266.80
$
$
$
Check paid to G. E. Pathology Medical Group,
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
12111/2007
0018788
.t'luanCIW
"UII1~m:uy
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~ c o u n tID: XG1486 UserlD' JACKK ~ I Appointments- I Claims I Pa~ent:t l ' Financial.. I Mab,renanea
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 47 of 189
'"?"" I
a-Records
Communication Center
I
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Oaysheet I Oaysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Dlpltation Summary I Patient Stotements I Custom Reports I Run Last Reoort
Financial Summary By Posting Date Fin"ncl"ISumma.ry All Providers Sillin!;! Prollider
Rendering Provider
Period for 03/01/2007- 03/31/2007
Charge"
Mise Chaty". In"IlTance
0.00
David F Jadwin
0.00
Loc"tion" All Location"
WriteOn,.
Payment. Patient
Insllran<;e
0.00
0.00
2A5
Patient
# Mise # PtOC Clta rges
262.00
0
3646.50
0.00
393.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
,.
David F Jadwin
0.00
N'A
0.00
0.00
0.00
203.00
0
Viyek Elhargava Lot Ten
0.00
N'A
377.98
0.00
238.02
98.00
0
,.
Jadwin LA
Total For Jadwin LA
3646.50
0.00
770.98
0.00
238.02
301.00
Upschul~
0.00
0.00
0.00
259.00
0.00
0.00
Upschula CA
0.00
0.00
200.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Shartukde
138.00
0.00
387.52
138.00
1564.99
57.79
Shertukde LA
10985.67
0.00
749.98
0.00
30.02
405.54
"
Shartukde Total For Shertukde l A D" DuttL A
'"" Totlll For DlIt±LA Rilling Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Tornl for practice
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0.00
N'A
0.00
25.00
0.00
2703.00
0
10986.67
0.00
74<;.98
25.00
30.02
3108.S4
0.00
0.00
266·:P
0.00
1211.87
47.86
"
1873.00
0.00
431.07
35.00
725.43
·114.00
19
0
0.00
NtA
I}.CO
0.00
0.00
2759.00
0
0
1873.00
0.00
431.07
35.00
725.43
.2645.00
19
Payments Char!] ....
$16644.17
Mise
C,,~t!l"~
$0.00
Insurance
WriteOtfs
Patient Insurnncc
$2808.27 $457.00
Patient
$3770.33 $6422.19
0
0-* 0
# Hi5C # Prall Charges
1J1
2-45+ 393 - 00" 002 395-/}5*
Powered by Me!
https:l/www.medrium.comlpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018789
.!-. l!UU1\.Jl(U ':>U1UUJ.Ul Y
, Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
IC>.Mt
~tOuntID: TL1487 UserlD: JACI<J( _ _ I
Aj>poln!ments
I Claims
I
Page 48 of 189
P3tlent!;
I. Financ1"t,.1
Malnllmance
I
e-Records
I
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communkatlon C..ntar
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance SummarY I Patient Aging I 1I1surance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Firtartclal Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Pr
Re"dering Provid,"
Philip Dutt
Savlta
P",kld for 03/01/2007- 03/31/2007
Payments
CI,arge,..
Location: All Location ..
WrlteOIl,.
# Mi,.c Mise Cllarg .." Insuranee Patient Ins ....,,,,ce Patient # Proc ellarge.
10.00
0.00
42336
0.00
62.45.59
0.00
3575.00
0.00
2744.55
0.00
ZOa52.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
'1"366:91
0.00
8372.09
0.00
30
0
Shettukd.. D2Ivld F Jadwin
Bming PrBvld"r
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Paym"nts Charge,.
$3586.00
Mise Chargell Insurance Patient
$0.00
$4534.82
0
WriteOffs Jnsu"~IlC
$0.00 $35470.04
# Mi,.c PaUent #Proe eltargu
$0.00
31
0
Powered by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.comJpractice10 1/1 ~1L1487/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018790
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 49 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis MaY,2oo7 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Shertukde
Dutt
Total
Mid level
Medruim
Fees
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
132.77 $
465.94 $
604.01
1,202.72 $
95.80 $ 1,298.52
132.77
352.72 818.66
68.29 672.30
421.01 1,623.73
95.80
132.77 $
818.66 $
672.30 $
1,623.73 $
95.80 $ 1,719.53
Medrium TL1487
Subtotal Special Total
$
$
421.01 1,719.53
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentiafing Cost Future ~ 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
13.28
81.87
67.23
162.37
13.28
81.87
67.23
162.37
119.49
736.79
605.07
1,461.36
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018791
rlIUUlliHU >'JUUUIHUY
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~c(luntJD:XG1486 UserID: _ _ 1
Appointments
I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 It'
JACKK
Claims
I
Palleob
! ~
Financial" I
Maln""nan,"
I
,,·Recome
I
Page 50 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Cent<>r
Daysheet I DaV5he."t Summary I Jnsurance Summary I Patient Aging I lnsurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient S!
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers BilHng Provider
Renderi,,!! Provider
Period For 04/01{2007- 04/:30{2007
.-
Patient
088_11
0.00
70.11
0.00
Payment/l
Cbarges
Mise Clla rges Insurance
David F Jadwin
0.00
Jadwin L A
0.00
0.00
Upschultz L
0.00
0.00
0.00
Location: Alllocati
0.00
'IF Misc Insurance Patient 'IF Proc Charges
0.00
0
0
~16.11
0.00
0
0
129.89
0.00
0
111.Z4
A Costa LA Shertukde
Shertukde L
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.69
0.00
0.00
0
0
10005.00
0.00
207.50
0_00
460.74
0.00
76
0
25.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10030.00
0.00
207.50
0.00
460.74
0.00
7861.00
0.00
346.51
50.00
544.49
0.00
0
A Total For Sherhlkde Shert\.lkde L
A
U, D", Dutt LA
0", To!
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
"
"
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
65.00
0.00
0
2208.00
0.00
223.94
0.00
230.Z0
0.00
17
464.00
0.00
77.00
0.00
106.00
0.00
,
0
0.00
NfA
0.00
165.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
464.00
0.00
77.00
165.00
106.00
0.00
PaYI"ents Charlles
$20563.00
Mise ChargM Insurance
$0.00
Patient
$1057.83 $240.69
,
WrlteOfls
# Mise Ilrsuranee Patient #Proe CII.rges
$1631.45
$0.00
'" Powered by Medrium
o~*
4t;·66+
002
88·11+ 13 2.°77'"-,.
https://www.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
1211112007
0018792
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 51 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee (Guarantee Fee Analysis
June, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
out!
Jadwin
Shertukde
Medruim
Mid level Fees
Total
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
597.87 $
Medrium TL1487 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal
597.87
827.50 $ 3,666.85
5,092.22
484.37
232.62
716.99
169.60 1,481.47
817.09 4,716.56
986.69 6,795.90
$
25.00
$ 5,117.22 $
716.99
$ 25.00
986.69 6,820.90
25.00
$ 6,820.90
Special
Total
$
597.87
$ 1,481.47 $ 4,716.56 $
6,795.90
$
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future-10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
59.79
148.15
471.66
679.59
59.79
148.15
471.66
679.59
538.08
1,333.32
4,244.90
6,116.31
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018793
rU1t1Ill;H1:1.:JUlllJUi1lY
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
~"Oll~tlD: XG1486 User lD: ]ACKK ~ I
Appalnbnent<:
I CI,"ms
I
Page 52 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Patients
I. Fu,andds I
M.nnmnance
Daysheet J Dayshe
I
I
....Rec:ords
I
Gommunkatlon CEnter
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Frnandal Summary All ProYiders Bitting Provider
Rendering Provider
David F Jadwln JadWin LA Upschullz L
payments Charg""
Location: All
Period for 05/01/2001- 05/31/2001
Mise Charge.. Insorance
WrlteOfl"
Patient
Insurance
Patjent
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
39"1-.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
59,Up
0.00
3023.63
0.00
138.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 ~o.oo
tocation~
# Mise #Proc Ch'''g"s
0
A 0.00
](1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Shertukde
21968.17
0_00
227.74
0.00
301.31
0.00
Shertukde L
34669.17
0.00
3439.11
0.00
6172.89
138.00
25'
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
0_00
0.00
0
5000.50
0.00
228_53
0.00
326,44
0.00
"
Costa LA
A Liu LA
0", Dutt LA
138.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total For Oult
5138.50
0.00
228.53
0.00
326.44
0.00
Dutt LA
4803.00
0.00
273.97
0.00
1782.03
0.00
"ott Tolal For Dutt L A
aillil,g P,ovider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practlee
'"
"
0.00
NlA
0.00
325.00
0.00
0.00
0
4803.00
0.00
27:3.97
325.00
1182.03
0.00
41
P~tient
# Proc
$4767.22 $350.00 $12000.30 $168.00
'"
PaYlnenlll Charges $66716.8"1-
Mise Charges Insurance
$30.00
Pallent
WrlleOffs InShanCe
0
41
#M;,;"
Charges
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comlpractice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018794
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 53 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis July,2oo7 Distribution
Professional Fees
Jadwin
Dutt
Shertukde
Total
(111.54)
3,=.35
16,701.65
19,812.47
Mid level
Medruim
Fees
Total
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 1211112007
0018795
r
Hl(Ull.iliU
Y
~UIlllHCU
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~cou~tlO: XG1486 User lD: lACKK _ I A4'l'olntments I Claims I Patients I. Financials J Mainbimanee Daysh"et I Da~sheat Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Agino I Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Raports I Run Last Report
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 54 of 189
_ _ I Log Ollt I Help I Contact I
I e_Reeon:ls
I Procedure
I
CormnunkatJon Cent<.r
I
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date !'Inanelal Summary All Provid..." Billing Provid.. r
Rendering Pr""id"r
P"ym.mts Charges
0.00
David F Jadwin
Location: All Locations
Period for 06/01{2007- 06{30{2007
Mise ChaTge.
Insurance
0.00
0.00
WTit"Offs
Patient
lnfiun"l':"
Patient
123.93
0.00
# Mise # Proc Charges
123.93
Shertukde
1160.67
0.00
7052.16
0.00
170B5.23
0.00
1Z
0
Shertukde L
5264.00
0.00
1309.04
0.00
1S65.63
0.00
"
0
A 0.00
NfA
20B.63
0.00
143.37
74.00
0
5264.00
0.00
1517.67
0.00
1709.00
74.00
C"
0.00
0.00
71.13
0.00
2.87
0.00
"
Liu LA
0.00
NfA
150,42
0.00
270.25
0.00
0
1646.00
0.00
1556.31
0.00
3292.75
0.00
1Z
0.00
0.00
46.22
0.00
51.78
138.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
6&.99
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
46.22
66.99
51.78
138.00
Shertukde
Total For Shertukde L A
D".
""
DlIttLA
0"" Total ForOl,lttLA Billing Prnvider
Payments
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
$8070.67
Mise Charges Insllranca
$0.00 $10393.91
WriteOlfs
Patient Insurance
,-
55.94
Patient
$22535.81 $212.00
0
0
0 0
0
0
# Mise #Proc ebarg"s
" Powered by Medrlllm
https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018796
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 55 of 189
· __I
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis August, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Dutt
Jadwin
Shertukde
Total
Mid level Fees- KMC
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month
Mednum XG1466
$
Medrium TL1487
167.70 $ 1,426.81
$14,430.34
16,046.85 $
60.60
$16,107.45
50.00
635.34
3,969.53
4,674.87
$ 4,674.87
237.70
2,064.15
462.00 16,881.87
462.00 21,183.72
60.60
21,163.72 $
60.60 $21,244.32
Correcting Error from
July Subtotal Special Total
$
237.70 $ 2,064.15
$ 16,661.67 $
$ 462.00 21,244.32
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovel) Credentialing Cost Future ~ 10%
23.77
206.42
1,888.19
2,118.37
111.56
TotalOH
6.06
2,124.43
111.56
111.56
135.33
206.42
1,888.19
2,229.93
6.06
2,235.99
102.37
1,857.73
16,993.68
18,953.79
54.54
19,008.33
Net Avaiiable(Current
Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 12/1112007
0018797
r
111C1l1!,..ilt:ll ,,",UHUIULl
Y
--Q-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~oountID: XG1485 User 10: JACKK ~ I Appointments I daims I Patients I ' Fh,andal., I Maintenance
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 56 of 189
=rm ! I
I
e-Rl!co"b
CommunIcation Center
Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
DaysheetJ Daysheet Summary) In5urante Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I ClIpitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date l'1nandal Summary All Previders BlUing prOl/lder
Rend"ring Provider
WriteOIf:l
Paytll .. ,,~
Misc Char!!",.
In5urance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
0.00
187.70
0.00
187.70
2274.36
0.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
4612.00
0.00
Total For David F ladwin
0.00
187.70
0.00
187.70
6886.36
0.00
Jadwin L A
David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava Lac Tefl
Charges
locatinn: All Locations
Perl"d for 07/01/2007- 07/31/2007
#Misc # Proe Charge.,
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.5.00
0.00
0
David F Jadwin
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
0
Total For Jadwin LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.5.00
138.00
0
Upschultz
0.00
0.00
48.20
0.00
89.80
0.00
0
0
CA ,~~
0_00
12.40
0.00
12.40
0.00
0.00
0
Shertukd"
0.00
0.00
1464.13
0.00
22.456.2.5
0.00
0
Shertukd" LA
0.00
0.00
12.901.21
0.00
25621.99
0.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
65.00
886.00
262..00
Tornl For 5hertukde L A
0.00
0.00
12.901.21
65.00
26507.99
262.00
D".
0.00
0.00
294.36
25.00
14836.66
0.00
0
0
DllttlA
0.00
0.00
10S9AS
0.00
2152.16
0.00
0
0
0.00
NfA
0.00
50.00
0.00
130.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
1059.45
50.00
2.152.16
130.00
0
Sh"rtukde
D". Tow) For DuttLA Billing Pmvider
R.endllrinlJ Pravld"r
Grand Torn! for practice
P"ymllnra Cltargll!l $0.00
Mille Cltargll5
0 0
WriteOf/., Patient
# Proc
$200.10 $15767.35 $340.10 $72.954.22. $530.00
0
Jnsu .... n~e
Pillient
Jnsur~nce
0 #Hi~~
CIt~fgOS
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comfpractice101/1_XG1486/ReportsffinSummary
12/11/2007
0018798
r
UU1l1IJli11 L')UlllHldl Y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~count 10: _ _ J
TLl487
AfJp~lntm"nbl
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 1t5-
Us~rlD: JACKK ) ClaIms
I
Patients
1~
Financial.. I
Maln!!!nanc!!
I
e-Rccorrls
1
Page 57 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
camm,mi,a~(ln Center
Daysh""t [ Daysheet Summary I Insurance SUmmMY I Patjent Aging I lnsurance Aglllg [ Adjustmertts I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitatlort Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date F",anci.1 Summary All Prc>viders Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Location' All l..cJcatic>ns
Period for 07/01/2007" 07/31/2007
WdtllOns
Pavme"ts ChillllllS
Mise; charge" Insurance Piltient Insnran",e
# Mise Patient # Proe Cbarges
Philip Dutt
0.00
0.00
635.34
0.00
8535.66
0.00
0
0
savita ShQrtukrle
0.00
0.00
3969.53
0.00
48660.87
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
--SOAlO
0.00
0.00
0.00
Patient '" Proc
# Mise Cbarge"
David F Jadwin Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practicE!
Payn",uts Charges
$0.00
Mise Cbarges Insurance Palient
$0.00
$4574.137
WriteOfis Illsurance
$0.00 $5719653
$0.00
0
Powered by Medrium
https:!/www.medrium.comJpracticc10111_TL1487/Rcports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018799
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 58 of 189
KMC Pathology Associatl!s Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis September,2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Shertukde
Dutt
Total
Medruim
Mid level Fees - KMC
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
$
Medrium TL1487 Correcting Error from July Subtotal
734.83 $ 2,989.74
3,724.57 $
66.96
$ 3,791.53
73.92
188.00
261.92
808.75
3,177.74
3,986.49
66.96
4,053.45
3,986.49 $
66.96
$ 4,053.45
$
261.92
$
Special
Total
$
$
808.75 $ 3,177.74 $
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
80.88
317.77
398.65
6.70
405.35
80.88
317.77
398.65
6.70
405.35
727.87
2,859.97
3,587.84
60.26
3,648.10
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018800
J.' lUQ.llVJ.CLl lJu.J.ll111(U. J
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
==
_~ountID:_ XG1486 User lD: JACKK _ _ _ I
Ap~crntments
I
claims
I
p"tien!>;
l ' Fin"n"'al,. I
Maintenance
I
,,_Records
Communication Genter
I
Page 59 of 189 I Loti Out I Help I Contact [
I
Daysheet I Daysh"et Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging [Insurance Aging I Adjustments [ Procedur.. summary Financial Summary [ capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom RepOrts I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Sumrrory All Pr(lv(d"rs Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Mise
Cllarg,,~
ln~uran«:
Patient InSQr311Ce
Patient
Coo~
0.00
66.96
0.00
66.96
0.00
0.00
Sh"rtukde
0.00
0.00
212.72
8.52
552.64
0.00
276.00
0.00
2669.58
98.92
4575.92
0.00
Si'lertukde L
Locatlun~
WriteOfis
PaymelllS Charge~
location: AU
Period lor 08/01/2007- 081'31/2007
# Pruc
it Misc Charges
0
A Shertukde Tohll For Shertukde L A
D" Dl.lttLA Total For Dutt Dut\: LA
D"" Total For Dutt LA
ailii""
Provld
Renderin!! Pmvid.. r
Grand Total for practice
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
276.00
0.00
2669.5"6
98.92
4575.92
138.00
0.00
0.00
44.74
33.10
0_00
0.00
0.00
N/A
30.70
0.00
99.63
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
75.44
33.10
99.63
0.00
D D
0
0.00
0.00
551.29
0.00
960.71
0.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
75.00
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
551.29
75.00
960.71
0.00
D
Patl"nt
#Pruc
$6188.90 $138.00
2
Payments Charges
$27&.00
Millc Charges Insurance
$66.96
pnll\nr
$3509.03 $2:82..50
Writeolfs Insurance
0
D
#
Mis~
Charges
powered by Medrlum
https:llwww.medrium.com/practice101l1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018801
r
UU11ll,,;liU
Y
~Ull1lU(U
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG MED TUM.
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Ift~&lI1lLIUL£o,,~O~",-L ~lH~'~l''-.l:lC2'~'~"~",-IL
count 10: TL1487 User 10: JAcKK
I
Appointment:!;
I
Claims
Page 60 of 189
I PatJ""ts
l'
Fin~nci~[s 1
Malntenanef!
I ,,-Records
I
Communk:atlon Center
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary 1 Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adju51:ments I Procedure Summary F1I1andal Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Stiltements 1 custom Reports I Run last Report
Financial Summary By PostIng Date financial Summary All Provid"rs Bllting provid"r
Rendering Provid"r
Location: All Locations
Pe60d for 08/01/2001- OB/31/2001 payments
Charge"
Wrtt"Offs
#- Misc Mise Charges Insurance Patient Insurallce Patient # Proc Chargee
Phillp Dutt
0.00
0.00
73.92
O.OD
0.00
0.00
savlti'l Shertukde
D.OO
0.00
lB8.00
0.00
276.00
0.00
Billing Provider
Payments
Rendering Provid~r
Grand Total for practlce
Charges
$0.00
"
"
WriteOfls
#Mwc MIse Charg"" Insnrance Patient Insurance patjent #- Proc Charges
$0.00
$261.92
$0.00
$276.00
$0.00
" Pow<'.red by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.com/practice10 111_TL 1487lReports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018802
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 61 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis
October, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees Mid level Jadwin
Dull
Shertukde
Total
59.95
88.50
148.45
Medruim Total
Fees- KMC
Beginning Balance
Collections for Month Medrium XG14B6 $ Medrium TL1487
$
148.45
$
Correcting Error from July
$
Subtotal
59.95
88.50
148.45
59.95 $
8850 $
148.45 $
148.45
Special
Tota!
$
$
$
148.45
Less·
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future ~ 10%
6.00
8.85
14.85
14.85
TotalOH
6.00
8.85
14.85
14.85
53.95
79.65
133.60
133.60
Net Available{Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018803
.rlnanCHll
~Umiintly
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
«5
~ c o u n t1D: XG1486 UserlD: JACKK
-*'"
I
Appointments
I
aairn~
I
Filed 12/01/2008
Patiel'll:>
I . Flnaneial,,1
Maintenance
I
I
Page 62 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
CommWllcatla" Center
Daysheet I DaysheetSummary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging t Insurancli! Aging I Adjuslments I PI"ocedure Summary Fmancial Summary I Capit
Financial Summary By Posting Date Rnandal Swmmar'l All Providers BlUing Provider
Rendering Provider
Paymenl/> Chargee
Wril"Offs
Mis.: Charg.... lllellrallee Patient Insurance
David f Jadwin
0.00
0.00
Teopengco
0.00
Jadwin LA
0.00 Vivek Bharg"va LocTen
Location: All locations
Period for 09/01/2007· 09/30/2007
Palle"t
# "'is., # Pro" Chuge..
0.00
0.00
489.63
662..38
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
62.0.04
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0_00
168.00
0
0.00
NtA
0.00
0.00
0.00
338.00
0
Total For Jadwin L A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
506.00
Teopengto LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
0 0
0
0
C<>,~
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1070.00
Shertukde
0.00
0.00
88.50
0.00
383.54
162.6.51
Shertukr!e LA
932.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
Shertllkde
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
585.00
0
Total For ShertlJkde LA
932..00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
585.00
10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
74.00
1252.2.5
O~O
0.00
2..28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NfA
7.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
9.95
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
U,
Octt DuttLA Total fer Dult
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
518.00
O,tt
0.00
NfA
0.00
50.00
0.00
1443.00
Tornl For Dult L A
0.00
0.00
D.OO
50.0D
0.00
1961.00
Dutt LA
Billing
Relldll
Provider
Provider
Grand Total for practice
Paymllllts
Charge"
$932.00
$98.45 $50.00
"
Patient
$1085.17 $8303.18
0 0
0
0
0
Writ"Olfs
Mise Charge" [nsnrance Patient IlIsnran.,e
$0.00
0
# Proc
"
# Mise Charge"
0
Pow£!red by Medrium
https:l/www.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018804
r l11i:Ull..ili:U ...,UIIUUaLY
_I
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countlD:TLi4117 AppoIntments
Document 278-2
UserrD: )ACKK
I Claims
I
Pall'mll;
~
I
FinaneJals I
MalnlBnance
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Agtng I Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
1
Filed 12/01/2008
e-~nrds
et I
Page 63 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
I Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Flnam:i~1
Bittin\l Provider Billing Prl>"ider
Summary AU Providers
Rendering Prl>"ider n.end"rlng Prollider
Grand Total for prBctlce
Payments ella ryes
Mise Chorges
Insu",n<:"
Patient
Payments Charg"" $0.00
location: All Locationg
Period for 09/01./2007- 09/30/2007
Wrireoffs Insuran<:e
patieut
# Prl>c
'" Mise Char\les
# Pruc
# M;"c Charges
Writ"Offs
M;s<:Charges
Insurance
Patl"nr
Ins"rance
Patient
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
o
Powered by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.comlpractice101/1_TL1487/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018805
rlnanClaJ. "ummilly
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
_ _ I Log
~cnuntlO'TL14S7 Us~r!D: JII.CKK _
I
App"lntments
I
Oalms
I
Page 64 of 189
Patjenlli
I > Financial.. I
MaJnlI!nance
Daysh"et I Daysheet Summary I Insurance summary I Patient Aging I Insuranc!!! Aging I Adjustments Fmandal Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient StEltements \ Custom Reports I Run Last Report
I
I
e·Rec"rtI.
I
Commul"llcatlon CenlI!r
Cut
I Help I o.mtact I
I
Procedure Summary
Financlal Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary ,1\11 Prll"idern Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
S"Vita Shertukde.
David F JadWin Billing Provider
R/;'lodering Provider
Grand Total for prllctlce.
Location: All Locations
Perjod fo' 10/01/2007- 10/31/2007
WriteOffs
Payments
Charges
# Mise Mis" Charges wSUl1lnee Patient Insurance P"tillnt # Proc Charge"
0.00
0.00
71'1.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
39.00
0.00
Paymeuts
Charges
$0.00
124.40
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
0
0
WriteOff.
#Mlsc Mise Charges IOSlIf"""e Patient Insurance Patient # Pro" Charge..
$0.00
$117.6-0
$0.00
$124.40
$0.00
0
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.com/practice1 0111_TL1487/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018806
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 65 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee (Guarantee Fee Analysis November,2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Total
Shertukde
Dull
Mid level Fees-KMC
Medruim
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
75.00
188.00
Medrium TL1487
39.00
Medrium ZQ 1486 Subtotal
39.00
13.42 8M2
39-00 $
8M2 $ 2,096.01
263m $
103.50 $
366.SO
$
117.60
78.60
117.60
1,829-41 2,096.01
1,842.83 2,223-43
103.50
2,223-43 $
103.50 $ 2,326.93
$ 1,842.83 2,326.93
Special
Total
$
$
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future-10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
3.90
8.84
209.60
=.34
10.35
232.69
3.90
8.84
209.60
=.34
10.35
232-69
35.10
79.58
1,886-41
2,001.09
93.15
2,094-24
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
12111/2007
0018807
l'manClal
~ummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 ==r'
~COlJntID: XG14S6 User ID: lACKK _
I
Appointments
I Claims
I
Pallents
I
t
Hnanda!" I
Maintenance
I
e-Record.
Communication Center
I
Page 66 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
1
D~Ysheet 1 OilvsheetSummary I lnsur/lnce Summary I PatJ.,ntAging (Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary finandal Summary I CapitBtlon Summary I Piltiertt S\>Itements I Custom Reports. I Run last ReDort
Financial Summary Bv Posting Date Rnancial summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Period for 10/01/2007.10/31/2007
Provider
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
Location: All locatio""
WrlteOlfs
Payme.ntll
Rendering
Patient
Ins-nunc!!
# Mise
Patient
Shllrtukde
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
338.00
20.66
Shertukde L
0.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
0.00
200.00
'#
Pro" Charges
0
0
A
Shertukde
Total For Sherwkde LA UtlLA
",
D,tt DllttLA Billing Provider
D"" Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
0.00
NfA
0.00
138.00
0.00
138.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
lS8.00
0.00
]]13.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
103.50
0.00
34.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ZOO.Oo
0.00
0.00
N/A
0.00
75.00
0.00
0.00
Pnyn,enls Charges
$0.00
Hise Charges Insurance
$0.00
Patient
$0.00 $]66.50
WriteOffs
0 0 0
0
P;ollent
# Hilic #Proc Charges
$538.00 $J,)3.16
0
Insurance
Powered by Medrll.lm
https:l/www.medrium.com/practice10l/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018808
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 67 of 189
FACULTY PRACTICE PLAN
PROFESSIONAL FEE DISTRIBUTION NOTICE Physician:
Name
Dr. Jadwin
FOR MONTH:
Date
December. 2005
Distribution Date:
Date
01/17/06
Month Medrium
Professional Fees
·IYear To Date
$ 3,668.63
$
I
3,668.63
-
· Total Fees Group Fee Distribution Other Fees/Awards
Less: Billing Fees
$ 3,668.63
Group Overhead
3,668.63
_ _---'-01 _ _---'-01
10% Medrium
Total Fees
$
$
..J ..J
366.86
366.86
.
· ·
366.86
$
0%1'--_ _--''--
366.86
_
Deduction - Other
0018809
page I or I
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 68 of 189
~q; I Leg 0.."
F;"... "c;~I" I
Maintl!nance
I
e·RM;"nls
I
Cnmmtlni<"tion Center
i Hell-' : (ol·,tact I
I
Daysntoet 1 O"y~h",et SU",,,,My, Iln~ma"ce S"mIT,al'\' [ PatIent Aqinq I In.manee Aqinq I Adjustment, I ~rccedu'E S",nmaf'.' Financ,al Sumrnar~' 1 Capitati"" Summa,\' I Patient Stat~f"""15 I C"$(om RelX)(t~, R.." La,l R"oort
0"
'j
C·
3f:. 00.-
;)'/)"/0
63 75·-
https://www.medrium.com/practice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018810
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 69 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: November. 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 12-20-05
I
November
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Fees [==-~.~5,~18':43r=j'1If.2.691~
10% Billing Service 1% Administrative Assessment
[=:=~:~i5_~4~~±C-~~11,126.~1] L __
_.._
•• _
_ ..L
-..·..--·_.._.. ._--_·!..
Compensation I
$4,903.591
••
_•.•._ _.
-'
_---_·_--~
$100,142.401
!_.""'"""__,,_.._"""_"._,._ _,"",,_ _""_ _._,
._~
__l
'·_"-·~-"-~···_····'-'-"r-"-"·---"-""-l
Balancel....._".
$0.00 ' _ __.1.._._
_.
$0.00 ._I
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018811
Page 1 of 1
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Fin"nd"l.< I
Mainbmilnce
I
Filed 12/01/2008
"-Re<,,n:l~
r
Page 70 of 189
CLlmmunkiltion Center
D'l\"sh",,,t I Dilysheet Surmna,'y I I"",,,-a,",,,, S""lmar \' I Patient Aqinq I 111~",'ance AQ"lG ; Adlllstl'n~"ts I Pro({,rlurl> Summar'. F"'anctal Sltlnmary [ C<'!I"tatlo" S\I""n
Financial Summary By Posting Date Penod f',r 1l!Ol/2005-11!JO!2005
F1Mnoiili $umnlMY All p,.""ide,.s
iWling Pco"id",
Pily",,,nts
Rende,i,,!!
Pr""ide,
David F
Mise eha tq~s !n''''i1hc",
Charge"
LGc."U<m'
Pillie"l
Ins",.""..
Pilti",,1
265&.92
135.05
0.00
430.97
78.00
1064.37
0.00
0.00
1788.13
24.50
316-4.37
32;92
O~Q)0'OO
0.00
11513.00
0.00
Toopengw
0.00
Jadwln LA
J3Z4.QO
David F )"dwln
465.00
N/A
Total for Jadwin LA
11.11 Locill;ons
Writ"O/ls
0.00
8022.31
'It
;: Mise !'roc Ch.'g""
m
0
Jadwin 0
"
37B9.00
0.00
17BB.13
99.50
3164.37
32.92
Upsc:hultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
44.00
40.00
0.00
"0
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
259.00
0.00
0
0
COSt4 L A
0.00
0.00
48.20
0.00
628.60
0.00
0
0
C~~
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
~S94.00
0.00
Shertukde
33630.96
0.00
10879.49
384.97
30959.26
13B.OO
,2<
0
Shertukde
12867.00
0.00
3025.22
304.00
1453.61
0.00
120
0
" '"
0
LA
LA Shertukde Total For Shl!rbJkde L A Liu
Do. Dutt LA
Do. Tot!ll For Outt l A Billing I'r
2351.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
15224.00
0.00
3025.n
304.00
1453.61
0.00
0.00
140.00
73.41
140.00
161.76
0.00
25435.00
0.00
5732.57
44.50
1497'J.20
0.00
'63
8916.00
0.00
3B13.44
28.00
2914.88
0.00
"
1022.00
N/A
22.56
133.00
''<4
44.00
9938.00
0.00
3836.00
161.00
2917_32
"'4.00
Payments
a,,"dui n9 Prol/ider
Grand Total for practice
Chu"es
Hisc
$99529.96
c:hor~es
lnsu
Paliellt
WriteOfls Insur~"ee
Patient
$140.00 $28470.91 $1391.02 $63095.60 $214.92
0
0
l2
'" '# Pree
0
" Mise Ch.,ges
1001
o·
c..pi""lioII s . . . .uy For AJI P..."Id..... Provider
Capit:"ion Payme'lls
David JadWin
Average # P.. lient"
806.44
Dal/ld Jadw)n
'37.39 Totals
4
$843.83
35 '( 0 ':.'
O~ .') .. ,
Powered by Medrium
005
\--
~."
https:l/www.medrium.comJpracticel 01/1_XG1486/ReportslfinSurnmary
12/11/2007
0018812
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 71 of 189
.KERN - , : MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: OCTOBER, 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 11-22-05
I Year-To-Date I
October
.···.·.-.··..
10% Billing Service IL_.
1% Administrative Assessment L. __
.
-.----~---
. --____:;_;l
...$~2.~J.~L_J~10,5§.~J.2J *_*•...._
*.._*._
_L._ _
_••• _.!
;-...- -......----,·-·..- ------1
Compensation L_._ ~. ~~~.~_~:~~1 __ ~.~~~?~~:~.1.J
.-..__.._._.
Balance!1
,__,
__._
..
~ _
$0.00 ,.
..
_-----~
,_,".,.
$0.00. _i
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018813
Page 1 of 1
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 72 of 189
Communkation Center O"v.h"et i [)~YSh~"t Su,nrna' Y I 1;\5,"aIK~ S'''llrnar, I PMient Aqinq I ;1't$u,"",,1(C Aqif\Q I AdlU5\,nent~ I Vroc
FinantiBI Summary By Posting DlIte Finan
Billi,,!! Provider
Rend"ring Provid",
David F
All Providers
Per;nd for 10/01/2005. lO/31/201J5 W"leOlls
Paymenl s
ChoHges
'/:. Pmc
Mise Cbarges
Insllr"nCOl
Patient
6068.00
0.00
'2721.19
178.89
16711.88
173.50
29&.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
29£ rel="nofollow">.00
o
0.00
", D
o o
ladwin Jadwin L A
0.00
N/A
'\1.J2
0.00
0.00
0.00
63£><1.00
0.00
2767..51
178.89
17007.88
173.50
Teopengto
0.00
0.00
143.02
10.00
-564.25
0.00
Jadwin LA
;<693_00
0.00
na.70
50.00
1054.33
0.00
63.3<1
49.00
136.66
0.00
Outt L A Toml For D3Vld F Jadwin
David F
1:11.00
If Misc Ch",ges
o
" o
o
"
o
"
o o
JadwiO
2904.00
0.00
342.0<1
99.00
1190.99
0.00
0.00
0.00
3<1.67
10.00
371.33
0.00
Upschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
-166.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9.18
0.00
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
5.17
0.00
157.83
0.00
c~~
0.00
0.00
-22'1.12
lJa.OO
106'\.72
0.00
o
o
42820.00
0.00
10396.82
618.59
34642.95
1772.52
'79
o
o.do
0.00
65.00
0.00
Total Fur Jadwin LA
Teopengco
D
CA
o o
LA
Shertukde Shertukde
65.00
LA <12885.00
0.00
10396.82
616.59
34707.95
1772.52
10686.00
0.00
3029.15
130.65
5393.93
0.00
1135.00
N/A
0.00
637.00
0.00
0.00
11621.00
0.00
3029.15
.767.85
5393.93
0.00
no
U,
0.00
0.00
150.12
0.00
1441.14
0.00
WIJ LA
0.00
0.00
999.00
0.00
25.00
25.00
o o
27102.00
0.00
8383.96
0.00
35640.11
0.00
5896.00
0.00
3404.94
0.00
<1456.76
0.00
937.00
N/A
0.00
276.00
65.00
0.00
6833.00
0.00
3404.94
276.00
4523.76
0.00
LA
"
o
"
o o
A
Dott Out!: LA
D,tt Total f
Re"deri"g
Provider
Provider
Grand Total for
practice
'" " "
"
Cha.ge~
:t!
$0.00 $29427.28 $2098.33 $l01169.57 $1605.02
50 C! (j .'. l~.9-uU·
006
D
: ~
o
Proc
Mise Charges
999
0
:J;
$97909.00
2
,eo
Total For Shertukde
Totlll For Shertukde l
iJ • "
o D
Sheltukde
Shertukde
o
50·'
006 i -
Power
..J
https://www.medrium.comlpracticeI01/1_XGI486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018814
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 73 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: SEPTEMBER 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 10-25-05
I
September
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Fees [:::::!fi~~.~i~~[::!iQ~;§'3~.~ 10% Billin9 Service r··········$i·~133:39T-···-$1O'252~941 1.•._ ...._..••_ .. _ ••__•..•. _ ..,••_••.••_.•."•. ••••_ •. ~ 1% Adm inistrative Assessment
L
_ _* *._..
••__.L
**._
_..•_.!
,.._·....·_-_.._··_········..-1"·--·_··.....·_·_--_.._--"
Compensation I..._._
$10,200.47 _ "..__. ._.1__
_$92,276.311 ..__ _ _ ...
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018815
rage
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
1 01 1
Page 74 of 189
~1' [let;) Out I Help I CQl1t,,(t I C
,
I Davsheet S,,,nrniHI' 1 [nsuranu; Surnmar-\' [ Pntle"t Acinq !ln$,,,ance Aqir\<j f Adj<Jstment',; I ""Qc"dure SlIm,niH'Y I capitation 5un"n~' ,. I PC':',,,,,! St".wments I Cu,torn 1:"llcrtS I Run Last "eDort
Flna'\~lal Sum,..",-v
Financial Summary By Posting Date F'na ...,;"1 Summar" All Provid",.,. BiUing
Rende,ing
Provide<
?,ovider
David F
Perl"rl r,,, 09/01/20IJS.09/30/10115
Ch~rgc5
His.: Charges
{n""tOlle.,
All Locations 1:
Pal;"nt
Mise
Patient
" P,oc
1711 l'l.78
86.00
"
302.00
1075.21
0.00
0
0
D.aD
4958.66
~36.00
0.00
10.00
0,00
"
0
0.00
0
0
InsurilllC
88
5867.00
0,00
Teopenaco
0.00
0.00
333.59
Jadwin LA
1276.00
0.00
Teopengco CA
0.00
~~_:9
0.00
JadwIn
L~(.ti~"
WriteOfls
PaVI"ellts
Charge~
Lipschllitz
0.00
0.00
0.00
40.00
194.00
49.00
0
0
Costa L-A
0.00
0.00
26.57
0.00
243.13
0.00
0
0
C~~
0,00
0.00
179.70
27,55
703.34
0.00
0
0
Shertukde
40950.00
0.00
10623.69
290.50
27263.59
0.00
9294.00
0.00
533Z,44
69.00
8537.16
65.00
'"95
0
Shertukde
0
LA 1589.00
NIA
0.00
38.00
0.00
0.00
10883.00
0.00
5332.44
107.00
8537.16
65.00
" '"
0
Liu
0.00
0.00
1090.43
0.00
2807.20
0.00
0
0
Uu LA
0.00
0.00
368.39
0.00
2331.61
0.00
41744.00
0.00
8851.57
0.00
20264.57
0.00
6-5.00
NIA
0.00
0.00
26S.00
0.00
Shertukde Tol2ll For Shertukde L
A
Dott Dutt LA
'"
Tobl For Dutt
'11809.00
0.00
8851.57
0.00
20529.57
0.00
Dutt LA
14188.70
0.00
5405.S7
1.5.00
5998.43
0.00
'" m
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
O.DO
0
"
D~vjd
F
JadWin
O,tt Totill For Dutt L A BiUing-
Rendering
p,,,vitler
P,,,~id,,,
Grand Total lor
practice
~
1517.00
NIA
138.00
1.5.00
0.00
0.00
15705.70
0.00
5543.57
6S.00
5998.43
0.00
Payments Ch",ges $116490.70
Mise
el'''rge~
Insurance
Patient
'"
WrlleOffs Insurance
Pal",n!
$0.00 $431El1.J1 $1319.S5 $92.466.68 $638.00
'#
0 0
Pr"e
;: Mise ehar"es
1093
0
o'l U :;, l~ d ';
Powered
,
c'
;,.. .,
U
!
':' U
~
0 iI 5
r;
()
,',
u0 {~ I I
https:llwww.medrium.com/practicel 0 111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
, ":;
:}
12/11/2007
0018816
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"C
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 75 of 189
IKERN MEDICAL
I CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: August 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 09-27-05 August
I Year-la-Date I
Professional Feesl-- $14,186.9!ir'-$-9-1:195.391
10% Billing Service
L
$1,418.701 _-.:!:.$9~,.:..119.551
1% Administrative Assessment [ .__.~··_ _"""'_IL-_-_-_-.-.--~
c--- '---,-,. - - - - - ,
SalanceLI_ _ $0.001
' $0.00 J
0018817
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 76 of 189
Fit'l~n£';-:>l
t:: Ln
Document 278-2
.11 c
.11 C
E
E
OJ
OJ
0 0
\
N
>ro
Cl.
'"OJ .2
'-
0
'.)
~
0.
J:
~
.E:
'"ro .l!l
"0 01
c
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Page 1 of2
~u _ _ ~_
t\0
>ro
--"g 0 0
Cl. OJ
..-I
.2!
~
:§
OJ OJ
.....
en
.s
0
~
iii
OJ
>ro
...
w
Ij
~
0. ~
0
u..
...
Z
Cl
0
..-I
~
0
OJ
III
to-
Z
-0
~
,
c 0
zw & Ci".
...
-.;1
to::l
-:r
~ ':P 0.
u
c
ro
ro to ~
1
G-
...3
~
~
I
.>L. ~ OJ
'J
.2 01
c
CO
en c
~
t:
CO
*
... ""Si ::.t)
"'"
0° -
0 ('-
.
--.:r \
&
0° ,§ ..9 r-
-5}
rr-!
... ·vv
u.uu
0.00
0.00
60
C'
4350.21
41.80
3206.42
6.00
150
C'
Teopengco LA
0.00
0:00
328.43
35.00
146.77
0.00
0
(I
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
8109.00
0.00
0
(I
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
562.00
0.00
0
(I
Costa LA
0.00
0,00
289.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
(I
Costa
0.00
35.40
127.Q1
35.40
785.99
138.00
0
l.
Shertukde
26308.00
0.00
9463.55
198.02
23843.51
52.45
243
(I
Shertukde LA
8302.00
0.00
4668.04
0.00
6978.87
0.00
97
(I
4107.00
N/A
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
40
(I
12409.00
0.00
4668.04
10.00
6978.87
0.00
137
(}
Total For Shertukde L A
https://www.medrium.com/practicel 0 111_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
<>. ~
.!ll
.~
~ ..r:::
~
U l."-.J
.\1./ 1 '6(".'j '6
""Si
~
a
- IO,Ollt,')lJ
r&
0.00
Shertukde
it;-
~ .'" -
-
17777.00
Total For Jadwin l A
0
I
~
Cl t::
-tl
0
..... ".
-.a
it
.l:l
u
OJ
ro
\
\
0.
...:
.~
\•
0
.2
~ ~ Z
"g
Cl. OJ
!nter
:.0..
---
E
.a
'§
CO
.l'J c
0.
0.
gOut) Help I Contact I
'!!! ,<.J
00 .... 00 00 .... 0
_ I.( J"
~f~d-U'::>'
9/6/2005
Page 2 of2
0.00
Liu
LA
0.00
44.04
112.67
2510.04
516.00
0
0.00
0.00
73.14
0.00
326.86
332.00
0
0
30353.00
0.00
·4940.57
224.18
15251.90
-1.00
293
0
200.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
0
Total For Dutt
30553.00
0.00
4940.57
224.18
15251.90
-1.00
294
0
Dutt L A
10592.00
0.00
4070.74
6874.39
0.00
107
0
15.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
0
4181.00
N/A
73.62
0.00
185.38
0.00
56
0
14788.00
0.00
4144.36
0.00
7059.77
0.00
164
0
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$35.40 $39796.37 $1059.96 $94395.73 $904.45
1185
1
Liu
Dutt Dutt L A
David F
0.00'
Jadwin Dutt Total for Dutt L A Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments
Charges
$124030.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs
Insurance
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
0)
..... 00 00 ..... 0 0
0
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 77 of 189
Finandal Summary
9/612005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 78 of 189
. MEDICAL • CENTER .KERN
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: July 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 08-16-05 July
I Year-To-Date I
- - - . , . . - - - - . -:l
Professional Fees! 10% Billing Service 1% Administrative Assessment
$8,153.701
$77,008.41!
L_.._ . . . $815.3..?J..__._F,70~:.?~
L--.:_--, 1-'"'''--'''''
Compensation I
••
J
,
$7,338.33i
$69,307.561
.
,-----,.---
0 .OO. i BalanceL_._.......o$c::.:
$0.00
I
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018820
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
(;(,/ (\ (
I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 79 of 189
2005
INPATIENT:
8)
IJ3 '70
Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal OUTPATIENT: Total pro fee payments Non-pro fee payments Balance Billing fee (10%) *Billing Clerk
Subtotal Amount Due Physician ., KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018821
Page lof2
N N 00
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 80 of 189
«Xl
.....
~ c o u n tID:
I
XG1486
Appointments
C}iN
User ID: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
1'-
Financials
I
Maintenance
I
e-Records
I
j
Log Out I Help
f
Contact I
Communication Center
Daysheet J Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging j Adjustments! Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I custom Reports
Financial Summary By Posting pate Financial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering Provider
50clw 1f1
Period for 07/01/2005~ 07/31/2005
location: All Locations WriteOffs
Payments
Insurance
;':1 Mise
Patient
# Proe
Charges
10171.25
98
0
14.67
0.00
0
0
0.00
263.90
0.00
0
0
6408.52
40.00
42631.76
10171.25
98
0
0.00
334.74
75.00
4526.90
1909.00
0
0
2537.00
0.00
1870.49
137.44
8615.91
2941.48
26
0
David F Jadwin
2343.00
N!A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
23
0
Total For Jadwin LA
4880.00
0.00
1870.49
137.44
8615.91
2941.48
49
0
Teopengco LA
0.00
0.00
121.94
49.00
2600.12
429.00
0
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
2951.00
0.00
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.00
176.84
0.00
2234.74
918.00
0
0
Shertukde
32772.00
0.00
11236.20
205.00
40931.90
2870.45
302
0
Shertukde LA
17603.00
0.00
2293.26
364.00
8255.24
100.08
151
0
7546.00
N!A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
59
0
25149.00
0.00
2293.26
364.00
8255.24
100.08
210
0
Uu
0.00
0.00
348.65
-75.00
2638.92
2369.00
0
0
Uu LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
39.00
239.52
352.00
0
0
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
12117.00
0.00
6105.77
40.00
42353.19
Dutt
0.00
N!A
10.33
0.00
Dutt LA
0.00
N!A
292.42
12117.00
0.00
Teopengco
0.00
Jadwin LA
Provider
David F
Charges
Jadwin
Total For DavidF Jadwin
Shertukde Total For Shertukde L A
hltPS:!!www.medrium.com/practice I 0 1/1_XG 1486/Reports!finSummary
6'105-77+ 40-00+ 1,870-49+ 137·4 I f+ 8'153'70*
liJil C-.-76+c. I 33,605- 00 + 854-44,34'459-44*
0 " ,,..."' ..... -
o o
Page 81 of 189
Financial Summary
Dutt Dutt LA
Dutt
Total For Dutt LA Billing
Filed 12/01/2008
Provider
Page:,( ot:,(
23195.00
0.00
8751.34
0.00
29954.06
187.00
245
I)
8632.00
0.00
2063.02
0.00
4140.98
0.00
94
'J
4872.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
42
J
13504.00
0.00
2063.02
0.00
4140.98
0.00
136
0
# Proc
# Mise Charges
1040
0
Wl'"iteOffs
Payments Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
$111617.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $33605.00 $854.44 $149721.05 $22247.26
M N 00 00
..-
0 0
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Powered by Medriljm
https:llwww.medrium.com!practicelOl/l_XGI486IReports/finSummary
8/112005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 82 of 189
IKERN
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: June 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 07-19-05
I Year-To-Date I
June Professional Feesl
$10,987.341
__~68,854.?~
10% Billing Service!
$1,098.731 $6,885.481 ----------------"
1% Administrative Assessment Compensation
L__,_*_*_ _
...l-_ _*_*
I
$9,888.611
--' i
$61,969.23!
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018824
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
Dr.
9U1~
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 83 of 189
2005
_-nOall.&ldtv~'t!rl/:<...::::·'----_~ {/
INPATIENT:
10,J 98 7, .3
<j
!() If 8. t' 3
q, 6 68 ,(PI OUTPATIENT'
Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal
/ ' ~ ,tal pro fee payments
____-...,,<:.../Non-pro fee payments
___---,'Z'---_
Balance Billing fee (10%) *BilIing Clerk
/
I Subtotal Amount Due Physician
.. KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018825
Page I of2
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 84 of 189
Financial Summary ~count 10: XG1486 _ _ _ _ I Appointments
IC)i!j'M
User ID:YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
I
~
Financials
I
Maintenance
I
I
e-Records
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary 1- Patient Aging J Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Sunmary
Billing Provider
Location: All Locations
Period for 06/01/2005- 06/30/2005 Payments
Rendering
WriteOffs
# Mise Mise Charges
Insurance
21217.80
0.00
3846.82
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
Jadwin LA
9691.00
Teopengco
Patient
# Proc
Charges
67.09
10219.53
49.00
184
0
562.18
10.00
1759.81
0.00
0
0
0.00
6983.43
90.00
10990.61
0.00
64
I]
0.00
0.00
955.76
76.80
827.24
0.00
a
I)
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-83.76
0.00
0
I)
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0.00
41.88
-19.40
96.12
0.00
a
I)
Costa
0.00
3.06
460.54
-8.10
355.08
0.00
0
:I
Shertukde
32434.00
0.00
9248.36
392.04
23116.17
177.00
279
Il
5hertukde LA
6340.00
0.00
8415.58
99.00
13165.92
0.00
51
Il
Uu
0.00
0.00
743.03
259.00
1503.36
0.00
0
0
Liu LA
0.00
0.00
580.64
0.00
539.36
0.00
0
0
Dutt
40078.44
0.00
2635.36
212.00
5146.00
0.00
375
0
Dutt LA
10054.00
0.00
2577.98
0.00
3652.22
0.00
96
0
518.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
0
10572.00
0.00
2577.98
0.00
3652.22
0.00
98
0
Patient
# Proc
Charge:.
$3.06 $37051.56 $1178.43 $71287.66 $226.00
1051
1
David F
Charges
Patient
Insurance
Provider
Jadwin
3,846-82+ 67'09+ 6'983-43+ 90-00+ 10'987-34."
LA
Dutt Total For Dutt LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments
WriteOffs # Mise
Charges
$120333.24
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
.38) J,;}0.
Insurance
qq
https://www.medrium.com/practice I0 l/I_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
..... o
o
Communication Center
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
CD N CO CO
7/512005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 85 of 189
I KERN fjj!IJMEDICAL mCENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: May 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 06-21-05 May
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Feesl
$18,465.80f
$57!867.3zj
I
J '
=-.....J
CompensationL $16,619.22\
$52,080.62!
1% Administrative Assessment
L !_ _ •• _ _
I
BalanceL..i_---"'$O::..O:::.:O'-'-!_ _
$0.00
I
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018827
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 86 of 189
2005
)1/fU
Dr.
INPATIENT:
18) 4to 5. fj 0 1/)/1 (P,.5 8 ):0 ;,'L),
J'
I (n ,1(;1 : ' ...
i
Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal
OUTPATIENT: .....~,'
"
Total pro fee",payments Non-pr
B
ee payments
nee
- - - - - - " t Billing fee (10%) *BH!ing Clerk
Subtotal
I
/
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physidans pay 50%
0018828
~
AAA~U~~~
.....
~
••••••
-.J
o
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I
User ID: YVONNEN
I,
Claims
1
I.
Patients
Financials
I
Oaysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summar)' ! Patient Statements 1 Custom Reports
Maintenance
e-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
Communication Cer:lter Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Period for 05/01/2005- 05/31/2005 Payments
Location: All Locations WriteOffs # Proe
# Mise Charges
36742.88
187.00
262
1
35.00
2495.77
0.00
12
a
287.00
14295.08
49.00
79
0
0.00
4190.08
0.00
3
0
301.54
40.00
1976.96
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
49.00
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
1033.83
0.00
2268.17
0.00
a
a
0.00
117.18
230.61
117.18
738.42
0.00
0
4
Shertukde
69471.00
0.00
6716.28
134.00
25040.25
0.00
557
0
Shertukde
22414.00
0.00
6718.46
67.80
14182.35
0.00
179
0
66.00
0.00
930.94
25.00
4416.92
0.00
1
0
0.00
0.00
563.11
0.00
1124.89
0.00
0
0
Dutt
23940.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
532.00
0.00
227
0
Dutt LA
10493.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
91
0
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$255.18 $37984.69 $986.12 $108052.77 $236.00
1411
5
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
29501.00
138.00
9775.52
280.14
Teopengco
551.00
0.00
1039.34
Jadwin LA
10544.00
0.00
8123.14
Teopengco
75.00
0.00
2551.92
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
Lipschultz
0.00
Costa LA Costa
David F Jadwin
Insurance
Document 278-2
Patient
Charges
9'775-52+ 280-1 11+ 8'125-1 11+ 287-00+ 18'465-80*
LA
LA
Filed 12/01/2008
LA
Liu liu LA
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for
practice
0 0
.......
00 00
II.)
to
WriteOffs
Payments Charges
$167055.00
Misc Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Page 87 of 189
Billing Provider
37,984-69+ 986-12+ 38,970-81* https://www.medrium.com/practicel 0 1/l_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~ c o u n tID: XG1486 . - - . . . . - I Appointments
6/1/2005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 88 of 189
IKERN - , : MEDICAL I CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: April 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 04-26-2005 April
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Feesl
~
10% Billing Service 1% Administrative Assessment
I _---.:::.::..::.;..:.:..::.L-, $867.751 i
i ** '---
l
$3, 949· 17 j **
J
(-------,-------,
Compensation[
$7,809.73j
BalanceL__._-,$__O_.o_o-,-l.
$35,461.401
$_0.00
I
-"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018830
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
· For posting dates in
~ Dr.
\, )
J
llpn'(
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 89 of 189
2005
'
O.ULUI tlL__----'--_
INPATIENT: Tot
ro fees payments
Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal
OUTPATIENT:
0 671
liB
...e-
Non-pro fee payments
8 te7'T. "'8
)St/r.
Total pro fee payments
74'
Balance Billing fee (10%) *Billing Clerk
~809. 73
Subtotal
1./ 8D9.
Amount Due Physician
13
KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018831
Page I of2
Financial Summary
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary Financial Summary I Capitation
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I flni'lnciills
I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Summary! Patierlt Statements I Custom Reports
I
Maintenance
Aging
I
I Adjustments I
e-Records
I
Communication Center
I
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
Payments
WriteOffs
Insurance
41434.00
0.00
7144.45
Teopengco
2840.00
0.00
2116.78
10.00
Jadwin LA
12408.00
0.00
/815.45
Teopengco LA
1103.00
0.00
Lipschultz
0.00
Lipschultz
...
Patient
Insurance
# Mise
Patient
# ProC Charges
'
David F .,
645.78 " 23260.30
361
0
5248.97
623.48
33
0
71.80
2617.96
657.00
117
0
358.80
88.00
336.13
318.00
19
a
0.00
8.38
1.50
331.39
123.19
0
a
0.00
0.00
4.83
0.00
205.17
10.00
0
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
254.84
0.00
576.16
0.00
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.00
854.82
0.00
1182.54
411.44
a
0
Shertukde
36230.00
0.00
8838.32
412.15
21743.64
2463.21
321
0
Shertukde LA
8435.00
0.00
3664.12
0.00
2461.18
2.00
86
0
Liu
1541.00
0.00
2112.69
0.00
4436.31
1266.11
10
0
552.00
0.00
686.34
0.00
1516.46
147.80
4
0
# PrOC
# Mise Charges
951
0
\..) adwin "."
.. ..." ,~~
~.
\,~<
LA
Liu LA
Payments
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for
o
$104543.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
,0.00 ($26859.82 $1229.23 $63916.21 $11286.00
26,859'82+ 1,229·23+ ,28,089·05,',
o......
Powered
00 00
~
Patient
https:llwww.medrium.comlpracticel 0 I/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
by Medrlum
"
~
,.:~
7' 1 44 - 45+ 645-78+ 815- lf5+ 71-80+ 8'677-48*
,'"
Page 90 of 189
practice
Charges
WriteOffs
Insurance
.......... ..... ..
Filed 12/01/2008
5263.77
Document 278-2
Mise Charges
Charges
Location: All Locations
Period for 04/01/2005- 04/30/2005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countID: XG1486 User ID: YVONNEN _ I Appointments I Claims I Patients I.
5/412005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 91 of 189
• KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: March 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 04-26-2005 ,---"CM:=a.:...:rc:..:;h=--_1 Year-la-Date r-"
I
,---.----,
Professional Feesl_. $9,561.911
$30,724.091 I
10% Billing Service!'--_-"-::c.:...::.=.::.l-_-'-'=.=-=-= $956.20[ $3,072.421 1% Administrative Assessment
L. ,~~.
'::'_
••_._--,I
_--,-_~
I
Balance!'--_--"-=.=::..J $0.00
$0.001 -"-=-'.:::.::..J
·Wole: Payroll Deduction
0018833
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 92 of 189
fI;/ rnieJI
For posting dates in
Dr.
Document 278-2
_-=J-'
_
MEDRIUM INPATIENT:
q, S fa !. qI )
Cj,5(D.
a0
--t!t"
8,, (OoS.
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
'71
Subtotal
MEDRIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee payments
(non-pro fee payments) Balance 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee *Billing Clerk Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018834
.1 Cl~v 1 Ul L
.
~
I
X(1486 Use,. IO: YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims
!
Patients
I
~
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I Financials
I
Daysheet J Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitatio-n Sumlnary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
e-Records
Communication Center
I Adjustments I Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count ID:
Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008
Powered by Medrium
....00
00 W 01
Page 93 of 189
o o
https://www.rnedriurn.comlpracticel ()111_XG 1486/Reports/finSurnrnary
41112005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 94 of 189
IKERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: February 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 03-15-05 February
10% Billing Service
I
I Year-lo-Date I
_.$1,413.321
~$2.!.!J..~}21
1% Administrative Assessment l-"---;;*---j-'---;;~l
,--------CompensationL. $12,719.901 Balance!---·----sO.OO I' i..-.--•• ._ _
,
$19,045.961
--- $0:00 1 .,_:...-1 ...
.__
"Nole: Payroll Deduction
0018836
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
(Wfa oi1.(
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 95 of 189
2004
Dr.
EDRIUM INPATIENT: Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
_ _ _ _ _ _'- Subtotal
MEDRIUM OUTPATIENT:
IIf) /3:.3. Ol~ Total prof fee payments
o 1'1)
/3.3.
I.,
z//j.
/61/, '//
(non-pro fee payments) ,?,;),
3~
q. 90
Balance 10% billing fee
-1% administrative fee *Billing Clerk
/01; 7/9· .if 0' /(4. 7;Q. qo I
Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018837
--0-----
_
I
10: XG1486 User ID; YVONNEN
ADDointme~ts
I
Claims
I
Patients
~
!
k>28 Financials
I
Maintenance
Ie-Records
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
Daysheet ! Daysheet Summary! Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments 1 Procedure Summary Financial Summary r Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers; Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Period for 02/01/200S- 02/28/2005 Payments
Location: All Locations WriteOffs
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
23875.00
0.00
11419.66
28.38
27497.37
124.00
227
a
Teopengco
8601.00
0.00
1419.83
10.00
3735.05
49.00
95
Jadwin LA
7314.00
0.00
2235.52
449.66
4457.58
-138.00
72
a a
Teopencgo
2980.00
0.00
316.73
-0.06
205.97
0.00
36
a
Lipschultz
O.C'O
0.00
224.00
0.00
672;91
0.00
a
a
Lipschultz L
O.W
0.00
36.74
0.00
213.08
0.00
0
0
O.CO
0.00
1436.16
0.00
2347.64
0.00
a
0
587.CO
0.00
2435.58
29.04
5029.47
0.00
5
a
32393.CO
0.00
5207.81
302.48
12638.29
250.00
284
a
Shertukde L A
9450.00
0.00
2261.46
0.00
5130.67
0.00
85
a
Uu
6993.00
0.00
3702.46
0.00
8276.73
0.00
57
0
Liu LA
2469.00
0.00
349.81
25.00
1198.99
0.00
20
a
Patient
# Proc
# Misc Charges
$0.00 $31045.76 $844.50 $71403.75 $285.00
881
0
David F Jadwin
11'419-66+ 28-38+ 2'235-52+ 449'66+ 14'133'22*+
Document 278-2
Mise Charges
Charges!
LA
A Costa La
Costa
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
o .....
Charges
$94662.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Page 96 of 189
o
WriteOffs
Payments
Filed 12/01/2008
Shertukde
31'045'76+ B44'50+ 31,B<}0'26*+
00
00 W 00
https://www.medrium.comlpractice J 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count
3/1/2005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 97 of 189
.KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: January 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 02-15-05 January Professional Feesl..
I Year-To-Date I
$7,028.961
10% Billing Service
i
1% Administrative Assessment
I
__ __.-
$7,028.961 .
_-----~--_.
---'1-----' $702.90\
-_:":"'::::':'::":..1.
__ $7_02_.9QJ
••
••
1 - - - -1 ~ Compensation I $6,326.0~.L __$6,32~.0~J Balance!,
$0.00
I
1
$0.00 i
""Nole: Payroll Deduction
0018839
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 98 of 189
---- 11 11M \I ,)Q I
Dr. _ _'--",-/:1,,-"-0d=W-'-'-.i1lC---
_
MEDRIUM INPATIENT: ,. :) ,:; (;. (J (p
70a. 9rJ
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
Subtotal MEDRIUM OUTPATIENT: ./,/
Total prof
// f~l'Jr5ayments
(non-pro fee. payments)
/
.Balance / /
10% billing fee 1% administrativefee *Billing Clerk
Subtotal
/
Amount Due Physician
• KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018840
Page 99 of 189 Filed 12/01/2008 Document 278-2 Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---*'"
.....
Page 1 0[2
Financial Summary
-.::t
~ c o u n tID: I
XG1486 User ID; YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims
I
I
Patients
~
Et:;tfWB Financials
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
Ie-Records
I Adjustments I
CO 00
.....
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
o
o
Communication Center
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering Provider
Period for 01/01/2005- 01/31/2005 Payments
Charges
Location: All locations WriteOffs
Insurance
#
Insurance
Patient
16420.00
15.00
6027.77
244.43
46976.40
3219.24
182
1
Teopengco
8007.00
0.00
1251.69
0.00
11707.19
25.33
72
0
Jadwin LA
2451.00
0.00
1012.76
-256.00
10131.61
666.00
32
0
Teopencgo
2146.00
0.00
929.54
0.00
2435.47
298.00
25
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
316.80
8.38
1590.06
83.76
0
0
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0.00
70.11
0.00
203.52
0.00
0
0
4007.00
0.00
1232.72
0.00
2340.62
0.00
36
0
David F Jadwin
Patient
#
6'027-77+ 244-43+ 1,012·76+ 256-0(J7'028-96*
Mi~;c
Proc Charges
Mise Charges
Provider
LA
Costa La
Costa
16182.00
0.00
3544.44
284.62
21724.67
0.00
125
0
5hertukde
29168.00
0.00
9893;27
212.48
46497.27
639.00
231
0
Shertukde
11814.00
0.00
3127.30
0.00
8261.50
0,00
85
0
951.00
0.00
4336.60
177.50
20385.78
841.00
9
0
0.00
0.00
1652.04
25.00
6519.46
163.00
0
0
LA Liu
Liu LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for
practIce
payments
WriteOffs
$91146.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$15.00 $33395.04 $696.41 $178773.55 $5935.33
.3 Lf} OqI . "/:.r ~
# Mis·.:
Charges
. .-
# Proc
Chargf!S
797
1
'7( 0 GAQ.. ~ c) 4,'......... -'"
a 7/)(oJ.. 'J
(7;
1'-) ') (
1
l
r
9 q non- eore
"-':,"',G .2' ,..-, ".:
"
0{)[1uJ I i,l
/t) 6{;
33'395-0 1++ 696-41 + 34'09'\ -45*
https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 0 1/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
1
! Ci t,:)
2/1/2005
IH{J('~
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 100 of 189
• KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
DECEMBER 2004 Date of Distribution: 01-18-05
DR. JADWIN
I ProfessionaI Fees
December
I Year-To-Date I
C
$1 5-,-, 8;;;:2;;;:2,-,.7,. :8.....1_$'-1,.:3.:::2-'-',9:....:3'--'4,.89 i
L
$14,240.~Or-$116,"651.631
Distribution Compensation
$15,365.12J $0.9-,-0,-1_--:-$9,18. 14 1
**Faculty Practice 1%L__
- _ . _ - - - - - - - - '-----"--'-_.._'-'! [ . $0.001 $O.OO!
'---__B=.a::.:l=a:..:.nc::..:e=-**1=H",,~#ill~ _
nQ_ _?R._ftAJ
--
tho -
!:J,rlrnin;C'f,.~f;"o::tC'e-oC'c:rn.onf
-_
_
_
~-
- - - - - - ••• -
IMil1 ho -
::II -
n.:::lurnll "'-,1" - ..
deduction
0018842
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
I:t:cembd
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 101 of 189
2004
j{~clWin
)r.
o1EDRIUM INPATIENT:
/.?, 6 ~ 01, '7 8 I ,S8&:;' /)8
--eI
! ()
)
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
IEDRIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee paYJJ1ents
(non-p:;~f§le~ments) Balance
;/ - -_ _------r/10% billing fee
---r/-7 / / /
/
1% administrative fee *Bil/ing Clerk Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
KMC pays 50%/physidans pay 50%
0018843
Page 1 0[2
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 102 of 189
Financial Summary ~ c o u n t10: ~. I
i k ~ I Log Out! Help I Contact I
XG1486 User IO: YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims
I
I ,.
Patients
Financials
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary! Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
e-Records
I Adjustments!
Communication Center
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Rendering provider
Payments
WriteOffs
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
16785.00
0.00
7947.46
35.85
Teopengco
5078.00
0.00
1031.02
Jadwin LA
8160.00
0.00
7839.47
Teopencgo
1265.00
0.00
0.00
David F Jadwin
Charges
Location: All locations
Period for 12/01/2004- 12/31/2004
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mjs~c Charges
133
0
23155.95
3162.00
58.20
5422.41
709.59
46
0
0.00
15640.73
49.00
70
665.38
0.06
1174.62
0.00
13
a a
0.00
0.00
0.00
414.00
-84.00
a
7133.00
0.00
365.04
0.00
2331.26
0.00
62
Costa
17337.00
0.00
2850.73
74.94
8583.41
108.00
169
Shertukde
38400.00
0.00
7858.66
68.75
20030.48
1251.86
351
a a a a
Shertukde
8752.00
0.00
1660.81
17.50
3893.19
0.00
81
0
LA
Lipschultz Costa La
'Toial Jadwin
LA
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
7'947-46+ 35-85+ 7,839-47+ 15' 822 '7'8'*
Liu
8588.00
0.00
4967.33
299.53
14813.90
406.00
64
Liu LA
2182.00
0.00
4337.19
44.95
7830.71
0.00
18
a a
# Proc
Charg~~s
1007
a
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments Charges
$113680.00
Misc Charges
Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $39523.09 $599.78 $103290.66 $5602.45
/lOn· eo(fd,
40'122·87+ 15'S22-7B24'3I}O'09*
# Mis,:
39'523-09+ 599-78+ 40'122-81* Powered by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.com/practicel 0111_XG1486/Reports/finSurnmary
113/2005
""" """
00 00
..... o o
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
.KERN MEDICAL - . : • CENTER
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 103 of 189
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
November 2004 Date of Distribution: 12-21-04
DR. JADWIN November
I Year-To-Date I
Professional FeesL.!~~$9:..'.,.::::52=-4.:.:..6::.:3::.J1~ $126,636.Z±i i
Distribution Compensation
I
Billing Service 10%L **Faculty Practice
10/01.
_ _-=B::::a.:.:::la:.:.,:n.:::;ce=--_ _
C
$8,572.171
$110,983.301
$952.461
$14,735.361
$0.001
$918.1'!J
!
--:::.$O;:.:..::.:oo:J.,I_ _--"$:..::o:..;:.O.::.:O
**Effect!ve 09-28-04, the administrative assessment wi!! be a payroll
deduction
0018845
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
=or posting dates in, /
)~
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 104 of 189
2004
~
)r.
'1EDRIUM INPATIENT: Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
Subtotal 1EDRIUM OUTPATIENT: // Total p~(ee payments
------ro
fee payments)
Balance 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
/
!
*Billing Clerk
Subtotal Amount Due Physician
KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018846
Financial Summary
Page 1 of2
1t211iJ I ~
Financials
I
MaIntenance
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging FInancial Summary I Capitation Summary: I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
I
I Adjustments I
e-Records
I
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
I
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
David F Jadwin
Payments
Charges
15036.01) 4587.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
318.00
6519.39
0.00
2144.38
WriteOffs
Patient
0.00
# Mise
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
Charges
26188.68
318.00
157
2
25.00
7816.15
38
0
425.00 5513.00
0.00
3005.24
0.00
4450.62
0.00
56
0
Teopencgo L
2346.00
0.00
362.50
77.00
605.60
0.00
23
a
To-mt Kme--
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
465.64
0.00
1950.44
166.00
0
a
Lipschultz L A
0.00
0.00
105.29
0.00
412.71
0.00
0
0
33'912·59+ 368·80+ 34'281 ·39*
7570.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
76
a
lOta t Ilbll- core.,
0
34'281·39+ 9 ' 52 {+ • ,t] :3 .~ 2.!p '156·76*
Costa La
23005.70
0.00
535.13
0.00
2318.87
0.00
5hertukde
50983.00
0.00
7180.39
77.00
19664.32
0.00
428
0
Shertukde L A
17537.00
0.00
1106.50
51.80
1746.22
0.00
139
a
L1u
20677.00
0.00
7705.63
0.00
20652.42
0.00
136
0
9400.0(1
0.00
4782.50
138.00
6237.73
0.00
68
0
Insurance
Patient
# Proc.
# Mise Charges
$318.00 $33912.59 $368.80 $92043.76
$59.00
1364
2
Liu LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
WriteQffs
Payments Charges
$156654.70
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
o o...... 00 00
.j:>.
https://www.medrium.com/oracticel (I 1/1 XC114RlilRpnnrtolr.n".. ~~o~,
Page 105 of 189
Costa
243
Filed 12/01/2008
Jadwin L A A
......
Jadwin 6'519·39+ 3'005·24+ 9'524·63*
Document 278-2
Teopengco
location: All Locations
Period for 11/01/2004- 11/30/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count 10: XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN _ _ _ I Appointments I, Claims I Patients
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 106 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
OCTOBER 2004 Date of Distribution: 11-23-04
DR. JADWIN Payments
I Year-To-Date I
$2,824.08L_j.!1~,11~_'!JJ
Professional FeesL Distribution Compensation
I
Billing Service 10%IL
$2,541.671 $:::.:;2::..:8:=2.:...:.4.JL
__
**Faculty Practice 1%rL--
$102,411.131 $13,782.84\
$:. .:0:. :. 0, -,0,-,-1
$-:..9,-1,-8_.1,-,41
_ _.....:B=.;a::.:l=an:.:..c:.:e"--_~I= _ _ $o.oO,..Ll
. 2:.$.::co.c::.o.;:.;ol
**Effective (J9-28-04, the administrative assessment wi!! be 3 payro!! deduction
0018848
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
)r
posting dates in
odobd
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 107 of 189
2004
EDRIUM INPATIENT:
oBd-.'f· 08
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
eJ.,s LJ f. {; 7
Subtotal
EDRIUM OUTPATIENT: _ _ _ _ _ Total prof n· payments (nonJ' fee payments) B ance 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
I
*Billing Clerk
Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018849
Page I on
1'lllctll\,.;JilI ollllllllC:try
AppolntmE~nts
I
Claims
I
Patients
I
~ Financiafs
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary i Insurance Summary I Patient Aging) Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary-I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
Communication Center
Ie-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date FinanCial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
Payments Charges
Location: All Locations
Period for 10/01/2004- 10/31/2004
Mise Charges
WriteOffs
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
# Mise
Patient
# Proc
Charges
91670.00
0.00
1516.01
140.00
11537.98
1939.00
807
a
Teopengco
14271.66
0.00
453.89
20,00
6159.85
746.00
118
JadWin LA
32959.00
0.00
1011.11
156.96
3390.89
867.05
260
a a
Teopencgo
2812.00
0,00
643.60
0.00
1835040
137.00
21
0
Lipschultz
15.00
0.00
311.86
0.00
635.38
0.00
1
a
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0.00
-125.39
0,00
382.95
0,00
a
0
84.00
0.00
371.41
0.00
1986.72
0,00
3
0
5herdukde
51559.00
0.00
2824.94
494.57
18497.76
442,00
500
a
Sherdukde
7794,00
0,00
4436.47
0,00
8078.23
0.00
79
0
Uu
70632,00
0.00
3383.44
-49.00
23732.16
731.00
609
Liu LA
22047.00
0.00
2006.92
0.00
3405.83
0.00
206
a a
1'516'01+ 140·00+ 1,011·11+ 156'96+ 2' 82lf' 08';'
Document 278-2
David F Jadwin
LA
Costa
Filed 12/01/2008
LA
Writeoff5
F:'yHlf!tl'-5 iJ i11i1l';1 1'1 (~'! id,·,
l:f'ilrl('!ll!(l
F,
~l·.'id,>t
Grand Total for
o
o .....
00 00 01
o
~J!::'~
$293843.66
:I~,( 1~ll
P(lti~llt
Il1sur;inCe
Pi1tienl.
$0.00 $16834.26 $762,53 $79643.15 $4862,05
tt Prot
2604
~J t·1j!'c ChiH'ges
o Page 108 of 189
practice
ell"!
I I\SI,n',lllce
1'516-01+ 140'00+ 1'011'11+ 156·96+ 2' 824' 08,;, hlips :11\\\\ \\ .111Cd I'i lllll.CO lll i praCI icc I 0 I / I . X (i 14~6!Rcpl1l'ls/liIlS Ul1ml"l')'
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
th.:
Account ID: XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN
11/1/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 109 of 189
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
SEPTEMBER 2004 Date of Distribution: 10-26-04
DR. JADWIN
I
Payments
I Year-To-Date I
Professional FeesL $10,707.051 Distribution
$114,288.9~
I
Compensation 1'---_$::..:9:..!..6::..:3:...:6:...;..3: . :4.: .J.!_ _$::..:9:.. :9-,-8, :. .:6:. .:9. :. .4,-=-,61 Billing Service 10% **Faculty Practice 1%
I IL...:
$1 ,070.711
$13,50~
. :. $0::. :.:. :.0. : .0.1. .1_ _..:. $:. .:9:. .:1:. :.8.:.-.1:. . :. ;4i
=====:B:a~la=n:c~e=====[======$~o:..::.oo~i'----=-_·--_-. $0.60] **Effective,09..28..04"the admjnist,.~t;lf~~ssessment will be a payroll deduction
0018851
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates
Dr.
in.)i¥J~
_--r(kifJ,Udt
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 110 of 189
2004
_
()
MEDRIUM INPATIENT:
70 '1,
J())
{).:J
/,()70·
'r ,f
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee
/
-e-
q) CoJ~,..3'-1
1% administrative fee
Subtotal
ME RIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee payments
(non-pro fee payments) _ _ _ _ _--",' Balance
__
~ -t7--
--e-
~/o billing fee 1% dministrative fee *Billing CI
Subtotal
k
'\
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018852
Page I 0[2
Page 111 of 189
Financial Summary
Filed 12/01/2008 Document 278-2
It)
CO
CO
~count ID: XG1486
~ I
APpointments
k»iiE
User 1D: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
I ~
Patients
Financials
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary J Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary! Patient statements J Custom Reports
Maintenance
Financial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
.Jtld uJ location: All locations WriteOffs
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
I'"
5:J S'Li fl, ~ U :5-'
'169
# Mise # Proc
ChargJ~s
David F JadwIn
8305.00
0.00
5504.03
169.38
24896.12
11158.35
113
0
Teopengco
2009.00
0.00
3058.29
166.38
8687.58
4764.74
18
0
Jadwin LA
1914.00
0.00
4965.27
68.37
15017.71
5171.83
35
0
Teopencgo
163.00
0.00
2026.43
0.00
3542.07
1672.48
2
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
103.61
0.00
690.89
1036.38
0
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0,00
253.08
0.00
6005.92
10.00
0
0
Costa La
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
724.00
9.80
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.06
70.11
0,06
2720,89
197.00
0
1
5herdukde
32255.00
0.00
2709.66
48.00
9438.59
207.00
285
0
Sherdukde LA
11053.00
0.00
1601.52
0.00
1849.88
5.00
112
0
Uu
28533.00
0.00
5208.54
49.00
15044.33
200.00
253
,0
liu LA
10616.00
0.00
3365.01
0.00
3559.99
0.00
100
0
# Proc
# Mise Charg
918
1
L~ .'
"3 ("". 9 -..; :; ~ ? 'l " 6U .. 3·-/·
i 0 ~ '/U?
Q
~U'5
LA
LA
Payments Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
Misc Charges
$94848.00
Insurance
WriteOffs
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$0.06 $28865.55 $511.19 $92177.97 $24432.58
2;L3
J
d6';· 51 1 •
'j ~H-
29~3"t6~"/'
J..«~~.JJ •• "~~,,
-.--.""A ... ~ ....................-.--.1.................. ~..,.=1 n1 11
V~lIlQhJDo
........... ..-t .... lh,...C'"........................ ,
.....
o
o
I
I Adjustments I Procedure Sunmary
Period for .09/01/2004- 09/30/2004 Payments
Charges
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communlcation.Center
e~Records
Financial Summary By Posting Date
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
M
1 (Ill /"}(I{l11
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
.KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 112 of 189
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees· 2004 Date of Distribution: 09-28-04 Dr. Jadwin Payments
I Year-To-Date I
AUGUST
Professional Fees
r-
$-1-'-1,-=7-'-66-=-.-'-3-=7"1 ----,$-1-,-03-,-=58-0=-.--=981
Distribution Compensation! $10,354.41T
$90,233.121
Billing Service 12% 'I- - - - ' -$1,411.961 $12,429.72 J --''--._--'----'---'----'
%L
**Faculty Practice 1
L___
._-...,;$"-'0..:..;.0:...;.0
_ _--=B=.;a::.,:/.:::.an:.;..c=.;e=--_-..JL_----:$=O,_Oo_!
$918.141
$_O_.O.Q]
·*Effective 09-28-04, the administrative assessment will be a payroll deduction
0018854
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~~
For posting dates in
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 113 of 189
2004
~
0'.
IIIEDRIUM INPATIENT:
o.
~(p(e..3
7
Total prof fees payments
J,J, % _-,-IL/...:../:..;.I...:..._9--=&_ .w% billing fee i
/f-'OrEtp
!a~3('. '7.1'
1% administrative fee
Subtotal
/03$'-1.4/ EDRIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee payments Non-pro fee payments
10% billing fee
~~ministrative fee Subtot1Jl
" TOTAL PRO FEES
____---=-
*Billing clerk
_ _ _ _ _ Iount Due to Physician , KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018855
Page 1 of 1
r:n~nci'll Summary
Page 114 of 189
~count ___ I
e:s
ID: XG1486 User ID: YVONNEN
Appointments
I Claims
I
I) Financials I
Patients
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
Ie-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
CommunIcation Center
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Filed 12/01/2008
Billing Provider
Payments
Rendering
Provider
WrlteOffs
# Mise
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
Charges
8292.87
659.15
18569.45
259.00
390
1
0.00
3419.56
10.00
6263.79
0.00
151
0
10615.00
0.00
2765.84
48.51
3976.26
0.00
94
0
2805.00
0:00
1256.22
0.00
1693.98
0.00
20
0
414.00
0.00
1529.91
90.25
2997.32
0.00
3
0
0.00
0.00
237.61
85.00
139.19
0.00
0
0 0
Mise Charges
Insurance
38868.50
19.96
Teopengco
14891.00
Jadwin LA
Teopencgo LA
DavId F
Location: All Locations
Period for 08/01/2004· 08/31/2004
Charges
Document 278-2
Jadwin
Lipschultz
Lipschultz L A
0.00
0.00
12.41
56.00
36.59
0.00
0
1948.00
0.00
176.51
0.00
368.49
0.00
14
0
Sherdukde
25451.00
0.00
546.31
0.00
938.78
0.00
241
0
Sherdukde LA
8117.00
0.00
1288.94
0.00
2073.06
0.00
80
0
53667.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
452
0
7128.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
73
0
Mise Charges
Insurance
patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mlsc Charges
$19.96 $19526.18 $948.91 $37056.91 $259.00
1518
1
Costa La
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Costa
Liu
Uu LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
payments Charges
$163904.50
d;'
~~9L ~
WriteOffs
:;'!.'
659· 'j 5-:· 2 ~ 'l6:':,· ;:;/t' (I,
Sac\cviA
li
~
[~l
• :.) .j .;.
7 () 6 " 3 '7 ,~
hltps:llwww.medrium.com/practice 10111_XG 1486/Reports/finSurnmary
....o o
Summary
Financial Summary BV Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
<0
10 00 00
Powered by Medrlum
9/112004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"'C
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 115 of 189
.KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Date of Distribution: 08/17/2004 Dr. Jadwin
~_-,-P-=a:.Ly.:..:m.:..:e:..:.n:..:.ts=--_-I.-_-=J-=U-=L:..:Y _ _1 Year-To-Date Professional Fees I"
I
$11 ,146.i4!-$91,814~1l
Distribution Co mpensation ,-Billing Service 12%1"
L_.
Faculty Practice 1%1,.
$9,697. 6::6~1_-_--=$c.:.7~9:,8c.:.7.=.8:.:.~7-,-,·1l $1,337.611
$11,017.76-1
...__.
$111.47,-1__ $918 ..14!
0018857
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 116 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Dr. Jadwin
J=:.cU::..:N..:..:E=--_1 Year·To·Date
_ _..:..P.=,aYL::m.:.:.=.;en:..:.:t=s
I
$10,971~
$80,667.871
Compensation LI__$-,-9-".,5_45. 03 I
$70, 181.0~
Professional Fees! Distribution
~------r-----.
Billing Service!
Billing ClerkL Faculty Practice 1%[ _ _.....:B::..:a::..:l=an:..:.:c::..:e=---__[--···-··
$1,316.561.
$9,680._'!§j
$0.001
$0.001
$109.71 i
$806.671
$0.001--····-$-0-.qgJ ymn07107104
0018858
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
-
"- lUVl 0'
For posting dates in Dr.
Filed 12/01/2008
--- J . _-''-.I..lI Q"""(J",-",,,W.l..:(n-'--
{a, /
q'1 f .3D /
Page 117 of 189
2004
_
Total prof fees payments Id,
_-!./...:::J....:..:!(p~.S',--w-,---- l:Q% Billing fee
f()
9. 'r(
q
,j"'I.$'.03
1
)
1% Administrative fee
0018859
Page 1 of2
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countJD; XG1486 _ _ _ I Appointments
User ID: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
I ~
Finandals
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary., Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
I
I
e-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
Communication Center
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Location: All Locations
Period for 06/01/2004- 06/30/2004
payments
WriteOffs
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
519.42
18191.61
349.50
446
0
2403.73
32.67
7964.41
0.00
174
0
0.00
5570.71
203.00
9082.47
0.00
113
0
6626.00
0.00
927.24
0.00
1271.16
0.00
50
0
lipschUltz
6306.00 .
0.00
1879.46
306.00
6261.84
0.00
60
0
lipschUltz
1339.00
0.00
1571.82
3.00
2765.17
0.00
10
0
435.00
0.00
1278.06
0.00
2150.14
0.00
5
0
Costa
7306.70
0.00
4258.08
0.00
12275.04
0.00
59
0
Sherdukde
6812.00
0.00
1766.84
10.00
5863.16
0.00
71
0
Sherdukde
2597.00
0.00
5.34
0.00
4.66
0.00
27
0
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$0.00 $24339.45 $1074 ..09 $65829.66 $349.50
1015
0
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Mise Charges
Insurance
43288.96
0.00
4678.17
Teopengco
18453.66
0.00
Jadwin LA
10468.00
Teopencgo
David F
Charges
Patient
Jadwin
Document 278-2
LA
LA Costa La
Filed 12/01/2008
LA Payments
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
. Charges
$103632.32
Mise Charges
Insurance
Insurance
10 ) CI'tI . .50 <9.5)
o
Page 118 of 189
:)GlduJin p(m0
Patient
WriteOffs
Powered by Medrium
o ...... CXl CXl
0)
o
https:l/www.medrium.com/practicel 0111_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
7/612004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 119 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Dr. Jadwin
I Year-To-Date I
MAY
Payments
Professional FeesL
$8,995.39L
$69,696.571
Distribution
.Compensation [~~~._E,?..?5:.99
L__~§.Q,,!?l6.-:.!)21
Billing Service J'-"-'$l, 079.451-'-----$8':363.591 ~"--'".
__...,,~-_ . ~-, .._~_ .._---,-_._-_.~-"" .."._,,-----j
Billing ClerkL r---
Faculty Practice 1%L,
.
;r;-;:;T------=1
---:!$~O.:.::.OOi
$Q.OOj
-....-
~89.9,~5!_
$696. 96 1
0018861
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
For posting dates in
Filed 12/01/2008
mo.Y
Page 120 of 189
2004
jo.dwin
Dr.
£$ QCf.5. J 't )
l.o~9. '15 i
89. 95
Total prof fees payments
IJ. biD W'fo Billing fee
1% Administrative fee
0018862
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 121 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Dr. Jadwin _ _.:. .P=..ay<..:.m.:. :.e=.:nc:..:t::;.s_ _L---:..;A:.:...P.o-R:.:.;IL=--_1 Year-To-Date r-'
-r
I
$7,421.771
$60,701.181
CompensationL $6,456.94i
$52,810.031
Professional FeesL. _ Distribution
Billing ClerklL . - . - _
$O.oDr """'---
$0.00:
,
Faculty Practice 1%\'---- $74.221 _ _.. .;$. .:.6. .:.07.:. ..:. .:.0-'-'11 Balance
0018863
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
AIuk(
For posting dates in
-<
Dr.
.
Page 122 of 189
2004
,JMQJ.LdW~'n+------
'0 4CJ,/
77
Total prof fees payments
!~
9'0
_..........J8CL....19~o:...c., CR=....LI .J:607o Billing fee
71. a:h {P)<;50. q<{
1% Administrative fee
0018864
Page 1 of 1
Page 123 of 189
Financial Summary ~countID: XG1486 _ _ I Appointments
:E}¥_
User 10: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
I
t
Financjals
I
Maintenance
e-Records
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
Daysheet 1 Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements 1 Custom Reports
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Payments Charges
Location: All locations
Period for 04/01/2004- 04/30/2004
WriteOffs
# Mise
Patient
563.07
17881.43
414.00
486
2
752.26
188.00
3332.74
1.47
79
0
0.00
2233':79
286,00
2416.17
0.00
114
2594.00
0.00
630.41
0.00
507.59
0.00
24
0
Lipschultz
24397.00
0.00
4123.44
20.00
13054.56
187.00
184
0
Lipschultz
7100.00
0.00
3050.35
51.80
5920.65
0.00
50
0
°0
Insurance
52568.00
2.18
4338.91
Teopengco
9659.00
0.00
Jadwin LA
13199.00
Teopencgo
. David F
Patient
# Proc ' Charges
Insurance
Mise Charges
Jadwin
7 (
.,', DOw! ()
1) 'I JJ '17
o -'
LA
LA Costa La
2407.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
17
Costa
8724.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
580.00
0.00
66
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$2.18 $15129.16 $1108.87 $43693.14 $602.47
1020
2
Billing Provider
Payments
Rendering
Provider
Charges
Grand Total for $120648.00 practl~e
Mise. Charges
Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs
Insurance
It;: .? P ...',\ ,
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.com/practicel 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
5/4/2004
LO
c.o
co co
..... o
o
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 124 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAl CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - ~004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
March
I Year-To-Date I
$29,478.081
$53,279.411
I
$25,645.931
$46,353.09/
Billing Service I
$3,537.371
$6,393.531
Professional Feesl Distribution
Compensation
Bill ing Clerk 1,--_.:...-$,,-,,0..;;..:.0,-,,-01_ _.:...-$:...;;0..:..,..0,--0I Faculty Practice 1%1 ,--_....:B::.:a:.::.:;la::.:.n:..::c.=.e
. $294. 78l_----'$:..::.53=2:.:..:.7...::..91 ---.:$::.:0c:..::.0:..::.0J_ _---.:$::.:0c:..:::.0;-=-O1
0018866
Financial Summary
Page I of I
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~count W: _ _ _ J
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 125 of 189 ~
XG1486 User 10: PAULW
Appointments
I
Claims
I
Patients
~
J
Financials
I
Maintenance
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary! Capitation Summary I Patient Statements 1 Custom R.eports
I
I
e-Records
I Adjustments I· Procedure
SUIl
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Location: All locations
Period for 03/01/2004-03/31/2004 Payments
WriteOffs
# Mis
Insurance
19622.00
0.00
17481,26
1921,00
91946.63
16.14
142
Teopengco
4567.00
0.00
3781,63
110.00
25419.12
77.00
45
jadwin LA
2669.00
0.00
9989.82
86.00
32813.65
0.00
28
Teopencgo
1138.00
0.00
1896.15
0.00
8608.05
20.00
11
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
308.00
0.00
0
1138.00
0.00
1896.15
0.00
8916.05
20.00
11
Lipschultz
46041,00
0.00
5864.39
0.00
23409.61
0.00
329
Lipschultz
16434.00
0.00
773.88
0.00
749•. 52
0.00
124
Patient
# Proc
$0.00 $39787.13 $2117.00 $183254.58 $113.14
679
David F Jadwin
Patient
Insurance
Patient
proc Chargl
Mise Charges
Charges
#
LA Teopengco Total For Teopencgo L
A
LA Billing
Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments Charges
$90471.00
Misc Charges Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs
Insurance
# Mis Chargt
red by Medrium
B6-0n·, 29' 478 -Og",
https:llwvvw.medrium.comJpracticeIOI/1 XG 14Rli/Renort
Lt!":;:j")OOA
0018867
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 126 of 189
Last- -Name -_.-.--
First Name - Insurance Name Date of Service Payment Date CPT Amount Paid Medi-CaJ Of California 12/4/2003 31212004 88305 $20.66 Medicare Of Northern ( 12/4/2003 31212004 $70.05 88307 Medicare Of Northern ( 12/12/2003 312/2004 88307 $70.05 Medi-Cal Of California 121712003 3/2/2004 88307 $70.11 Medicare Of Northern ( 12/12/2003 312/2004 88305 $33.01 12/12/2003 312/2004 --- --,,------ . __,Medicare Of Northern ( 88311 $10.68 . Medicare Of Northern ( 12/4/2003 31212004 88309 $100.37 Medi-Cal Of California 12/21/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/21/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/18/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/19/2003 312/2004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/20/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/19/2003 31212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 1211912003 $10.00 312/2004 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 1211812003 312/2004 $70.11 88307 Medi-Cal Of California 12122/2003 312/2004 88307 $70.11 Medi-Cal Of California 1212612003 $10.00 31212004 88300 -_._--_._.-_ Medi-Cal Of California 12/1812003 31212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/1612003 31212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/912003 312/2004 $20.66 88104 Medi-Cal Of California 1219/2003 31212004 $48.20 88305 Medi-Cal Of California 1211912003 312/2004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/1712003 312/2004 $30.40 88304 - - - .. Medi-Cal Of California 12121/2003 3/2/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-eal Of California 12/2212003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Kaiser Foundation Heal 12/1612003 312/2004 $4.76 88300 Champus 12/2012003 312/2004 $17.51 88307 Medi-Cal Of California 12/15/2003 31212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/9/2003 31212004 $20.66 88104 -- _----- Medi-Cal Of California 12131/2003 3/2/2004 88305 $48.20 Medi-Cal Of California 1212812003 31212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/2912003 31212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12129/2003 3/212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12123/2003 3/212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/22/2003 31212004 $70.11 88307 - - -------Medi-Cal Of California 12/2912003 312/2004 88307 $70.11 Medi-Cal Of Cal'lfornia 12/2212003 31212004 88307 $70.11 Kaiser Foundation Heai 12123/2003 3/2/2004 $12.23 88304 ot:\., ....... 'J1"1 l"lnnA K~isp.r FoundatiQn Hea! 12/23/2003 -$13.35 UU,J I l Medi-Cal Of California 11712004 31212004 $41.58 88173 Medi-eal Of California - . -- ---------------------.".11712004 31212004 88305 $48.20 '- Medi-Cal OfCalifornia 1212912003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 lIJIedi-Cal Of California 12/2912003 31212004 88300 $10.00
..
...
,",l~IL.VV"1'
0018868
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 127 of 189
0018869
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---
MedicCal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California .. Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California ,--Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Pinnacle Clairns Mana, Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Ca! Of C3tifcrnia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California .----,-----Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Of Californ·,a Be Of California Medi-Cal Of California
~_
~~-
~--.-".
_._._-~_.
.....
---------
._--~-_
_.~~
-
.. _...
Document 278-2
_-",,-~
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 128 of 189
12/1.5/2003 12/14/2003 12/19/2003 12/30/2003 12/30/2003 12/28/2003 12/28/2003 1/2/2004 12/28/2003 1/4/2004 12/30/2003 1/8/2004 1/4/2004 12/23/2003 1/6/2004 1/7/2004 1/2/2004 12/28/2003 12/28/2003 1/6/2004 1/12/2004 1/2/2004 1/27/2004 112712004 111812004 1130/2004 1212212003 12122/2003 12/1812003 12/1812003 12/512003 12/812003 1112612003 12/2112003 12/17/2003 12/2112003 12/2312003 1212212003 1212212003
3/2/2004 312/2004 312/2004 . 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 312/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 312/2004 312/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/212004 31212004 31212004 31212004 3/212004 31212004 31212004 31212004 312/2004 312/2004 3/212004 31212004 3/212004 312/2004 312/2004 312/2004 31212004
88300 88300 88307 88307 88300 88307 88311 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 . 88300 88300 88307 88307 88311 88300 88300 88300 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88305 88304 88311 88307 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307
$10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11 $6.32 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $7011 $6.32 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $48.20 $30.40 $6.32 $207.20 $70.11 $15.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11
12/15/2003
3/2/2004
OU,JV!J
..p
1212512003 12/25/2003 12/2312003 12/3012003 12/3012003 12130/2003 1212312003 1211512003 113/2004 12/1212003 12/912003 12/912003
31212004 31212004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 312/2004 31212004 31212004 3/2/2004 3/212004 3/2/2004 3/212004 31212004
88300 88300 88305 88172 88173 88305 88300 88300 88304 88304 88300 88305
$10.00 $10.00 $48.20 $26.95 $41.58 $48.20 $10.00 $10.00 $30.40 $34.30 $7.00 $48.20
nn., .... n
".~ 1'\
nl'\
IU,VU
0018870
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 129 of 189
0018871
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG -'-,_.---,,_.-
__
. , ~ -
----------
_
_._._--~--
-
.
_
-
~
..
_
_
.
..
_
._----~-_._-
....
_._ ..-
' - - ' - " ' - - - - - - .. _--
- - - - --
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 130 of 189
..... _---
--- .. _-._----
-_.
Document 278-2
_.... ---
. -. -----,_.,----
Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cai Be Medi-Cai Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Sheet Metal Workers L, Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Combined Benefits'Adr Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-f:81 Bc Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( KernFamily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern FamHy Health Car Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Farnlly Health Car Medicare Of Northern (
12/22/2003 1/5/2004 121712003 1/1612004 1212512003 112012004 121112003 121912003 12/1012003 121412003 121912003 1/1212004 11912004 11912004 11912004 1213112003 1113/2004 111312004 112012004 111512004 111512004 11712004 11912004 1212312003 1211912003 1211912003 1211912003 11812004 1/2912004 11812004 11812004 1/1512004 111512004 1/1512004 1/1512004 111412004 1/13/2004 1/13/2004 1127/2004 1!24!200~
1114/2004 1/15/2004 811512003 1011112003 1011112003 111612003 111612003 11/6/2003 11/3/2003 11/3/2003 11/18/2003 12/4/2003
318/2004 3/812004 3/812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 3/912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 319/2004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 3/912004 319/2004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 3)912004 31912004 31912004 3/912004
88305 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88305 88300 88302 88305 88304 88305 88331 88332 88300 88305 88305 88305 88104 88305 88305 88305 88305 88172 88173 88305 88305 88305 88305 88312 88172 88173 88305 88305 88300 88307 88305 88307
$48.20 $70.11 $70.11 $15.00 $70.11 $70.11 $73.62 $248.40 $10.00 $15.00 $138.00 $30.40 $48.20 $41.32 $31.02 $10.00 $33.50 $33.50 $33.50 $50.02 $33.50 $33.50 $48.20 $33.01 $26.44 $61.16 $33.01 $134.02 $48.20 $67.01 $24.10 $26.83 $61.66 $33.50 $48.20 $10.00 $70.68 $67.01 $70.11
00')1"11::
VIVU::.. VV""
UU,,;V;,)
$48.20
3/912004 31912004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004
88305 88300 88302 88307 88302 88304 88305 88329 88305 88311 . 88300 88302
$96.40 $3.86 $57.84 $17.51 $4.27 $31.92 $101.22 $57.84 $404.88 $6.64 $10.00 $5.90
"1/01'lr'l('\A
0018872
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
--"------_._---------
-'------,-
--- --- ....
__ __ .- ...
--
.. - --'----
----------.
_.
."--'-
-~-
..
-
--_.----
_-
Document 278-2
Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern FamilyHealth Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Heaith Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car
Kern Fam:!y Hcolth Car Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern
Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health
Car Car Car' . Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car
11/29/2003 11/25/2003 11/29/2003 12/9/2003 12/9/2003 12/9/2003 12/9/2003 12/7/2003 12/21/2003 12/20/2003 12/17/2003 12/16/2003 12/17/2003 12/17/2003 12/4/2003 12/2212003 12/19/2003 12/23/2003 1/5/2004 12/27/2003 12116/2003 12/18/2003 12/11/2003 12/30/2003 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 1/7/2004 1/6/2004 12/20/2003 12/31/2003 1/1/2004 1/1/2004 1/7/2004 1/9/2004 1/12/2004 1/14/2004 1/12/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 '" 10 l'"lt'lf"l ~
IIVILVU"t
1/8/2004 12/31/2003 1/14/2004 12/12/2003 1/13/2004 1/12/2004 1/5/2004 12123/2003 11/30/2003 12/27/2003 12/15/2003 1111/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004
3/1112004 3/1112004 3/1112004 3111/2004 311112004 3/11/2004
Page 131 of 189
88307 88307 88302 88329 88309 88307 88305 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307 88305 88311 88300 88304 88304 88300 88300 88104 88300 88304 88300 88305 88300 88304 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88302 88300 88307 88304 88304
$73.62 $73.62 $15.00 $29.42 $100.37 $124.23 $73.62 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $10.68 $10.00 $31.92 $31.92 $10.00 $10.00 $21.69 $10.00 $31.92 $10.00 $50.61 $10.00 $31.92 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $15.00 $10.00 $73.62 $31.92 $31.92
88305
$50.6i
88307 88307 88307 88305 88302 88304 88304 88304 88307 88304 88300 88307
$73.62 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $15.00 $31.92 $31.92 $31.92 $73.62 $31.92 $10.00 $73.62
0018873
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
----"-----
--"-
-._--~_.-.-
-
..-_.-.-
-----_._-~
..
-
Document 278-2
Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Famnv HB;:\lth Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health C;ar Kern Farnlly Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car
1/16/2004 11/26/2003 11/26/2003 12/4/2003 12/17/2003 12/15/2003 12/16/2003 12/1/2003 11/15/2003 12/2/2003 12/412003 12/4/2003 12/2/2003 12/3/2003 12/4/2003 12/412003 11/1912003 12/8/2003 12/19/2003 12/20/2003 12/17/2003 12/19/2003 12/2712003 12/14/2003 12/15/2003 12/20/2003 12/15/2003 12/17/2003 12/1912003 12/24/2003 12/5/2003 12/30/2003 12/29/2003 12/28/2003 1/4/2004 12/30/2003 1/3/2004 1/5/2004 12/23/2003 12/2412003 12/25/2003 1/7/2004 12/9/2003 1/3/2004 1/4/2004 1/8/2004 1/6/2004 1/9/2004 1/5/2004 1/4/2004 1/10/2004 1/912004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/11/2004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3/1112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004
Page 132 of 189
88305 88304 88311 88305 88300 88307 88307 88302 88305 88307 88307 88302 88302 88302 88302 88305 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88305 88304 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88300 88307 88307 88307
$50.61 $95.76 $6.64 $33.01 $3.81 $73.62 $73.62 $15.00 $50.61 $73.62 $70.05 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $50.61 $147.24 $45.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $50.61 $31.92 $50.61 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $73.62
VU,JU,
00""7
.."..;.v"-
88307 88300 88300 88307 88300 88307 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307
$73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62
co"'7'"1 1:""1
0018874
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
..
-
-
._---._'
------ ' . - - ' , - -
.J
"-----._------
--,._---,,,
Document 278-2
Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Of California Medicare Of Northern (
1/8/2004 1/5/2004 1/5/2004 1/4/2004 1/7/2004 1/13/2004 1/3/2004 12/30/2003 12/26/2003 1/2/2004 1/1512004 1/13/2004 1/14/2004
Medicare Of Northern C
9/6/2002 1013012002
Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern
( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (
111412004 1/4/2004 1116/2004
121312003 12/10/2003 12111/2003 118/2004 8/412003 11125/2003 11125/2003 11/4/2003 1/10/2004 1/8/2004 118/2004 1/9/2004 12/21/2003 1/7/2004 1/7/2004 1/8/2004 12/18/2003 1/11/2004 1111/2004 12/16/2003 12/16/2003 1/13/2004 1115/2002
10/4/2002 9/30/2002 8/29/2002 9/24/2002 9/2412002 9/2412002
912012002 9/20/2002 9/16/2002 9/13/2002 9/13/2002
Filed 12/01/2008
3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/1112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/1112004 3/1112004 311112004 311112004 3/1212004 3/1612004 .,'''' .... ',.,nru.
",)1 rU/LVU",
3/16/2004 3116/2004 3/1612004 3/1612004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
Page 133 of 189
88307 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 . 88300 88304 88307 88307 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88305 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88302 88305 88300 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88329 88304 88305 88304 88307 88304 88304 88305 88305 88104 88307 88311 88305 88302 88300 88305 88311
$73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 531.92 $73.62 $73.62 $101.22 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $50.61 $10.00 $1000 $220.86 $73.62 $30.00 $50.61 $10.00 $1000 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 510.00 $73.62 $10.00 $29.42 $9.78 $8.38 $9.62 $69.82 $9.62 $9.62 $32.78 $196.70 $24.55 $69.81 $10.52 $32.78 $11.62 $.3.74 $32.78 $10.51
0018875
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
------
-- -- - ------- .. -
- - ----',. ---- ..
-------_.,
.. -
------._--_. __ .'-
----
Document 278-2
Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Cn!ifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi:Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Bc Of California Medi-Cal Of California
9/12/2002 9/12/2002 9/12/2002 9/14/2002 9/14/2002 12/19/2002 12/6/2002 12/6/2002 6/2/2003 6/2/2003 6/2/2003 12/19/2003 12/19/2003 12/10/2003 1/2/2004 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 1/8/2004 1/10/2004 1/10/2004 1/7/2004 1/11/2004 1/11/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/9/2004 1/10/2004 1/9/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/12/2004 1/2/2004 12/31/2003 12/30/2003 1/2/2004 1/2/2004 '" /7/"'lnnA II I tLVU""t
1/7/2004 12/30/2003 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 2/5/2004 1/16/2004 1/13/2004 1/13/2004 1/12/2004 1/12/2004 1/13/2004 12/29/2003
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 3116/2004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 311612004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004
88305 88311 88300 88305 88104 88305 88304 88311 88305 88311 88300 88307 88305 88304 88302 88104 88305 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88304 88300 88300 88300 88305 88309 88311 88307 88305 88300 88104 88104 88305 88304 88302 88300 88304 88311 88305 88307
Page 134 of 189
$163.90 $10.52 $3.75 $32.77 $24.56 $196.70 $9.63 $10.50 $231.05 $10.69 $3.81 $59.78 $37.87 $60.80 $30.00 $20.66 $48.20 $10.33 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $30.00 $10.00 $10.33 $10.00 $3040 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $96.40 $148.38 $6.32 $70: 11
$48.20 $10.00 $20.66 $20.66 $48.20 $30.40 $19.67 $10.00 $30.40 $6.32 $8.38 $70.11
0018876
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---_.'.,-_...-
------------,-
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Blmc Blmc Pinnacle Claims Mana. Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Western Growers Assu Western Growers Assu Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern C Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern C Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
12/29/2003 1/8/2004 12/22/2003 12/22/2003 12/16/2003
12/9/2003 12/5/2003
12/6/2003 12/6/2003 12/15/2003 11/11/2003 11/11/2003 1/14/2004
1/14/2004 1/15/2004 1/14/2004 1/7/2004
1/7/2004 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 1/12/2004 1/22/2004 1/20/2004 1/21/2004 1/21/2004 2/2/2004 2/2/2004 1/27/2004 1/7/2004 1/7/2004 12/11/2003 1/31/2004 1/31/2004 2/2/2004 1/19/2004 1/30/2004 1/1/2004 1/2/2004 1/2/2004
1/1/2004 12/18/2003 1/14/2004 6/6/2003 1/8/2004 4/9/2003 1/7/2004 1/15/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
1/16/2004
3/16/2004 3/16/2004
1/9/2004 1/9/2004 12/14/2003
3/16/2004 3/16/2004
3/16/2004
88302 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88305 88307 88305 88300 88172 88173 88307 88302 88307 88307 88304 88302 . 88305 88331 88332 88300 88300 88305 88305 88305 88307 88302 88307 88304 88304 88300 88307 88307 88307 88305 88304 88300 88304 883-12 88300 88304 88300 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88312 88302
Page 135 of 189
$30.00 $70.11 $19.67 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $48.20 $86.81 $40.83 $8.00 $26.95 $41.58 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $30.40 $15.00 $48.20 $41.32 $15.51 $10.00 $10.00 $138.00 $48.20 $96.40 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $30.40 $30.40 $10.00 $152.80 $106.20 $70.11 $48.20 $30.40 $10.00 $30.40 $52.53 $10.00 $30.40 $10.00 $33.01 $48.20 $99.02 $48.20 $48.20 $48.20 $48.20 $26.26 $12.78
0018877
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"----,-------
- , _ ..
-'-'--'--'~'--
--'
-,_
.. _---
-- ---'---'- ..
-_._,
--.
'---"----'-
-~
--'
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Madi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Madi-Cal Of California· Medi-Cal Of California Madi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Madi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
1211612003 12116/2003 12/16/2003 12/23/2003 12/23/2003
Filed 12/01/2008
3116/2004 3/1612004 311612004
311612004 311612004
11912004 11812004
3116/2004 3/16/2004
1/4/2004 1/5/2004 1/4/2004
311612004
11412004 1/9/2004 1/912004 1/9/2004 1/912004
11612004 11712004 12/3012003 1/612004
1213012003 1213012003 1/13/2004 12/30/2003 12/3/2003 12/31/2003 1212912003 12/3012003 12/29/2003 12130/2003 116/2004
11312004 112/2004
11812004 1/13/2004 1113/2004
111312004 111312004 111812004 1112/2004 1/1312004 1/1612004
111812004 111912004 12123/2003 1/14/2004
11912004 121512003 121412003 12/612003 1/15/2004 117/2004 1/3012004
311612004 311612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3116/2004 311612004
311612004 3/16/2004 3116/2004
311612004 311612004 311612004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3116/2004
3116/2004 311612004 311612004 3116/2004 311612004 .
311612004 3116/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/1612004
311612004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
311612004 311612004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004
311612004 3/1612004 3116/2004 311612004 3116/2004
311612004 311612004 311612004
88307 88302 88305 88307 88302 88307 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307
88302 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88302 88300 88300 88300
88300 88300 88300 88300 88300
88300 88302 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307
88307 88307 88302 88302 88302 88307 88300 88307
Page 136 of 189
$70.11 $3000 $144.60 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00
$10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $19.67 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00
$12.78 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00
$10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $15.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $1000 $15.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11
0018878
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
- - - - - - ._--
------"-._---._--,-
-"._-----.-.
' - - - - - _.. -.-._-- -
----------
---_._,
_ _ _ "_"
..
.. __ .. -
,.~._-
___
_
--"'--'-'---"~---'-
-
.. ·· _ _ m
_
"
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cat Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-CalOfCalifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Californ.ia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Med.1care Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern C Medicare Of Northern ( . Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medi-Cal Of California Medi-CalOf California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
1/30/2004 1/29/2004 1/19/2004 1/30/2004 12/12/2003 12/11/2003 12/12/2003 12/18/2003 12/26/2003 12/15/2003 1/27/2004 1/27/2004 1/20/2004 1/8/2004 12/27/2003 12/21/2003 12/12/2003 1/10/2004 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 12/10/2003 12/10/2003 1/8/2004 1/1/2004 1/1/2004 1/1/2004 914/2002 10121/2002 11/4/2002 11/4/2002 10/31/2002 9/26/2002 9/17/2002 8/30/2002 9/11/2002 9/11/2002 12/18/2002 12/30/2002 12/30/2002 1/812003 1/12/2003 3/4/2003 1/7/2004 1/712004 12131/2003 115/2004 1/14/2004 1/12/2004 1/11/2004 1/7/2004 1/14/2004 11/26/2003
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
88302 88307 88300 88307 88300 88307 88300 88300 88307 88300 88307 88302 88307 88305 88300 88300 88307 88300 88304 88311 88304 88311 88305 88104 88305 88312 88307 88305 88104 88305 88305 88305 88305 88307 88304 88305 88305 88305 88307 88305 88305 88104 88302 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88305
Page 137 of 189
$30.00 $70.11 $1000 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $48.20 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $3040 $6.32 $3040 $6.32 $48.20 $20.66 $48.20 $26.26 $69.82 $32.78 $24.55 $65.57 $32.78 $32.78 $32.78 $69.82 $9.62 $32.78 $65.57 $65.56 $69.83 $33.01
$32.78 $24.64 $19.67 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $48.20
0018879
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
-----------
~---
-
-
-'- .---_.
-._.
----
- --"'--
-'----_ ... -
---
_.•------"-'._-----
--_.._ - - ' ..--
~----
-----
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medic,are Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Medi-Cai Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi,Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cai Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cai Of California Medicare Of Northern ( Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Western Growers Assu
1/5/2004 1/2/2004 12/10/2003 1/16/2004 1111/2004 1/2/2004 8/26/2002 8/26/2002 4/13/2003 12/19/2003 12/19/2003 4/10/2003 4/10/2003 10/29/2003 10/29/2003 10/29/2003 12/4/2003 12/4/2003 11/5/2002 11/5/2002 10/28/2002 10/28/2002 9/12/2002 1/13/2003 1/13/2003 1/13/2003 1/3/2003 2/12/2003 11/7/2002 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 12/2/2003 12/18/2003 12/18/2003 12/26/2003 12/26/2003 12/19/2003 12/19/2003 12/6/2003 12/26/2003 12/20/2003 11/20/2003 11/20/2003 4/18/2003 7/25/2003 8/18/2003 12/5/2003 12/29/2003 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 1/10/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 311712004 311712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 311712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 3117/2004 3117/2004 3117/2004 311712004 311712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 311712004 311712004 311712004 3122/2004 312212004 312212004 312212004 312212004 312212004 312212004 .3/220004 312212004 3122/2004 312212004 312212004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3123/2004 312312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004
88300 88304 88300 88300 88300 88300 88305 88311 88304 88305 88331 88305 88313 68305 88305 88305 88104 88307 88305 88313 88304 88302 88305 88307 88305 88302 88305 88307 88305 88307 88305 88304 88307 88304 88302 88305 88313 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88304 88311 85060 88305 88304 88302 88300 88304 88300 88307
Page 138 of 189
$10,00 $30.40 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $32.78 $10.51 $9.78 $33.01 $52.58 $33,01 $21.36 $3301 $33.01 $68,02 $24.64 $70.05 $32,78 $10.51 $9,62 $5.81 $89.07 $70,05 $33.01 $5.90 $6.44 $69.82 $32,78 $70.05 $33,01 $9,78 $70.11 $30.40 $30.00 $48.20 $84.00 . $70.11 $30.00 $70.11
$70.11 $70,11 $30.40 $632 $12.89 $48.20 $9,78 $15.00 $10.00 $30.40 $10.00 $207.20
0018880
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"------
--- "------- -
- -- -.--- -.-. ".- _._-_.-
Document 278-2
Western Growers Assu Western Growers Assu Kaiser Foundation Heal Kaiser Foundation Heal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Pinnacle Claims Mana£ Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern C Be Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern C Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of Californ ia Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Be Medi,Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car
111012004 11612004 111512004 111512004 1/1612004 1116/2004 12/1512003 1/1412004 1/16/2004 1/1612004 1/28/2004 2/2/2004 1/27/2004 1/7/2004 12/22/2003 12/22/2003 2/2/2004 11212004 11212004 112/2004 1211712003 1/21/2004 2/1/2004 1/27/2004 1/1/2004 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 1113/2004 1/1312004 511312003 4/30/2003 413012003 12/27/2003 12/27/2003 1/18/2004 1/13/2004 1/14/2004 1/13/2004 1/14/2004 112612004 12/912003 12/1112003 2/312004 2/3/2004 1/1812004 12/412003 111412004 111312004 121212003 12/212003 11312004 111612004
Filed 12/01/2008
312312004 312312004 312312004 312312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 312312004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3123/2004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 312312004 312312004 3/2312004 3123/2004 312312004 3123/2004 312312004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3/2312004 3/2312004 312312004 312312004 312312004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3123/2004 3/23/2004 312312004 3/2312004 312312004 312312004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 312312004 312312004 3/23/2004 312312004 312312004 312312004 312312004 312312004
88302 88304 88304 88311 88304 88302 88300 88300 88300 88300 88304 88307 88305 88300 88307 88311 88307 88302 88305 88311 88307 88305 88300 88304 88307 88305 88307 88305 88331 88305 85097 85060 88307 88300 88302 88305 88307 88307 88305 88300 88307 88300 88304 88309 88307 88305 88300 88309 88307 88304 88307 88307
Page 139 of 189
$24.00 $49.00 $49.00 $39.00 $30.40 $5.98 $2.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $91.20 $73.62 $50.61 $10.00 $73.62 $6.64 $73.62 $15.00 $50.61 $6.64 $73.62 $33.50 $7.00 $30.40 $70.11 $50.61 $73.62 $50.61 $43.38 $33.01 $35.25 $12.89 $70.11 $10.00 $15.00 $96.40 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $10.00
$73.62 $10.00 $31.92 $152.00 $73.62 $50.61 $10.00 $152.00 $73.62 $31.92 $73.62 $73.62
0018881
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.
-------'-
----_ •... --------- - ..
-- -
~_._-_.---
-._._.------
Document 278-2
Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California United Healtheare Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Sheetmetal Workers Sheetmetal Workers Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Western Growers Assu Western Growers Assu Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California State Compensation In' Be Medi-Cal
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 140 of 189
11/9/2003 1114/2003 12/15/2003 6/3/2003 6/3/2003 5/28/2003 5/28/2003 1/1/2004 1/27/2004 1/28/2004 2/5/2004 2/7/2004 1/27/2004 2/5/2004 2/4/2004 2/4/2004 2/9/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/6/2004 2/6/2004 2/5/2004 8/4/2003 9/17/2003 2/5/2004 1/19/2004 2/8/2004 2/4/2004 1/27/2004 2/3/2004 2/2/2004 2/2/2004 1/31/2004 2/5/2004 2/11/2004 2/5/2004 12/8/2003 2/8/2004
3123/2004 3/23/2004 312312004 3/25/2004 3/25/2004 3/25/2004 3/25/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3126/2004 3/26/2004
,/5/2004
3/26/2004
88307
2/1/2004 2/3/2004 1/22/2004 1126/2004 1130/2004 2/2/2004 10/28/2003 10/28/2003 2/3/2004 5/6/2003 11/20/2003 12/19/2003
3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/31/2004 313112004 3/31/2004
88307 88304 88305 88305 88304 88304 88307 88305 88307 88304 88300 88300
$70.11 $30.40 $48.20 $48.20 $30.40 $9.93 $207.20 $'106.30 $70.11 $30.40 $10.00 $10.00
88305 88305 88304 85097 85060 85097 85060 88302 88307 88307 88305 88307 88104 88305 88305 88104 88305 88331 88305 88309 88304 88311 88305 88304 88311 88305 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88302 88304 88304 88307
$48.20 $5061 $31.92 $35.25 $12.89 $35.25 $12.89 $12.78 $110.00 $70.11 $289.20 $70.11 $20.66 $48.20 $48.20 $20.66 $48.20 $41.32 $48.20 $148.38 $30.40 $6.32 $289.20 $49.00 $39.00 $48.20 $19.67 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $48.20 $30.00 $60.80 $30.40 $70.11 ""
v. , ,
0018882
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
-
-
..__ . --'--_._-_._-._-
--
----_.
- ." .... -
--_._--- .... ,'-._- -- .. --.
-_._-_._-
__ .-----_-.
_.---.---.-
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 141 of 189
.,_._,._--,
-- ._---------_ . .,
-
Document 278-2
Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Superior Ins. Services Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi"Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California . Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California United Healtheare Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi,Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
12/12/2003 12/12/2003 12/17/2003 12119/2003 12127/2003 12/11/2003 1/7/2004 1/7/2004 12/9/2003 12/15/2003 12/15/2003 1/30/2004 1/29/2004 1/27/2004 1/26/2004 1/26/2004 1/26/2004 1/2612004 1/2812004 1/2812004 1/27/2004 1/2912004 1/23/2004 1/18/2004 1/21/2004 1/21/2004 1/23/2004 1/23/2004 2/28/2004 2/11/2004 2/9/2004 2/9/2004 2/11/2004 2/12/2004 2/12/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004 2/16/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/10/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/20/2004 2/13/2004 2/19/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/23/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004
313112004 313112004 313112004 3/3112004 3/3112004 313112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3131/2004 313112004 313112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 ~/~1/2004
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88104 88305 88300 88304 88300 88304 88305 88304 88304 88305 88331 88305 88307 88300 88300 88300 88305 88307 88300 88307 88304 88300 88300 88300 88307 88304 88302 88307 88307 88104 88304 88311 88307 88300 88300 88104 88305 88307 88104 88305 88313 88307 88305 88104 88304 88300 88307 88307 88302 88300 88307 88313
$44.76 $44.76 $10.00 $30.40 $10.00 $30.40 $48.20 $91.20 $49.00 $96.40 $41.32 $48.20 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $50.61 $73.62 $10.00 $70.11 $30.40 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $30.40 $15.00 $70.11 $137.50 $20.66 $30.40 $6.32 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $20.66 $48.20 $70.11 $20.66 $48.20 $28.00 $70.11 $48.20 $20.66 $30.40 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $45.00 $10.00 $70.11 $84.00
0018883
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
- -
-------
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Pinnacle Claims Mana, Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Bc Medi-Cai Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California - Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern FAmily Hea!thCar Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
2/19/2004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/26/2004 2/25/2004 2/20/2004 2/23/2004 2/19/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/24/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/25/2004 2/26/2004 2/26/2004 1/20/2004 2/11/2004 1/24/2004 2/12/2004 1/22/2004 1/22/2004 1/21/2004 1/21/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/12/2004 2/18/2004 1/16/2004 12/12/2003 1/20/2004 1/23/2004 1/27/2004 1/26/2004 1/27/2004 1/28/2004 1/28/200"1 1/28/2004 1/24/2004 1/22/2004 1/22/2004 1/24/2004 1/23/2004 1/23/2004 1/23/2004 1/24/2004 2/3/2004 2/4/2004 2/15/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/3112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 313112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88307 88304 88307 88305 88305 88307 88307 88307 88300 86304 88307 88305 88304 88311 88307 88304 88304 88305 88305 88305 88309 88305 88305 88305 88305 88172 88173 88305 88313 88305 88329 88302 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88309 88300
':II':!'! ',,)(',f"l11
00"'('\1:"
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88307
Vi'"' "L.,UU-"
UU..JU"';
Page 142 of 189
$70.11 $30.40 $70.11 $289.20 $138.00 $70.11 . $70.11 $70.11 $10.00 $30.40 $207.20 $48.20 $30.40 $6.32 $70.11 $30.40 $30.40 $48.20 $48.20 $50.61 $148.38 $96.40 $48.20 $50.61 $50.61 $26.95 $41.58 $48.20 $28.00 $96.40 $26.06 $15.00 $70.11 $50.61 $73.62 $70.11 $73.62 $148.38 $10.00 $GO.G1
$73.62 $73.62 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $73.62 $70.11 $70.11 $192.80 $70.11
0018884
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
------_ .. _ - - - -
Total Insurance Payments
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Western Growers Assu Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
2/18/2004 2/11/2004 2/10/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/22/2004 2/24/2004 2/2112004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/21/2004 2/23/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/12/2004 3/2/2004 6/23/2003 8/30/2003 1/29/2004 2/11/2004 1/13/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 ·3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88307 88307 88307 88304 88307 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88304 88300 88305 88307 88307 88307 88304
Page 143 of 189
$70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $30AO
$70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $207.20 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $30AO
$10.00 $3615 $52.58 $70.11 $7011 $30AO
$39,253.64
0018885
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 144 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004 Last Name
- -- - ---' - -
-----",-_.-------
First Name
-------
0'- _ _ _ _- -
------,~"._-
Primary Insurance Claim Entry Date Date of Service CPT Charges Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 $30.00 2/11/2004 88302 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88311 $39.00 2/6/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/6/2004 88304 $49.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/4/2004 88104 $62.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/1/2004 2/5/2004 88304 $49.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/9/2004 88305 $138.00 Mia 3/1/2004 88304 $49.00 2/10/2004 Gemcare 3/1/2004 88305 $138.00 2/10/2004 None 3/1/2004 88305 2/11/2004 $138.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/11/2004 8.8307 $259.00 Med i-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88305 $138.00 2/11/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88331 2/11/2004 $191.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 2/10/2004 88305 $1,380.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 88305 $1,380.00 2/10/2004 None 3/1/2004 88304 2/11/2004 $49.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 88302 2/12/2004 $15.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88309 $152.00 2/10/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88305 $138.00 2/10/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88331 2/10/2004 $191.00 Mia 3/1/2004 2/12/2004 88313 $84.00 Mia 3/1/2004 2/12/2004 88307 $259.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 2/11/2004 88305 $138.00 Mia 3/112004 2/11/2004 88305 $276.00 . Mia 31112004 3/1/2004 88305 $276.00 Mia 31112004 2/1212004 88307 $259.00 Mia 31112004 2111/2004 88173 $152.00 Mia 3/1/2004 88172 $104.00 2/1112004 None 31112004 2/7/2004 88307 $259.00 None 3/1/2004 88305 2/9/2004 $138.00 Mia 314/2004 2/6/2004 88173 $152.00 Mia 3/412004 2/6/2004 88172 $104.00 Bc Of California 3/412004 2/10/2004 88300 $10.00 Mia 3/4/2004 2/6/2004 88332 $97.00 Mia 314/2004 2/6/2004 88331 $191.00 Mia 3/412004 88302 $15.00 2/6/2004 Mia 3/4/2004 216/2004 88305 $276.00 Mia 31412004 2/612004 88309 $152.00 Mia 3/4/2004 88307 2/6/2004 $259.00 Mia 3/4/2004 88300 2/6/2004 $10.00 Mia 3/412004 2/612004 88307 $259.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/4/2004 88305 $276.00 2/412004 Kern Family Health Care 3/4/2004 2/4/2004 88104 $124.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 88307 2/8/2004 $259.00 Bc Medi-Cal 3/412004 2/412004 88304 $49.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/4/2004 88304 2111/2004 $147.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 2/812004 88307 $259.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 2/812004 88307 $259.00 Kern Family Health Care 314/2004 218/2004 88307 $259.00 Bc Medi-Cal 3/4/2004 2/8/2004 88307 $259.00 Medi_Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 2/8/2004 88307 $259.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrter 3/4/2004 88307 2/6/2004 $259.00 Medicare Of Northern Calif01 3/5/2004 2/10/2004 88305 $193.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/9/2004 88302 2/12/2004 $30.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/9/2004 88307 $259.00 2/12/2004 Ccs Medi-Cal 3/9/2004 88104 $62.00 2/13/2004
0018886
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 145 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004
-"--------------
._--. - - - - - , _.. _------
Medi-Cal Of California Kern Farnily Health Care None Be Medi-Cal Kern Farniiy Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Farnily Health Care Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Schaller Anderson Clairns Dr Mia Mia Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Pinnacle Claims Managemer Kern Family Health Care Mia Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care None Medi-Cal Of California None Kaiser Foundation Health PI, Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None Mia Western Growers Assurance
Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Mia Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medicare 01 Northern CalitOl Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Breast Health Program Gsec Breast Health Program Gsec Breast Health Program Gsec Kern Family Health Care Mia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi·Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal None
31912004 31912004 3/912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 319/2004 31912004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 3/1012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 3/1012004
21412004 2/17/2004 214/2004 211712004 211312004 211412004 211112004 21912004 21912004 211012004 211012004 211212004 211112004 211012004 211712004 2/17/2004 2112/2004 211212004 21912004 211112004 21912004 211712004 211312004 211812004 21612004 21612004 211312004 211112004 21912004 2/1212004 211212004 211112004 21912004 21412004 21412004 211212004 211212004 211212004 112912004 211212004 21412004 21412004 211212004 211312004. 211512004 211512004 211912004 211912004 211912004 211112004 211312004 211812004 211812004 211612004 211712004 211712004
88305 88305 88304 88305 88307 88307 88104 88311 88304 88305 88104 88300 88104 88305 88304 88307 88311 88304 88307 88307 88104 88305 88305 88304 88311 88304 88305 88307 88307 88304 88309 88305 88307 88305 88305 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88331 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88173 88172 88104 88312 88305 88104 88307 88307 88305
$552.00 $276.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $62.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $62.00 $10.00 $62.00 $1,380.00 $98.00 $259.00 $39.00 $49.00 $259.00 $777.00 $62.00 $276.00 $138.00 $49.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $152.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $138.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $259.00 $10.00 $191.00 $1,104.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $152.00 $104.00 $62.00 $76.00 $138.00 $62.00 $259.00 $259.00 $414.00
0018887
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
-,._---....
-
.
- --- -
-_
------
... _------_.
-----' •....
----
---- - ----'--- .. -
. -
-
Document 278-2 Dr. Jadwin Charges by entry date March 2004
None Kern Farnily Health Care Kern Family Health Care None None Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of Califomia Kern Family Health Care None None None Medi-Cal Res1ricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Pinhacle Claims Managemer Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Oi california Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern Califo! Medicare Of Northern Calif01 None Medicare Of Northern Califo! Medicare Of Northern Califo! Pinnacle Claims Managemer Kern Family Health Care
3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/1 0/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
211712004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/11/2004 2/18/2004 2/1812004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2117/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/9/2004 2/9/2004 2/13/2004 2/16/2004 2/16/2004 2/16/2004 2/16/2004 2/14/2004 2/18/2004 2/16/2004 2/11/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/24/2004 2/25/2004 2/24/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/19/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/27/2004
Page 146 of 189
88305 88302 88307 88300 88304 88304 88305 88302 88305 88305 88311 88304 88304 88307 88309 88332 88331 88313 88307 88305 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88313 88305 88173 88172 88305 88104 88305 88104 88305 88305 88307 88307 88305 88104 88307 88304
$138.00 $15.00 $259.00 $10.00 $49.00 $49.00 $138.00 $15.00 $414.00 $414.00 $39.00 $49.00 $49.00 $259.00 $152.00 $97.00 $382.00 $84.00 $259.00 $138.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $28.00 $138.00 $152.00 $104.00 $138.00 $62.00 $138.00 $186.00 $138.00 $138.00 $259.00 $518.00 $138.00 $62.00 $259.00 $49.00
0018888
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 147 of 189
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Or. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 148 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004
-------,,- .. - . " .
._~--------_.-
Bc Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern CaiifOi Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Kaiser Foundation Health PI, Kaiser Foundation Heaith PI, Bc Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Lerdo Kern Family Health Care None • None Kern Family Health Care Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Western Growers Assurance Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Mia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California None None Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal None Mia Schaller Anderson Claims 01 Schaller Anderson Cla.ims 01 Kern Family Health Care None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Kern Farnily Health Care None Lerdo Lerdo Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal
3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004
2/13/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/22/2004 2/10/2004 2/21/2004 2/9/2004 2/22/2004 2/24/2004 2/21/2004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/12/2004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/13/2004 2/25/2004 2/20/2004 2/10/2004 2/20/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/26/2004 2/20/2004 2/12/2004 2/11/2004 2/23/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/26/2004 2/20/2004 2/25/2004 2/20/2004 2/25/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/19/2004 2/23/2004 2/22/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004
88304 88311 88305 88311 88304 88307 88302 88307 88302 88307 88304 88307 88305 88307 88304 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88302 88307 88305 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88304 88304 88305 88304 88302 88304 88305 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88300 88305 88104 88305 88300 88304 88307 88304 88305 88302
$49.00 $39.00 $138.00 $39.00 $49.00 $259.00 $30.00 $259.00 $15.00 $259.00 $49.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $49.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $30.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $1,380.00 $259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $49.00 $276.00 $98.00 $15.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $62.00 $138.00 $10.00 $49.00 $259.00 $49.00 $138.00 $30.00
0018890
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2 Charges by entrY date
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 149 of 189
March 2004
-
--------,-._--
-
---
-----,------
-'.'---' -._,--
- ._--- .. ------.-.---.---_.
Bc Medi-Cal None None Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of California Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of C~lifornia Medi-Cal Of California Mia None None None Mia Gemcare Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Heaith Care Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern Califor Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cai Of California None Schaller Anderson Claims D. Schaller Anderson Claims D. Schaller Anderson Claims D. Medicare Of Northern Califor Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia None Schaller Anderson Claims D. Medl-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Mia Medi-Cal Of California Mia Kern Family Health Care . None
3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/1712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/1712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004
2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 1/20/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/24/2004 2/25/2004 . 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/24/2004 2/26/2004 2/24/2004 2/25/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/26/2004 2/23/2004 2/26/2004 2/27/2004 2/26/2004 2126/2004 2/26/2004 2/26/2004 2/28/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/29/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/28/2004 3/1/2004 2/18/2004 2/27/2004 2/23/2004 3/212004 3/112004 2/25/2004 212612004
88307 88307 88304 88313 88311 88304 88305 88305 88305 88311 88304 88311 88304 88300 88305 88305 88305 88305 88300 88305 88300 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88304 88307 88304 88304 88304 88304 88311 88300 88305 88304 88300 88312 88307 88331 88305 88300 88312 88307 88331 88305 88305 88304 88329 88305 88305 88300 88305 88304 88300
$259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $28.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $39.00 $49.00 $39.00 $49.00 $10.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $10.00 $690.00 $10.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $259.00 $49.00 $49.00 $49.00 $49.00 $195.00 $10.00 $690.00 $49.00 $10.00 $76.00 $259.00 $382.00 $138.00 $10.00 $76.00 $259.00 $382.00 $138.00 $138.00 $147.00 $101.00 $138.00 $138.00 $10.00 $138.00 $147.00 $10.00
0018891
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2 Charges by entry date
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 150 of 189
March 2004
--- --------,--------,,--
_~
None None None None Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California State Farm Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Califomia
None
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of ~alifornia Amalgamated Life Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Bc Medi-Cal Schaller Anderson Claims Dl Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None None Schaller Anderson Claims D, Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal State Comp Family Pact
3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/18/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/2212004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/2212004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/2212004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3123/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004
2/26/2004 2/26/2004 212412004 2/22/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/26/2004 2/26/2004 2/24/2004 3/212004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/28/2004 2/28/2004 2/28/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 2/28/2004 2/26/2004 3/112004 3/1/2004 3/1/2004 2/26/2004 2/25/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 3/112004 3/2/2004 3/1/2004 2/29/2004 3/112004 3/2/2004 2/29/2004 3/112004 2/27/2004 2125/2004 2/29/2004 2129/2004 2/27/2004 3/512004 3/5/2004 3/3/2004 3/4/2004 3/1/2004 3/1/2004 3/212004 3/212004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/1712004 2/25/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2111/2004
88311 88305 88104 88104 88300 88300 88302 88307 88309 88309 88305 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88331 88311 88305 88307 88307 88307 88300 88300 88307 88305 88305 88307 88305 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88305 88104 88104 88302 88300 88304 88304 88311 88304 88309 88305 88332 88331 88305 88305 88305 88304 88305
$39.00 $690.00 $62.00 $62.00 $10.00 $10.00 $15.00 $259.00 $152.00 $152.00 $414.00 $414.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $191.00 $39.00 $690.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $10.00 $518.00 $138.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $62.00 $62.00 $50.00 $10.00 $49.00 $49.00 $39.00 $49.00 $152.00 $138.00 $97.00 $191.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $49.00 $414.00
0018892
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---------._-
--'
". "--'---...-
'--
- - ' . ' - - , ...
_-
,----- --
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Charges by entry date March 2004
Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal None None Schaller Anderson Claims 0, Mia Medicare Of Northern Califor Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Kern Family Health Care Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor None Mia Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Mia , Medicare Of Northern Califo! None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California California Children Services None None Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Modi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Bc Medi-Cal None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medicare Of Northern Califo! None Medicare Of Northern Califo!
3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 312912004 312912004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 312912004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/2912004 3129/2004 3/2912004 3/29/2004 . 3129/2004 3/2912004 312912004 312912004 3129/2004 3/2912004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 312912004 3/2912004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/412004 3/412004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 3/112004 3/212004 3/812004 3/812004 2/27/2004 3/312004 3/312004 3/312004 3/512004 3/412004 3/412004 3/412004 3/412004 3/312004 3/412004 3/512004 3/412004 3/312004 3/412004 313/2004 3/812004 3/312004 3/412004 3/312004 3/112004 3/312004 31812004 3/612004 31412004 3/512004 31412004 3/4120Q4 31512004 31312004 3/3/2004 212812004 31312004 31112004 212812004 31312004 3/212004 31312004 3/412004 313/2004 3/312004 3/512004 3/512004 3/812004 3/912004 3/912004 3/8/2004
Page 151 of 189
88305 88307 88305 88173 88172 88307 88305 88173 88172 88305 88305 88305 88305 88302 88307 88304 88304 88304 88302 88305 88304 88302 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88300 88302 88300 88307 88300 88300 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88311 88304 88305 88302 88300 88304
$138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $152.00 $104.00 $518.00 $276.00 $152.00 $104.00 $138.00 $138.00 $276.00 $276.00 $50.00 $259.00 $49.00 $49.00 $49.00 $25.00 $138.00 $49.00 $25.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $690.00 $138.00 $10.00 $10.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $50.00 $10.00 $259.00 $10.00 $10.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $15.00 $10.00 $4900
0018893
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 152 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004
--
.-
Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Medi-Cal Of California Mia Medi-Cal Of California Mia Medi-Cal Of California None Schalier Anderson Claims 0, --- -_ _--,- ----,- -----,._---' Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Schaller Anderson Claims 01 Kern Farnily Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Mia Mia Kern Farniiy Health Care Mia Mia Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None - - " " - - ' - - --None Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None Kern Family Health Care Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Mia Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier - --,-,--, Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California - ._-- Kern Family Health Care --Kern Family Health Care . None Mia Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern Calif01 -,_._,,_. Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medicare Of Northern Calif01
,.,"._---~~.,.
..
..
'-'-
--
_.-
-
Totai Charges
3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/30/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
3/9/2004 3/7/2004 3/712004 3/9/2004 3/9/2004 3/9/2004 3/912004 3/912004 3/712004 3/312004 3/3/2004 3/7/2004 3/512004 3/3/2004 3/312004 3/1/2004 3/112004 3/812004 3/3/2004 3/6/2004 3/6/2004 3/8/2004 3/8/2004 3/1/2004 3/8/2004 3/8/2004 31112004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/1/2004 2/21/2004 3/3/2004 3/212004 3/212004 2/26/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/312004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/4/2004 3/112004 3/3/2004 3/5/2004 3/4/2004 3/3/2004 3/312004 3/512004 3/5/2004 3/3/2004
88305 88302 88307 88300 88305 88304 88305 88305 88305 88305 88304 88305 88307 88304 88300 88311 88304 88305 88300 88311 88305 88331 88305 88307 88331 88305 88307 88331 88307 88307 88307 88300 88305 88307 88307 88300 88305 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88300 88305 88305 88304 88104 85060 85097 88305 88104 88104
$1,518.00 $75.00 $518.00 $20.00 $138.00 $49.00 $276.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $49.00 $10.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $10.00 $39.00 $138.00 $191.00 $1,242.00 $259.00 $191.00 $1,104.00 $259.00 $191.00 $518.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $414.00 $49.00 $62.00 $87.00 $213.00 $138.00 $62.00 $62.00 $90,471.00
0018894
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 153 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees March 2004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
March
I Year-To-Date I
Inpatientl
$6,326~
$23,80f33)
Outpatient I
$0.001
$0.001
$5,504.371
$20,707.161
Distribution Compensation
! ,
I
Billing ServiceL
$759.22 [
$2,856.161
Billing Clerk[
$0.001
$0.001
$63.27\
$238.01 \
$0.001
$O.OO!
'--"
Faculty Practice 1% i Balance
0018895
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 154 of 189
·KERN MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
MEMO
Date:
February 5, 2004
To:
Dr. Jadwin
From: Re:
.Paul Westover
9tLJ
January Professional Fees
Professional fees for the month of January 2004 in the amount of$8,175.47 will be included in your February 17. 2004 payroll check.
PFW/ymn
0018896
Financial Summary Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Page155 I ofof1 189 Page
Filed 12/01/2008
. ~count ID: XG1486 User1D; PAULW
___ I Daysheet
I
Appointments
Claims
I
I ~
Patients
Finandals
I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
I
Aging
Maintenance
I Adjustments
I J
e-Records
I
Procedure Sun
Fihanclal Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Frnancial Sum(TIary All Providers
Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
Payments Charges
Location; All locations
Period for 01/01/2004- 01/31/2004
WriteOffs
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
# Mise
Patient
# Proc
David F Jadwin
71814,00
0,00
6593,00
438,00
16252,24
6173,00
674
Teopengco
10380.00
0,00
2381.01
109,59
5448,99
1690.00
106
Jadwin l A
21824,00
0.00
2189.19
176.90
3175,60
2341.00
218
Teopencgo
4370.00
0.00
833,63
0.00
1484,37
0.00
33
ChargE
LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
WriteOffs
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $11996,83 $724.49 $26361.20 $10204.00
$108388.00
# Proe
# Misl ChargE
1031
Powered by Medrium
..... 6,59 -00+ 1,3 E\ - [} 0 .,. ·176-90+
o. rel="nofollow">,,;.r::-
_._---- _ - - - .........
httns'//WVJUJ
mpt1rillTYl [",........"/........ Q
....
+: . . "'" 1 "1
11
·vn..,,, 01': In ~
...L _
I~
n
0018897
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 156 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees February 2004
0018898
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 157 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees March 2004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
March
Year-To-Date
Inpatient 1,--_ _------,$_0_.0_0-,-1 Outpatient 1'--_-"$-=.6=,3.=26.:..;0-=.86.;...;1
_ ---'
Distribution
Compensation IL...-.-----"c.=.=-=...:.:.::.:....l $5,504.37i Billing Service
$759.221 l__-",-,-==
Billing Clerk!L.-_ _------'--'--'$0.001 Faculty Practice 1%1'-------'::.=.=.:-. $63.271 Balance
_
_
J
1
. $0.001
0018899
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 158 of 189
• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
MEMO
Date:
March 8, 2004
To:
Dr. Jadwin
From:
Paul
Re:
February Professional Fees
westover~t!»J
Professional fees for the month of February 2004 in the amount of$5,504.37 will be included in your March 16, 2004 payroll check.
PFW/ymn
0018900
Page I of I
Financial Summary
I
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I
XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims.
I
I
PatIents
~ Finandals
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary J Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
I
I
e-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
Communication Center
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing proyider
Rendering Provider
Period for 02/01/2004- 02/29/2004 Payments
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
Location: All Locations
WriteOffs
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
58677.42
0.00
3876.99
142.92
18644.07
12311.00
607
a
Teopengco
6459.00
0.00
371.10
15.00
2462.69
1683.00
68
Jadwin LA
17973.00
0.00'
2144.22
162.73
3612.63
187.00
171
a a
Teopencgo
5061.13
0.00
381.41
0.00
544.64
2196.00
47
0
Upschultz
18597.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
130
a
Lipschultz
5779.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
41
0
# Proe
# Misc Charges
1064
a
David F Jadwin
Document 278-2
LA
LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
practice
Charges
$112546.55
Mise Charges Insurance
$0.00
Patient
WriteOffs Insurance
Patient
$6773.72 $320.65 $25264.03 $16377.00
Filed 12/01/2008
Grand Total for
Payments
c03 ~c'O. 8<:0 '(.,J/9. 6lJ,
fa % bt"!J/ f7S / % adm Powered by Medrium
Page 159 of 189
03.a7 :$ .5j'OV. 037 J
o
o .... CO (0
....
o
https://www.medrium.com/practicel 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count 10:
3/8/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 160 of 189
IIKERN MEDICAL II CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
MEMO
Date:
March 8, 2004
To:
Dr. Jadwin
From:
Paul Westover
Re:
February Professional Fees
Professional fees for the month of February 2004 in the amount 0£$5,504.37 will be included in your March 16, 2004 payroll check.
PFW/ymn
0018902
Financial Summary
r(115~
.
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I ~
Financials
I
!
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statement' I Custom Reports
Maintenance
e~Records
Communication Center
I
I Adjustments I Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By postinlg Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
David F Jadwin
Period for 02/0:L/2004- 02/29/2004
Charges
Location: All Locations
WriteOffs
Payments
,.lise Charges Insurance Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Mise # Proc Charges
0.00
3875.99
142.92
18644.07
12311.00
607
0
Teopengco
5459.00
0.00
37l.10
15.00
2462.69
1683.00
68
0
Jadwin LA
17973.00
0.00
162.73
3612.63
187.00
171
0
Teopencgo
5061.13
0.00
2144.22 I 381.41
0.00
544.64
2196.00
47
0
Lipschultz
18597.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
130
a
Lipschultz LA
5779.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
41
0
# Proc
# Mise Charges
Document 278-2
S8677.42
LA
Billing
Provider
Rendering Provider
Charges
$112S46.55
'"iscCharges Insunnce
$0.00
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$6773.72 $320.65 $25264.03 $16377.00
1064
Filed 12/01/2008
Grand Total for practice
WriteOffs
I'ayments
o
(c, ::, J, c,. 80
7S'9.
R,J,
1o 0/0
~~o .1'50 '-{. ;;7
Powered by Medrlum
Page 161 of 189
o
o .....
00
to
o
W
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.
~count 10: XG1436 User 10: YVONNEN! _ _ I Appointments I Claims I F:atlents
1 Vi 1
https://www.medrium.comJpracticel 0 1/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
3/8/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 162 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees January 2004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
January
,
I Year-To-Date I
Inpatient I
$8,077.381
$8,077.381
I
$0.001
$0.001
I
$7,027.321
$7,027.321
Billing Service 12%1
$969.291
$969.29\
Billing Clerk I
$0.001
$O.OOJ
$80.771
$80.771
$0.001
$0.001
Outpatient Distribution
Compensation
Faculty Practice 1%[ Balance
0018904
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 163 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR '['HI' EASTERN DI.3TRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, vs.
No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
COUN']'Y OF KERN; et a1. Defendants . ....
-~-~-----_ ..._~-~_._---_.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF IRWIN EVERETT HARRIS,
~.D.
Wednesday, August 13, 7008 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Susan R. Wood, CSR No. 6829
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free. (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
---'I"'R\
,
JADWIN VS. COUNTY -VERETI HARRIS M D., Wednesday, August 13 2008
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 02:39:44
1
02:39:48
2
02:39:52
3
02;39;5-4
4
02:40:05
5 6
02:40:0B
7
02:40:11
8
02:40:12
9
02:40,04
02:40:13 10 02:40:17 11 02:40:21 12 02:40:22 13 0240:24 14 02:40:27 15 02:4030 16 ONO:33 17 02:40:35 18 02:40:38 19 02:40:41 20 02:40:45 21 024053 22 02:40:57 23 02:4101 24 02:4104 25
113 Document 278-2
occasions to -- to counsel him about some of his behaviors, but I feel that the purpose of this is not to talk about Dr. Roy. Q. Okay. Focusing on this letter, Dr. Harris, what do you recall saying to Dr. Roy when you received this letter? Or did you say anything to him at all? A. I don't remember. Q. You don't remember. Did you tell anybody else what you thought about Dr. Roy's letter, Exhibit 193? A. No. Q. You didn't discuss -A. No. Why would I do that? These -- these letters are total and complete confidential and private. I would never do that. Q. SO what happened to this letter after you received it from Dr. Roy? A. I believe this letter went into the private, confidential, separate, and secure file that I mentioned to you, which is called a quality file. Q. It was never -- and that letter stayed in your file permanently and never left that -A. I don't believe that letter went anywhere except to our County Counsel. WOOD & RANDALL
02:42:14
Filed 12/01/2008 1
02:42:15
2
02:42:17
3
02:42:18
4
02:42:19
5
02:42:20
6
02:42:21
7
02:42:22
8
02:42:23
9
02:42:24 10 02:42:25 11 02:42:27 12 0242:28 13 02:42:31
14
02:42:32 15 02:42:32 16 0242:36 17 0242:38 18 02:42:40 19 02:42:41
20
02:42:42 21 02:42:43 22 02:42:43 23 02:4243 24 02:42:46 25
(800) 322-4595
(800) 322-4595
02:4LD
1
02:4L13
2
02:41:15
3
02:41:15
4
02:41:17
5
02:41:20
6
02:41:22
7
02:41:23
8
0241:24
9
02:41:26 10 02:41:2611 C2:41:29 12 C2:4Ul 13 02',41:35 14 0241:41 15 C2:41:44 16 C241:4B 17 02:41:4B 18 02:41:49 19 02:41:51 20 C2:4155 21 02:42:Cl 22 02:42:D
114 Q. Okay. And when do you -- how did it get to the County Counsel? Do you recall the circumstances? A. What was the question? Q. How did this letter, Exhibit -A. The County Counsel asked me for it. Q. When did the County Counsel -- are we talking about Karen Barnes here? A. Yeah. Q. When did Karen Barnes ask you for Exhibit 193? A. I don't remember the date. Q. Was it years afterwards? A. I think -- I remember at the time that Karen had asked me for the letter. I -- I don't believe that at that time, but later I guess I learned that Dr. Jadwin's attorney had asked her for it. Q. Asked her for it? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. How did people know about Exhibit 1937 How did they know it existed, to your knowledge? A. No -- no one except for a very select few in the leadership should have known that it existed. Q. Okay. Well, you got this letter from Dr. Roy. You asked -- I mean, he came -- well, let's WOOD & RANDALL
Page 164 of 189 115
step back for a minute. Did Dr. Roy come to you after the conference with complaints -A. Yes. Q. ~- about the presentation by -- let me finish. -- by Dr. Jadwin? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And then you had the same conversation with Dr. Roy that you had with Dr. Taylor and Dr. McBride? A. That's right. Q. In other words, I recommend you go ahead and write a written complaint? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And so then this Exhibit 193 resulted from Dr. Roy. Correct? This letter from Dr. Roy, he wrote it-A. Yeah. Q. -- after he had the conversation with you. A. Yeah. Q. Right? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. You got this letter. You put it into your top secret confidential file. WOOD & RANDALL
116 02:42:49 02:42:50 02:42:52 02:42,54 02:42:58 02:43:C4 02:43:17 02:43:20 C2:43:24 02:43:28 C2:43:32 C2:43:36 02:43:41 C2:43:43 02:43,46 02:43:46 02:43:49 02:43;53 02:43:54 02:43:55 02:43:56 C2:4358 C2:44:00 02:44:02 C2:44:C5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. Yes. Q. SO I'm asking, to your knowledge, how did other people know it existed? A. other people didn't know it existed. They -- at the time when I met with the medical staff leadership we .- I -- I prepared a summary, if you will, of some of the comments that were made from the letters that I had received and shared those with the medical staff leaders. I don't remember whether I showed them the actual letter or not, but I do remember writing a summary in the anticipation that at some point we would be meeting with Dr. Jadwin. Q. Okay. So you wrote a summary of memo. To whom did you write this memo, if you can recall? A. I wrote these -- the summary memo, if you will, to the president of the medical staff, the vice president of medical staff. Q. Okay. That's Eugene Kercher? A. Yes. Q. Is that -- Scott Ragland is vice president? Who is the vice president? A. In all honesty, I'm not sure that I remember exactly who the officers were at the time. But it was the president of the medical staff, the vice WOOD & RANDALL
(800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395·1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
(800) 322-4595
"
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 165 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN,
D.O.,
Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF EDWARD WILLIAM TAYLOR, M.D. Wednesday, December 5, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free. (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
.-
=EC
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN 0 WILLIAM TAYLOR M D., Wednesday December 5 20(
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
13 Document Q. Did you have any discussions about this deposition with anybody before coming to this deposition? A. My counsel. We essentially talked about 5 this document as I -6 MR. WASSER: Yeah. Don't -- you don't have 7 to say what we talked about. 8 MR. LEE: Yeah. 9 Q. SO Mr. Wasser is your attorney? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Okay. Have you talked with anyone else 12 besides Mr. Wasser about this deposition? 13 A. My wife knows I have it. My chief resident 14 knows I have it because I'm on call. My partner 15 knows I have it because he's covering me while I'm 16 here. That's probably about it. 17 Q. Did you have any discussions with them about 18 the deposition beyond -19 A. Oh, no. No specifics. Just that I need 20 coverage. 21 Q. Okay. Okay. Since we started on it, why 22 don't we go to Exhibit 13. Take a look at this. 23 You're saying that this letter was to clarify your 24 feedback on the oncology conference; is that correct? 25 A. Correct. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1 2 3 4
278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 166 of 189 14 Q. Okay. Now, this feedback form, is this a 2 form that you filled out at the conference or 3 immediately as the conference ended? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. And which conference are we talking about? 6 Are we talking about the one that occurred on or 7 around October 12th, 2005? 8 A. On or around, and it's the oncology 9 conference. Tumor board is the other name for it. 10 Q. Okay. Can you tell me a little bit about -11 well, tell me what you know about this conference or 12 what you remember about it. 13 A. That specific one or the conference itself? 14 Q. This specific conference on October 12th or 15 around October 12th, 2005. 16 A. What I remember is essentially what I wrote 17 here because it's been a while. And most of the 18 specifics and scientific physician-type knowledge is 19 completely gone. What I remember about it is that I 20 was quite appalled that the resident who had prepared 21 the conference never got to say anything. I was -22 Q. Just to stop you for one second. 23 Are you referring to George Alkhouri? 24 A. I don't remember who it is. 25 Q. Okay. Sorry. Please continue. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1
16
15
1
A. So what I remember most is the process
2
that's been set up in oncology conferences was not followed, and the educational benefits of the conference were essentially lost. And that's kind of what I focused in on and why I wrote this letter. Q. Sure. A. Because I've been a teacher at KMC for 20 years, and I'm very interested in maintaining a good educational environment. Q. Well, actually, let's step back to what you were suggesting we should talk about, which is what is this -- what is this conference in general? This tumor board or oncology conference, what is its purpose? A. We go over -- we -- excuse me. We, being many different departments. Usually surgery is always there, medicine is always there; both residents, attendings, medical students; on occasion family practice is there; on occasion GYN is there if they have a particular case; and cancer cases are presented -- in an ideal world it's a case that hasn't been treated yet or completed treated yet, and It's an open forum to discuss the future direction for that patient. Sometimes the case has already come to fruition as far as the treatment, and WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
3 4 5 6
7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
it ends up being a bit of a retrospective discussion. Usually the resident will present the case members from the audience -- radiation, oncologists, chemotherapists, surgeons -- everybody will give their input if they were involved; or if it's still a case we're trying to figure out what to do, we'll talk about what might happen next. If there were problems along the way, delays, we talk about that; so it's -- it's a part of a quality improvement process, although that's not its main thrust. And then usually -Q. Let me stop you right there. What -- what is the main thrust? A. The main thrust is -- is to educate -- two main thrusts, and I put them both equally. One is to educate the audience in cancer-related topics; and number two, but no less important, is to discuss that particular case and decide what the plan is; or if the plan's already been carried out, if that seemed like the best idea. MR. LEE: I'd like to get a document marked for identification, please. (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 14 marked for identification.) THE WITNESS: And I have to say I don't run WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800.322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,-
=EC
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN 0 WILLIAM TAYLOR M 0 Wednesday December 5 20C
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25
Document 21 Q. Okay. A He may have said it and it didn't sink in. What sunk in is there -- there is some ratio and most of them are supposed to be current cases which refer to the 20 -- the 75 percent. Q. I'm sorry. So Dr. McBride did mention -A I never heard the 75 percent. I do remember him saying, as I said before, that -- that whatever governing bodies he had to report to preferred the cases to be ongoing current cases, not retrospective. Q. Do you recall when he told you that? A Several times during the last 15 years. Q. And how did you respond to that when he told you that? A He told the whole group. Q. I see. So it wasn't in the one-on-one conversation? A No. Q. It was him speaking to the entire group? A Correct. Q. SO to your knowledge, was there any adjustment made in the conference format in -- as a consequence of his comments? A I think everybody tried to find the most recent, fresh cases we could. WOOD & RANDALL (800)322-4595
23 BY MR. LEE; Q. Okay. You have just been handed a document that has been marked for identification as Exhibit Number 15. Do you recognize this document? A No. Q. Okay. Okay. Let me -- let me get back to your feedback on these conferences. Now, typically what has your feedback consist- -- you said that you've attended these oncology conferences and you've given feedback on them. What kind of feedback generally have you given? I mean, some people -A There's hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and I've given feedback on every single one of them. And I couldn't possibly begin to remember all of those. Q. Okay. Of course not. But have they tended to be more In the nature of praising or have they tended to be more in the nature of offering constructive criticism? A Both. Q. Both. Okay. A Both. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 167 of 189 22 Q. Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Okay. So -- so it seems to you that the message was heard by the cancer committee? A Well, some of us already did that, whether he said it or not. Q. Okay. A Somehow I had already known that; so it wasn't ever any new news to me. But it is always a challenge to find -- when a conference occurs once a month, you don't just hold your patients' care up until -- you know, so that they can be an undecided case. Q. Uh-huh. A And so it always is -- yet you need some time to prepare the case; so it's always a challenge to get a case that everything hasn't been decided yet during the right timing to do the -- what's preferred. MR. LEE; Okay. I'd like to get this marked for identification. (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 15 ma rked for identification.) MS. HERRINGTON: Number? THE COURT REPORTER; 15. III WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
24 Q. And, for example, if you find a presentation 2 to have been below average in your experience, would 3 you clearly indicate that in the feedback? 4 A Absolutely. I hold nothing back. 5 Q. Okay. A We evaluate the res- -- usually two 6 7 different residents. There's usually two cases, and 8 each case is evaluated separately. Like I said, some 9 of it is check box, but some of it there is room for 10 comment. We evaluate the resident and how they did. 11 Some of those were great and some of those were 12 terrible and everything in between. 13 We evaluate radiology. We evaluate 14 pathology. Radiology has been all the way from why 15 weren't they there, they needed to be there, which 16 would be a terrible mark, to they did a great job. 17 Pathology, the same thing. There's 18 excellent and then there's not excellent. 19 Q. Okay. A And then the overall presentation and then 20 21 the discussion. Did you learn something? I think 22 there's a spot on there if you think it affected the 23 patient's care, but I'm not sure. I missed the last 24 couple; so I don't remember that one. 25 And then there's room for comments, and I WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free" 800~322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050: Fresno: 559-224-2223
6
~
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-,E=:D,-
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ) WILLIAM TAYLOR MO., Wednesday December 5 200
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 25 try to write comments, especially -- if the evaluation found either really good things or really bad things, then I feel it's my job to justify that or else check the box doesn't help anything. Q. Okay. MR. LEE: I didn't print this out, but I don't know, Mark, if you have this. But it's Bates Number 536. It's the -MR. WASSER: Not with me. MR. LEE: You wouldn't have it. Okay. Should I just show it to him? MS. HERRINGTON: No, you shouldn't. BY MR. LEE: Q. Well, I'm looking at a feedback form for the oncology conference dated October 12th, 2005. I'll represent to you that it states the following. It states: Pathologist should have arranged with Dr. McBride and OB/GYN -- OB/GYN presenter before conference get his, quote, extra time, end quote. Dash, he gave no one else the time to talk, including the presenter, exclamation point. Not acceptable. And in the boxes that you -- you had where you put your score -MR. WASSER: Is this -- is this the -- the WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
27 number 1, except for the last one, which is how would you rate the overall presentation from radiology, and the answer there, it looks like it's N.A., which -would that stand for not -A. Maybe there wasn't any radiology. Q. Okay. A. Can you remind me, is 1 low or is 1 high? Q. One -- according to the rating system at the top, it says performance rating, 1, very good -A. Okay. Thank you. Q. -- 2, satisfactory; 3 needs improvement. A. Okay. Q. And in the B column there's a big N.A. written, which I would -- does that mean not available? A. It means there was no time for anybody else to say anything; so I feit I shouldn't evaluate that; that, to the best of my knowledge and remembrance, is why I put that. Q. Okay. A. It was quite a while. Q. SO you do recognize this document that I'm discussing with you right now? A. I definitely remember writing the words at the bottom. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5
6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 168 of 189 26 form that the Dr. Taylor filled out? MR. LEE: Yes, it is. It's got a signature at the bottom that states Bill Taylor, and it's Bates number -- your Bates Number 536. MR. WASSER: And you don't have a copy of that so we can see what you're looking at? MR. LEE: Unfortunately, at Kinko's we had problems with that. We can try to make it there on break. I mean, I'll just show it to you, Mark, so you know what I'm talking about. Q. Now, what I've just read to you, does that sound-A. Sounds like exactly something I would write from what I remember two years ago in -- during that conference. Q. And just to continue on this Bates Page Number 536, I see there's -- you've -- well, someone's written scores in in the document, and there's an A at the top and there's a B at the top representing the A column and the B column. A. That was the two different presenters for the two different cases. Q. Okay. And there's a -- there's a bunch of criteria for which you can put a score. And for the A column I see every box has been filled in with the WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
28 Q. Okay. A. I don't remember filling the 1s and the N.A.s out, but that's my writing at the bottom. Q. Okay. And it also asks in the B column that you rate the overall presentation from pathology, and there is a 2 that is scribbled out or stricken out and it's replaced by a 3. Do you -- does that -A. I don't remember, but I can't imagine I would give it much -- a very good rating when I felt that it detracted from the other aspects of the conference that I felt should have been allowed to go on. So my guess is I would have given it a poor rating. Q. Well, not your guess, but your best recollection? A. My best recollection, yes. Q. Okay. And just to continue to finish this off, the Presenter A it states here is Dr. N. Sharkey; and presenter B is Dr. G. Alkhouri. And I'll spell those: Alkhouri is A-I-k-h-o-u-r-i. Sharkey is S-h-a-r-k-e-y. Okay. And so if I understood you correctly earlier, you were saying that this Page 536, which I've been reading to you from, was your orig',nal WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800.322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN
,
) WILLIAM TAYLOR M D Wednesday December 5 200 Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 169 of 189 30 29 feedback form. 1 wrote -- I wrote some in the evaluation, and at that And what is the connection between this 2 point they asked me ',f I would write everything I 3 thought. And I did. feedback form and Exhibit 13? 4 A. When the on- -- at the end of the conference Q. Who is "they"? I talked to Dr. -- it was still in the same room. 5 A. I know it was Dr. Harris, and I don't There were many of us that were appalied, quite 6 remember if McBride was there too. But I believe honestly, at what had gone on. I -- I first talked 7 those two were both there. 8 to the resident and said did you know this was going Q. Okay. When you say Dr. Harris, do you mean to happen; that you weren't going to get to say 9 Dr. Irwin Harris? anything. And he was, quite honestly, not very happy 10 A. Correct. about it. He said he didn't know anything about all 11 Q. Okay. This is the CMO? of this time being taken up. 12 A. Correct. Q. Just to stop you. 13 Q. What -- what can you recall the contents of What do you mean by "he"? 14 that conversation with Dr. Harris? When did it A. Dr. -- I don't even remember his name, but 15 occur? Where was it? it's the male of the two presenters. Sharkey was a 16 A. It was right in -- in the conference room at female. Alkhouri, or whoever, was the male. I know 17 the end of the conference, and I was sharing with him it was the maie that got cut short. 18 and I believe Dr. McBride and I'm not sure who eise, Q. Okay. 19 but there were attendings there, and we were all A. So I talked to him briefly. And then at 20 sharing our disbelief, as well as unhappiness with that point on the way out of the conference, after 21 the way the conference had gone. And I had mentioned turning in my evaluation, I talked to Dr. McBride and 22 to Dr. Harris that -- that I'd at least put some of Harris, who were standing right there with, I'm sure, 23 my thoughts down on the evaluation form. And he said several other attendings that were pretty unhappy 24 well, if -- if you feel it's important, please go 25 ahead and write the rest of them in legible that that happened. And I said, well, you know, I WOOD & RANDALL WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 (800) 322-4595 "ED ec
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
31 typewriter and send it to me. And I said I would be absolutely happy to do that. Q. Okay. You've made several references to being appalled by the presentation being -- disbelief because of the presentation. Can you tell us a little bit about why you were in disbelief and why you were appalled? A. In my 20 years at KMC -- and at 2005 would have been two years less, I guess; so 18 -- I had never seen -- and I'm very into education; so things like this are important. I'm also a very emotional person who carries it on my sleeve; so I have to, in my own way, be careful not to say everything I think in front of residents and students because it's not appropriate. So maybe that's why I was a little sensitive to what went on. There was essentially two major things that bothered me the most. Number one, that all of the resident's time was taken up and that he wasn't warned about it ahead of time. And residents are busy. They have a lot of -- it takes a lot of effort to prepare one of these conferences. And for them to not get to do what they have prepared to do I think is a crime -- not a discipline crime that you deal with, but it's a crime. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
32 Secondly, after the first 20 minutes of -of this -- this discussion that Dr. Jadwin was giving us, it start -- I didn't -- I had no idea what it was really about, and I didn't really know of any kind of feud or disagreement between him and Dr. Roy. I -- I was completely naive, as was most people in the room, but it became very apparent that this was an example of getting their argument out in public, in front of residents and students. And I thought that was phenomenally inappropriate and that's why I wrote the things I wrote. And I -- I tried to do it as -- with really just stating the facts and what I thought was bad and, quite honestly, I didn't have a whole lot of baggage carried beforehand, and I didn't even know any of this stuff that was going on between them, and so I felt this was the time for me to go write this memo because I could truly just state what I thought about what happened at the conference. It was unfavorable, bad for education, bad to do in front of residents and students, and that's why I wrote that. Q. Okay. MR. LEE: Can we get the actual presentation? MS. HERRINGTON: You have it right there. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free" 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395+1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
JADWIN VS, COUNTY OF KERN
,-
-'Eo,,-D
) WILLIAM TAYLOR M D., Wednesday, December 5, 20(
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
33 Document MR. LEE: The actual presentation? Can we just go off the record for just one moment? MR. WASSER: Sure. MS. HERRINGTON: Going off the record at 5 -- 4:45 p.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Okay. Back on the record at 4:51 p.m. MR. LEE: I'd like to get this marked for identification. MS. HERRINGTON: That's number? MR. WASSER: 16. THE COURT REPORTER: 16. (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 16 marked for identification.) BY MR. LEE: Q. Okay. Dr. Taylor, you've just been handed a document marked for identification as Exhibit 16. Why don't you take a moment to look at it. Do you recognize this exhibit, Dr. Taylor? A. No, I don't. Q. Do you recognize this -- well, is it possible that this is the presentation that Dr. Jadwin gave -- well, that was -- Dr. Alkhouri and WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
35 parts of the conference have run over and caused other parts -- other presenters to have less time. So I can remember generalizing -- not specific cases, but I can remember radiology spending too much time and there being no times for pathology. I can remember pathology going longer and there's almost no time for the next case. I suspect that's why Dr. McBride wrote this. Q. Exhibit is? A. Exhibit 15. Q. All right. A. So that's what I mean to this degree. So it's -- there are times where the audience members won't shut up and everybody wants to argue, and we have to -- Dr. McBride would kind of round everybody up and say okay, it's time to move along. Q. Uh-huh. A. Or we would do it to ourselves, realizing that the clock's ticking. But never to the degree -to the degree that I saw that day. Q. Okay. In other words, it had happened, but not to this amount of -- not this much time had been taken away from the student? A. Nowhere close. Q. Nowhere close. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 170 of 189 34 Dr. Jadwin were supposed to give at the October oncology conference on October 12th, 2005? A. This -- yes, it's possible. Q. Okay. Well, I'm going to direct your attention to Page DFJ559. Could you just take a look at that page and the next four or five pages ending on DFJ562. So after you've had -- now that you've had a chance to review some of the critical pages of this exhibit, does it refresh your recollection as to whether it was the presentation that was given on the October 12, 2005, oncology conference? A. My best estimate is that it is, but I don't remember many details. Q. Okay. Now, you had said earlier that this presentation -- well, Dr. Jadwin had essentially disallowed the male presenter, who you believe to be Dr. Alkhouri, from having his time to present. Had that ever happened before at any oncology conference in the past? A. Not to this degree, to my knowledge, in my presence. Q. Okay. And when you say "degree," can you be more specific? A. There have been other times that different WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
36 Okay. Did Dr. Alkhouri have a chance to make any -- well, I'm going to represent to you that Dr. Alkhouri was the male presenter that day. Did Dr. Alkhouri -- do you believe or do you recall that he had a chance to make any presentation of facts at the beginning of the conference? A. I believe he introduced the case at the beginning, and I believe that was about all he got to do, but it's been quite some time. I know he told me later he had a whole discussion he had prepared that he never got to give, and I do not know the contents of that or any details of that because he never gave it and I didn't look at what it was. I just wanted to find out if he had prepared something which he didn't get to give, and indeed he had. Q. Let -- I mean, how long -- when is -- does the conference begin or -- when did this conference end? What time? A. I can just tell you they usually start at 7:30 and .end at 8:30. Q. In the morning? A. Yes. Q. Was October 12th, 2005, any different, according to your recollection? A. I do not recollect at all. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free· 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
~
",EDe.
JADWIN VS, COUNTY OF KERN ) WILLIAM TAYLOR M 0 Wednesday, December 5 200
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Document 49 I know there was a lot of arguing, for lack of a better word, about FNAs between I think mostly radiology and pathology. I wasn't involved with any of that, but I knew there was a lot of arguing, for lack of a better word. And I didn't know anything about GYN and pathology, there being any conflicts until it became very apparent at this conference. So that's about as much as I know. Q. Were you aware that one of the issues in this lawsuit is the fact Dr. Jadwin was complaining to the hospital and raising concerns with the hospital about patient care issues in the treatment of certain patients, his concern being that the medical care and procedures might not -- might be harming patient care? A. No. I'm not aware of that right now. Q. Okay. Getting back to this conference, this October conference. Now, in the case of retrospective cases, you mentioned that some of the cases were involving current ongoing cases for which the treatment needed to be discussed, but then there were also situations where the conference discussed retrospective cases, cases that had already basically been resolved but still were good topics for training and for WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
51 At the October oncology conference, how much did you understand of the contents of the Presentation B? A. Very little. Q. Okay. A. And that's not because of my lack of knowledge. Q. Sure. A. And -- well, it's partly because of my lack of knowledge in that's not what I do. Okay? I don't do any GYN at all, but also there -- there was -after the first few minutes there was a lot of uneasiness in myself and other people that made it absolutely impossible to really focus on what we probably were supposed to be learning -Q. Uh-huh. A. -- because it was obvious that this was a conflict being played out in front of us that most of us knew nothing about, and we were all feeling nervous for the resident because there's no time and he's up there wanting to present something, and that pretty much took my -- and I even -- I wrote in Exhibit 13 that I still wasn't sure what it was all about. And I wrote this right afterwards. 1-and -- but I certainly didn't learn anything. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 171 of 189 50 discussion for these conferences. So that's what I mean when I say retrospective cases. In the case of retrospective cases, is the time for audience participation generally shorter or longer than with respect to the current cases? A. It's about the same. Sorry. It's usually about the same. It might be a little shorter, but we -- if you put five different types of physicians in the same room, they will find something to argue about, whether the case is done or not. We find things that were delayed and -- and argue about how we can make them better. Q. Uh-huh. A. We -- and there's always different ways to take care of somebody; so we still end up talking about the different options, even though one of them has already been chosen. So there's -- there's still quite a bit of talk. Q. Okay. Well, on this October 12 oncology conference where this issue arose of Dr. Jadwin taking time away from the resident's presentation time, let's just call that the October oncology conference. A. Okay. Q. I'll refer to it that way. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q. Okay. You had said earlier that in these October -- I'm sorry. In these oncology conferences, you said typically radiology and pathology should just stand up and say their piece, and that shouldn't normally take more than 10 minutes, correct? A. Or much less than that. Q. Much less than that. Okay. Can you think of cases where pathology or radiology would require more time than that where it could even -- let me just finish -where it could be that the pathology issues or radioiogy issues may have predominant importance in the conference? A. I can think of times that in the past pathology took way too much time, quite honestly. With all due respect, pathologists, their profession is words, describing things, and it's very important that -- that they do that to the best of their ability. But quite honestly, a lot of them go overboard. I'm sure that's why Dr. McBride's letter was sent in Exhibit 15, and I imagine that that's been a problem since the beginning of time of tumor boards. So I will differentiate more time needed versus more time taken. This is not the first time a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certlfled Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-'E=O'-'
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN M D., Wednesday, December 5 200
) WILLIAM TAYLOR
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 172 of 189 54 53 1 The next bullet point says the reviewer did pathologist took more time than I think they needed, but to a much higher degree than ever seen or 2 not comment on the tubal metaplasia. Reviewer did imagined in my opinion. 3 not comment or appreciate severe active cervic1tis/ THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. I missed 4 c-e-r-v-i-c-i-t-i-s, or inflammatory component of the last part. Ever-5 this lesion. THE WITNESS: Ever-6 Do you recognize this language? THE COURT REPORTER: Ever seen -7 A. No. THE WITNESS: Or imagined in my opinion. Q. This Page DFJ559, do you recognize this -8 BY MR. LEE: 9 this slide? Q. Have there been other departments which have 10 A. No. been guilty of time overruns or taking more time than 11 Q. Is it possible that this is a page from the you think they should? 12 presentation of the October oncology conference? A. There's no other departments involved. 13 A. Yes. Q. Okay. 14 MR. WASSER: You've already asked him that. A. There could be individuals, as -- we talked 15 MR. LEE: I'm talking about this page, about this already. 16 though. Q. Okay. Well, can you take a look again at 17 MR. WASSER: Well, you asked about the whole Exhibit 16, Page 559 -- DFJ559. 18 exhibit. Okay. I'm just going to just take a look at 19 BY MR. LEE: it. And you'll notice that on the second -- well, 20 Q. Okay. Well, what does that mean to you, the second bullet point, I guess, reviewer did not 21 what I just read? comment or recognize incorrect orientation in the A. Nothing more than you just read. This is 22 colposcopic, c-o-i-p-o-s-c-o-p-i-c, biopsy that led 23 not my profession. to a missed diagnosis of severe squamous dysplasia, Q. Okay. That's fine. 24 s-q-u-a-m-o-u-s d-y-s-p-I-a-s-i-a. Do you take that to be critical of USC's 25 WOOD & RANDALL WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 (800) 322-4595
55
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
review?
A. Yes. Q. Okay. Well, can you -- can you -- how so?
A. Well, words like "incorrect" was not appreciated. Simple English, nothing scientific or doctor about it. Q. Okay. Do you think it's inappropriately critical? A. I think putting USC on it is inappropriate. Q. Can you explain why. A. Because this is a conference filled with residents and students that could go wherever they want to go in their training, and this is not a conference to -- this is not -- this is not a conference that -- I think it's important that the -an error be brought out. We do that all the time. I think it could -- simply would have been better to be stated outside review. Q. Okay. So in other words, the aspect of this Page DFJ559 that you find offensive or inappropriate is the -- the mention of USC at the top; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. SO if that term "USC" had been blacked out or left out of this slide, would this slide have WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
56 been -- would you have considered it appropriate then? A. Yes. With a qualification that my lack of knowledge in this area from a medical standpoint is not able to summarize this form. This is an awful lot of words, and most people in this audience don't know more than me about this. And in this talk it -there was so many words and so much description that essentially everybody, in my opinion, except Dr. Jadwin and Dr. Roy, was completely lost and learning nothing. And it is a challenge to get everything down in the short time you have that's important; but on the other hand, being a person that gives all sort of national presentations, it's a challenge that you have to figure out how to do it or else you lose your entire audience. I was lost in most of this case because there were too many words. Q. Do you think that -- were gynecologists in the audience at the October oncology conference? A. Yes. Q. Do you feel that -- do you have a reason to believe the gynecologists would have understood this presentation or this Page DFJ559? A. Ask them. You'll have to ask them. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
"'H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN D WILLIAM TAYLOR M D Wednesday December 5 20l
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 61 appropriateness useless in that conference because everybody saw that it was just this battle; so everybody couldn't wait to leave the room. Q. Okay. When you say everyone -- let's break that down. You made two statements there. You said everyone saw that this was a battle and everyone wanted to leave the room. A. I should say it became apparent. Can I strike the "everyone"? Q. Sure. Sure. A. It became apparent. Q. To you that people -A. No. I said it became apparent. Q. Okay. Okay. But -- it became apparent to whom? A. I believe it became apparent to the entire room. Q. Okay. Why do you say that?
A. Because it was so blatant. Q. Okay. You also said that -- were you also saying earlier that it became apparent that everyone wanted to leave the room? A. It became uneducational. It was just a fight with one person standing at the podium giving their opinion and their data -WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
A. -- which I'm sure a lot of this data's very, very important, and that's really, in my mind, not at all what I wrote about or what I thought because to me that wasn't the issue. The point was that this decompensated into one person giving their opinion and side of things and very important data, and the other person not being able to speak, which is probably good because it would have just decompensated into a screaming match, which it tried to do a couple of times. And I felt that was -- that entire thing was absolutely inappropriate in oncology. Is it inappropriate to argue about the patient care? Absolutely not. All of this stuff was very important. It was not the right venue to carry out this battle. Q. Okay. You keep mentioning the word IIbattle. ll What do you mean by battle? A. Loud voice; arguing back and forth between Dr. Roy and Dr. Jadwin; Dr. Jadwin not giving -Q. I'm sorry. Just one second. When you say Dr. Roy, do you mean Dr. William Roy? A. Correct. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
64
63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
It -- and again, I -- I didn't know anything about this. I have no sides of anything because I don't know -- I know nothing, okay, regarding the patient or any of this. But as an innocent bystander, it was very apparent to me that -- that this was not at all about education. This wasn't at all about a cordial discussion of how to take care of a patient. This -- this was an ongoing battle that was taken to a public forum with residents and students involved, which I think is absolutely inappropriate, and that's why I wrote what I wrote. Q. Okay. Do you think there's room for a difference in opinion as to what the proper purpose of the present -- oncology presentation is? A. I think there's always room for a difference of opinion on anything. Q. Sure. Do you think -- can you imagine an oncology conference where the focus is on treatment of the current case and where a presentation like this Exhibit 16 might be appropriate? A. If you give other people a chance to talk and -- and it could be very appropriate. Q. Uh-huh. A. But if your presentation is so long and WOOD & RANDALL
(800) 322-4595
Page 173 of 189 62
Q. Uh-huh.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
detailed that nobody else in the room is allowed to talk, and even if they try to talk they're cut off, that is not what an oncology conference is about. Q. When you say "cut off," is that what happened at the -A. Yes. Q. Just like that. Sure. When you say "cut off" at the oncology conference, can you be more specific who was being cut off -A. There were -Q. Who was cutting off and who was being cut off? A. Dr. Jadwin was cutting off anybody else who wanted to talk. The only people I remember trying to talk is Dr. Roy and Dr. McBride trying to get Dr. Jadwin to stop. I don't remember if other people were trying to cut in or not, but those two were completely cut off several times. Q. Okay. So getting back to my question, putting aside the cutting off and the behavior, perhaps we can call it, could you imagine a -- weil, can you envision or -- a situation where an oncology conference focuses on treatment of a current case, a current patient, and where Presentation 16 might be WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield"" 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
11
~
-,E~Do.c\
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN WILLIAM TAYLOR M D., Wednesday, December 5, 200,
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2 65
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
appropriate, that level detail that we discussed on those pages? A. I believe if I were helping a resident to get one of these ready, I would make sure that they gave some sort of little educational spiel ahead of time because 90 percent of the people in that room are not GYN or pathologists. And so I think just to -- in our oncology conference to go straight to this without letting the resident at least educate people is -- is a waste of time and is inappropriate. Q. Okay. Well, it seems like an underlying theme, what you're saying is that this presentation was -- this conference should be about education. I guess what I'm asking or what I'm trying to ask is can there be an oncology presentation -- in your opinion, can there be an oncology presentation which puts aside the education mission and focuses solely on facilitating the treatment of the current patient case? And I mean really putting aside the education issue. A. If three-quarters of the people in the room do not understand what you're talking about, you won't have a worthwhile discussion about the care of the patient. So when medicine analogies are good, when medicine has -- is doing a leukemia case -- I WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
multispecialty crossover so that we don't have to give a whole giant lecture and we can focus on the planned current care of the patient. But there are certain things in -- and I'm sure in every different department where I believe it is crucial to bring everybody up to speed, at least a bit, before moving into what would seem to be minutia but probably very important minutia. Q. Were you aware that -- that the patient care of this patient, this current case involved in the October oncology conference, Presentation B, were you aware that there was genuine disagreement about-about the proper treatment path? A. I was not aware. It became very obvious as the battle began in the conference. Q. Okay. Again, you're saying the word "battle." Can you be more specific? A. Dr. Roy tryi ng to spea k out. I rea Ily seem to remember there were other people trying to speak out and them being cut off by Dr. Jadwin. I had no idea before that, but it became very obvious that they had a disagreement, and it -- it seemed very obvious, at least to me, that it -- it wasn't a new thing, it had been going on, just because they both WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 174 of 189 66
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
don't remember anything about leukemia other than medical school. It's been a long time. They know that. They know most of the people, other than the medicine attendings and residents, need a quick refresher on what's important and what's not. So those -- when they're presenting one of those cases, the resident will give not even five minutes -- a five-minute spiel, about maybe three slides of refreshing what you should know to be able to move on so the whole room understands what everybody else is talking about so that everybody can participate in a useful discussion about the patient care. Q. Okay. Well, in follow-up to that, can you envision an oncology conference that is focused on patient care where the content of the presentation goes over the head of 90 percent of the participants but that's okay? A. No. I can't. Q. Okay. So in your opinion, the oncology conference should always -- always have as a prerequisite that it is at a comprehension level that the participants or most of them -- of the participants can comprehend it, correct? A. Fortunately for us, most of the topics are topics that repeat quite frequently, and they are WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
kind of had -- I mean, Dr. Jadwin certainly had his act together and his argument together; so I wasn't beforehand, but it became obvious during the -during the conference. Q. Okay. So when you say that Dr. Jadwin was cutting them off, how -- I mean, how did this happen? I just want to understand -- have a visual image of how that happened. A. The visual image that I still have, so I think I'm probably remembering quite well because I don't have a whole lot of it, but I have a visual image of Dr. Roy trying to say "no, no, no" to something, and Dr. Jadwin saying, "Just let me finish. Just let me finish. Just let me finish." It happened several, several times. And just let me finish went on for half an hour until the case-everybody had to leave. So again, I think -- as -- you know, everything I think is on the Exhibit 13, and I still think everything that I wrote on this paper -. because I thought I was very careful with my words. I -- I think it was a very bad example to the residents for this to go on in front of them. This just isn't the right place to do this sort of thing with students and residents, being a person who's WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
67
68
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 175 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday,
December 6, 2007
Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT
...-... _... _-_ .•..•. ---._-
WOoo-SoRANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free. (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
~
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
----.:Ce'2.H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ·S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday, December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 9 it with and what you discussed? A. Defendants' counsel. Q. You're referring to Mr. Wasser? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Mr. Wasser is representing you today as his attorney; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Is there anyone else besides Mr. Wasser you have discussed this deposition with? A. There's been no substantive discussion. I have informed people that I would be here so that I would not conflict with other responsibilities. Q. Okay. Can you tell us about your educational background briefly? A. I attended Dartmouth College, Boston University School of Medicine. Training at University of California at San Diego. National Institutes of Health. Q. Can you tell me the dates of your attendance of each of those institutions? A. Would it be more helpful for me to provide you with a curriculum vitae under separate cover? Q. No, it's not necessary. If you can just do it briefly now. A. Dartmouth, 1973-1977; Boston University, WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
11 And I just wanted to ask you how much -- how much contact have you had with Dr. Jadwin during your time at KMC? If you had to put a number on the interactions you've had with him, how many would you estimate that to be? A. Could you clarify how many years Dr. Jadwin was at Kern Medical Center? Q. He's been at Kern Medical Center since -from 2000 to 2000 and -- well, technically seven. So 2000 to 2007, so seven years. A. Can you clarify "technically"? Q. Pardon me? A. Can you clarify for me why you said he was technically there until 20077 Q. Sure. Sure. Well, physically he wasn't at KMC in the year 2007; he was on administrative leave. His contract ended on October 4, 2007. So the last time he was physically present at KMC was in December 6 or 7 of 2006. MR. WASSER: And he was only there for two months in December of 2006. BY MR. LEE: Q. Does that answer your question? A. So we are -- so we have five years -Q. Yes. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 176 of 189 10 1977 to 1981; University of California San Diego, 1981 to 1986, 1988-1990; the National Institutes of Health, 1986 to 1988. Q. Okay. And can you describe briefly your work experience since the National Institutes of Health, giving dates? A. Clinical instructor for University of California San Diego commencing 1989. And under their auspices, I have been at Kern Medical Center ever since 1991, I think. Q. What is your position at KMC? A. Neurosurgeon. Q. Have you had -- do you understand what this litigation is about, this lawsuit? A. No. Q. Okay. Is there -- have you heard anything about it? A. No. Q. Are you aware that you're not a party in this lawsuit? A. No. Q. That you're not being sued? A. No. Q. Well, I'll tell you right now, you're not being sued. You're appearing here as a witness. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
12 1 2
3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. Q. A. Q. A. Q.
-- is that correct?
Well, actually, let's see. Calendar years. Let's say five years. Yeah, that's correct. Probably ten times. Ten times. And were those interactions very significant with Dr. Jadwin or -A. No. Q. No. So were they really more in the nature of just saying hello in the hallway? A. No, they were to ask about a pathology specimen which happened, I believe, probably twice a year. Q. I'm sorry? A. It was to ask about a pathology specimen, maybe twice a year, my recollection. Q. Okay. So the conversations were strictly work-related then, correct? A. That is correct. Q. Okay. Did Dr. Jadwin ever strike you as arrogant? A. I don't remember. Q. Well, we're entitled to your best recollection. Is your best recollection that he was arrogant at any time with you? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-"C"-H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2 17
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 177 of 189 18
A. No. Q. Do you have -- have you ever used the tissue
family -- I'm sorry -- medical leave? A. No. Q. Okay. Are you aware of the American Disability -- Americans with Disabilities Act or the ADA? A. I've heard of it. I have no further comment. I have heard the term, but don't know what it means or the implications or the application or the relevance. Q. Okay. Have you ever attended any training seminars at KMC regarding discrimination or harassment or medical leave? A. I don't re member. Q. SO sitting here today you have no recollection? A. I don't remember attending any such session. Q. Have you ever been offered such a seminar at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. Okay. Have you ever received any materials, written materials, regarding discrimination, harassment, medical leave at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. All right. Okay. Now, can you tell us a little bit about the tissue bank at KMC? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
19 any other freezers like that in the -- at KMC? A. I don't know. Q. Okay. But that's the only one that you're aware of there, correct? A. That is correct. Q. Okay. Are there any other places where you might store human tissue at KMC? A. I don't know. Q. In the last two years, can you recall any places that you might have stored tissue, human tissue, besides this minus 70 freezer in the pathology department? A. I cannot recall any other. Q. Okay. What's your understanding of the requirements or regulations regarding storage of human tissue? A. I have no knowledge of those regulations. Q. Have you ever received any materials or written or oral instructions regarding the storage of human tissue at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. Okay. Dr. Wrobel, have you ever been involved in any litigation yourself as a party? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Can you recount some of those times? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
20 1 Can you describe them, times and the subject matter? 2 A. One patient alleged that he had not improved 3 from a carpal tunnel release. He had a coexistent 4 Dupuytren's -- D-u-p-y-t-r-e-n-apostrophe s (sic) -5 contracture, and he was upset that the Dupuytren's 6 had not been treated. So we went to small claims 7 court and it was dismissed. Another patient had -8 9 Q. Just let me back up. 10 A. Certainly. 11 Q. To clarify, so you were the defendant in 12 that small claims action? 13 A. Yes, I was. 14 Q. Okay. Okay. Can you proceed with the next 15 example? 16 A. A patient had a operation for a brain tumor 17 in 1998. After surgery he had a stroke on the side 18 of the surgery, and he also had a stroke in the other 19 unoperated hemisphere. And there was a lawsuit 20 involving the stroke, which was settled for $15,000. 21 Q. And, again -22 A. This was in 1998. 23 Q. Okay. And, again, you were the named 24 defendant in that action? 25 A. Amongst others, yes. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
bank at KMC? A. There is no tissue bank. Q. There is no tissue bank? A. To my knowledge. Q. SO are there -- are there ever times as a neurosurgeon you need to store tissues, body tissues anywhere for an -A. Yes. Q. Let me finish. -- extended period of time? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Can you tell me about some examples of those? A. We will save bone flaps in the minus 70 freezer. Q. Okay. Can you describe the location of this minus 70 freezer? A. It is in the pathology department. Q. Where in the pathology department is it located? A. There's a room. I cannot be any more specific than that. Q. Okay. And this minus 70 freezer, are there WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDAll, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 178 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT \,yOOD~GoRANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322·4595 Toll Free' (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
r-
"'C~H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M 0 Thursday December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Document 25 (Reporter asking for break due to technical difficulties.) MS. HERRINGTON: Going off the record at 8:26 a.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Back on the record at 8:38 a.m. BY MR. LEE: Q. Is it -- by the way, Dr. Wrobel, is it Dr. Wrobel or Wrobel? A. Either way. Thank you. Q. Either way is okay? Okay. Getting back to the minus 70 freezer, what kind of tissues have you stored in that freezer in, say, the past seven years? A. Bone flaps. Q. SO there's no other human tissue you can think of that you store in that freezer? A. No. Q. Okay. And how often do you store human tissue in that -- when I say "the freezer," by the way, just for the sake of clarity, the freezer will refer to the minus 70 freezer in the pathology department that Dr. Wrobel -- Wrobel has been referencing. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 179 of 189 26 Can you think of how often -- well, can you tell me how often or the frequency with which you store human tissue in the freezer' A. It would depend on the epoch that we are talking about. Q. Okay. A. The point in time. Q. Why don't we say the last four years then. A. Probably two or three times a year as an estimate. Q. Okay. And you said these are called bone flaps. Can you describe for us what that is? A. They are skull flaps that are removed ',n the course of performing a cranial operation, and there are occasions when you cannot put the bone flap back immediately. Q. Okay. So just as a layman, from a layman's standpoint, when you say "bone flap," you mean the top part of the human skull then? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Are there any risks associated with storing bone flaps in the freezer? A. No. Q. No. Okay. When you store bone flaps in the freezer, do you make a written record of that? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
28
27 1 2
3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. I personally do not make a written record. The nursing personnel in the operating room do make a written record of that to the best of my knowledge. Q. Okay. Well, when you say they make a written record, what kind of information would be contained in that written record? A. I have no idea. Q. Okay. Do you -- do you notify anybody in particular when you store bone flaps in the freezer? A. No. Q. When you use that freezer, is it typically empty or have you noticed that there are other contents in that freezer' A. I don't know. Q. Okay. So you can't -- whenever you open the freezer, you couldn't -- you can't recall now whether there was -- whether it was empty or not? A. No, I can't recall. Q. Now, previous to working at KMC you had been attending other institutions. Were you -- were you operating on patients prior to coming to -- prior to working at KMC? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Were you -- did there ever arise occasions where you had to store human tissue at WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
these other institutions where you were performing 2 surgery? 3 A. No. 4 Q. Are you aware of whether there is a back-up 5 system for that freezer? 6 A. I don't know. 7 Q. Don't know. Okay. Just as a hypothetical, 8 if the freezer were to fail for a couple days and 9 then come back on after the failure, let's say it was 10 repaired, how would you become -- would you -- do you 11 think -- is there a procedure for you to be notified 12 ofthat? 13 A. I don't know. 14 Q. SO since you've been -- during your time of 15 employment at KMC, have you -- can you recall of any 16 times that freezer has failed? 17 A. Don't remember. 18 Q. How long typically do you store bone flaps? 19 What length of time do you store bone flaps in the 20 freezer typically? 21 A. It would vary from a minimum of several 22 months to a maximum of -- I don't know. 23 Q. Okay. If -- now, again another 24 hypothetical. If the freezer were to fail, if the 25 power to the freezer were to fail for any reason and WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800~322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050: Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 180 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT WOOD.oRANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322·4595 Toll Free· (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
SerVing Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
,..-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-"C"'H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEl M 0 Thursday December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 29 thus the freezer would be not op- -- non operational for a lengthy period of time, let's say one week, would that present any risk to the tissues, to the skull flaps you were storing in that freezer? A. For the purpose that I'm storing them, no. Q. SO in other words, from a layman's standpoint, these skull flaps don't necessarily need to be stored in the freezer then 7 A. They're traditionally stored in the freezer, but for the purposes that I use them, it is irrelevant. Q. Okay. So do you -- in your opinion -- well, I can't say that. Are you aware of any risks associated with storing skull flaps in the open, let's sayan a bookshelf, on an open bookshelf, at room temperature? A. It would depend upon what the -- I have a skull flap at room temperature in my office that is not posing any risk to anyone. It's used for teaching purposes. It's a skull. Q. Okay. But -- well, I'm talking -- I'm referring specifically to skull flaps which you are storing for reinsertion into a patient. MR. WASSER: He understands the statement. MR. LEE: Well, that's what I'm doing right WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
31 circumstance where placing the flap in the abdominal wall produced sufficient necrosis of the underlying muscle that the patient had what is called rhabdomyolysis. Q. Spell that. A. R-h-a-b-d-o-m-y-e-I-o-s-i-s (sic). And I published this observation in the Journal of Neuro Trauma -- Journal of Trauma, and following that publication and the recognition that this could be a significant complication leading to renal failure, there was a recognition that larger bone flaps could not be stored in the abdominal wall if the patient was thin. At that junction, storing bone flaps in the abdominal wall became an option less often, although it can still be done most of the time -most of the time it can be done. The circumstances when it cannot be done, we would store the bone flap in the minus 70 freezer. Most patients who require removal of bone flap do not survive if the bone flap cannot be put back in. Most of these patients do not survive. Q. I don't -- I'm sorry. Could you clarify for me the last statement? When you say these patients do not survive, are you saying that they do not survive because -WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 181 of 189 30 now, Mark. MR. WASSER: Okay. BY MR. LEE: Q. I'm now -- let's say we're talking strictly about skull flaps which you intend to reinsert into the patient. A. I'm sorry, you haven't established that that's my intention. Q. I'm sorry? A. You have not established that that is my intention. Q. Okay. Well, let's ask you: These skull flaps which you're storing in the freezer, what is your intent with respect to these skull flaps? A. To clarify this line of questioning for you, when I was in training we would place the bone flaps in the abdominal wall so that they would always be with the patient because our patient population is somewhat transient, they can leave. Some people come from the east coast, they have an auto accident on the 1-5, it would be impractical. So that traditionally at training facilities where I have been, we would put it in the abdominal wall, not inside the peritoneal cavity, but sometime -someplace in the subcutaneous fat. I encountered a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. They die. Q. Yeah, I understand that. When these patients die, is it because of the reinsertion process or is it because they had to have their skull flap removed in the first place 7 A. They die because the cranial trauma was so bad, of such a significant degree, that they become brain dead before we can consider any other steps down the line. The majority of patients who have so much brain swelling, you cannot put the bone flap back, which is the reason you do not put it back at the time of surgery. The majority of those patients die. Q. Can you give me some examples of why you would need to remove a patient's bone flap? A. Brain swelling. Q. Okay. So just to recount, patients who require their bone flaps to be removed in the first place are at high risk of mortality then? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Now, are there any hazards associated with -- well, are there -- is there a possibility of bacterial infection of the skull flap if you were to store it at room temperature? And again, just for the sake of clarity, whenever I say bone flap, I am WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free" 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 182 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN,
D.O.,
Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT WOOD
,RANDALL
Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free' (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
,-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-'C""H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday.. December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 29 thus the freezer would be not op- -- nonoperational for a lengthy period of time, let's say one week, would that present any risk to the tissues, to the skull flaps you were storing in that freezer? A. For the purpose that I'm storing them, no. Q. SO in other words, from a layman's standpoint, these skull flaps don't necessarily need to be stored in the freezer then? A. They're traditionally stored in the freezer, but for the purposes that I use them, it is irrelevant. Q. Okay. So do you -- in your opinion -- well, I can't say that. Are you aware of any risks associated with storing skull flaps in the open, let's say on a bookshelf, on an open bookshelf, at room temperature? A. It would depend upon what the -- I have a skull flap at room temperature in my office that is not posing any risk to anyone. It's used for teaching purposes. It's a skull. Q. Okay. But -- well, I'm talking -- I'm referring specifically to skull flaps which you are storing for reinsertion into a patient. MR. WASSER: He understands the statement. MR. LEE: Well, that's what I'm doing right WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
31 circumstance where placing the flap in the abdominal wall produced sufficient necrosis of the underlying muscle that the patient had what is called rhabdomyolysis. Q. Spell that. A. R-h-a-b-d-o-m-y-e-l-o-s-i-s (sic). And I published this observation in the Journal of Neuro Trauma -- Journal of Trauma, and following that publication and the recognition that this couid be a significant complication leading to renal faiiure, there was a recognition that larger bone flaps could not be stored in the abdominal wall if the patient was thin. At that junction, storing bone flaps in the abdominal wall became an option less often, aithough it can still be done most of the time -most of the time it can be done. The circumstances when it cannot be done, we would store the bone flap in the minus 70 freezer. Most patients who require removal of bone flap do not survive if the bone flap cannot be put back in. Most of these patients do not survive. Q. I don't -- I'm sorry. Could you clarify for me the last statement> When you say these patients do not survive, are you saying that they do not survive because -WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 183 of 189 30
now, Mark. MR. WASSER: Okay. BY MR. LEE: Q. I'm now -- let's say we're talking strictly about skull flaps which you intend to reinsert into the patient. A. I'm sorry, you haven't established that that's my intention. Q. I'm sorry? A. You have not established that that is my intention. Q. Okay. Well, let's ask you: These skull flaps which you're storing in the freezer, what is your intent with respect to these skull flaps' A. To clarify this line of questioning for you, when I was in training we would place the bone flaps in the abdominal wall so that they would always be with the patient because our patient population is somewhat transient, they can leave. Some people come from the east coast, they have an auto accident on the 1-5, it would be impractical. So that traditionally at training facilities where I have been, we would put it in the abdominal wall, not inside the peritoneal cavity, but sometime -someplace in the subcutaneous fat. I encountered a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. They die. Q. Yeah, I understand that. When these patients die, is it because of the reinsertion process or is it because they had to have their skull flap removed in the first place? A. They die because the cranial trauma was so bad, of such a significant degree, that they become brain dead before we can consider any other steps down the line. The majority of patients who have so much brain swelling, you cannot put the bone flap back, which is the reason you do not put it back at the time of surgery. The majority of those patients die. Q. Can you give me some examples of why you would need to remove a patient's bone flap? A. Brain swelling. Q. Okay. So just to recount, patients who require their bone flaps to be removed in the first place are at high risk of mortality then? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Now, are there any hazards associated with -- well, are there -- is there a possibility of bacterial infection of the skull flap if you were to store it at room temperature? And again, just for the sake of clarity, whenever I say bone flap, I am WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, CertifIed Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 184 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, ·M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free· (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
r-
-"'Cl
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ES JOSEPH WROBEL M 0 Thursday December 6 200'
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 37 Q. Don't remember. Did the chair of surgery at 1 8:55 a.m.
KMC ever have an occasion to discuss the storage of bone flaps with you at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. Do you think that the chair of pathology has an obligation to ensure safe practices and procedures at KMC? MR. WASSER: The whole facility? MR. LEE: Well, let's just say with regard to the handling of tissue at KMC. So if I could just rephrase the question for a clear record. Q. Is it your understanding that the chair of pathology at KMC has an obligation to ensure the safe handling of surgical specimens at KMC? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So if the chair of pathology were to advise against the storage of bone flaps in the freezer, would you -- would you consider that a part of the chair of pathology's responsibilities? A. I don't know. MR. LEE: Okay. We're going to -- pardon me. Could we just go off the record? MS. HERRINGTON: Off the record at 8:50 a.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Back on the record at WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
39 BY MR. LEE: Q. Okay. Dr. Wrobel, your attorney has suggested I ask this question, so I'm going to ask it. For what purpose do you store bone flaps in the freezer' A. There are two reasons. One reason -although this is a hypothetical and it has not -there has not been such a request, but in the operating room when we shave patients' hair before surgery, we save it in a bag in case the family wants to have an open casket ceremony. And it would make sense to have -- and these can be fairly large bone flaps -- have those available so that there can be some semblance of normality for the family afterwards, in which case the sterility or nonsterility of the bone flap would not be an issue, I don't think. And the other reason is that if we do wish to perform a cranioplasty or reconstruct the patient's skull, generally there is still a fair amount of brain swelling, and there's brain sort of pooching out underneath the scalp, and there are measures we can take to decrease that. But ultimately, analogy would be if you were to take a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Page 185 of 189 38
MR. LEE: I'll give this -- you want to take it? MR. WASSER: Trial subpoena? Fine. MR. LEE: So let the record reflect that we've served the trial subpoena on Dr. Wrobel. MR. WASSER: The trial is -- by the way, the trial date is December 3rd, 2008. MS. HERRINGTON: We've got a copy for you as well, Dr. Wrobel. THE WITNESS: Thank you. MS. HERRINGTON: This concludes the deposition of Dr. Wrobel at 8:56 a.m. THE WITNESS: No, it does not conclude the deposition. My counsel hasn't asked his questions. MR. WASSER: Well, but -- thank you. I'm not going to ask any. THE WITNESS: But may I speak with you? Can we go off the record for a moment so we may speak? MR. LEE: Sure. MS. HERRINGTON: Of course. Off the record at 8:56 a.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Okay. Back on the record at -- back on the record at 8:57 a.m. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
40 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
pumpkin and you cut the head off of a pumpkin, and then your kids, for some reason known only to them, decide to fill it all the way to the top with ]ello, all the way to the very brim, then you want to put the top back in the pumpkin. Well, if you take that pumpkin head and put it back in there, you're going to compress the ]ello; but if you want to cover that opening in the pumpkin, you could take that pumpkin head that the kids took off, and you could mold a piece of wire mesh over it and you would get the exact same contour, and then tack that wire mesh over the top of the pumpkin without compressing the lello. So the bone flaps that are saved, sterile or not, take them to the operating room and use them to mold a piece of titanium mesh to the right specifications, sterilizing the titanium mesh in an autoclave, implant it. That would be the rationale for saving the bone flaps. But so few of these patients survive, that's the problem. But that's the reason I save the bone flaps, is to be able to have a template to perform an accurate titanium mesh cranioplasty. There's yet another variation on this thing, which is if the patient has sufficient insurance and they survive long enough, we can send them to an WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
r-
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
C"'-t
~S
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN JOSEPH WROBEL M D., Thursday December 6 200·
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 41 outside CT scan facility to have a high resolution CT scan performed. Then there's a company that for $5,000 will mill, m-i-I-I, a custom cranioplasty that is not thick, that is just like a little shell, that you could put on there instead, which would save that step. But once again, these are trauma emergencies. So when they come in, we don't know if they have any insurance or not, and we don't want to deprive somebody that opportunity, or you don't know what your opportunities are go going to be down the road. Maybe you're going to be able to -- to provide them with a custom fit, a computer-generated, lathed, thin cranioplasty; maybe you won't. But we just don't have that information at the time that we -- we start these procedures. Q. Do you think the storage of bone flaps in the freezer present any kinds of hazards to anything else that might be stored in that freezer? A. They're wrapped up pretty good. I don't know. Q. Do you think it's possible that people store food -- their food in that freezer? A. At minus 70? I don't think so. Q. I'm sorry. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. I don't know. Q. Is it possible that hazardous substances could be stored in that freezer? A. That's a tautology. I won't answer that. Q. I'm sorry, I don't -A. It is a tautology, and I will not answer a tautology. Q. You know, I'm not as bright as you are. Can you explain what that means? A. A tautology is a statement that is inherently always true. For instance, when we say that secret things -- that covert operations are susceptible to discovery, what you are saying is that secret things can be found out. That's a tautology. It's a statement that's always true. Secrets can always be discovered. When you say is such a thing possible, the answer's always yes. It is possible the sun will not rise tomorrow in the east. That is possible, yes. So it's a tautOlogy, and I cannot answer a tautology. Q. Okay. So what you're saying is, as you sit here today, you cannot answer whether or not it's possible that there could be hazardous substances stored in that freezer? A. Once again, anything is possible, so I WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 186 of 189 42
A. At minus 70 degrees, I don't think so. And if somebody is storin9 food in the refrigerator in the pathology department that's a minus 70-degree freezer -- I don't mean to be flippant -- but I would consider that to be unwise. Q. SO the answer's no, you don't think it's very possible or you don't think it's possible 7 A. I can't think of everything. That's-that's beyond my comprehension somebody would do that. Q. Okay. If someone were to see bone flaps in -- I'm sorry, let me rephrase that. If a pathologist in the laboratory were to see bone flaps being stored in the freezer, do you think it would be reasonable they would be -- to become so alarmed or concerned about that? A. I don't know. Q. Well, would you find it -- if somebody were to open the minus 70 freezer and to find bone flaps, do you think that it would be reasonable for them to be concerned about that? A. Again, I don't know. Q. Don't know. Okay. Is it possible that infected specimens like hepatitis might be in that freezer? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
44 cannot answer that question. Q. Well, if anything is possible, that suggests your answer is yes/ correct? A. Anything is possible. You're welcome to list possibilities, you're rested more in the afternoon, but anything is possible. Q. SO you don't disagree that it's possible that there could be hazardous substances stored in that freezer then, correct? A. Anything is possible. Q. Okay. Do you have any reason to believe that there might be hazardous substances stored in that freezer? A. I don't know. I have no idea. Q. Do you have any reason to believe that there would not be hazardous substances stored in that freezer? A. No basis for knOWing one way or the other. MR. LEE: Okay. This time we'll -MR. WASSER: We're done. MS. HERRINGTON: This concludes the deposition of Dr. Wrobel. The time is 9:04 a.m. (9:04 a.m.) --00000--
WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDAll, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800·322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 187 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN,
D.O.,
Case No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
Plaintiff, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF COUNTY OF KERN THROUGH PERSON MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE, EUGENE KERCHER, M.D. Thursday, September 4, 2008 Pasadena, California
Reported by:
Cindee L. LeFevre, CSR No. 7974
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT WOOD
RANDALL
Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free' (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
CaseKERCHER, 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG EUGENE M.D.
Document 278-2 Page 50
14:25:39
1
14:25:42
2
work the next day·· I meall, I just had a wonderful evening
14:25:44
3
with him .- he would come to work the next day, and I would
14:25:47
4
see this tightened up, controlled, and at times, suspiciolls
14:25:52
5
-
14:25:52
6
Q.
You are a psychiatrist. You observed him?
14:25:56
7
A
Yeah.
14:25:57
8
Q
Did you think he had Axis It issues? WouJdyoli
14:26:03
9
A. It was Jekyll and Hyde. But then when he came to
14:26:08
10
14:26:11
11
when I deal with people, unless
14:26:16
12
14:26:20
13
Page 18809-04-08 of 189
I
Page 52
,II 14:28:03
1
out on December 7, 2005 -- I'm solT)' -- 2007. I don't know
14:28:09
2
why I am doing this.
14:28:10
3
14:28:14
4
beginning, was David pretty nonnal, easy to get along with?
14:28:18
5
Did he have this Jekyll and Hyde aspect to him from the vel)'
I 14:28:22
6
beginning or was this something that you noticed --
I
•
I 14:28:22
Now, when did you -- was there -- in the
7
A. No, it came on It wasn't there initially.
I 14:28:26
8
Q
14:28:28
9
I
say he had some personality disorders, in your opinion?
Filed 12/01/2008
It wasn't there. So when did it start to appear,
this Jekyll and Hyde aspect'!
14:28:31
10
A. I can't tell you when. Somehow--
14:28:32
11
Q. Was it after the October tumor board conference?
don't interact with people with the DSM stutI, and I never
14:28:35
12
really assigned any axis stulfto him or diaj,,'lIOSis.
14:28:39
13
he had in his department, discontent with the fact that they
14:28:45
14
weren'l- he was --
14:28:48
15
high expectations of himself. I mean, his expectations of himself were just huge, but it was also his expectations of
A. YOll know, r·- you know, -interestingly enough,
r see them clinically, I
14:26:24
14
14:26:28
15
and I recognized somehow, he had troubles, he had some
Alii know is he was basically an insecure guy,
!
A. No, he was having problems with some of the people
YOll
know, he was one thaI really had
14:26:32
16
losses, and there was an underlying depression, but f never
14:28:51
16
14:26:35
17
went any further thalilhat.
14:28:55
17
those that worked for him were huge, and he had some issues
14:26:37
18
14:29:00
wilh one individual specilically -- actually, two, a woman
14:26:40
19
i, 14:29:04
18 19
and a man.
14:26:43
20
A
!
14:29:06
20
14:26:43
21
Q. Okay. Okay. Well, what about Axis I? You know
14:29:07
21
14:26:47
22
14:29:10
22
14:29:12
23
14:29:14
24
A. Yeah. And it seems like in dealing with those
:29:18
25
people and his frustration with them that that seemed to
I
Q. Well, okay, Let's talk about A..xis II then. Did you ever suspect he had personality disorders?
I
No
Axis I?
14:26:49
23
A. Yeah.
14:26:49
24
Q
14:26:53
25
A. No
Did you ever suspect he had Axis I issues?
Q. Dr. Shel1udke and Dr. Out!?
A. No. No. No. These are people that were on-board when he arrived.
Q Elsa Ang and Adam Lang?
Page 51
Page 53
14:26:54
1
14:27:01
2
14:27:02
3
14:27:05
4
that's just my assumption,
14:29:32
4
A. [know
14:27:07
5
Q. Based on what?
14:29:33
5
Q
14:27:07
6
A
14:29:34
6
A. I know
Q. Okay Well, Okay. When did you learn Dr. Jadwin had depression?
A
I just assumed it.
r didn't leam it.
[ mean,
14:29:23
1
14:29:25
2
14:29:30
3
Based on the fact t1mt he had issues with anger
14:27:10
7
and he had issues with getting along with people. He was
14:29:35
7
14:27:14
8
discontent. He was never happy, he was never satisfied.
14:29:38
8
14:27:17
9
There was always a reason to be upset with something, and he
14:27:20
10
I
would always be critical of something
14:27:22
11
14:27:25
12
an individual. And I sort oflay this -- you know, I am a
14:27:28
13
psychiatrist, but' am a pretty reasonable what you see is
14:27:31
14
what you get. 'don't -- when I interact With people, I
14:27:34
15
don't look at them clinically. And David is exactly how J
14:27:38
16
explained.
14:27:39
17
14:27:43
18
I mean, there is something wrong with that kind of
Q. Okay. Well, when didMR. WASSER: At one point,
YOll
asked him to
have moved him in a direction that -.
Q Well, Elsa Ang and Adam Lang were in the Department of Patholo!,.'Y from 2000 because they overlapped.
nley were there when he arrived?
Q. SO he was having problems from the time he arrived then?
14:29:38
9
A. Wet!, my lUlderstanding is that he was -- that he
14:29:41
10
worked very hard to make it clear to some of us that he
14:29:46
11
wasn't happy with the people that he inherited in that
14:29:50
12
department, and --
14:29:51
13
i 14:29:54
14
Q. Did you think there was good reason for that?
A. He didn't give a particular reason, but these were
I
14:29:57
I
14:30:04
18
would I want -- that was his depal1ment. So I didn't wan!
II
15
people we had worked with for some time, having been
14:30:00
16
there as long as we had.
14;30;01
17
So I stayed sort of away from that because why
14;27:45
19
describe the meeting, wh.ich we are kind of off the subject
I 14:30:08
19
to bother him with his department. That's not my job unless
14:27:48
20
or now.
14:30:12
20
he asked me to, and he never asked me to.
14:27:48
21
BYMR. LEE:
14;30:15
21
14:27:50
22
14:30:18
22
already with Ang, Lang, and I guess there was Fang Luo Liu;
14:30:18
23
right, Fang Luo Liu?
14:30:18
24
A. Yeah.
14:30:18
25
Q. There were three pathologists there. He seemed to
Q. I understand. Now, getting back to Dr. Jadwin, he
14:27:52
23
was hired - I am going to represent to you that he began
14:27:55
24
his employment in October of2004
14:28:00
25
October 12 of2000, and he was there until his contract rail
~~
I'm sorry -- 2000,
Q. Okay. But then
14
JADWIN WOOD & RANDALL
vs.
-~
so there were some issues
(Pages 50 to 53)
COUNTY (800 ) 322-4595
CES Job Classfication Change Form
Page I of 1
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 189 of 189
Change of Employee Status DEPARTMENT #
8997 EMPLOYEE
II)
999-00-2739 EFFECTIVE DATE 09/26/2008
I
DATE PREPARED DEPARTMENT NAME 09/17/2008 KERN MEDICAL CENTER EMPLOYEE NAME MARTINEZ GILBERT R CLASSiFICATION 0657 MGR, CLiN LAB SV
APPOINTMENT CHANGES TYPE OF APPOINTMENT TYPE OF CIIANGE Pennanent 35 Retirement RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE DATE 09/27/2008
I
RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE 09127108. COMMENTS
DATE
SIG~ATURE
ACKNOWI.EDGMENT BY TilE EMPLOYEE: IACKNOWI.EDGE AND CERTIFY THAT TIlE STt\TEMENTS ON TillS fORM ARE TRUE ANDCORREcr TO TltE
BEST OF MY KNOWI.EDGE DEPARTMENT HEAD OR OTIIER AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE REQUESTED CHANGE IS: RECOMMENDED
NOT RECOMMENDED
DIRECTOR OF PI.:RSONNEL AND SECRETARY. CIVil. SERViCE COMMISSION
APPROVED
NOT APPROVED
Keyed By ARMIDA SMITH
Approved By ARMIDA SMITH
Personnel Approval JUDY BEGGS
Dale To ITS 09/2412008 3:02:00 PM (Reconciled )
Warnings: 1. This Transaction closes out Leave Type 60 effective from 06/20/2008 to 09/26/2008.
https:llauditor-wcb/cesnoe/reports/CES_display.asp?trans_00=09/17/2008%202 :24:00%20... 1211/2008
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 280
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 2
1 Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 2 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 3 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 4 E-mail: [email protected] 5 Bernard C. Barrnann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL 6 Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor 7 Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 8 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected] 9 10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
14
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
15
Plaintiff,
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
16 17 18 19
vs. COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,
Defendants.
Date: January 12,2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
REQUEST FOR WDICIAL NOTICE
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 280
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 2
1
Defendants hereby requests, under section 201 of the Rules of Evidence, that the Court
2
take judicial notice of the records of this proceeding identified below. This request for judicial
3
notice is made in connection with the January 12 hearing in this matter.
4
Defendants requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following records:
5
1.
Defendants' Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Motion for
6
Summary Judgment andlor Summary Adjudication on All Claims in the Second Amended
7
Complaint, filed on November 13,2008.
8 9 10 II
12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19
2.
Statement of Undisputed Facts In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication on All Claims in the Second Amended Complaint ("DSUF"), also filed on November 13,2008. 3.
Declaration of Michael J. Rubio In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13, 2008. 4.
Declaration of Rayrnond A. Watson In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13, 2008.
S.
Declaration of Mike Maggard In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13, 2008. 6.
Declaration of Jon McQuiston In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
and/or Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13,2008. 7.
Declaration of Don Maben In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment andlor
20
Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13,2008.
21
Dated: December 1, 2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
22 23
24
By: lsi Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.
2S 26 27
28 -1REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Document 281
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 2
Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: [email protected] Bernard C. Barmann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected]
9 10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris
11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13 14
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
15 16 17 18
Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
Plaintiff, vs.
COUNTY OF KERN, et aI., Defendants.
Date: January 12, 2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
19 20 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4
5 6 7
Document 281
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 2
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendants have lodged, pursuant to LR 5-133(j), the following deposition transcripts for the Court's convenience in the above matter: Exhibit 1:
Deposition of Edward Taylor, M.D., taken December 5, 2007, condensed
transcript; Exhibit 2:
Deposition of Charles Wrobel, M.D., taken December 6, 2007, condensed
transcript and Exhibit 3:
Deposition of Eugene Kercher, M.D., taken September 4,2008, condensed
8
transcript;
9
Dated: December 1, 2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
10 11
12
By: /s/ Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 285
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 285
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 2
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 29
Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: mwasserialmarkwasser.com Bernard C. Barmann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected]
9
10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan, and Irwin Harris
11
12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14 15
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
16 17 18 19
Plaintiff, vs. COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,
Defendants.
20
Case No.: I :07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG DEFENDANTS' MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Date: January 12,2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA
21 22
----------------
Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
23 24 25 26 27 28
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 1
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 29
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
11
3
INTRODUCTION
1
4
LEGAL STANDARD ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
1
5
ARGUMENT
1
6
A.
7
DEFENDANTS TOOK NO ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF 1.
8
2.
9
3. 4.
5.
10
11
B.
DEFENDANTS NEVER RETALIA TED AGAINST PLAINTIFF 1. 2. 3. 4.
12 13 14
C.
15 16
D.
17 18 19 20 21
E. F.
October 17,2005 Letter of Reprimand Full-Time Leave Removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology Paid Administrative Leave Nonrenewal of Employment Agreement
Oncology Conference Blood Product Chart Copies Skull Flaps Radical Prostatectomy
1
3 5 6 8
9 10
11 12 13 15
DEFENDANTS DID NOT VIOLATE PLAINTIFF'S RIGHTS UNDER FMLA AND CFRA
16
DEFENDANTS DID NOT DISCRIMINATE, DID NOT FAIL TO ACCOMMODATE AND DID NOT FAIL TO ENGAGE IN THE INTERACTIVE PROCESS
17
DEFENDANTS DID NOT VIOLATE PLAINTIFF'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS
20
DEFENDANTS DID NOT RETALIATE AGAINST PLAINTIFF FOR ASSERTING HIS RIGHTS UNDER FMLA, CFRA AND FEHA
24
CONCLUSION
25
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 3 of 29
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
2 United States Supreme Court Cases 3
4 5
Board ofRegents v. Roth (1972) 408 U.S. 564, 577 Gilbert v. Homar (1997) 520 U.S. 924 Matsushita Elec. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. (1986) 475 U.S. 574, 593 Perry v. Sindermann (1972) 408 U. S. 593 Circuit Court Cases
6
7 8
9
20,21,22,23 23 15 10,20,21,22,23
Freundv. Nycomed Amersham (9th Cir. 2003) 347 F.3d 752 Joseph v. Leavitt (2 nd Cir. 2006) 465 F.3d 87,91 Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc. (5 th Cir. 1996) 93 F.3d 155, Ulrich v. City and County ofSan Francisco (9th Cir. 2002) 308 F. 3d 968 Watkins v. Ameripride Services (9 th Cir. 2004) 375 F.3d 821,828. Wideman v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (11 th Cir. 1998) 141 F 3d 1453, 1456
14 8 19 2 19
2
10 District Court Cases
11
12
Gannon v. Potter (N.D.Cal. 2006) U. S. Dist. LEXIS 85995 Swonke v. Sprint, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2004) 327 F.Supp.2d 1128,1138 Tomczak v. Safeway, Inc. (N.D.Cal. 1997) LEXIS 13247
8
5 8
13 California Supreme Court Cases 14
15
Skelly v. State Personnel Bd. (1975) 15 Cal.3d 194,206-207 Yanowitz v. L'Oreal (2005) 36 Cal. 4 th 1028 ,1054-1055 California Appellate Court Cases
16
17 18
19 20 21
22 23
Colarossi v. Coty, Inc. (2002) 97 Cal.AppA th 1142. Daly v. Exxon (1997) 55 Cal.AppA th 39 Hammond v. County ofLos Angeles (2008) 160 Cal.AppA th 1579 Morgan v. Regents of University ofCal. (2000) 88 Cal.AppAth 52 Neisendorfv. Levi Strauss & Co. (2006) 143 Cal.AppA th 509 Patten v. Grant Joint Union High School Dist. \2005) 134 Cal.AppA th 1378 Raine v. City ofBurbank (2006) 135 Cal.App.4 h 1215 Shoemaker v. County ofLos Angeles (1995) 37 Cal. AppA'h 618 Tollefson v. Roman Catholic Bishop (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 843,854
26
24
9, 10 8 25 17,24 14, 16 19 7,21,22
9
United States CodelUnited States Code Annotated 17
29 U.S.C. §2612(a)(I)(D) Code of Federal Regulations
24 25
20 1,2,3
17,24
29 C.F.R. §825.214, subd. (b) California Statutes
27
California Government Code §12945.2(a)
28
California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d)
17 2,3 II
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY mDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 1 2 3
California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health &
Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
§1278.5(d)(l) §1278.5(d)(2) §1602.5 §l602.5(a) §1635.1 §1635 (d)
Page 4 of 29
3 3 12 12 13 14
4
5
California Labor Code §1102.5 California Labor Code §2924 California Labor Code §6400(a)
11 7,23 19
6
California Code of Regulations 7 22 C.C.R §7075l
12
CACI §2600 Restatement (Second) of Contracts §268
16 13
8
9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 111
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I 2
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 5 of 29
INTRODUCTION Defendants have filed a separate request that the Court take judicial notice of Defendants'
3
Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and lor
4
Summary Adjudication On All Claims In The Second Amended Complaint ("Defendants'
5
Memo"), Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts in Support of Motion for Summary
6
Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication on all Claims in the Second Amended Complaint
7
("DSUF") and other documents, filed November 13,2008. Defendants will cite to both
8
documents, as well as Plaintiffs Memorandum of Point and Authorities in Support of Corrected
9
Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment Against Defendants ("Plaintiffs Memo") and
10
Plaintiffs Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of Plaintiffs Corrected Motion for
II
Partial or Full Summary Judgment Against Defendants ("PSUF"), throughout this memorandum.
12
Plaintiff s moving papers misstate and mischaracterize both the law and the facts relevant
13
to Plaintiffs claims. Most of the discussion that follows is focused on those misstatements and
14
mischaracterizations.
15 16 17
LEGAL STANDARD ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendants incorporate herein the discussion from Defendants' Memo at pages 2:25-3:27 regarding the legal standards for summary judgment.
18
I
19
ARGUMENT Defendants Took No Adverse Employment Actions Against Plaintiff.
20
A.
21
Plaintiff correctly notes that California has adopted the "materiality" test for the purpose
22
of determining whether an employment action is adverse. Yanowitz v. L'Oreal (2005) 36
23
Cal.4 th 1028, 1036. However, Plaintiff attempts to connect the Yanowitz materiality test with
24
the "deterrence" test that the California Supreme Court has rejected for claims arising under
25
California statutes. Id. at 1036. (See, Plaintiffs Memo at pg. 5:2-4.)
26
Having erroneously expanded the test beyond what the California Supreme Court has
27
endorsed, Plaintiff asserts that a reprimand is an adverse employment action. (Plaintiffs Memo
28
at pg. 5:9.) But, under the accepted materiality test, an employment action is adverse only ifit -1-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 6 of 29
1
materially affects the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. Yanowitz, 36 Ca1.4 th at
2
1052. A reprimand, by itself, does not materially affect the terms, conditions or privileges of
3
employment and, consequently, is not an adverse employment action. Id. at 1055.
4
After the California Supreme Court outlined the contours of the materiality test, it
5
adopted a "totality of the circumstances" approach to determine when a series of employment
6
actions, taken together, will be construed as an adverse employment action. Id. at 1052, fh. 11.
7
In this context, thc Court cited Wideman v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
8
which held that written reprimands in conjunction with an employer's solicitation of negative
9
comments by coworkers coupled with a one-day suspension constituted an adverse employment
(lIth
Cir. 1998) 141 F.3d 1453,
10
action. Yanowitz, 36 CaI.4th at 1061, citing Wideman
11
Wideman stands for the proposition that courts should look at patterns of employment actions as
12
well as individual employment actions to determine what is truly adverse.
13 14
(lIth
Cir. 1998) 141 F.3d at 1456.
No authority supports Plaintiffs assertion that a written reprimand, by itself, is an adverse employment action.
15
Plaintiff improperly relies on Ulrich v. City and County ofSan Francisco (9th Cir. 2002)
16
308 FJd 968. Dr. Ulrich resigned his position knowing his hospital had begun an investigation
17
into his patient care practices. Id. at 972-973. Because the hospital had already begun its
18
investigation, it reported Dr. Ulrich's resignation to the National Practitioner Data Bank
19
(NPDB). Id. at 973. The NPDB is typically accessed by potential employers to perform
20
background checks on physicians. Id. at 974. So, the hospital's report to the NPDB presented a
21
threat to Dr. Ulrich's career.
22
Those facts are quite distinct from what happened to Plaintiff. The letters Plaintiff
23
complains of were confidential and were not distributed beyond the medical staff officers at
24
KMC. (Harris Depo., 8113/08, pgs. 113:14-16 and 116:4). They did not threaten Plaintiffs
25
career. In fact, Plaintiff was actively looking for a new job during much of the time he was on
26
leave and there is no evidence any prospective employer knew anything about what was gong on
27
with Plaintiff at KMC. (DSUF
28
~8).
Defendants never reported Plaintiff to NPDB.
Finally, Plaintiff asserts that California Health & Safety Code §l278.5(d) provides that -2DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 7 of 29
1
the threatened placement of letters of reprimand in Plaintiff s medical records file is sufficient to
2
support a retaliation claim. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 5:22-23.) That is not what the statute says.
3
There are two parts to California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d). The first part,
4
§1278.5(d)(l), contains the rebuttable presumption that an adverse employment action occurring
5
within 120 days of whistleblowing is retaliation. The second part, §1278.5(d)(2), describes what
6
constitutes an adverse employment action. Subdivision (d)(2) states:
7 8 9
10 11
[D]iscriminatory treatment of an employee, member of the medical staff, or any other health care worker includes, but is not limited to, discharge, demotion, suspension, or any unfavorable changes in, or breach of, the terms or conditions of a contract, employment, privileges of the employee, member of the medical staff, or any other health care worker of the health care facility, or the threat of any of these actions.
12
California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d)(2) is essentially a codification of the
13
"materiality" test that the California Supreme Court adopted in Yanowitz. See, Yanowitz at 1036.
14
Nothing in the statute supports Plaintiffs contention that an employment event that does not
15
materially effect an employee's status is sufficient to support a retaliation claim.
16 17
1.
October 17, 2005 Letter of Reprimand
In keeping with Plaintiff s habit of mischaracterizing the facts to try to make them fit his
18
unsupported theories, he has labeled the October l7'h, 2005 letter admonishing and counseling
19
him for his behavior at the October 12, 2005 oncology conference the "Credential Threat." This
20
is specious. There is no evidence that Plaintiff s credential was ever threatened. None of the
21
Defendants ever took any action to jeopardize or "threaten" Plaintiff s credentials as a physician
22
at KMC. As Plaintiff admits, the letter was confidential and was never even placed in his
23
medical records file. (Harris Depo., 8/13/08, pgs. 113:14-16 and 116:4). Plaintiffmakcs no
24
attempt to explain how a confidential letter that was never placed in his file constituted a threat
25
to his credential. The fact is, Plaintiff continued to enjoy all the privileges of a credentialed
26
physician at KMC until November 10,2008 -long after his employment contract expired.
27
(Letters to Jadwin, dated 8/14/01 to 9/12/08, attached to Defendants' response to Plaintiffs
28
Statement of Undisputed Facts). His privileges finally lapsed because Plaintiff never returned -3· DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 8 of 29
the requisite renewal application to KMC. Id.
2
Oncology conferences are held monthly. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 22:9-10. They are
3
an hour long and are routinely devoted to a discussion of two cases. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg.
4
24:7-8 and pg. 36:19-20. There are usually 70-80 people - mostly residents and medical students
5
- in attendance. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 32:8-9. There had been previous issues with
6
Plaintiffs presentations at the conferences. In 2003, Plaintiff was counseled to prioritize
7
information and present it succinctly. (DSUF ~I 0I). In 2004, he was warned that a presentation
8
he wanted to make, consisting of 52 slides, would take more time than was allotted. (DSUF
9
~102).
10
In May 2005, he was again requested to observe the time limits. (DSUF
~103).
Plaintiffs presentation at the October 12,2005 oncology conference was inappropriate.
II
It greatly exceeded the allotted time, contained too many slides, did not conform to the
12
instructional purpose of the conference, included unprofessional criticisms of both the University
13
of Southern California and Stanford University, deteriorated into an argument between Plaintiff
14
and Dr. Roy over a specific case and monopolized the conference to such an extent that no one
IS
else was able to make their presentations. (Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 14:19-21; pg. 15:1-4; pg.
16
27:16-17; pgs. 31:17-32:21; pg. 51:12-25; pg. 55:7-23; pg. 62:19-25; pg. 63:4-11; pg. 64:12-19;
17
68:9-17 and DSUF ~~104, 105, 106 and III and PSUF ~89). After Plaintiff finally relinquished
18
the podium and sat down, he continued to argue with Dr. Roy. (DSUF ~112).
19
Three physicians who attended the conference wrote confidential letters to the Chief
20
Medical Officer about Plaintiffs behavior. (DSUF ~107; PSUF ~91). They were not the only
21
attendees who complained. The chief of surgery also voiced a complaint. (DSUF ~I 08). The
22
past-president of the medical staff testified she was embarrassed by several things Plaintiff had
23
said - such as his criticisms of outside consultants. (DSUF ~III). Several residents and medical
24
students noted Plaintiff s unprofessional behavior on their performance evaluations. (DSUF
25
~109).
26
A few days after the conference, the Executive Board of the medical staff presented
27
Plaintiff with a confidential letter that both admonished and counseled him regarding his
28
behavior at the conference. The letter referenced Plaintiff s failure to observe the time limits, his -4DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 9 of 29
1
failure to cooperate with the conference coordinator's instructions regarding time and his use of
2
the conference as a platfonn from which to advance his personal agenda. (DSUF
3
~113).
Plaintiff s behavior during the oncology conference and afterwards eroded his
4
relationships with other members of the medical staff. In a meeting with KMC's Chief
5
Executive Officer about a week later, Plaintiff made loud, angry and derogatory comments about
6
other members of the medical staff. (DSUF ~116). He refused their conciliatory efforts to bring
7
resolution to the issue. (DSUF ~~166-174). Rather than accept the comments in the spirit in
8
which they were given, Plaintiff chose to become increasingly antagonistic and hostile. (DSUF
9
~~114;
166-174). He told Dr. Abraham she was nothing but a "fat doctor." (DSUF ~166). He ~173).
10
told Dr. Ragland, he was unfit to be president of the medical staff. (DSUF
11
ultimately destroyed the collegiality necessary to build professional trust and respect. (DSUF
12
~~133,
13
This
134). Without supporting legal authority, Plaintiff asserts his criticisms of virtually every
14
physician at KMC were all cloaked with a mysterious "protected" status but, when other
15
physicians complained about his behavior, they were motivated by malice and retaliation.
16 17 18 19
Defendants request a finding that the October 17, 2005 letter was not an adverse employment action.
2.
Full-Time Leave.
Plaintiff has chosen to characterize his full-time leave as "forced", apparently in an
20
attempt to transform the County's deferential and supportive decision into an act of retaliation.
21
This is also specious.
22
An employer may require an employee to stay at home and recuperate, regardless of the
23
employee's wishes. Swanke v. Sprint, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2004) 327 F.Supp.2d 1128, 1138. It is not
24
an adverse employment action to place an employee on a leave the employee did not request.
25
Here, the facts are not favorable to Plaintiff. Plaintiff s physician wrote that Plaintiff ~~14
26
should be restricted to part-time work or less. (DSUF
27
testified that he gave Plaintiff the option of taking full-time leave. (DSUF ~21). Plaintiff
28
obviously disputes that. However, the dispute does not defeat summary judgment because full-
and 21). Defendant Peter Bryan
-5DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 10 of 29
1
time leave represents a less demanding work schedule than part-time. Whether Plaintiff chose
2
full-time leave as Bryan says he did or the County decided to place Plaintiff on full-time leave,
3
the full-time leave was consistent with what Plaintiffs physician specified. And, importantly,
4
Plaintiff did not object to it. (DSUF
~21).
There is no basis for his contention it was adverse.
5
Plaintiff asserts the full-time leave, although paid, was an adverse employment action
6
because it deprived him of the opportunity to earn professional fees from April 28, 2006 until
7
June 17,2006. However, Plaintiff put himself on leave in December 2005. (DSUF ~15). And,
8
he decided which duties he would perform and which he would not. (Second Amended
9
Complaint ~80). The duties Plaintiff decided to not perform were his duties as a pathologist. Id.
10
It was Plaintiff s routine work as a pathologist that generated professional fees, not his
11
administrative work. Professional fees result from billable medical work. (Plaintiffs Memo,
12
pgs.6:27-7:2). Thus, Plaintiffs decision to stop working as a pathologist damaged his ability to
13
earn professional fees. The County's decision to follow his physician's directive and put him on
14
less than part-time work had no appreciable affect on his ability to earn professional fees. This is
15
borne out by a review of the professional fees Plaintiff billed. His fees declined substantially
16
after he put himself on leave in December, 2005.
17 18
The County's decision to place Plaintiff on full-time leave was reasonable and did not materially affect the terms, conditions or privileges of his employment.
19
Defendants request a finding that the County's decision to comply with Plaintiffs
20
physician's request that Plaintiff work part-time or less by placing Plaintiff on full-time leave
21
was not an adverse employment action.
22
3.
23
Removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology.
Plaintiff chooses to describe his removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology as a
24
"demotion." This, again, is misleading. Plaintiff was not "demoted" as that term is used in the
25
KMC Medical Staff Bylaws. (The Medical Staff Bylaws were submitted, in their entirety, as
26
Defendants' Undisputed Fact No.4 in support of Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment.) "Demotion" is referenced in Section 12.2 as one of several possible corrective actions.
27 28
(DSUF
~4,
pg. 71). It means moving a medical staff member to a "lower staff category or -6-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 11 of 29
1
membership status." Id. The categories of medical staff are also defined in the Bylaws (See,
2
Article V, "Categories of Membership." (DSUF
3
Courtesy, Consulting, Provisional, Honorary, Retired, Advisory, Administrative, and Associate.
4
(DSUF ~4, pgs. 18-28). Plaintiff was always in the "Active" category with full rights of
5
membership and clinical privileges. (KMC Letter to Jadwin, dated 8/14/01 to 9/12/08). He was
6
never "demoted" to any other category.
~4,
pgs.l8-28).) The categories are Active,
7
Plaintiff s removal from his position as Chair of the Department of Pathology is covered
8
by a different provision of the Bylaws. (DSUF ~4, Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319».
9
Peter Bryan recommended that Plaintiff be removed as department chair because of Plaintiffs
10
"continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing member of the
11
medical staff leadership group" and because Plaintiff "has provided no indication that he is
12
committed to return to work or resume his duties as chairman." (DSUF
13
subsequent removal were in accordance with the Bylaws. (DSUF
14
had no effect on Plaintiff s employment status or the term of his employment agreement.
15
~~31
~33).
The report and
and 37). The removal
Plaintiffs reason for wanting to treat his removal as a demotion is clear because, under ~4,
16
the Bylaws, demotions carry certain procedural rights whereas removal does not. (DSUF
17
Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319) versus Article XII, Section 12.2, pg. 66 (0000337».
18
Plaintiff also relies on Shoemaker v. County ofLos Angeles (1995) 37 Cal.AppA th 618 but it is
19
little application to this issue. The question in Shoemaker was whether the plaintiff was entitled
20
to pre-disciplinary procedures before he was relieved of his dual positions as chief of the county
21
medical center's emergency medicine services department and chair of the university's
22
department of emergency medicine. Shoemaker sheds no light on the question of what
23
constitutes a demotion.
24
0
The County's actions are further supported by California Labor Code §2924 which
25
authorizes an employer to rescind an employment contract under certain conditions. Section
26
2924 states "an employment for a specified term may be terminated at any time by the employer
27
in case of any willful breach of duty by the employee in the course of his employment, or in the
28
case of his habitual neglect of his duty or continued incapacity to perform it." -7-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 12 of 29
Plaintiff was not only physically absent from the hospital for over 7 months, he ignored ~23).
2
the County's inquiries about when he would return to work. (DSUF
3
termed "inability" or "unwillingness", Plaintiff was not doing the job he was hired to do.
4
Whether properly
Defendants request a finding that the County removed Plaintiff as Chair of the
5
Department of Pathology consistent with the terms of his employment agreement and the
6
removal was not an adverse employment action.
7
8
4.
Paid Administrative Leave
Plaintiff contents that his placement on paid administrative leave was an adverse
9
employment action. In Defendants' Memo, pg. 5:22-28, Defendants cited authority that paid
10
administrative leave is not an adverse employment action because it does not materially affect
II
the employment relationship. Gannon v. Potter (N.D. Cal. 2006) __F.3d_ _, 2006 U.S.
12
Dist. LEXIS 85995 at 13-14; Tomczakv. Safeway, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 1997) _ _F.3d~_, 1997
13
LEXIS 13247; Joseph v. Leavitt (2 nd Cir. 2006) 465 F.3d 87, 91. The employee retains the same
14
position at the same base pay and there is no negative evaluative comment. This rationale is
15
consistent with the Yanowitz "materiality" rule: An action is not adverse ifit does not materially
16
affect the terms, conditions and privileges of employment.
17
Plaintiff cites Hammond v. County ofLos Angeles (2008) 160 Cal.AppA th 1579 for the
18
proposition that "extended leave, even when paid, is an adverse action where it impairs an
19
employee's job performance or prospects for advancement or promotion." (Plaintiffs Memo, pg.
20
6: 17-18). Although the Hammond court mentioned adverse employment actions, the court was
21
referring to a passage out of Yanowitz, which it cited. Hammond, 160 Cal.AppA,h at 1599, citing
22
Yanowitz, 36 Cal.4th at 1054-1055. The Hammond opinion does not discuss extended leave, paid
23
or otherwise, because that was not relevant to the facts in Hammond. The plaintiff in Hammond
24
was never put on leave. She was a nursing instructor who sued because she was given less
25
teaching time and more curriculum-development time by her new supervisor. The case has no
26
application to the facts here and it does not support Plaintiffs position.
27 28
Plaintiff also argues that paid administrative leave is an adverse employment action because it caused him to be away from the workplace for months. Plaintiff produced an expert, -8-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 13 of 29
1
Regina Levison, who testified that a pathologist is at risk oflosing his or her skills within a few
2
months if not engaged in pathology work. (PSUF ~53). However, as mentioned above, Plaintiff
3
put himself on leave in December, 2005 and practiced no pathology until September, 2006,
4
during which time-ten months-he probably did suffer a self-induced erosion of his skills.
5
(DSUF
6 7 8 9
~~1 0,
15 and 19; Second Amended Complaint ~80).
If practicing pathology is important to maintaining one's skills, Plaintiff might have considered the consequences of his self-induced absence from the hospital. Plaintiff maintains that being placed on paid administrative leave denied him the opportunity to earn professional fees - which he alleges amounted to approximately $100,000 per
10
year. (PSUF ~57). In fact, Plaintiffs professional fees for 2004 were $131,709.58; for 2005,
11
they were $103,444.13; and for 2006, they were $28,596.64. (Bates Numbers 0018755-
12
0018917). Plaintiff s professional fees varied greatly according to his performance. They were
13
not guaranteed by his employment agreement. They were merely a potential. (DSUF
14
did not earn them if he did not work. Plaintiff s decision to stop practicing pathology in
15
December, 2005 substantially impacted his ability to earn professional fees.
16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
~6).
He
Administrative leave is expressly authorized by the County's policies, which are incorporated into Plaintiffs employment agreement. (DSUF ~6, Article V,
~7,
pg. 15).
Defendants request a finding that Plaintiff s paid administrative leave and was not an adverse employment action. 5.
Nonrenewal of Employment Agreement.
Finally, Plaintiff alleges that the "nonrenewal" of his employment contract was an adverse employment action because it was a form of retaliation. Plaintiff relies on Daly v. Exxon (1997) 55 Cal.App.4 th 39. At the beginning of the
24
opinion, the Daly court expressed its agreement with the result in Tollefson v. Roman Catholic
25
Bishop (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 843. Tollefson stands for the proposition that an employment
26
contract that expires on its own terms is not the basis for a claim. The court wrote, "Plaintiff
27
could not transmute an express, one-year employment contract into an implied contract for an
28
indefinite term, terminable only for good cause." Tollefson, 219 Cal.App.3d at 854. This -9DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 14 of 29
remains true even if one-year contracts have been renewed for successive terms. Id. at 849. In Daly, the plaintiff had her one-year "consulting agreement" renewed several times.
3
Daly, 55 Cal.AppA th at 42. When it was not renewed, she alleged retaliation for having reported
4
what she believed to be Cal-OSHA violations to her employer. Id. The Daly court reversed an
5
award of summary judgment in favor of the employer, holding that proof of retaliation by the
6
employer entitled her to statutory damages. However, nothing in the opinion holds that
7
nonrenewal of an employment contract is, by itself, an adverse employment action.
8 9
Plaintiff advances the novel argument that his employment agreement should have been renewed because there was a "mutually explicit understanding" that it would be. (Plaintiffs
10
Memo, pg. 8:12 and pg. 30:5). He bases this argument on language he extracted from Perry v.
11
Sindermann (1972) 408 U.S. 593,601. Perry does not support Plaintiff. (See, discussion below
12
at page 21 :8-17). There was no "mutually explicit understanding" that Plaintiffs employment
13
agreement would be renewed.
14 15 16 17
Contrary to what Plaintiff writes, in the last 7 years, the employment agreements for four physicians at KMC have not been renewed. (PSUF '\[71). Nonrenewal is not rare. Plaintiff asserts he was a "permanent" employee. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 30:6-7). He wa not permanent in the sense he tries to use the word. (See, discussion below at page 21: 11-17).
18
Plaintiff cannot establish that his contract was not renewed for retaliatory reasons.
19
Supervisor Ray Watson only remembered a discussion about removing Plaintiff from the
20
department chair position. (DSUF '\[34). He did not remember (and Plaintiff asked him three
21
times!) any discussion about Plaintiffs termination, resignation or denial of privileges. (DSUF
22
'\[34). He also did not recall a vote on the nonrenewal of the contract but he speculated there
23
must have been one. (DSUF '\[35). In fact, no vote was ever taken on whether to renew
24
Plaintiffs contract. (DSUF '\[36a).
25
There is no evidence to support Plaintiffs allegation of retaliation with regard to the
26
nonrenewal of his contract and Defendants request a finding that the County's nonrenewal of his
27
employment agreement was not an adverse employment action and was not retaliatory.
28
B.
Defendants Never Retaliated Against Plaintiff. ·10·
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 15 of 29
Plaintiffs First and Second Claims are commonly referred to as "whistleblower" claims.
2
Plaintiff was not a "whistleblower" or ever engaged in "whistleblowing" while employed at
3
KMC. (Def.'s Answer to Second Amended Complaint '\1'\117,41,74, and 78).
4
To be a "whistleblower," an employee must report information to a government or law
5
enforcement agency that the employee reasonably believes discloses a violation oflaw.
6
California Labor Code §11 02.5. Plaintiff claims he "blew the whistle" four times.
7 8 9
1.
Oncology Conference.
Plaintiff says the first incident of alleged whistleblowing occurred at the October 12, 2005 oncology conference. Plaintiff was one of three or four speakers at an instructional,
10
presentation about a medical case to an audience of approximately 70-80 members of the KMC
11
staff, who were mostly residents and medical students. (Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 24:6-18 and
12
pg. 32:8-9). This was the normal format for the oncology conferences. Id. A resident would
13
introduce the case and give a brief overview, a physician from radiology would report the
14
radiologic findings, a pathologist would report the pathology, the treating physician would
15
comment on treatment and there would be a few minutes of general discussion about the case.
16
Each presentation was limited to 30 minutes. (Taylor Depo., pg. 36:16-20). Otherthan
17
Plaintiffs behavior, the October, 2005 oncology conference followed the routine fOlmat.
18
Plaintiff asserts he "blew the whistle" on a plan of care for a patient that was "based on
19
inaccurate outside pathology reports." Those pathology reports were from the University of
20
Southern California and Stanford University. (PSUF '\189). Plaintiffs assertion that the outside
21
pathology reports were "inaccurate" is at odds with other statements Plaintiff made about the
22
nature of pathologic diagnoses. For example, in an e-mail to Dr. Dutt, (which Plaintiff wrote to
23
defend his own work) Plaintiff stated, "As you well know, there are frequent disagreements
24
between pathologists, even expert pathologists, about a given diagnosis. These are customarily
25
resolved by referee opinions by outside consultants and the results are widely published." (PSUF
26
'\1114). In a 2005 letter to Dr. Roy, Plaintiff wrote, "Pathology diagnoses are consensus based,
27
with few gold standards to affirm accuracy. Consultants offer opinions, not accurate diagnoses.
28
There is no universally agreed upon definition for what constitutes an 'accurate' diagnosis." -11DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 16 of 29
(DSUF -,r74).
2
Plaintiffs criticisms of the work done by USC and Stanford were no more than his
3
opinions of a diagnosis rendered by another pathologist. Disagreement between physicians over
4
diagnoses and patient care is not "blowing the whistle" because it lacks all the elements of
5
"whistleblowing." There is no violation oflaw and there is no enforcement agency to report to.
6
Plaintiff asserts he also "blew the whistle" during the conference regarding "unsafe
7
conditions created for other patients by the lack of a KMC policy requiring internal pathology
8
review of all outside pathology reports prior to treatment." Yet, again, there is no law that
9
requires the practice he was advocating. This is not "whistleblowing." It is disagreement.
I0 II
12 13
Defendants request a finding that Plaintiffs statements at the October oncology conference did not constitute whistleblowing.
2.
Blood Product Chart Copies
The second incident of Plaintiff s alleged whistleblowing concerns Blood Product Chart
14
Copies ("PCCs"). PCCs are the paper records of blood usage and cover such things as
15
transfusions. Plaintiff asserts he made a "protected" report to Peter Bryan, the Chief Executive
16
Officer ofKMC, on January 9, 2006, that Plaintiff "reasonably suspected" transfusion
17
documentation at KMC was not being processed in compliance with state regulations.
18
Although California Health and Safety Code §1602.5(a) applies to the preparation,
19
labeling and storage of blood products, violation of §1602.5 was not Plaintiffs original concern.
20
Instead, Plaintiff had argued aggressively with Toni Smith and others that the original copies of
21
all PCCs should be filed and stored in the Pathology Department. (DSUF -,r118).
22
However, 22 C.C.R. §70751 requires that patient medical record be maintained in an
23
easily accessible marmer and in accordance with policies that insure their integrity. Plaintiffs
24
desire to file PCCs in the Pathology Department would have fragmented medical records by
25
causing records of blood usage to be housed separate from the rest ofthe patient's medical
26
record. Toni Smith correctly vetoed Plaintiffs request, thereby insuring that KMC's medical
27
records continued to be maintained as required by law (and, of course, earning Plaintiffs enmity
28
in the process). (DSUF -,r129). -12DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY mDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
I
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 17 of 29
Plaintiffs campaign to force Toni Smith to change KMC policy and store the PCCs in
2
the Pathology Department was persistent and unpleasant. (DSUF nl17-131). Plaintiff refused
3
to acknowledge that there was an opposing viewpoint. (DSUF ~~117, 128, 130 and 131).
4
Plaintiff was so stubborn that, when he was confronted with the repmi from the Joint Committee
5
on Accreditation of Hospital Organizations ("JCAHO") that found no problem with KMC's
6
PCCs, Plaintiff dismissed the report as being based on too small a sample. (DSUF ~~123 and
7
124). While the California Department of Health found minor lapses in KMC's regulatory
8
compliance (for example, the blood usage committee did not meet often enough (PSUF
9
KMC was never found to be out of compliance with the legal requirements. (DSUF ~132).
10
~98»,
In sum, Plaintiffs concerns about pecs were not reasonable. No enforcement agency
II
ever found a basis for his complaints. His concerns were frivolous. Defendants request a findin
12
that Plaintiffs statements about PCCs did not constitute whistleblowing.
13 14
3.
Skull Flaps.
The third incident of alleged whistleblowing concerns the issue of "skull flaps." (A skull
15
flap is a piece of skull that is removed, usually to relieve swelling in the brain following head
16
trauma. (Wrobel Depo., 12/6/07, pg. 32: 14-20». Plaintiff alleges he "reasonably believed" skull
17
flaps were being stored in the freezer in the Pathology Department laboratory in violation of
18
California Health & Safety Code §1635.1, which imposes licensing standards on the storage of
19
tissue that will be reimplanted. Plaintiffs belief was not reasonable.
20
Dr. Charles Wrobel is the neurosurgeon at KMC responsible for brain surgery. (Wrobel
21
Depo., 12/6/07, pg. 10: 11-12). He is the physician who removes skull flaps from patients and he
22
is the surgeon who put the skull flaps in the freezer in the pathology laboratory. (Wrobel Depo.,
23
12/6/07, pg. 18:7-24).
24
Plaintiff deposed Dr. Wrobel but, curiously, omitted reference to Dr. Wrobel's testimony
25
from his Statement of Undisputed Facts. Dr. Wrobel testified that he put the skull flaps in the
26
freezer, that the skull flaps were not reimplanted into patients, and that he stored the skull flaps
27
in the freezer to preserve them so he could use them as molds for titanium mesh patches that are
28
fabricated to close the skull if the patient recovers or, if the patient dies, for cosmetic purposes in -13DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 18 of 29
the event of an open-casket funeral. (Wrobel Depo., 12/6/07, pgs. 39:5-41 :6). California Health & Safety Code §1635(d) only imposes a licensing requirement on "any
3
place, establishment, or institution that collects, processes, stores, or distributes tissue for
4
transplantation into human beings." Since the undisputed evidence is that the skull flaps stored
5
in the KMC freezer were not stored for "transplantation into human beings", the freezer was not
6
a "tissue bank" and no license was required.
7
Defendants acknowledge that proof of an actual violation is not required in order for a
8
person to be a whist1eblower because he only needs to show that he had a good faith belief that
9
the reported activity was in violation oflaw. Freund v. Nycomed Amersham (9 th Cir. 2003) 347
10
F.3d 752. However, the undisputed facts show that Plaintiff could not have had a reasonable,
11
good faith belief that KMC was storing skull flaps in violation of the statute.
12
As Chair of the Department of Pathology, Plaintiff supervised the pathology laboratory ~6a).
13
where the freezer was located. (DSUF
14
because Gilbert Martinez, the laboratory manager and one of Plaintiffs subordinates, told
15
Plaintiff on three different occasions, beginning in 2004, that skull flaps were being stored in the
16
laboratory freezer. (PSUF
17
charge of the laboratory that there were skull flaps in the freezer in his Department.
18
~1 02).
He knew skull flaps were being stored in the freezer
Thus, Plaintiff knew, for over two years while he was in
Plaintiff has acknowledged he did not report any concerns about the skull flaps during
19
those years. After all, reporting a suspected violation while he was Chair of the Department
20
might have reflected badly on him. He did not report any concerns until November 28, 2006 -
21
after he had been removed as Chair. (PSUF
22
~11 0).
In reporting what he had known and ignored for over two years and alleging it was a
23
violation oflaw, Plaintiff was not blowing the whistle, he was seeking revenge. He had no good
24
faith belief there was a violation. He knew exactly what Dr. Wrobel was using the skull flaps for
25
and he knew they were not being reimplanted. He falsely alleged they were being stored in
26
violation oflaw just to get back at the County for removing him from his chairmanship.
27 28
However, even if the Court does not grant summary adjudication of this fact, Plaintiff must prove the County subjected him to an adverse employment action and that his -14DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 19 of 29
I
"whistleblowing" was the reason for it. Pat/en v. Grant Joint Union High School Dist. (2005)
2
134 Ca1.App.4th 1378,1384. (See, Defendants' Memo, pg. 6:21-27.)
3
It is impossible for Defendants to have subjected Plaintiff to an adverse employment
4
action as a result of his alleged "whistleblowing" because Defendants did not know about it until
5
December 13, 2006 - after Plaintiff was placed on paid administrative leave. (DSUF ~41). No
6
other employment actions occurred until October 4, 2007, when Plaintiffs employment
7
agreement expired. It is not possible for Defendants to have "retaliated" against Plaintiff for
8
complaints they did not know he had made. As the Supreme Court has written, "If the factual
9
inference sought by the nonmoving party is objectively impossible, the proffered facts do not
10
create a factual dispute." Matsushita Elec. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. (1986) 475 U.S. 574, 593.
II
Plaintiff asserts he informed Gilbert Martinez, the manager of the pathology laboratory,
12
that he intended to blow the whistle on the County (Second Amended Complaint ~20) but there
13
are three problems with that argument. First, Mr. Martinez was not in management. He was, in
14
fact, one of Plaintiffs subordinates. (DSUF ~6a).
15
Second, that is not actually what Plaintiff told Mr. Martinez. Plaintiff told Mr. Martinez
16
to be prepared for an inspection (DSUF ~55) and Mr. Martinez had no idea why Plaintiff told
17
that. (DSUF
18
"blowing the whistle" to either management or an outside enforcement agency.
~55).
Instructing a subordinate to be prepared for an inspection is not the same as
19
Third, there is no evidence Plaintiff ever told anyone about the skull flap issue.
20
Defendants request that the Court find the storage of skull flaps in the pathology
21
department freezer did not violate the law, that Plaintiff had no good faith belief that it did and
22
that Defendants did not take any adverse employment action against Plaintiff in response to his
23
alleged "whistleblowing" regarding the skull flaps.
24 25
4.
Radical Prostatectomy
The fourth incident of Plaintiffs alleged "whistleblowing" concerns a radical
26
prostatectomy. Plaintiff asserts that "at 12:54 p.m. on December 6,2006," he "formally"
27
reported his concerns on this issue to the County. (Plaintiff's Memo, pg. 12:11-13). The
28
"report" Plaintiff refers to is an e-mail between himself and Dr. Philip Dutt, the interim chair of -15DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
~114).
Page 20 of 29
1
the Department of Pathology, covering a wide range of topics. (PSUF
2
the radical prostatectomy in the third paragraph of the e-mail and admits he and Dr. Dutt had
3
discussed it before. Id. Discussions between physicians about the care and treatment of a patient
4
are not "whistleblowing"- even if they involve disagreement. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 62:13-
5
14. More importantly, Plaintiff has never identified the law that was violated by this incident.
6 7 8
Plaintiff discusses
Without a law to be violated, Plaintiff cannot have the requisite good faith belief that there was a violation to blow the whistle on. Even if Plaintiff could malce his prima facie case, the Defendants may still prevail by
9
showing a legitimate, non-retaliatory business reason for any adverse employment action that
10
was taken. Patten, 134 Cal.App.4th at 1384. The County's extensive non-retaliatory business
11
reasons for getting Plaintiff out of the hospital before he could further damage the working
12
enviromnent are described in the Defendants' Memo at pages 18:10-22;12. That discussion is
13
incorporated herein. (See, also, DSUF ~~80, 82-86, and 176-190).
14 15 16 17 18
Defendants request the Court find that the radical prostatectomy incident did not qualify as "whistleblowing" because it did not involve the violation of any law. Defendants request the Court grant summary judgment in favor of Defendants on Plaintiffs First and Second Claims.
c.
Defendants Did Not Violate Plaintiffs Rights Under FMLA and CFRA.
19 Defendants addressed these claims in Defendants' Memo on pages 9: 17-12: 13, which are 20 incorporated herein. Plaintiff makes several material misstatements in his memorandum and 21 those misstatements will be addressed here. 22 To state a prima facie case of interference with medical leave rights under FMLA and 23 CFRA, Plaintiff must show that he provided reasonable notice of his need for medical leave and 24 some estimate of the length of leave. See, California Civil Jury Instruction, CACI 2600, which 25 enumerates the elements of the claim. 26 Plaintiff alleges his notice was timely. He bases his argument on his request for medical 27 leave in March, 2006. However, this was not his first request for leave. Plaintiff went out on 28 -16-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 21 of 29
1
leave on December 16, 2005. (DSUF ~15). He notified the County of this leave in January,
2
2006, while he was already out. (DSUF ~7). He did not submit a request for leave or inform the
3
County of the expected length of his leave until over a month after he took leave. (DSUF ~13).
4
The County's Human Resources department had to prompt Plaintiff to submit this paperwork.
5
(DSUF
6
~~11
and 12).
Because Plaintiff s notice of his need for medical leave was not timely, Plaintiff cannot
7
establish the first element of his prima facie case. For this reason alone, Defendants submit they
8
are entitled to summary judgment on both the Fourth and Fifth Claims.
9
Plaintiff also misstates when he was granted personal necessity leave. FMLA and CFRA
10
grant 12 workweeks' leave in a 12-month period. 29 U.S.C. §2612(a)(l)(D); Gov't Code
II
§12945.2(a). Once the 12 weeks ofleave have been taken, an employee's rights under FMLA
12
expire. Neisendorfv. Levi Strauss & Co., (App. 1 Dist. 2006) 143 Cal.AppA th 509, 518; 29
13
C.F.R. §825.214, subd.(b)(2003). All parties agree that Plaintiff had exhausted his 12 weeks by
14
Jtme 2006. (DSUF ~~30, 32, and 38). Personal necessity leave did not begin until June 14,
15
2006. (DSUF ~24).
16
There is no evidence that Plaintiffs rights under either FMLA or CFRA were violated.
17
Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiffs Fourth and Fifth Claims.
18
D.
19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Defendants Did Not Discriminate, Did Not Fail to Accommodate and Did Not Fail to Engage in the Interactive Process.
Defendants addressed these claims in Defendants' Memo on pages 12:15-29:7. That discussion is incorporated herein. Plaintiff alleges the County knew Plaintiff was "an individual with disabilities" when he was hired. He bases this assertion on a two-page medical report that was sent to the COlmty's Human Resources Department on November 30,2000. (PSUF ~144). However, this allegation i contradicted by Plaintiff s own forensic psychiatrist who confidently testified, "it is unequivocal that he was asymptomatic when starting work at Kern and so did not bring with him to the job any nascent depressive vulnerability." Reading Decl., pg. 59. Dr. Reading's opinion supports Defendants' position that Plaintiff is not "disabled" -17DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 22 of 29
I
within the meaning of either the ADA or FEHA; that he is not substantially limited in the major
2
life function of work; that he is not a qualified person because he cannot perform the essential
3
functions ofajob at KMC; and that the California's Workers Compensation system is his
4
exclusive remedy. (See, discussion in Defendants' Memo at pgs. 15:21-17:7.)
5
Plaintiff argues that he could have performed the essential functions of his job and that
6
his "unavailability was largely manufactured" by Defendant Peter Bryan. This is unsupported.
7
Plaintiffw1ilaterally put himself on leave beginning in December, 2005. (DSUF
8
unilaterally decided what part of his job he would continue to do and what part he would not do.
9
(Second Amended Complaint ~80). He continued to perform administrative duties but he
10
~15).
He
stopped practicing pathology. Jd.
II
Although his position is inconsistent with the clear provisions of his employment
12
agreement, Plaintiff asserts that his duties as Chair comprised only 10-20% of his job. (Plaintiffs
13
Memo, pg. 23: 11-12). Accepting this for the sake of argument, this means Plaintiff stopped
14
doing 80% to 90% of this job when he put himself on leave.
15
Plaintiff offers no evidence to support his assertion that the essential functions of his job
16
took only 10-20% of his time. Thus, Plaintiff offers no evidence that he could do the essential
17
functions of his job. Even if his duties as Chair were the only essential functions of his job,
18
Plaintiff has admitted he was not able to do them. For example, he notes Dr. Dutt had to cover
19
for him when Plaintiff could not perform his administrative duties. (Plaintiff s Memo, pg. 23: 12-
20
14).
21
The fact is that Plaintiff could not perform the essential functions of even the limited
22
administrative duties he kept. In April, 2006, the Chief Executive Officer counseled Plaintiff
23
that he must improve his relationships with staff or step down as Chair of the Department of
24
Pathology. The CEO wrote to Plaintiff, "this apparent lack of insight on your part is at the heart
25
of your inability to meaningfully contribute as a member of the medical staff leadership group."
26
(DSUF
27 28
~~
25, 136 and 160).
The recommendation that Plaintiff be removed from his Chair position was based on his "continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary" and his failure to provide and -18DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 23 of 29
1
"indication that he is committed to return to work or resume his duties as chairman." (DSDF
2
'\133). This was manifestly a legitimate business reason.
3
Likewise, Defendants had legitimate business reasons for putting Plaintiff on paid
4
administrative leave. After finally returning to work in October, 2006, Plaintiffs behavior
5
toward his co-workers substantially deteriorated. Because the employer is responsible for the
6
work environment (California Labor Code §6400(a).), Plaintiff left the County no choice but to
7
remove him from the hospital.
8 9
Plaintiff quotes Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc. (5 th Cir. 1996) 93 F.3d 155, that"...the ADA requires employers to reasonably accommodate limitations, not disabilities."
10
But Plaintiff argues his limitation is that he can only work part-time. Thus, the real issue is
II
whether KMC could reasonably accommodate his limitation.
12
An employer is not obligated to make turn a full-time job into a part-time job, if the part-
13
time position did not exist before. Raine v. City ofBurbank (2006) 135 Cal.App.4 th 1215, 1223-
14
1228, citing Watkins v. Ameripride Services (9 th Cir. 2004) 375 F.3d 821, 828. Plaintiffs
15
position was full-time. 11 required 48 hours (on average) of work in a week and 2112 hours per
16
year. (DSDF '\I'\I6a and 6b). Plaintiff s unilateral reduction of this work by 80% to 90% is an
17
unnecessary and unreasonable accommodation.
18
Plaintiff asserts Defendants failed to engage in a good faith interactive process with him
19
to reach an accommodation of his disability. But the evidence shows it was Plaintiff who
20
obstructed the interactive process. Plaintiff, without informing either KMC management or the
21
County's Human Resources department, unilaterally put himself on part-time leave in December
22
2005. (DSDF '\115). Without any input from his employer, Plaintiff unilaterally chose which
23
duties he would continue to perform and which he would not while he was on part-time leave.
24
(Second Amended Complaint '\180). Plaintiff never broached the subject with his employer.
25
KMC did its best to accommodate Plaintiffs unilateral determination of his schedule and
26
work duties. However, Plaintiff clearly intended for his self-imposed schedule to continue
27
indefinitely. He had already been on leave for seven months when he requested more even more
28
leave to consider when, or if, he would return to work. (DSDF '\123). Defendants made an effort -19DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 24 of 29
to work with Plaintiff but he did not reciprocate.
2 3
Document 276
Defendants request findings they did not discriminate, did not fail to accommodate Plaintiff and did not fail to engage in the interactive process.
4
E.
5
In determining whether procedural safeguards are required in response to a particular
Defendants Did Not Violate Plaintifrs Dne Process Rights.
6
employment action, a court must first determine whether the employee had a property interest
7
that was adversely affected by the employer's action. Skelly v. State Personnel Bd (1975) 15
8
Cal.3d 194, 206-207. Although Plaintiff acknowledges Board ofRegents v. Roth, (1972) 408 U.S. 564, he
9 10
relies on the "mutually exclusive understanding" language in Perry v. Sindermann (1972) 408
11
U.S. 593. Roth and Perry were both decided by the Supreme Court on June 29, 1972. Both
12
cases involved teachers at state institutions of higher learning. Both teachers did not have tenure.
13
Both state schools had a policy that nonrenewal of a nontenured teacher's employment contract
14
required neither a hearing nor an explanation. Both teachers were notified, without explanation,
15
that their employment contracts would not be renewed. Both teachers believed that their
16
employment contracts were not renewed because they had criticized their respective school
17
administrations. Both teachers sued, asserting violation of their 14th Amendment rights to
18
procedural due process and alleging a violation of their 1st Amendment rights. Yet, the outcomes
19
were different. The plaintiff in Roth was found to have no 14th Amendment right to procedural
20
due process while the plaintiff in Perry was found to have had his 14th Amendment right to
21
procedural due process violated. The different outcomes were driven by slight difference in the
22
facts.
23
The plaintiff in Perry had worked in the Texas university system for ten years, the last
24
four under a series of one-year contracts at the same school. He alleged he had de facto tenure
25
based on two documents. The first document was the school's Faculty Guide which stated that
26
the college wanted each faculty member to "feel that he has permanent tenure as long as his
27
teaching services are satisfactory ... " The second document was a set of guidelines adopted by
28
the Coordinating Board of the Texas College and University System which stated that a teacher -20-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 1
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 25 of 29
who worked in the system for seven years or more had some form of tenure.
2 3
Document 276
The Supreme Court found these documents showed a "mutually explicit understanding" that could support the plaintiff's claim of tenure. Perry, 408 U.S. at 601.
4
The plaintiff in Roth did not have similarly helpful evidence. He had only an
5
employment agreement that expired according to its terms. Without more, he could not establish
6
his claim that its nonrenewal had deprived him of a property interest.
7
The Supreme Court wrote that property interests are not created by the Constitution.
8
Rather, they are created and defined by independent sources, such as state law. Roth, 408 U.S. at
9
577. A plaintiff must have more than a unilateral expectation. He must have a legitimate
10
entitlement based on an independent source. Id.
11
Although he invokes it frequently, Perry's "mutually explicit understanding" does not aid
12
Plaintiff. Plaintiffs employment contract clearly explains when due process applies and when it
13
does not. (DSUF ~~4 and 6; Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319); Article XII, Section
14
12.2, pg. 66 (0000337». There is no evidence of other understandings, explicit or implicit.
15
Plaintiff attempts to use Peter Bryan's testimony that a core physician is a "permanent"
16
employee and the fact that KMC has allowed only one other physician's contract to expire to
17
establish an understanding that is contrary to his employment agreement. The concept of
18
"permanent" status means only that the employee was not "temporary." It does not mean the
19
employee has life tenure. The fact that another physician's contract expired without renewal
20
simply proves it happens. Neither argument established the kind of "understanding" Plaintiff
21
asserts.
22
Plaintiff does not cite Shoemaker, 37 Cal.AppAth 618. Shoemaker discussed both Roth
23
and Perry in determining the due process rights of an employee who was removed from a
24
position but not discharged from his employment. Shoemaker, 37 Cal.AppA th at 630, fn. 12.
25
In addition to being employed at two facilities as an emergency room physician, the
26
plaintiff in Shoemaker held two positions. He was Chief of Emergency Medicine Services at the
27
county medical center and Chair of a university Department of Emergency Medicine. After
28
several years of service, he was removed from both positions. However, he was not discharged -21-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSlTlON TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 26 of 29
I
from either institution and remained employed as an emergency room physician at both. He sue
2
to restrain his removal and alleged that his due process rights had been violated.
3
The county medical center personnel were, by contract, part of the county civil service
4
system. Pursuant to those rules, if an employee was demoted or discharged, the employee was
5
entitled to notice and a pre-deprivation hearing. However, the plaintiff had not been discharged.
6
The Court determined that his removal as Chief of Emergency Services was a mere reassignment
7
or transfer - actions that did not trigger the requirement of notice and a pre-deprivation hearing.
8
Id. at 627.
9
His position at the university, on the other hand, was not included in a civil service
10
system. The university had bylaws and the bylaws gave the university president "full power of
II
appointment, direction and supervision of the Faculty." The Court found the plaintiff was not
12
entitled to notice or a pre-deprivation hearing under the bylaws.
13
Plaintiffs position at KMC combined elements of both positions in Shoemaker. Like
14
Shoemaker's county medical center, KMC is a department of County government. Like
15
Shoemaker's university, civil services rules do not apply to core physicians at KMC. (DSUF
16
~6b).
17
vest the KMC Chief Executive Officer with the power to recommend removal of a department
18
chair, with or without cause, subject to approval by the KMC Joint Conference Committee.
19
(DSUF
Plaintiff's employment was governed by the KMC Medical Staff Bylaws (Id.) and they
20
~~4
and 37).
From a constitutional standpoint, the analysis in Roth, Perry and Shoemaker supports the
21
conclusion that Plaintiff was not entitled to notice or a hearing on his removal from the Chair
22
position. That conclusion is equally supported by simple contract law. Plaintiff s employment
23
agreement was subject to the Bylaws and they provided he could be removed without cause.
24
(DSUF ~4, Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319».
25
The KMC Bylaws do afford due process for certain types of employment actions. (See,
26
e.g., PSUF ~167.) For example, demotion to a lower staff category triggers a right to a hearing.
27
(DSUF
28
demoted, he was not. Under the Bylaws, staff categories are defined by the employee's clinical
~4,
Article XII, Section 12.2, pg. 66 (0000337». Although Plaintiff alleges he was
-22DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 27 of 29
I
privileges or staff membership. The highest staff category - Active - carries full clinical
2
privileges and staff membership. (DSUF ~4). Plaintiff was always a core pathologist in the
3
Active staff category. (KMC Letter to Jadwin, dated 8114/01 to 9112/08). He was not demoted.
4
Plaintiff quotes Gilbert v. Homar (1997) 520 U.S. 924, for the proposition that an
5
employee has a "significant private interest in the uninterrupted receipt of his paycheck" and,
6
therefore, is entitled to procedural due process. Gilbert, 520 U.S. at 931. However, in Gilbert, the
7
employee lost. While the Supreme Court acknowledged the obvious - that a paycheck is
8
important - it ruled against Gilbert, finding a pre-suspension hearing would have been futile
9
because the evidence Gilbert had been arrested on drug charges was so compelling. Id.
10
Plaintiffs absence from the hospital and unavailability for over 8 months is as
II
compelling as the evidence in Gilbert. KMC needed - and was entitled to have - someone who
12
could provide on-site leadership and administrative support. What would a hearing have
13
established even if one had been required? Plaintiff would have probably used it as another
14
opportunity to attack the medical staff and hospital management. (DSUF ~~166-174).
15
Plaintiff asserts he had a property interest in his base compensation that was independent
16
from his position as Chair. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 27:7-10). This argument does not survive thc
17
application of basic principles of contract. (Which is appropriate. In Perry, the Supreme Court
18
cited Corbin on Contracts when it discussed implied contract terms. Perry, 408 U.S. at 602.)
19
The purpose of Plaintiff s employment contract was to pay him a salary in return for his
20
performance of specified duties. Nothing in Plaintiffs contract guaranteed him a specific salary
21
even ifhe did not do his job.
22
Since Plaintiff stopped performing his specified duties, the purpose of the contract was
23
frustrated and the County's duty to pay him the contract price was discharged. Restatement
24
(Second) of Contracts, §268. This rule is incorporated in California Labor Code §2924 which
25
allows an employer to rescind a written employment contract for, among other reasons,
26
continued nonperformance. Again, as the Supreme Court wrote in Roth, property rights do not
27
spring from the Constitution. They are based in state law. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577. California law
28
does not protect the compensation of employees who do not do their jobs. -23DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3
6
7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 28 of 29
Defendants request the Court grant swnmary judgment for the Defendants on Plaintiff s Ninth Claim.
F.
4 5
Document 276
Defendants Did Not Retaliate Against Plaintiff For Asserting His Rights Under FMLA, CFRA and FEHA.
Plaintiff alleges that Defendants retaliated against him for asserting his rights under FMLA, CFRA and FEHA. Plaintiff cites Colarossi v. Coty, Inc. (2002) 97 Ca1.App.4 th 1142 for the proposition that retaliatory remarks made by decision makers are direct evidence of retaliation. He asserts he has direct evidence of retaliation. In fact, he does not. Plaintiff alleges that comments made by Chief Executive Officer Peter Bryan to the Joint Conference Committee show retaliatory bias. In his recommendation to remove Plaintiff as Chair of the Department of Pathology, Peter Bryan stated, 'This recommendation to rescind Dr. Jadwin's appointment as Chairman, Department of Pathology, is based solely on his continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing member of the medical staffleadership group." [emphasis added] (DSUF
~33).
This recommendation was made on July 10,2006 - after Plaintiffs leave entitlement under FMLA and CFRA had been exhausted. (DSUF
~~30,
32, and 38). Defendant Bryan's use
of the word "continued" shows that his recommendation was based on Plaintiffs long-term unavailability. Once the 12 weeks ofleave have been taken, an employee's rights to their position expire. Neisendorf, 143 Ca1.App.4th at 518; 29 C.F.R. §825.2l4, subd. (b) (2003). Supervisor Ray Watson's deposition testimony does not aid Plaintiff. Watson said, "My understanding was the [Plaintiff]
had~he had
been on medical leave, family leave, and had
requested even more leave ... " (PSUF ~124). This, again, only references Plaintiffs long-term unavailability and has nothing to do with punishing Plaintiff for taking leave. Further, as mentioned above, Watson's vote as member of the JCC came after Plaintiff had exhausted all his leave rights. Plaintiff also claims a retaliatory motive in the nomenewal of his contract. In his deposition on August 25,2008, Supervisor Ray Watson, testified quite clearly he did not recall any discussions about termination, resignation, or denial of Plaintiffs privileges. (DSUF
~34).
-24-
DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY mDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 276
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 29 of 29
1
In addition, he testified that he was unable to recall whether a vote was taken on the nonrenewal
2
of Plaintiffs contract, although he guessed that there must have been a vote. (DSUF '\[35). In
3
fact, neither the JCC nor the Board of Supervisors decided to let Plaintiffs contract expire.
4
(DSUF '\[36a).
5
When asked about the reasons for the nonrenewal, Supervisor Watson speculated that it
6
might have been because of Plaintiffs continued absence from his job and the fact that he was
7
suing the County. (DSUF '\[36; PSUF '(124). Since Supervisor Watson was not a decision maker
8
on the nonrenewal of Plaintiffs contract, his after-the-fact speculation is not evidence of
9
retaliatory motive. No law requires employers to renew contracts of employees who are suing
10 II
them. Without evidence of a link between the protected activity and the allegedly adverse
12
employment action, Plaintiffs claims of retaliation fail. Morgan v. Regents of University ofCal.
13
(2000) 88 Cal.App.4 th 52, 69.
14 15
Defendants request that the Court grant summary judgment for the Defendants on Plaintiff s Third, Tenth and Eleventh Claims.
16
II
17
CONCLUSION
18
Defendants went out of their way in an attempt to tolerate, counsel and assist Plaintiff in
19
adapting to the KMC medical community. Plaintiff resisted every effort and, oblivious to his
20
own behavior and the ways it contributed to his problems, decided everyone was out to get him.
21
They were not. Plaintiff was simply not able to work productively at KMC. Defendants never
22
retaliated against Plaintiff or denied him any rights and they are entitled to summary judgment.
23
Respectfully submitted,
24
Dated: December 1,2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
25 26 27
By :._---'-"/s'!.../~M:!
28 ·25· DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 38
Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: [email protected] Bernard C. Barrnann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected]
9 10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris
11 12
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
13
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
14 15
18 19
DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Plaintiff,
16 17
Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
vs.
COUNTY OF KERN, et aI., Defendants.
Date: January 12,2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA
20 21
Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
22 23 24
Defendants submit this Response to Plaintiffs Statement of Undisputed Facts in
25
Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication
26
pursuant to LR 56-260(a).
27 28 -1DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 38
1
2
Disputed Facts
Supporting Evidence
3
1.
4
2.
5
3.
6
4.
7
5. Plaintiff is the former Chief of Pathology at Kern Medical
Deny. Plaintiff is the former
8
Center ("KMC" or "the hospital"), an acute care teaching
Chair of the Department of
9
hospital and health care facility that is owned and operated
Pathology. See Defendants'
10
by Defendant County of Kern ("Defendant County" or "the
Statement of Undisputed Facts
11
County").
(hereinafter "DSUF") 1a,
12
(DFJOO043-46).
13
6.
14
7.
15
8. In October 2000, Dr. Jadwin began full-time employment
16
at KMC as chair of the pathology department. Plaintiff was
17
an employee of Defendant County from October 24, 2000 to
18
October 4,2007.
19
9. Throughout the course of his employment at KMC, Dr.
Deny. See DSUF 152b
20
Jadwin tried to ensure that patient care was based on
(DFJ00592), 74 (DFJ00364-
21
adequate and accurate pathology.
366),76 (0027069-27070), 78
Admit.
22
(0000506), 80 (Dutt
23
Deposition, 8/20108, pg. 285 :6-
24
23).
25
10. In May 2005, Dr. Jadwin began formally expressing his
Deny. See DSUF 118
26
concerns that KMC was not complying with state regulations
(DFJ00408-409).
27
regarding blood transfusion documentation.
28 -2DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY WDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADWDICATlON
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 3 of 38
I
II. In October 2005, Dr. Jadwin presented at an intra-
Deny. See DSUF 107
2
hospital conference where he reported on uncaught
(DFJ00580), 74 (DFJ00364-
3
pathology report errors that potentially jeopardized the care
366) and Plaintiffs Statement
4
of a hysterectomy patient and the need for a policy to address of Undisputed Facts
5
the problem.
(hereinafter "PSUF") 114
6
(Jadwin Dec!., Exh. 10
7
(Jadwin's email to Dutt,
8
Culberson et a!. of 12/6/06 at
9
DFJ1479; Lee Supp. Dec!.,
10
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at 13:19-
11
25); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 24
12
(Rog 67 at 14:22-23 (noting
13
difficulties outside reviewers
14
had reaching conclusions about
15
the diagnosis)).
16
12. Defendants responded by calling him into a meeting,
Deny. See DSUF 113
17
severely reprimanding him, and informing him that letters of
(DFJ00588), 114 (0000094).
18
reprimand would be placed in his physician credentials file.
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
19
8114/01 - 9112/08.
20
13. Defendants retaliatory conduct exacerbated Dr. Jadwin's
21
chronic depression and proved so disabling that, at the end of was not retaliatory. See DSUF
22
2005, he was forced to take a reduced work schedule medical 62 (Jadwin Deposition, 1/9/08,
23
leave as an accommodation and seek psychiatric therapy.
pgs.414:24-418:12).
24
14. In April 2006, Dr. Jadwin requested an extension of his
Deny. Plaintiff requested an
25
reduced work schedule leave.
extension of his Leave of
Deny. Defendants' conduct
26
Absence. See DSUF 19
27
(DFJOI158).
28
-3DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 4 of 38
1
15. On April 28, 2006, Defendant Bryan responded by
Deny. See DSUF 20
2
placing him on full-time "personal necessity leave" under the
(DFJOI121), 24 (DFJOI141),
3
County's leave policy and, a few months later, ordered him
27 (0001424), 29 (Bryan
4
not to contact anybody at KMC or he would be fired
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 244:6-
5
("Forced FT Leave").
16),30 (Bryan Deposition,
6
8/14/08, pgs. 280:21-281 :4).
7
See Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21,
8
Interrogatory 36.
9
16. On June 4, 2006, Defendant Bryan told Dr. Jadwin that
Deny. See DSUF 24
10
he had decided to "rescind your appointment at chairman"
(DFJOI141), 28 (Bryan
11
and that "this decision is effective June 17,2006."
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 257:9-
12
15).
13
17. On July 10,2006, Defendant Bryan recommended to
Deny. The quoted material is
14
KMC's Joint Conference Committee ("JCC") that Plaintiff
not an accurate quotation; see
15
be removed from his position as Chair of the pathology
DSUF 33 (0001476-1565,
16
department "based on Dr. Jadwin's unavailability for service
0000073-75).
17
because of extended medical leaves for non-work related
18
ailments" and "solely based on his continued non-availability
19
to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing
20
member of the medical staffleadership group....Dr. Jadwin
21
has provided no indication that he is committed to return to
22
work or resume his duties as chair. Other than his latest
23
written communication requesting an extension of his
24
medical leave, Dr. Jadwin has made no attempt in the last
25
two months to contact me concerning his employment status
26
or how the Department of Pathology should be managed
27
during his absence."
28
-4DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 5 of 38
1
2
18. At a meeting of the JCC on July 10,2006, Defendant
Deny. Plaintiff was not
3
County approved the demotion ofPlaintifffrom chair of the
demoted. See DSUF 33
4
pathology department for "unavailability." Members of the
(0001476-1565,0000073-75).
5
JCC based their vote on his unavailability due in part to his
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
6
medical leave.
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
7
19. Defendant County then conditioned Dr. Jadwin's return
Deny. See DSUF 44 (Jadwin
8
to work as a regular pathologist on his medical release to
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
9
full time work and entry into an amendment to his contract
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
10
that contained restrictive terms and conditions and reduced
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
11
Dr. Jadwin's base pay from roughly $300,000 to $200,000.
3/12/08,974:3-976:12).
12
20. When demoting Dr. Jadwin, Defendants Bryan and the
Deny. Plaintiff was not
13
County did not notify Dr. Jadwin of the hospital committee
demoted. See DSUF 28
14
vote to demote him or give him a chance to defend himself
(Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08,
15
prior to, at or after the vote.
pg. 257:9-15), 31 (Bryan
16
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 258:7-
17
16). KMC letters to Jadwin
18
dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
19
21. On his return to work as a demoted pathologist in late
Deny. Plaintiff was not
20
2006, Dr. Jadwin was placed beneath a former subordinate
demoted. See DSUF 4
21
whom he had hired and trained the year before.
(0000272-358, specifically
22
0000319). KMC letters to
23
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
24
9/12/08.
25
22. After about two months, Dr. Jadwin decided to go
Deny. See DSUF 56
26
outside the hospital and report his ongoing suspicions of
(DFJ02540-2541, DFJ01454,
27
legal noncompliance and illegal and/or unsafe care and
DFJ01459), 57 (DFJ02538-
28
-5DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 6 of 38
1
conditions of patients at KMC to regulatory and
2
accreditation agencies, as well as KMC senior management.
3
23. Plaintiff also complained to KMC's senior management
Deny. See PSUF 114 ((Jadwin
4
about the harsh treatment he was receiving.
Dec!., Exh. 10 (Jadwin's email
2539).
5
to Dutt, Culberson et a!. of
6
12/6/06 at DFJ1479; Lee Supp.
7
Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at
8
13:19-25); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
9
Exh. 24 (Rog 67 at 14:22-23
10
(noting difficulties outside
11
reviewers had reaching
12
conclusions about the
13
diagnosis).
14
24. The following day, on December 7, 2006, Defendant
15
County placed Dr. Jadwin on administrative leave "pending
16
resolution of a personnel matter."
17
25. The leave denied Plaintiff the opportunity to ear patient-
18
based professional fees, which had amounted to roughly
19
$100,000 per year ("Professional Fees") prior to his taking
20
of reduced work schedule leave.
21
26. Dr. Jadwin formally notified KMC of his whistle-
22
blowing reports to the outside regulatory and accreditation
23
agencIes.
24
27. Dr. Jadwin remained on administrative leave for another
25
ten months until his contract expired on October 4,2007.
26
28. During six of those months, Dr. Jadwin was physically
Deny. Plaintiff was required
27
restricted to his home during work hours.
by County policy to be
Admit.
Deny. 0018755-0018917.
Admit.
Admit.
28 -6DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY WDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 7 of 38
1
"available by telephone." See
2
DSUF 41a (0016941).
3
29. The county decided not to renew Dr. Jadwin's contract,
4
which expired on October 4,2007.
5
30. From October 2000 to the present, KMC - a hospital
Deny. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh.
6
with roughly 60 full-time faculty physicians - had failed to
22, Interrogatory #28.
7
renew the contract of only 1 other KMC physician.
8
31. Plaintiff s position had been that of a permanent, core
Deny. See Response to #30
9
physician, whose contracts are customarily renewed.
above.
10
32. Defendant County based its nonrenewal decision on Dr.
Deny. See DSUF 36a
11
Jadwin's medical and recuperative leave, and the fact he had
(Declaration of Michael Rubio,
12
brought a lawsuit opposing employment practiced prohibited
11110/08, '12; Declaration of
13
by the Family & Medical Leave Act ("MFLA"), and the
Raymond Watson, 11110/98,
14
California Family Rights Act ("CFRA"), and the Fair
'1'13, 4 and 5; Declaration of
15
Employment & Housing Act ("FEHA").
Mike Maggard, 11110108, '12;
Admit.
16
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
17
11110108, '12; Declaration of
18
Don Maben, 11/10108, '12).
19
33. To this day, Dr. Jadwin has not personally received an
Admit. There were no charges
20
explanation from Defendants as to why he was placed on
against Plaintiff.
21
administrative leave or why his contract was not renewed,
22
despite repeated requests for an explanation. Defendants
23
never notified Dr. Jadwin of the charges against him or
24
permitted him to defend himself.
25
34.
26
35.
27
36. During the entire tenure of Plaintiffs employment,
28
Admit.
-7DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
I
Defendant County was continuously an employer within the
2
meaning ofFMLA [29 C.F.R. § 825.105©], CFRA [Gov't C
3
§ 12945.2(b)(2)], and FEHA [Gov't C § 12926(d)] engaged
4
in interstate commerce, and regularly employing more than
5
fifty employees within seventy-five miles of Plaintiffs
6
regular workplace at KMC.
7
37. Defendant County is a government agency.
8
38.
9
39.
Page 8 of 38
Admit.
10
40. On October 12,2005, Defendant Harris solicited and
Deny. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh.
11
received letters of dissatisfaction from three KMC core
21, Interrogatory #34. (Harris
12
physicians, criticizing Dr. Jadwin's presentation at a KMC
Deposition, 8/13/08, pgs.
13
monthly Oncology Conference.
113:14-16,116:4).
14
41. On October 17, 2005, KMC's senior medical staff wrote
Deny. Plaintiff s Corrected
IS
to Dr. Jadwin notifying him that these letters of
Motion for Partial or Full
16
dissatisfaction would be placed in his credentialing file
Summary Judgment Against
17
("Credential Threat").
Defendants, pg. 6:1. KMC
18
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
19
- 9112/08.
20
42. Some of the medical staff involved later apologized to
Deny. 166 (Abraham
21
Dr. Jadwin.
Deposition, 8/18/08, pgs.
22
198:24-207:17), 167 (Bryan
23
Deposition, 8114/08, pgs.
24
109:12-111:10),168 (Bryan
25
Deposition, 8114/08, pgs.
26
156:22-157:12),169 (Harris
27
Deposition, 8/13/08, pg. 159:2-
28
-8DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 9 of 38
1
13), 170 (Harris Deposition,
2
8113/08, pg. 196:7-20), 171
3
(Harris Deposition, 8113/08
4
pgs. 230:4-232:13),172
5
(Harris Deposition, 8113/08,
6
pgs. 234:24-235:23 and
7
305:20-308:22), 173 (Ragland
8
Deposition, 8/22/08, pg. 16:12-
9
16), 174 (0000507).
10 11
43.
1--------------------+------------1 44.
1--------------------+------------1
12
45. Dr. Jadwin's employment contract expressly provided
13
that Dr. Jadwin would be chair of the KMC pathology
14
department and paid base compensation of$287,529 ("Base
15
Pay").
16
46. On July 10,2006, Bryan recommended and the JCC
Deny. Plaintiff was not
17
approved Jadwin's demotion from department chair to staff
demoted. See DSUF 4
18
pathologist ("Demotion").
(0000272-358, specifically
Admit.
19
0000319). KMC letters to
20
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
21
9/12108.
22
47. 1t is uncontested that Defendants considered a portion of
Deny. Plaintiff was not
23
Dr. Jadwin's pay to be tied to his chair position, and that the
demoted. See DSUF 4
24
demotion therefore made the paycut a foregone conclusion.
(0000272-358, specifically
25
The JCC vote to demote Plaintiff was effectively a vote to
0000319), 44 (Jadwin
26
reduce his Base Pay as well.
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
27 28
969: 1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and -9DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICAnON
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 10 of 38
1
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
2
3/12/08,974:3-976:12). KMC
3
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
4
- 9/12/08.
5
48. Defendants County and Harris informed Dr. Jadwin that
Deny. See DSUF 44 (Jadwin
6
his return to work at KMC was conditioned on his entry into
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
7
an amendment to his employment contract, instituting a
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
8
reduction in Base Pay from $287,529 to $186,687
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
9
("Paycut").
3/12/08,974:3-976: 12).
10
49. On October 3, 2006, Plaintiff executed the amendment
Admit.
11
to his employment contract.
12
50.
13
51.
14
52. A pathologist is valued according to the efficacy of his
Deny. This is not a fact; it is
15
"eye," i.e., the training and experience that allows him to
an expression of opinion. The
16
spot minute patterns and telltale abnormalities in
opinion is not relevant to
17
microscopic and gross tissue samples.
Plaintiffs administrative
18
duties as Chair.
19
53. Developing and maintaining the pathologist "eye"
Deny. This is not a fact; it is
20
requires years of daily pathology work; however, it takes
an expression of opinion. The
21
only a few months of being away from work to lose enough
opinion is not relevant to
22
efficacy to threaten a pathologist's career.
Plaintiffs administrative
23
duties as Chair.
24
54. Moreover, Dr. Jadwin's contract expressly provided that
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
25
he was to earn patient billing-based professional fees,
1499).
26
separate and apart from his fixed Base Pay.
27
55. In order to earn Professional Fees, Dr. Jadwin needed to
28
Admit.
-10DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 11 of 38
1
process and bill patient cases.
2
56. Restriction to his workplace at KMC by placement on
Deny. Defendants do not
3
leave denied him the opportunity to earn such fees.
know what "restriction to his
4
workplace at KMC" means.
5
57. Dr. Jadwin's professional fee income amounted to
6
approximately $100,000 per year.
7
58. On December 7, 2007, Defendant County placed
8
Plaintiff on paid administrative leave "pending resolution of
9
a personnel matter" ("Admin Leave").
Deny. 0018755-0018917.
Admit.
10 11
59. Defendant County further ordered Plaintiff to "remain at
Deny. See DSUF 41
12
horne and available by telephone during normal business
(DFJOI482,0016941).
13
hours" and not to contact anyone at KMC, else he could be
14
terminated. There was no further indication of what Plaintiff
15
was being charged with, whether he would be permitted to
16
respond to charges, or when the leave would end.
17
60. No investigation, explanation or resolution ensued.
Deny. Defendants deny there
18
was anything to investigate,
19
explain or resolve.
20
61. On April 4, 2007, Plaintiff notified Defendant County
21
that the long leave was exacerbating his depression, eroding
22
his pathology skills and employability, and denying him the
23
opportunity to earn professional fees.
24
62. On April 30, 2007, Defendant County informed Dr.
Deny. Defendants informed
25
Jadwin that he remained on administrative leave but
Plaintiff that he was relieved of
26
removed the home restriction.
the obligation to be available
27 28
Admit.
for daily work. -11DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 12 of 38
1
63. On May 1,2007, Defendant County informed Dr.
Deny. Defendants tried to
2
Jadwin that they intended to keep Dr. Jadwin on leave and
negotiate a settlement by
3
"let his contract run out."
buying out Plaintiff s contract
4
and lifting restrictions on
5
Plaintiffs leave. See PSUF 63
6
(Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21
7
(Rog No. 43 at 53:3-9); Lee
8
Supp. Decl., Exh. 22 (Rog No.
9
44,28: 17-22); Lee Supp.
10
Decl., Exh. 6 (Wasser Email to
11
Lee of 5/1/07 at DFJOI705)).
12
64. Dr. Jadwin remained on administrative leave until his
13
employment contract expired on October, [sic]4, 2007.
14 15
Admit.
65.
f------------------+-------------1
1-6:...::6~.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f - - - - - - - - - -
16
67. Supervisor Ray Watson, then-Chair of the Board of
Deny. See DSUF 36a
17
Supervisors, voted as a member of the JCC to demote Dr.
(Declaration of Michael Rubio,
18
Jadwin and effectively cut his pay, and also participated in
11/1 0/08,
19
the decision not to renew Plaintiff s employment contract.
Raymond Watson, 11/1 0/98,
~2;
Declaration of
20
~~3,
21
Mike Maggard, 11/1 0/08,
22
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
23
11/1 0/08,
24
Don Maben, 11/1 0/08,
25
Plaintiff was not demoted.
26
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
27
8/14/0 I - 9/12/08.
4 and 5; Declaration of
~2;
~2;
Declaration of
28 -12DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
~2).
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 13 of 38
1
68. Ray Watson, Chair of the Board Supervisors [sic] at the
2
time of the Nonrenewa1, testified in deposition: "My
3
understanding was that [Plaintiff] had - he had been on
4
medical leave, family leave, and had requested even more
5
leave, and that for that reason and the fact that he was suing
6
us, that we decided not to renew his contract."
7
C'Nonrenewal")
8
69. Moreover, Dr. Jadwin was a "core physician" at KMC, a
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
9
permanent position.
1499).
10
70. There was a mutually explicit understanding that, as a
Deny. This is not a fact;
11
core physician, Plaintiff s contract would be continuously
"mutually explicit
12
renewed.
understanding" is one of
13
Admit.
Plaintiff s legal arguments.
14
71. In fact, from October 2000 to present, only one other
Deny. See Response to #30
15
physician besides Dr. Jadwin has not had his contract
above.
16
renewed.
17
72.
18
73.
19
74. Credential Threat was a substantial cause of Dr.
Deny. Plaintiff s credential
20
Jadwin's emotional distress leading to recurrence of his
was never threatened. See
21
chronic major depressive disorder.
DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition,
22
8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-53:18).
23
~'Substantial
24
and "major" are subj ective
25
terms. KMC letters to Jadwin
26
dated 8/14/01- 9/12/08.
27 28
75. Credential Threat was a substantial cause of Dr.
cause," "chronic"
Deny. Plaintiff s credential
-13DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 14 of 38
1
Jadwin's reduced work schedule medical/recuperative leave
was never threatened. See
2
and loss of opportunity to earn Professional Fees from
DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition,
3
December 16,2005 to on or around April 28, 2006.
8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-53:18).
4
Plaintiff s Second Amended
5
Complaint '80. "Substantial
6
cause" is a subjective term.
7
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
8
8/14/01-9/12/08.
9
76. Forced FT Leave was a was a substantial cause of Dr.
Deny. See DSUF 7A (Dutt
10
Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr.
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-
11
Jadwin's major depression.
53: 18), 21 (Bryan Deposition,
12
8/14/08, pgs. 250:15-251 :6,
13
Exhibit 303). "Substantial
14
cause" and "major" are
15
subjective terms. Lee Supp.
16
Decl., Exh. 21, Rog #36.
17
77. Forced FT Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 7A (Dutt
18
loss of opportunity to earn Professional Fees as provided for
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-
19
in his employment contract from on or around April 28, 2006
53:18),21 (Bryan Deposition,
20
to June 17, 2006.
8/14/08, pgs. 250: 15-251 :6,
21
Exhibit 303). Second
22
Amended Complaint '80.
23
"Substantial cause" is a
24
subjective term. Lee Supp.
25
Decl., Exh. 21, Rog #36.
26
78. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of Dr.
Deny. Plaintiff was not
27
Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr.
demoted. See DSUF 4
28
-14DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Jadwin's major depression.
Page 15 of 38
(0000272-358, specifically
2
0000319). "Substantial cause"
3
and "major" are subjective
4
terms. KMC letters to Jadwin
5
dated 8/14/01 - 9/12108.
6
79. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of Base
Deny. Plaintiff was not
7
Pay reduction from $287,529 to $186,687 from October 3,
demoted. See DSUF 4
8
2006 onward.
(0000272-358, specifically
9
0000319), Lee Supp. Decl.,
10
Exh. 21, Rog #41.
11
"Substantial causes" is a
12
subjective term. KMC letters
13
to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
14
9/12108.
15
80. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of
Deny. Plaintiff was not
16
termination of Plaintiffs career as a pathology department
demoted. See DSUF 4
17
chair due to unemployability.
(0000272-358, specifically
18
0000319), 8 (DFJ02422-2459).
19
See Levison Decl., pg. 6, ~6.
20
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
21
8/14/01 - 9/12108.
22
81. Admin Leave, during 5 months of which Plaintiff was
Deny. See DSUF 41
23
restricted full-time to his home, was a substantial cause of
(DFJ01482,0016941).
24
Dr. Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr.
"Substantial cause" and
25
Jadwin's major depression.
"major" are subjective terms.
26
82. Admin Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs loss
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
27
ofopportnnity to earn Professional Fees as provided for in
1499). "Substantial cause" is a
28
-15DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 16 of 38
I
his employment contract from on or around December 7,
2
2006 to October 4, 2007.
3
83. Admin Leave was a substantial cause ofloss of
Deny. See DSDF 10
4
Plaintiffs pathologist "eye," causing him to become
(DFJ00726), 15 (DFJ00746).
5
unemployable as a pathologist.
Plaintiffs Second Amended
6
subjective term.
Complaint ~80.
7
84. Nonrenewal was a substantial cause of Dr. Jadwin's
Deny. "Substantial cause" is a
8
emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr. Jadwin's
subjective term.
9
major depression.
10
85. Admin Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs lost
Deny. Admin Leave was paid.
11
Base Pay of$186,687 and Professional Fees of roughly
See DSDF 41 (DFJOI482).
12
$100,000 per year, as provided for in his employment
"Substantial cause" is a
13
contract, from on or around October 4, 2007 onward.
subjective term.
14
86.
15
87.
16
88.
17
89. Dr. Jadwin made a protected report to KMC's medical
Deny. Nothing about
18
staffleadership about (a) the medical appropriateness of a
Plaintiff s statements was
19
radical hysterectomy for a KMC patient (Patient No.
"protected." See DSDF 105
20
1142693) based on inaccurate outside pathology reports-
(DFJ00508-574), 106
21
which case was the subject of Plaintiff s presentation at the
(DFJ00578), 107 (DFJ00580),
22
monthly KMC oncology conference held on October 12,
108 (Harris Deposition,
23
2005 ("October Conference") - and (b) the unsafe conditions
8/13/08, pgs. 126:8-127: 19),
24
created for other patients by the lack of a KMC policy
109 (Exhibit 190), 110
25
requiring internal pathology review of all outside pathology
(Ragland Deposition, 8/22/08,
26
reports prior to treatment ("IPR").
pgs. 106:18-109:14 and
27
156:14-25), III (Abraham
28 -16DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 17 of 38
1
Deposition, 8/18/08, pgs.
2
14:10-21:17 and 131:5-133:23
3
and 135:24-138:22), 112 (Dutt
4
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs.
5
292:25-293:20),74
6
(DFJ00364-366). See PSUF
7
114 (Jadwin Decl., Exh. 10
8
(Jadwin's email to Dutt,
9
Culberson et al. of 12/6/06 at
10
DFJl479); Lee Supp. Decl.,
11
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at 13:19-
12
25); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 24
13
(Rog 67 at 14:22-23 (noting
14
difficulties outside reviewers
15
had reaching conclusions about
16
the diagnosis)). Taylor Depo.,
17
12/5/07 pgs. 14:19-21, 15:1-4,
18
22:9-10; 24:7-8, 27:16-17,
19
31:17-32:21,36:19-20,51:12-
20
25,55:7-23,62:19-25,63:4-11,
21
64:12-19,68:9-17.
22
90. Defendant County knew of Dr. Jadwin's whistleblowing
Deny. See DSUF 113
23
report at the October Conference since Defendant Harris,
(DFJ00588). Plaintiffs
24
then CMO ofKMC, and Jennifer Abraham, then-Immediate
presentation at the October
25
Past President, were in attendance.
Oncology Conference was not
26 27
"whistleblowing." 91. Each of the letters of reprimand which Defendant
Deny. Plaintiff's Corrected
28 -17DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 18 of 38
1
County decided to place into Plaintiff s medical credential
Motion for Partial or Full
2
file specifically reference Dr. Jadwin's presentation at the
Summary Judgment, pg. 6:1.
3
October Conference.
KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
4
~
9/12/08.
5
92.
6
93.
7
94. On January 9, 2006, Dr. Jadwin made a protected report
Deny. Nothing about
8
to Bryan regarding KMC's noncompliance with state
Plaintiff s statements was
9
regulations regarding blood transfusion related
"protected." See DSUF 7
10
documentation called product chart copies ("PCCs"),
(DFJOO723).
11
jeopardizing patient safety.
12
95. Improper documentation of blood transfusions creates
13
patient risk of morbidity and mortality.
14
96. Dr. Jadwin reasonably suspected that KMC's ongoing
Deny. See DSUF 118
15
failure to maintain accurate and complete records of patient
(DFJ00408-409), 121
16
blood transfusions did not comply with H&S § 1602.5,
(0000572), 123 (DFJOO788),
17
which requires PCC documentation to conform to AABB
124 (DFJ00793), 126 (Harris
18
accreditation standards.
Deposition, 8/13/08, pgs.
Admit.
19
268:8-23), 127 (Smith
20
Deposition, 8/19/08, pgs. 59:4-
21
60: 13), 129 (Smith Deposition,
22
8/19/08, pg. 71 :2-21).
23
97. During his reduced work schedule medical leave, Dr.
Deny. See DSDF 117 (Bryan
24
Jadwin audited PCCs, and continued to report noncompliant
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
25
incomplete or missing PCCs to Defendant Bryan, Toni
205:6-206:25 (Exhibit 291»,
26
Smith, KMC Nurse Executive, and Risk Management and
124a (Bryan Deposition,
27
Quality Assurance through at least April 17, 2006, when
8/14/08, pg. 226:10-16).
28
-18DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDlSPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 19 of 38
Plaintiff asked Defendant Bryan to set up a meeting with
2
Bernard Barmann, County Counsel, to discuss his concerns
3
regarding PCC noncompliance.
4
98. The California Department of Health Services later
Deny. See DSUF 132 (Smith
5
determined during the course of an inspection that KMC was
Deposition, 8/19/08, pgs.
6
indeed failing to comply with PCC-re1ated regulations.
84: 11-85:7).
7
99. On April17, 2006, Defendant Bryan threatened to
Deny. Plaintiff was not
8
demote Plaintiff.
demoted. See DSUF 160
9
(DFJ00794-795; Bryan
10
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
11
231 :9-237:25). KMC letters to
12
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
13
9/12/08.
14
100.
15
101.
16
102. Dr. Jadwin reasonably believed that storage of patient
Deny. No License was
17
skull caps occurring in an unlicensed laboratory freezer at
required for the freezer and
18
KMC violated H&S § 1635.1.
Plaintiff knew it. Wrobel
19
Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12,
20
18:7-24,25: 13-26:20,30:4-
21
31:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6.
22
See PSUF 102 (Lee Supp.
23
Dec!. Exh. 9 (Martinez Depo at
24
14:2-22); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
25
Exh. 12 (Dutt Depo at 244:6-
26
9».
27 28
103. Unlicensed skull flap storage could give rise to a risk of
Deny. Storage is not a risk.
-19DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
patient morbidity or mortality.
Page 20 of 38
Reimp1antation of improperly
2
stored tissue is the risk.
3
104. Gilbert Martinez, the Manager of Laboratory Services
Deny. KMC's freezer did not
4
at KMC ("Martinez") confirmed that there were typically
need a license. Wrobel
5
seven to nine skull flaps being stored in the lunlicensed [sic]
Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12,
6
aboratory [sic] freezer.
18:7-24,25:13-26:20,30:4-
7
31 :21,32:14-20,39:5-41 :6.
8
105. At times, upwards of 15 to 20 skull flaps were being
Deny. KMC's freezer did not
9
stored in KMC's unlicensed freezer.
need a license. Wrobel
10
Deposition, pgs. 10: 11-12,
11
18:7-24,25:13-26:20,30:4-
12
31:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6.
13
106. Martinez shared Plaintiff s concerns about unlicensed
Deny. KMC's freezer did not
14
skull flap storage in the laboratory freezer.
need a license. Wrobel
15
Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12,
16
18:7-24,25: 13-26:20, 30:4-
17
31:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6.
18
107. When Dr. Jadwin discovered skull flaps being illegally
Deny. The storage was not
19
stored in the laboratory freezer, he discussed the problem
illegal. Wrobel Deposition,
20
with Gilbert Martinez, the Manager of Laboratory Services
pgs. 10:11-12, 18:7-24,25:13-
21
atKMC ("Martinez").
26:20,30:4-31:21,32:14-20,
22
39:5-41 :6. Plaintiff supervised
23
the pathology laboratory and
24
was in charge of the freezers.
25
See DSUF 6a (0001479-1499).
26
108. Around Thanksgiving 2006, Dr. Jadwin tipped Martinez Deny. The storage did not
27
off that he intended to blow the whistle about his unresolved
28
need a license. See DSUF 55
-20DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 21 of 38
1
complaints about unsafe patient care and conditions,
(Martinez Deposition, 4/16/08,
2
including unlicensed skull flap storage, and that inspections
pgs. 111: 12-118:22). Plaintiff
3
ofKMC by regulatory and accreditation agencies was likely.
only told Martinez to expect
4
inspections.
5
109. Within a few days, Martinez relayed this information to
Deny. There is no evidence
6
his supervisor, David Hill, the Director of Ambulatory Care;
that David Hill communicated
7
who in turn relayed it to a pathologist, Philip Dutt, and/or
with either Dr. Dutt or Dr.
8
Defendant Harris.
Harris.
9
110. Beginning November 28,2006, Dr. Jadwin formally
Deny. Plaintiff has not
10
reported his suspicions of illegal and/or unsafe care and
produced his alleged letters to
11
conditions of patients at KMC - including unlicensed skull
CAP or DHS. Defendants
12
flap storage, noncompliance PCCs, and an inappropriate
have never seen them. See
13
radical prostatectomy (see below) - to the Joint Commission
DSUF 56a (DFJ02540-2541).
14
on Accreditation of Hospital Organizations ("JCAHO"), the
See PSUF 110 (Lee Supp.
15
College of American Pathologists ("CAP"), and the
Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 35 at
16
California Department of Health Services ("DHS").
8:10-14)); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
17
("Outside WB Reports).
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 21 at 5:22-
18
24 (DHS)); Lee Supp. Dec!.,
19
Exh. 20 (RFA No. 22 at 5:25-
20
6:2 (JCAHO)); Lee Supp!.
21
Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 23 at
22
6:3-6 (CAP)).
23
111. On January 4,2007, Dr. Dutt received confirmation that
Deny. See PSUF 111 (Jadwin
24
Dr. Jadwin had in fact complained to CAP about the
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 2 (Dutt's
25
unlicensed tissue storage and noncompliant PCCs, and
Email to Culberson of 1/4/07
26
shared this with then-CEO Mr. Culberson.
at 0001330)).
27
112.
28
-21DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 22 of 38
1
113.
2
114. At 12:54 p.m. on December 6, 2006, Dr. Jadwin
Deny. See DSUF 190
3
formally reported to KMC leadership his concerns regarding
(DFJ01479-1480). See Jadwin
4
a KMC patient who was scheduled for immediate radical
Dec., Exh. 10.
5
prostatectomy to treat possible cancer. Plaintiff had
6
recommended the attending physician delay the
7
prostatectomy because he believed the pathologic findings of
8
cancer were inconclusive. Instead, Plaintiff had
9
recommended the findings be validated by outside experts.
10
115. Radical prostatectomies pose numerous risks to patient
11
care, including incontinence, impotence and other morbid
12
factors.
13
116. In his report to KMC leadership, Dr. Jadwin also
Deny. See DSUF 189 (Dutt
14
complained of a pattern of non-transparent "peer review"
Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs.
15
being conducted against him and asked that the Board of
296:20-297: 13). See Jadwin
16
Supervisors be apprised of his concerns and initiate a formal
Dec!., Exh. 10.
17
reVIew.
18
117. Four minutes later, at 12:58 p.m., Dr. Dutt emailed Mr.
Dcny. Dutt's e-mail to
19
Culberson complaining about Dr. Jadwin's competency, and
Culberson does not refer to
20
insistence on outside review of numerous cases after Dr.
Plaintiffs "competency." See
21
Dutt had counseled him on failing to send a case out for
Lee Dec!., Exh. 23.
22
consultation. Dr. Dutt also complained about alleged "other
23
Problems" involving Dr. Jadwin which he worried might
24
lead to loss of staff and the pathology department's ability to
25
serve patients and doctors in a timely manner.
26
118.
27
119.
28
Admit.
-22DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 23 of 38
1
120. Plaintiff was eligible to take medical leave as of
Deny. Plaintiff was eligible on
2
December 16,2006. [sic]
December 15, 2005.
3
121. Plaintiff requested and took reduced work schedule
Admit.
4
CFRA medical leave from December 16, 2005 to at least
5
March 15, 2006.
6
122. Members of the JCC subsequently voted to demote
Deny. Plaintiff was not
7
Plaintiff, basing their decision on his unavailability due in
demoted. See DSUF 4
8
part to his medical leave. Mr. Bryan told the JCC at the
(0000272-358, specifically
9
removal vote: "This recommendation [for removal] is based
0000319). KMC letters to
10
on Dr. Jadwin's unavailability for service because of
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
11
extended medical leaves ...."
9112/08.
12
123. Previously on April 17, 2006, 4 months into Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 160
13
reduced work schedule medical leave, Bryan admitted to Dr.
(DFJ00794-795; Bryan
14
Jadwin, "Yes the Department of Pathology continues to
Deposition, 8114/08, pgs.
15
function well as it has for many years, and yes, you have
231 :9-237:25).
16
made many positive changes in the department."
17
124. Plaintiff also has direct evidence that Plaintiffs medical
Deny. See DSUF 36a
18
leave was a negative factor in the Nonrenewal.
(Declaration of Michael Rubio,
19
11110/08, ~2; Declaration of
20
Raymond Watson, 11110/98,
21
~~3,
22
Mike Maggard, 11/1 0/08,
23
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
24
1111 0/08,
25
Don Maben, 1111 0/08,
26
125.
27
126.
28
4 and 5; Declaration of
~2;
~2;
Declaration of
-23DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
~2).
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 24 of 38
1
127. On April 28, 2006, Defendant Bryan represented to Dr.
Admit.
2
Jadwin that he was still entitled to 137 hours of medical
3
leave.
4
128. Sandra Chester, Defendant County's Director of Human
Deny. See DSUF 9 (Chester
5
Resources, testified in deposition that Plaintiffs request for
Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs.
6
medical leave in his email to Bryan and herself on March 16,
135: 12-137:6), 11 (Chester
7
2006; and provision by Dr. Jadwin's treating therapist, Dr.
Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs.
8
Riskin, ofleave certification on April 29, 2006 was timely
75:19-76:10),12 (Bryan
9
under Defendant County's customary practice.
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
10
195:9-196:14),13 (Chester
11
Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs.
12
113:23-114:12).
13
129. Dr. Riskin's certifications notified it that Plaintiff s
14
depression was serious enough to require a reduced work
15
schedule leave and regular treatment from December 16,
16
2006 to September 15,2006.
17
130. Nonetheless, Defendant Bryan denied Plaintiff reduced
Deny. Peter Bryan gave
18
work schedule medical leave, and forced him to take full-
Plaintiffthe option to take full-
19
time "personal necessity leave" under the County's leave
time leave. See DSUF 20
20
policy.
(DFJOI121), 21 (Bryan
Admit.
21
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
22
250: 15-251 :6, Exhibit 303), 24
23
(DFJOI141), 29 (Bryan
24
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 244:6-
25
16), 30 (Bryan Deposition,
26
8/14/08, pgs. 280:21-281 :4).
27 28
131. -24DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS iN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 25 of 38
1
132.
2
133.
3
134. Dr. Jadwin was an individual with a mental disability
Deny. Dr. Reading never used
4
because of his chronic major depressive disorder. Dr.
the word "chronic." See PSUF
5
Reading, Plaintiff's forensic psychologist, diagnosed Dr.
134 (Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at
6
Jadwin as having Major Depressive Disorder. Dr. Reading
"Diagnostic Impressions" on p.
7
also noted Dr. Jadwin reported developing depressed mood,
58; Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at
8
pervasive anhedonia, suicidal ideation, sleep disturbance,
"Structured Clinical Interview"
9
and other symptoms while working at KMC.
at p. 57-58.).
10
135. Dr. Jadwin's depression limited his ability to take
Deny. See PSUF 135
11
pleasure from life, and to engage full-time in, and take
(Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at
12
pleasure from, the medical work to which he had devoted his
"Structured Clinical Interview"
13
life.
at p. 57-58). Dr. Reading does
14
not comment on the effect
15
Plaintiff's depression had on
16
his life.
17
136. Likewise, Defendant County has admitted, by and
Deny. See PSUF 136 (Lee
18
through the PMK deposition testimony of its representative,
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 17 (Kercher
19
Eugene Kercher, a psychiatrist, that it was familiar with the
Depo at 95:13-22, 96:3-8».
20
symptoms of depression and believed that Dr. Jadwin was
Dr. Kercher never diagnosed
21
depressed over several years during his tenure of his
Plaintiff. (Kercher Depo
22
employment at KMC.
9/4/08, atpg. 51:1-16).
23
137. Plaintiff also required sinus surgery and required a few
Admit.
24
weeks to recover from it during May of 1005.
25
138. Further, Plaintiff suffered an avulsed ankle at the end of
26
May of 2005 that limited his ability to walk.
Admit.
27 28
-25DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 26 of 38
1
139. The limitations from these physical conditions
Deny. See PSUF 139 (Riskin
2
contributed to Plaintiff s limitations from his chronic
Dec., Exh. 3 atDFJl814.).
3
depression during May through the first part of June of 2005.
There is no evidence that
4
Plaintiff s sinus surgery and
5
broken ankle contributed to his
6
depression.
7
140.
8
141. 2. Plaintiff Was "Otherwise Qualified"
9
Deny. See PSUF 141 (Lee Dec!., Exh. 19 (Bryan's Letter
10
to DHS of?/25/06 at
11
0001619); Exh. 18 (Bryan's
12
Letter to JCC of 7/10/06 at top
13
of 001476 and end of 001457
14
[sic. Should be 001477]); Exh.
15
14 (Bryan's Memo to Jadwin
16
of 4/28/06 at DFJ01152,
17
DFJOl155-1159, DFJOll64);
18
Exh. 16 (Nunn's Cover Email
19
to Jadwin of 6/26/06 at
20
DFJ01346); Exh. 10 (Bryan's
21
Letter to Supervisors of
22
1/17/06 at No. 10 on
23
0001567)). None of Plaintiffs
24
evidence establishes that he
25
was a qualified person under
26
either the ADA or FEHA.
27
142.
28 -26DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 27 of 38
1
143.
2
144. Plaintiffs physician, Dr. Lempel, disclosed Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 65 (Jadwin
3
depression when he faxed his medical report to KMC's HR
Deposition, 1/9/08, pgs. 452:4-
4
Department on November 30, 2000, around the time of
455:19). See Reading Dec!.,
5
Plaintiff shire.
pg. 59, ~3, last two lines.
6
145. Defendant Bryan admitted knowing that Dr. Jadwin
Admit.
7
needed leave because of his depression.
8
146. Dr. Riskin's certifications stated that Plaintiff needed
9
medical/recuperative leave for depression from
Admit.
10
December 16, 2005 to September 16, 2006.
11
147. Supervisor Watson testified in deposition that he knew
Deny. See PSUF 147 (Lee
12
Dr. Jadwin was in continuous need of extensions of his
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 14 (Watson
13
medical leave.
Depo. at 80:22-81 :2)). The
14
page numbers are incorrect and
15
Supervisor Watson did not
16
express an opinion about
17
Plaintiff s need for continuous
18
extensions of his leave.
19
148. On April 4, 2007, during Plaintiff s Admin Leave,
20
Plaintiff expressly notified Defendant County in writing that
21
Plaintiff was depressed and that the Admin Leave was
22
exacerbating his chronic depression.
23
149.
24
150. 4. Disability Was A Motivating Factor in Demotion,
Deny. Plaintiff was not
25
Pay Cut & Nonrenewal.
demoted. See DSUF 33
Admit.
26
(0001476-1565,0000073-75),
27
36a (Declaration of Michael
28
-27DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 28 of 38
1
Rubio, 11110/08, '12;
2
Declaration of Raymond
3
Watson, 11/10/98, '1'13, 4 and
4
5; Declaration of Mike
5
Maggard, 11/10/08, '12;
6
Declaration of Jon McQuiston,
7
11/10/08, '12; Declaration of
8
Don Maben, 11/1 0/08, '12).
9
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
10
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
11
151.
12
152.
13
153. On January 9, 2006, Dr. Jadwin asked Defendant Bryan
14
to allow him to work part-time and at home while he was
15
recovering from his disabling depression.
16
154. Dr. Riskin, Plaintiff s psychiatrist, certified that part-
Deny. See DSUF 14
17
time work was medically necessary.
(DFJOl150).
18
155. KMC accommodated Jadwin's disability from
Deny. See DSUF 7
19
December 16, 2005 to April 16, 2006 by providing him with
(DFJOO723).
20
the reduced work schedule medical/recuperative leave and
21
ability to perform work at home that he requested during his
22
meeting with Defendant Bryan on January 9, 2006.
23
156. As customary, a Locum Tenens pathologist covered
Deny. There is no evidence to
24
Plaintiff s clinical pathologist duties, while plaintiff
support this fact.
25
performed the remaining 10-20% of his administrative duties
26
as Chair of Pathology.
27
157. As usual, if Dr. Jadwin was unable to attend to an
28
Admit.
Deny. There is no evidence to
-28DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSlTION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 29 of 38
1
administrative duty at a particular time, then Dr. Dutt filled
2
in for him.
3
158. On March 16, 2006, Dr. Jadwin requested an extension
Deny. See DSUF 14
4
of his reduced work schedule leave. Dr. Jadwin submitted
(DFJO 1150).
5
Dr. Riskin's certification of his continuing need for a
6
reduced work schedule within three days of learning that
7
Defendant County required it.
8
159. On April 28, 2006, Bryan refused to accommodate
Deny. See DSUF 21 (Bryan
9
Jadwin's disability. Instead he forced him to take full-time
Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs.
10
leave, and refused to hold his job open for him any longer
250:15-251:6, Exhibit 303).
11
while he was on recuperative leave, and refused to allow Dr.
There is no evidence to support
12
Jadwin to return to work until he could work full-time. As a
this fact.
13
result, Dr. Jadwin was prevented continuing to carry out his
14
duties as Chair of Pathology.
15
160.
16
161.
17
162. Defendant Bryan acted in bad faith when he tmilaterally
Deny. See DSUF 14
18
denied Dr. Jadwin's request for continuing accommodation
(DFJOlI50). There is no
19
in the form of part-time work, and refused to allow him to
evidence to support this fact.
20
return to work until he could work full time.
21
163. Defendant Bryan also acted in bad faith when he
Deny. See DSUF 33
22
represented to the JCC that Dr. Jadwin's lack of
(0001476-1565,0000073-75).
23
communication with him led him to believe that Dr. Jadwin
There is no evidence to support
24
had essentially abandoned his job.
this fact.
25
164.
26
165.
27
166.
28
support this fact.
-29DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 30 of 38
I
167. The Bylaws of Kern County Medical Center as in effect
Deny. See DSUF 37
2
between June 13,2006 and October 4,2007 ("Bylaws")
(DFJ01359-1361).
3
provided for due process for core physicians in numerous
4
scenarios like loss of hospital privileges, but not for (i)
5
removal of physicians from department chairmanship, (ii)
6
placement of physicians on administrative leave, or (iii)
7
nonrenewal of physician employment contracts with
8
Defendant County.
9
According to Bylaws Section 12.2 GROUNDS FOR
10
HEARING, due process is provided in the following
II
situations:
12
"A. Denial of medical staff membership.
13
B. Denial of requested advancement in staff membership
14
status, or category.
15
C. Denial of medical staff reappointment.
16
D. Suspension of staff membership or clinical privileges for
17
more than thirty (30) days in any twelve (12) month period.
18
E. Demotion to lower staff category or membership status.
19
F. Summary suspension of staff membership or clinical
20
privileges for more than fourteen (14) days.
21
G. Revocation of medical staff membership.
22
H. Denial of requested clinical privileges.
23
1. Involuntary reduction of current clinical privileges.
24
1. Termination of all clinical privileges.
25
K. Involuntary imposition of significant consultation or
26
monitory requirements excluding monitoring incidental to
27
provisional status and Section 7.3)."
28 -30DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 31 of 38
1
The due process afforded by the Bylaws in the above cases is
2
robust, as contained in Bylaws Section 12.3-1 NOTICE OF
3
ACTION OR PROPOSED ACTION:
4
"In all cases in which action has been taken or a
5
recommendation made as set forth in Section 12.2, the
6
president of staff or designee on behalf of the medical
7
executive committee shall give the member prompt written
8
notice of (1) the recommendation or final proposed action
9
and that such action, if adopted, shall be taken and reported
10
to the applicable licensing or certifying authority and/or the
11
National Practitioner Data Bank if required; (2) the reasons
12
for the proposed action including the acts or omissions with
13
which the member is charged; (3) the right to request a
14
hearing pursuant to Section 12.3-2."
15
168. The Board of Supervisors of Defendant County ratified
16
the Bylaws on December 13,2004.
17
169. When the defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with
Deny. Plaintiff was not
18
adequate due process in connection with the Demotion,
demoted. See DSUF 4
19
Admin Leave and Nonrenewal, they were acting pursuant to
(0000272-358), 31 (Bryan
20
the Bylaws.
Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 258:7-
Admit.
21
16). There is no evidence
22
Defendants failed to comply
23
with the By-Laws. KMC
24
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
25
- 9/12/08.
26
170.
27
171.
28 -31DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 32 of 38
I
172. It is incontrovertibly established that "Any acts or
2
omissions of the individual Defendants were under color of
3
law." See Scheduling Order, 9:22-23.
4
173.
5
174.
6
175.
7
176. Plaintiffs employment contract expressly set forth a
Deny. See DSDF 6 (0001479-
8
mutually explicit understanding with Defendant County that
1499).
9
Plaintiff would receive Base Pay of$287,529, and that
Admit.
10
Plaintiff would be chair ofKMC's pathology department.
11
177. Moreover, the employment contract barred Defendant
Deny. See DSDF 6 (0001479-
12
County from reducing Plaintiffs Base Pay, removing
1499).
13
Plaintifffrom chair or terminating or otherwise modifying
14
the Contract at will, without cause, or without Plaintiffs
15
consent.
16
178. Defendant COlmty has not removed a department chair
17
without cause since at least October 2000.
18
179. Defendants County and Harris told Plaintiff several
Deny. See DSDF 44 (Jadwin
19
times that the Demotion "necessitated" the Paycut, and that
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
20
he would have to agree to it to continue working at KMC.
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
Admit.
21
581)),45 (Jadwin Deposition,
22
3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12).
23
Plaintiff was not demoted.
24
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
25
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
26
180. Having no other choice, Plaintiff executed the Paycut
Deny. See DSDF 44 (Jadwin
27
amendment to his employment contract.
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
28
-32DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADmDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 33 of 38
1
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
2
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
3
3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12).
4
181. Defendant County was subjectively aware of Plaintiff's
Deny. Plaintiff was not
5
contractual interest in Base Pay, as evidenced by the
demoted. See DSUF 4
6
numerous reminders by Defendants Bryan and County that
(0000272-358, specifically
7
Plaintiff would have to expressly amend his employment
0000319), 44 (Jadwin
8
contract to implement the Paycut resulting from his
Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.
9
Demotion.
969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and
10
581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition,
11
3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12).
12
KMC letters to Jadwin dated
13
8/14/01 - 9/12/08.
14
182. There was nearly a month gap between the time
Deny. Plaintiff was not
15
Defendant Bryan informed Plaintiff he was initiating
demoted. See DSUF 4
16
demotion procedures to the time the JCC voted to demote
(0000272-358, specifically
17
Plaintiff.
0000319). KMC letters to
18
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
19
9/12/08.
20
183. Defendants never notified Plaintiff of the time or place
Deny. Plaintiff was not
21
of the JCC vote to demote Plaintiff gave him an explanation
demoted. See DSUF 4
22
of the evidence against him, or provided him an opportunity
(0000272-358, specifically
23
to tell his side ofthe story.
0000319). KMC letters to
24
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
25
9/12/08.
26
184. Before the JCC vote occurred, Plaintiff sent a letter to
Deny. Plaintiff was not
27
Defendant County legally challenging the Demotion.
demoted. See DSUF 4
28
-33DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 34 of 38
I
(0000272-358, specifically
2
0000319). See PSUF 184 (Lee
3
Supp. Decl., Exh. 2 (Lee Letter
4
to Barnes of 6/29/06 at
5
DFJl349). There is no
6
evidence to support this. KMC
7
letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
8
- 9/12/08.
9
185. Nor did Defendant County ever offer Plaintiff a post-
Deny. See DSUF 4 (0000272-
10
deprivation hearing.
358, specifically 0000319).
11
186. More importantly, the JCC did not constitute an
Deny. See Lee Decl., Exh. 17.
12
impartial tribunal since it comprised individuals who had
13
been harassing and retaliating against Dr. Jadwin and/or
14
individuals on whom Dr. Jadwin was blowing the whistle.
15
187. Nor was Defendant Bryan - who invited Plaintiff to
Deny. Plaintiff was not
16
contact him, and only, him regarding the Demotion he
demoted. See DSUF 4
17
himself had instigated - an impartial adjudicator given his
(0000272-358, specifically
18
demonstrated bias against Plaintiff.
0000319). KMC letters to
19
Jadwin dated 8/14/0 I -
20
9/12/08.
21
188.
22
189.
23
190. Plaintiffs employment contract expressly set forth a
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
24
mutually explicit understanding with Defendant County that
1499).
25
Plaintiff would be paid Professional Fees.
26
191. Defendant County was subjectively aware of Plaintiffs
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
27
contractual interest in Professional Fees as evidenced by the
1499). Plaintiff was not
28
-34DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 35 of 38
1
then-CEQ's letter to Plaintiff regarding the Paycut. Mr.
demoted. KMC letters to
2
Culberson explained that, as a demoted staff pathologist with
Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -
3
a drastically reduced base salary, Plaintiff would
9/12/08.
4
nevertheless be able to take advantage of his reduced
5
administrative duties in order to increase his Professional
6
Fees-based income.
7
192. Mr. Culberson participated in the decision to place
Deny. See DSUF 41
8
Plaintiff on Admin Leave, which denied Plaintiff the
(DFJO 1482).
9
opportunity to earn Professional Fees.
10
193. Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff any pre- or post-
Deny. See DSUF 4 (0000272-
11
deprivation procedure when placing him on Admin Leave.
358).6(0001479-1499).
12
194. When Defendant County sent a letter to Plaintiff
Deny. See DSUF 41
13
placing him on Admin Leave, the letter stated only that the
(DFJ01482).
14
Admin Leave was "pending resolution of a personnel
15
matter."
16
195. At no time did Defendants County or Harris inform
Deny. There was no "charge"
17
Plaintiff of the nature of the charges against him, give him
against Plaintiff.
18
and explanation of the evidence against him, or provide him
19
an opportunity to tell his side of the story.
20
196. Even when Plaintiff protested the lack of due process,
Deny. See PSUF 196 (Lee
21
Defendant County refused to respond.
Supp. Dec!., Exh. 4 (Lee Letter
22
to Barnes of 4/4/07 at
23
DFJ01619». There is no
24
evidence to support this.
25
197. Since 1995, only one other department chair had ever
26
been placed on administrative leave in excess of 1 month.
27
198.
28
Admit.
-35DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 36 of 38
1
199.
2
200. Defendant County customarily renews the contracts of
Deny. See Response to #30
3
all of its KMC medical staff.
above.
4
201. When Plaintiff asked Defendant County to identify all
Admit.
5
members of the KC medical staff - which comprises roughly
6
60 full-time faculty physicians at any given time - who had
7
employment contracts which were not renewed during the
8
period from October 24, 2000 to the present, Defendant
9
County was able to name only one doctor.
10
202. At no time did Defendant County inform Plaintiff of the
Deny. See Response to #195
11
nature of the charges against him, give him an explanation of
above.
12
the evidence against him, or provide him an opportunity to
13
tell his side of the story.
14
203. Defendant County denies that anyone even participated
Deny. See PSUF 203 (Lee
15
in a decision not to renew Plaintiff's employment contract.
Supp. Decl., Exh. 21 (Rog No.
16
45,53:16-20)).
17
204. Even when Plaintiff protested the lack of due process,
This is the same as #196. See
18
Defendant County refused to respond.
Response to #196 above.
19
205.
20
206.
21
207. Defendant County itself admits that no relevant event
Deny. See DSUF 6 (0001479-
22
occurred on or before January 6, 2005.
1499), 48 (0000623-630), 65
23
(Jadwin Deposition, 119/08,
24
pgs. 452:4-455:19), 71
25
(0001059-1072), 90 (0000260
26
(Exhibit 560)), 91 (0000031-
27
70),92 (DFJ00246), 97
28
-36DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 37 of 38
I
(DFJ0025 1-270), 98
2
(DFJ00289-290), 101
3
(DFJ00241-242),102
4
(DFJ00248), 147 (DFJ00243-
5
245).
6
208.
7
209.
8
210. Defendant County admits that Plaintiff has exhausted
9
his administrative remedies as to all claims except for the
10
new FMLAlCFRAlFEHA retaliation claim added via the
11
Second Amended Complaint, filed on October 7, 2008 (Doc.
12
241).
13
211. Plaintiff exhausted his CRFA & FEHA
14
oppositional/participation retaliation claims by filing a
15
timely complaint with the California Department of Fair
16
Employment & Housing ("DFEH") on September 3, 2008,
17
and obtaining a right to sue letter that same day.
18
212.
19
213.
20
214. Defendant Bryan was the Chief Executive Officer at
21
KMC from September of 2004 until September of 2006.
22
215. Eugene Kercher, M.D. was the President ofKMC
23
Medical Staff from July 2004 to July 2006, and a member of
24
the JCC.
25
216. Defendant Irwin Harris, M.D., was Chief Medical
26
Officer at KMC from July of2005 to September of2007,
27
and a non-voting member of the JCC.
28
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
-37DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278
Filed 12/01/2008
1
217. Jennifer Abraham, M.D. was Immediate Past President
2
ofKMC Medical Staff during 2004-2006, and President
3
Elect in July 2006 to December of 2007.
4
218. Scott Ragland, D.O. was President-Elect of the KMC
5
Medical Stafffrom 2004-2006, Chair of the Quality
6
Management Committee, and a member of the JCC.
7
219. Toni Smith was the Chief Nurse Executive ofKMC,
8
and a member of the Jec.
9
220. William Roy, M.D., was Chief of the Division of
Page 38 of 38
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
Admit.
10
Gynecologic Oncology at KMC.
11
221. Marvin Kolb, M.D. was former Chief Medical Officer
12
at KMC who left in September of 2004.
13
222. Phillip Dutt, MD., became Chair of Pathology at KMC
Deny. Dr. Dutt was the
14
in August of2006.
interim Chair.
15
223. David Culberson was Interim Chief Executive Officer
Admit.
16
from September of2006 to May of2007.
17
224. Paul Hensler became Chief Executive Officer at in [sic]
18
May of2007.
19
225. Gilbert Martinez was and is the Manager of Laboratory
Deny. Gilbert Martinez retired
20
Services at KMC.
on September 27,2008.
21
22
Admit.
Admit.
Change of Employee Status. Respectfully submitted,
23 24
Dated: December 1, 2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
25 26 27 28
By: lsi Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al -38DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICAnON
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG · ~ • KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 189
AFFIUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
August 14,2001
David F Jadwin, DO Kern Medical Center 1830 Flower Street Bakersfield CA 93305 Dear Doctor Jadwin:
I
~
I am pleased to infonn you that your request for medical staff membership at Kern Medical Center was approved by the Kern County Board of Supervisors. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions. if applicable). Your appointment is as follows: Department: Specialty: Status: Fromffo:
\
~
Pathology Pathology ProvisionallActive 0312012001 to 10/3112002
According to KMC's Bylaws (a copy is attached), it will be necessary for you to serve a provisional appointment for at least six months or for a period sufficient for your Department Chair to evaluate your skills, competency and privilege requests accurately. Proctoring is required for a minimum of six cases, unless your clinical department has established a greater number of cases. Please contact your Department Chair to discuss available proctoring physicians. You should keep a list of these cases and note the physicians who proctored you for each. The purpose of this process is to satisfY the department's obligation to assure the medical community that you are proficient in your specialty. You should discuss the care plans with the proctoring physician before or upon admission, at intervals through the patient's length of stay/course of treatment and discharge. .
~
Our hospital policies require that prior to a physician initiating any practice at Kern Medical Center, the physician must first meet certain health screening documentation rquirements. After these requirements have been satisfied, our Human Resources Department will authorize the issuance of a hospital identification badge. All persons providing services at Kern Medical Center, in whatever capacity, are required to wear this identification badge. Please contact our Human Resources Department at (661) 326-2640 for infonnation and assistance with this process. After Human Resources requirements are met, please report to the Medical Director's Office - Room 124I, to sign the Employee
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN
1830 FLOWER STREET' BAKERSFIELD. CAUFORNIA ~197 • TELEPHONE (661) 326-2000
•
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 189
Confidentiality Statement and User Access Code Agreement at which time you will be issued an HBO number for dictation purposes. You have been provided a copy of Kern Medical Center's booklet entitled, "Health Care That's Here for Good" which contains valuable information. Please read the booklet at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact the Medical Staff Office at (661) 326-2218. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely,
I
~
Enclosures cc:
Department Chair KMC Human Resources Department
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~ • MEDICAL CENTER .KERN
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 3 of 189
AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
September 28,2001
David Jadwin, DO Pathology Department 1830 Flower Street Bakersfield, CA 93305 Dear Doctor Jadwin: RE:
Release of Proctoring RequirementIModification of Staff Category
Congratulations on successfully completing the required credentials proctoring process for staff privileges at Kern Medical Center. As a result, on September 18, 2001, the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved the release of these conditions and modified your medical staff category from Provisional to Active. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact the Medical Staff Office at (661) 326-2218.
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET· BAKERSFIELD. CALlFOANlA933054197 '" TELEPHONE (661) 326·2000
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
• KERN MEDICAL - . : • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 4 of 189
AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
October 31, 2002
David Jadwin, DO Kern Medical Center Department of Pathology 1830 Flower Street Bakersfield, CA 93305
l
Dear Doctor Jadwin:
I am pleased to inform you that the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved your request for reappointment to Kern Medical Center on October 31, 2002. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions. if applicable). Your reappointment is as follows: Department: Specialty: Status: Period:
Pathology Pathology Active October 31,2002 to October 31, 2004
It is essential that your credential file remains current, so as you receive renewals of your medical license, DEA Registration, and malpractice insurance, please forward copies to Kern Medical Center's Medical Staff Office. Your continuing contributions to the standards of excellence at Kern Medical Center are greatly appreciated, and I look forward to seeing you in the hospital.
lef Medical Officer
-----_. --
cc: Departmenl Chair Enclosure: Current Privileges
OWNEO AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET· BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA 93305·4197 • TELEPHONE (661) 326·2COO
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 5 of 189
~ • MEDICAL CENTER .KERN
AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
November 1. 2004
David Jadwin, DO Department of Pathology Dear Doctor Jadwin: I am please to inform you that the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved your request for reappointment to Kern Medical Center. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions, if applicable). Your reappointment is as follows:
Department: Specialty: Status:
Pathology Pathology Active
Period:
11/1/2004 to 10/31/2006
It is essential that your credential file remains current, so as you receive renewals of your medical license, DEA Registration, and malpractice insurance. please forward copies to Kern Medical Center's Medical Staff Office.
~
Your continuing contributions to the standards of excellence at Kern Medical Center are greatly appreciated, and I look forward to seeing you in the hospital. Sincerely,
fJ~lvDt:)RJfl~ rM
Peter K. Bryan f Chief Executive Officer Enclosure:
Current Privileges
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET· BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (66') 326·2000
.
~
• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 6 of 189
AFAUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
September 4, 2008 SECOND REQUEST
David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
RE:
MEDICAL STAFF REAPPOINTMENT
Dear Dr. Jadwin: On July 28, 2008 you were requested to complete your application for reappointment to the Medical Staff of Kem Medical Center. This letter serves as your SECOND REQUEST that your reappointment application and associated documents are needed to complete your credential file. Your cooperation in returning this information is essential for you to maintain medical staff membership and privileges. Failure to acknOWledge this request by FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2008 may result in termination of staff privileges according to the hospital bylaws. According to Article VI, Section 6.15-4 of the Medical Staff Bylaws: "Failure without good cause to timely submit a completed application for reappointment shall result in the automatic termination of the member's membership and clinical privileges and prerogatives at the end of the current staff appointment, and the member shall be deemed to have resigned membership in the medical staff. In the event membership terminates for the reasons set forth herein, the procedures set forth in Article XII shall not apply." Please contact the Medical Staff Office at 661-326-2718 if you have any questions about the reappointment process. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. Sincerely,
Tracy L. Subriar. CPCS Medical Staff Services Coordinator OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FlOWER STREET' BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (661) 326-2000
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 7 of 189
~ • MEDICAL CENTER .KERN
AFFlUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE
November 1, 2006
David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 91207 Dear Doctor Jadwin:
I am pleased to inform you that the Kern County Board of Supervisors approved your request for reappointment to Kern Medical Center. A copy of your approved privileges is attached (please note any exclusions, if applicable). Your reappointment is as follows: Department: Specialty: Status: Period:
Pathology Pathology Active 11/112006 to 10/31/2008
It is essential that your credential file remains current, so as you receive renewals of your medical license, DEA Registration, and malpractice insurance, please forward copies to Kern Medical Center's Medical Staff Office. Your continuing contributions to the standards of excellence at Kern Medical Center are greatly appreciated, and I look forward to seeing you in the hospital. Sincerely,
~~~I&s , Irwin E. Harris, MD Chief Medical Officer Enclosure:
Current Privileges
OWNEO AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET. BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (56l) 326·2000
•
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 8 of 189
Confidentiality Statement and User Access Code Agreement at which time you will be issued an HBO number for dictation pwposes. You have been provided a copy of Kern Medical Center's booklet entitled, "Health Care That's Here for Good" which contains valuable information. Please read the booklet at your earliest convenience. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact the Medical Staff Office at (661) 326-2218. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely,
ve Officer Enclosures cc:
Department Chair KMC Human Resources Department
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 9 of 189
AFAUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGElES, SAN DIEGO, AND IRVINE
September 12, 2008 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
RE:
MEDICAL STAFF REAPPOINTMENT
Dear Dr. Jadwin: Your current staff appointment and clinical privileges will expire on OCTOBER 31, 2008. We have previously informed you of your responsibility to re-apply for medical staff membership and clinical privileges if you wish to continue to practice at Kem Medical Center. If the Medical Staff Office does not receive your reappointment application by SEPTEMBER 19,2008, your membership and all clinical privileges may be automatically terminated on October 31, 2008 In accordance with the Medical Staff Bylaws, Article VI, Section 6.15-4 of the Medical Staff Bylaws: "Failure without good cause to timely submit a completed application for reappointment shall result in the automatic termination of the member's membership and clinical privileges and prerogatives at the end of the current staff appointment, and the member shall be deemed to have resigned membership In the medical staff. In the event membership terminates for the reasons set forth herein, the procedures set forth In Article XII shall not apply." If you wish to voluntarily resign your medical staff membership and privileges or have any questions, please contact Tracy Subriar in the Medical Staff Office at (661) 3262718. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. Sincerely,
Tracy l. Subriar, CPCS Medical Staff Services Coordinator OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNlY OF KERN 1830 FLOWER STREET' BAKERSFIELO, CAUFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (56') 32"2000
Complete IIems 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
Rem 4 If Restricted ,Delivery Is desired.
-. PrInt your name and address on the reverse so that we can return the card 10 you. • Attach this card to the back of the maIIplece, or on the front If space pem1fts.
A.SIgnatwe
CJ Agent CJ Addressee
X B.
-b)'(--J
'IfYES,.-delMHy_below:
3.
llejb l\'P8 cenIlled Mall
CJ RegIstwecI C11nswed Mall
CI El<presa Moll CI R..... _ p l f o r _ CI C.O.D.
4. _lloIloery'I (Em8 Fes) (IIansfer ""'" setvlce_
i PS Fenn 3811. February 2004
~
CI Yes
7005 3110 0001 7095 7501 llomostJc Return RsceJpl
'lJ2595
I
Document 278-2
David Jadwin. DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
I
C. Dale of DelIvery
D.lsdellwry _ _ 1Icm_l?
1. Miele Addl1lS!llld to:
2. ArtIcle Number
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
! •
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 10 of 189
Page 11 of 189
--.~--.
__
.,.,..,,-
..
-.~,--_._._-,-~._-
...
_--_._-~_.
-_.._-_.__ ..-
Filed 12/01/2008
t05L 5bOL tooo DttE 500L
. . . . KERN
, II
~1.fSPo.s1:
~
. . . . ~~L
... . f/!!
.
OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUI
MEDICAL STAFF OFFICE
"'7/fJW 01/://1H13
-------3;no3uoa~~o;~3~~;~nu~3~~-------
':)
~r'"'"·~?j~~'::'_~l~.~~:~~_~~ :<;:."t1"""""I"'"!~"'~''''' 4
•..-: 0004 02 '"
~
•
1830 Flower Street Bakersfield. CA 93305-4197
~
0';-
~,""T."""~'
l .. ''''trlll ...........
$ 05.320
232550 SEP,; 2DG6 MAltED FROM ZIPCOOE 9330.5
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
LH!)fli 31il. Qt 3dOHIIN;J:lO dOl. l" ti:i)t:)Us 3~"'d
",. ,~ ~11'"' rel="nofollow"> f" 'J" .--<:",0,.... : -__ r.J
cpa,at' 1s1 NO"S!:
•.".
~r",,.,
,
Y/~~/@ 1l: 4." 0
._-
1:(\' .. :.:}-'-h"~\:
'.
David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
~
;;:-:·U~:-! - - -
q'2.J_ If) -(),i ::i i 2CY7$ i 0:::15
eCl();
11,1,,,,,II.,1,1ll",I,,, I",] Iii" '" II" 1,1", 11,,1,1,,1,,II
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 12 of 189
U.S. Postal Service""
CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT (Domestic Mo1fJ Only; No Insurance Coverage Provided)
-
0 IF IF ~ C ~ fA. l •
•
-
C4n\lIlodFeo
.-
Retum Rocelpt Fv8 (Endarsa.tmd Required) ~D_F" orsam81lt Roqulmd)
1blllI_..... $
U1
l:l _ro l:l r'-
~ddW\~
~.1jji"lWii""""-""'''-''''''
U S IE
f1·h2.1~
_.-...................................-._.
tJT PO BoJr No.
CiIji,·sWO:JIj,;;;;..••..__..••..••..........•....__•..••..·····_·..•..•••••••••.. PS FOfm 3600. June 2002
Sec Ro.:y,:r:;c 101 InSlrl,lclloos
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 13 of 189
','
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis January 2006 Fee Distribution Professional Fees Dull Jadwin Beginning Balance (4,000.00) February, 2006 Normal Guaranteed Subtotal
Total
$
3,668,63 3,668,63
$
3,668.63
$
(4,000,00)
$ 4,825,08 4,825,08
Subtotal
Shertukde
$
3,668,63 9,650.16 13,318.79
$
13,318.79
4,825,08 4,825,08
$ 4,825,08 $ 4,825.08
Less: Medrium Billing Cos Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future -10% TotalOH
366.86
366.86
366.86
366.86
Net Available Amount Distributed
(698.23)
Ending Balance
(698,23)
4,825,08 4,825,08
4,825,08 4,825.08
8,951,93 9,650,16 (698.23)
0018755
l'manClai
1'iummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countID: _ _ _ I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
=mm
XG1485 User ID: JACKK
Appointments
1 Claims
I
Page 14 of 189
Pallent!<
1
I
Fillancials I
Malumnance
I
,,-Records
I
Communlcation Center
I Log Out I Help I Cont~ct I
I
Daysheet I Dayshel't Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Agirlg I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary FiMncial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient smtements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Anancial Summary All Provide .... BlUing
Reudering Provider
location: All
Po
Location~
WritoOff.,
Payments
!'lise Charges
Insorance
Patient
Insurance
9555.00
0,00
24B9.66
134;00
11054.76
4421.04
Teopllngco
0.00
0.00
162.00
0.00
660.2.0
991>.00
0
Jadwin l A
3419.00
0.00
971.20
63.75
1746.00
465.13
DaVid F JadWin
453.00
N/A
0.00
10.00
0.00
1197.00
"5
Total For Jadwin L A
3012.00
0.00
971.2.0
73.75
174&.00
166-2.13
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2&.2.0
"
Provider
DaVid F jadWin
Teopengco
Charges
Patillo.
#Pmc
# Mise Charges
m
0
0
0
LA Upschult;r.
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.5.00
276.00
0.00
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
22.9.97
0
c~~
Shertukde Shertukde
0.00
0.00
252..60
0.00
911.65
2.86.13
0
49101.00
0.00
9677048
25.00
33501.32
2.4]0.00
1]8.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
138.00
0.00
""
0
LA Total For Shertukde
49239.00
0.00
96nA8
25.00
33639.32
2430.00
Shertukde
14113.00
0.00
4639.18
0.00
645tl.07
16ROO
LA Shertukd..
'" '"
4tlB1.00
N/A
0.00
95.00
0.00
998.00
37
16194.00
0.00
4639.18
95.00
6458.07
1166.00
'64
",
0.00
106.14
144.60
106.14
1084.20
1993.21
0
Liu LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
25550.00
0.00
6535.17
0.00
18691.09
334.07
7146.70
0.00
3013.90
180.00
4062.88
:ZOO.OO
1433.00
N/A
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
8579.70
0.00
3013.90
205.00
4062.88
:Z00.00
Total For Shertllkde L
A
Dott
DI.lttLA Dott
Total For Dutt L A Elilling Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for pr'
Payments Ch;
$114989.70
Hi.." Cbarge.. In"uranc"
Patient
WriteOffs Insoran""
Patient
$106.14 $27885.81 $663.89 $78584.17 $13769.75
0
m
" " "
0 0 #
# Pro"
Mi!l~
C~"rges
1045
2'489-68+
13i,-00+ 971
20+
63 75+ 1 0 . 00+ 005 3' 668 . 6:0":"
https://www.medrium.com/practice101/1 XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018756
·
" Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 15 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis February 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Beginning Balance February, 2006 Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Jadwin Dull (698.23)
$
$
Shertukde
Total (698.23)
6,057.75
$ 5,528.80 $ 11,280.95 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 6,057.75 10,353.88 16,106.03 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 5,334.79 13,591.43 13,591.43 7,316.03 32,862.19 5,334.79 $46,453.62 $ 20,907.46 $
22,867.50 9,650.16 32,517.66 100.000% 32,517.65 40,178.22 72,695.87
Less: Medrium Billing Cos Overhead
541.96
1,354.91
1,354.91
3,251.78
3,301.33
1,500.00 2,000.00 4,854.91
7,301.33 4,000.00 14,553.11
58,142.76
Current Future - 10% TotalOH
3,843.29
2,500.00 2,000.00 5,854.91
Net Available
793.27
40,598.71
16,052.55
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Ending Balance
$
$
4,000.00
0018757
rluam.llat ';'UllUlli.11Y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countlD' XG1486 Us~r!O' JACKI( ~ I Appolntm"nts I Oalms I Patients
Document 278-2 I. Finandal" I
Mainllman<:e
oayshalilt I oaysh
I
Filed 12/01/2008
e-R<:corns
Q>mm""lcation Center
I
mzr ,
Page 16 of 189 I Log Out I Heip I Contact I
I Procedure summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date flnan"i,,1 Summary All Provider" Silling Provider
Rendenn!! Provider
Payments MIlOI' Charges
Illsu.""ee
7462.00
62.00
3543.08
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
Jadwin LA
1756.00 David F Jadwin
476.00
Total For Jadwin LA
WrlteOfls Pallent
245.00
10984.98
17S4.00
5.34
0.00
1581.oCl
25.00
0.00
2044;67
200.00
3283.13
0.00
NfA
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
"
2232.00
0.00
2044.67
lZ5.00
3183.13
0.00
17
0.00
0.00
31.92
0.00
4B1.08
259.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
241.76
0.00
0
0
Lipsehultz LA
0.00
0.00
44.10
0.00
4.90
0.00
0
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
259.00
0.00
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.00
140.2Z
0.00
866.53
0.00
Shertukde
35975:00
0.00
9784.86
0.00
29424.72
553.00
,eo
0
SlIertukde LA
1292.7.00
0.00
55B.17
75.00
8080.06
0.00
m
Toaopengco
Patienl
# Mise #Proc Charge"
Insllran.:.e
D
Charges
location, AlIl
f'erlod for 01/01/1Q06_ 01/31/2006
" 0 0 0
0
O·
CA
2121.00
NfA
0.00
733.00
0.00
0.00
5513.17
B08.00
BOBO.06
0.00
"
0
0.00
0
c,
'"
0.00
0.00
153.39
BB.OO
3377.07
0.00
0
0
Uu LA
0.00
0.00
49.00
0.00
163.00
0.00
23002.00
0.00
6390.28
0.00
12947.41
0.00
7519.00
0.00
3737.60
25.00
SZSBAl
0.00
1918.00
NfA
0.00
201.00
0.00
0.00
9437.00
0.00
3737.60
226.00
528B.41
0.00
Dott
Dutt LA
O,tt Total For Dutt L A lIilling Provider
RenderIng Provider
Grand Total for practice
Paymenls Cllargeg $93156.00
Mise Charges Illsuran.:.e
Patient
Writ"Ofls Inf/lIrunee
Patient
$62.00 $31437.63 $1667.00 $76983.05 $2.621.00
3J 5A·3- 08+
245-00+ 67+ 200'00, 25'00+
0
15048.00
She.rtukde Tot
0
'" "18 "
,', "'i'
2,OAI,
005 6'057 . 75';'
0
0 # His.:.
# Proe Charge"
763
Powered by Medrlum
https://www.medrium.com/practice10111_XG1486/Reports/finSummaty
12111/2007
0018758
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 17 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis March 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Shertukde Dult 2,000.00 2,000.00
Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
4,253.34 4,253.34 16.667% 5,063.92
$
$ 4,197.59 4,825.08 9,022.67 41.66667% 12,659.81
Total 4,000.00
$ 12,282.45 $ 4,825.08 17,107.53 41.66667% 12,659.81
5,063.92
$12,659.81
$ 12,659.81
506.39
1,265.98
1,265.98
$
20,733.38 9,650.16 30,383.54 100.000% 30,383.54 30,383.54
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
1,506.39
1,265.98
1,265.98
4,038.35
Net Avaiiable(Current
3,557.53
11,393.83
11,393.83
26,345.19
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Ending Balance
3,038.35
1,000.00
$
1,000.00
$
4,000.00
0018759
1" llli:UlvI(U .:JUllUl1(l.1 y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
m:r
~c"untID: XG14B6 User 10: lACKK
_ _ _ _ ! Ap~ointm""ts
I Claims
I
Patients
I ' Flnancials]
Maintenance
I
,,~Recorns
I
Comml,lllk"tkln Center
Page 18 of 189 I Leg Out I Help I ecntaet I
I
Dal'sh""t I Dal'shMt Summary I Insurance Summary I Plltl"nt Aging I Insur"nce Aging I Acijustrt1ents I Procedure Summary Anand,,1 Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Repents I Run Last Report
Finandal Summary By Posting Date financial Billing Provid.. r
Summ~1Y
R"nd"dng Provld"r
David F Jadwin Teopengw
All Providers
Payments charges
location: All LoeatlQM
Period for 02/01/2006- 02/28/2006 Mise Charges [nsuranee
WriteOfis
Patient
[usura"e,",
Patient
4926.00
n.oo
3156.02
15B.00
12476.45
0.00
"
0.00
0.00
86.76
0.00
707.24
0.00
,.
0
0
1999.00
0.00
528.97
197.35
916.63
0.00
David F Jadwin
75.00
N/A
65.00
148.00
0.00
0.00
Total for JadWin LA
JadWin LA
# Mise # Proe Charges
,
L074.00
0.00
593.97
345.35
916.63
O.Co
Teopengco CA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
0.00
"
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
133.67
0.00
606.33
0.00
0
Co>~
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
2266.00
0.00
0
0
Shertukde
35425.00
0.00
10335.60
410.00
29953.93
0.00
'69
0
Shertukde CA
11134.00
0.00
5409.93
496.00
5754.17
0.00
"
0
0
1126.00
'IA
0.00
456.00
0.00
103.50
10
122.60.00
0.00
5409.93
5754.17
10350
A LI,
952.00
"
0.00
0.00
4B.20
0.00
34B.BO
0.00
Lill LA
0.00
0.00
132.87
0.00
1107.00
0.00
0
0
16712.00
0.00
7374.13
115.00
2.0553.03
0.00
129
0
52.86.00
0.00
110B.54
90.00
12B4.37
25.00
",
0
Shertukde Total For Sherwkde L
D,tt Putt LA
D,tt Total for Dlltt L A BlJ1ing Pro\lider
Rendering Provid ..r
Grand Total for prnctic
B89.00
'/A
0.00
335.00
0.00
0.00
6175.00
0.00
110B.54
425.00
lZS4.37
25.00
Paymeot$ Chargolls
$77572.00
Patient
Insurance
0
"
Patient
# Proe
$72.00 $28379.69 $2425.35 $76173.95 $12850
630
Mise Ch at!!""
Insurance
WrlteOfls
0
0 # Mise Charge"
,
Powered by Medl
006
https://www.medrium.comJpracticel0111_XG1486/ReportsifinSummary
3'"156'02+ 158-00+ 528-97+ "197· 35+ 65 - 00+ 11,8-00+
12/11/2007
0018760
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 19 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis April 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin
Dut! Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Total 4,000.00
$
3,331.21
$11,762.21 $ 3,546.55 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 3,331.21 16,587.29 8,371.63 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 4,715.02 11,787.55 11,787.55
18,639.97 9,650.16 28,290.13 100.000% 28,290.12
$
4,715.02
$11,787.55
$ 11,787.55
28,290.12
471.50
1,178.76
1,178.76
$
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
5,000.00
Net Avaiiable(Current
Ending Balance
2,829.02 5,000.00
471.50
6,178.76
1,178.76
7,829.02
4,243.52
5,608.79
10,608.79
20,461.10
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
$
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation
12/11/2007
0018761
Financial Summary
-' ~
II:IilIIIL
Account ID: XG1486 User m: JACKK
Appointments
Claims
~ Flnancials
Patients
Daysheet I DaysfJ6et Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging 1 Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary j Capitatlon Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
I
Maintenance
a-Records
CommunIcation C
W
Cu.
I PrccedUl'e Summary
Penod fOr
\
I/01I2006~ 03/31[2006
Billing
Rendering
Provider
" :d~$i\:I't-F'-
30-003'331~21~d"
Location: All Locations
# Mise Mise Charges
Charges
4055.00
Insurance
2.48%1
Jadwirt~;,
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
·~·1'643,93·'"
- '291'.;'2:311
Charges
4456.34
1629.84
34
0.00
17.67
397.00
372,00
o
o o
_co.
~;',1426.0_5
2167.75
718.00
8
0,00
0,00
225,00
4
1926.00
0.00
1426.05
-30.00
2167.75
943.00
12
0,00
0.00
0.00
-42.00
0.00
226.00
o
625,00
Teopengco L A
0.00 !
'7,;,
o o
0.00
0.00
55.00
0,00
0.00
o
o
0.00
0.00
0.00
51.80
0.00
0.00
o
o
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
Costa
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
441.00
0.00
o o
Shertukde
44645.00
0.00
8828,81
202,37
37651.06
1572,18
362
Shertukde L A
19913.00
0.00
7255.11
0.00
8809.20
38.00
153
o o o o
0.00
301.00
0.00
1129,00
51
7255.11
301.00
8809.20
1167.00
204
Liu
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
455.60
50.00
o
Uu LA
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
0.00
178.00
o
- '3'3"f¥'i¥
15659.49
422.00
232
J/3iii'1iM'f
4982.53
138.00
140
o o
0.00
908.00
50
o
4982.53
1046.00
190
o
I; l4AiI
Dutt
31580.00
0.00
17183.00
0.00
5841.00
NfA
0.00
23024.00
0.00
3248.34
Dutt Total For Dutt l A
o
~5248.34
ifft?'tP9n 223.00
Billing
Rendering ProvideI'
Charges
Mise Charges
;Insurance
Patient
8'371 -S3+ 1 07 - I; 7 + 28' 397 - 60'd
WrlteOffs
Payments Provider
301 -00+
,IS'587.29'd
Page 20 of 189
NfA 0.00
Dutt L A
t~
7' 255·11 +
o o o o
5963.00 25876.00
Shertukde Total For Shertukde LA
X
8,828·81+ 202-37+
Filed 12/01/2008
0,00
Lipschultz L A
lipschUltz
~/
Document 278-2
Total For Jadwin LA
# Proc
NfA
1301.00 David F Jadwin
PatIent
i
I
I
Insurance
Patient
I
Jadwin LA
29c1'23+
WriteOffs
Payments ProVider
1 '6.4.. 3'93+
'426"05+
Financial Summary By Posting Date finanCial Summary All Providers
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
/
o .....
0·*
~~
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
00
......
0)
N
~t3'f(,bQ, https:llwww.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486IReports/finSummary
4/312006
Page 2 of2
$131106.00
$2.48
$27144.33
$1253.27
$75019.97
$7606.02
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Grand Total for practice
1034
Powered by Medrlum
Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 21 of 189
o
o ...... (Xl
......
O'l W
https:llwww.medrium.comlpracticel 0 1/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
4/3/2006
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 22 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis May 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Shertukde DUll 2,000.00 2,000.00
Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Total 4,000.00
$
$ 7,849.38 $ 11,223.22 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 1,885.00 12,674.46 16,048.30 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 5,101.30 12,753.23 12,753.23
20,957.60 9,650.16 30,607.76 100.000% 30,607.76
$
5,101.30
$12,753.23
$ 12,753.23 $
30,607.76
510.13
1,275.32
1,275.32
3,060.77
510.13
1,275.32
1,275.32
3,060.77
4,591-17
11,477.91
11,477.91
27,546.99
1,885.00
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current
Ending Balance
$
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00 $
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018764
r
llU1l1\,:i1i:1l OWlllUtu y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~countID: XG1486 U~er lD: JACKK ~ I A/>pclnbnenls I Claims I Patlen!l;
Filed 12/01/2008 ="ft"
I. Finandal$ I
MillnlImanCf'l
Pavsheet I Daysh""t summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insur""c" Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I P"tient St
I
a_Records
1
Comrnunko"tion Center
Page 23 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
I Procedure summary
Financial Summary BV Posting Date financial Summary All Providers Billing Proyider
Rendering ProvIder
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
62.00
Location: All U1eations Writ"Offs
Pay.""nls
2040.00
David F Jadwin
Period for 04{01/2006· 04{30/2006
Patient
1490.54
-188.07
Insoranc"
6275.12
Patient
# Mise # Proc Charges
3557.63
17
Tecpengco
0.00
0.00
25.00
138.00
,
90.00
0.00
'"'
138.00
Jadwin LA
482.53
100.00
910.47
2199.93
2
DB~ld F Jadwin
0.00
NIA
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
Tot.
90.00
0.00
482.53
100.00
910.47
2399.93
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
a4.00
0.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
0.00
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
276-.00
Teopengco
,
,
0.00
0.00
0.00
3&.58
294.00
0.00
Shertukde
34727.00
0.00
7941.64
0.00
33&25.16
3231.98
Shertukde
12415.00
0.00
6391.86
182.80
5788.31
199.21
6622.00
NIA
200.00
1332.00
0.00
3816.00
19037.00
0.00
6591.86
1514.80
5788.31
4015.21
'"
,
LA Shertukde Total Fer Shertl.lkde L
A Uo
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
129.75
570,44
Liu L A
0.00
0.00
25.62
0.00
112.38
598.13
29307.00
0.00
8677.79
133.73
24071.69
824.13
12751.00
0.00
3599.94
20.00
2650.57
325.00
3515.00
NIA
0.00
43.00
0.00
602.00
16266.00
0.00
3599.94
63.00
2650.57
92.7.00
Dott
Dutt LA Dott
Total for Dutt L A Siliing PrOllider
Rend"rlng Prnllider
Pav menl1i Chuges
Grand Total fer $101467.00 practice
Hi",,,, Charg.... In50ran<;e
", '"
"
0
Insurance
Patient
$62.00 $29009.92 $1823.04 $74104.45 $16538.45
, , , , , ,
,
, ,
m
"
"
,
m
WriteOff$
Patient
,
,
CA
""~
, ,
It Mise
# Pro" t:1t:HfJCS
837
Powered by Medrium
1 ' 4·90 - 54+ 1138,0711.82-53+ 100-00+ Cl02
.https://www.medrium.comlpractice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
1211112007
0018765
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 24 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis June, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Shertukde Dult 2,000.00 2,000.00
Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Total 4,000.00
$
3,168.50
$13,907.02 $ 15,278.84 $ 4,825.08 4,825.08 3,168.50 18,732.10 20,103.92 16.667% 41.66667% 41.66667% 7,000.73 17,501.88 17,501.88
32,354.36 9,650.16 42,004.52 100.000% 42,004.49
$
7,000.73
$17,501.88
$ 17,501.88
42,004.49
700.07
1,750.19
1,750.19
4,200.45 0
700.07
1,750.19
1,750.19
4,200.45
6,300.66
15,751.69
15,751.69
37,804,04
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
$
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current
Ending Balance
$
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018766
.1.' U.1U.llV1(W. lJLUU.ll1u,1
J
-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
=z=m
~count 10: XG1486 User 10: jACKK
_ _ I
Al'1'''intmomt§
I aalms I Pati~N"
I ~
FIQand"ls
I
Malnb,manc,e
I e_Reoords
I
C<Jmmunkation C
--0-
-
Page 25 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Cont<'lct I
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I !nsuriltlCe Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitatim, Summary I Patient SlDtements I Custom Re(Xlrts I Run Last Report
Financial SummalY By posting Date PIOandal Summary All Providers Billing
Provider
Rendering Providllr
203.00
David f Jadwin
WriteOlfs
Pavrn.",ts Charges
Ln,.tinn: An l
Period for 05/01/2006- 05/31/1006 Mise Charges Insurance
0.00
Patient
1,964.84
0.00
Insurance
Paticnt
# Mlllc # Proc Charges
5040.16
128.00
0
0.00
Tl!opengco
0.00
0.00
10.33
138.00
704.67
Jadwin LA
425.00
0.00
'},7A:.66
729.00
1361.89
0.00
0
David f' Jadwin
65.00
NIA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
Total For Jadwin L A
490.00
0.00
774.66
729.00
1361.89
0.00
4
0
Ups<;hultt
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
50.61
0.00
-50.61
0.00
Costa
0.00
0.00
153.05
0.00
105.95
0.00
0
0
Shertukde
23922.00
0.00
11209.87
112.00
27404.69
49.00
204
0
Shatukde
11359.00
0.00
8550.05
0.00
11919.70
0.00
9S
0
LA
Shertukde Total For Shertukde L
2633.00
NIA
0.00
232.00
52.04
6g.00
0.00
asso.os
232.00
11971.74
69.00
"
0
139Sl2.00
121
A
U, Dutt
Dutt LA 0",
Total For Dutt L A Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Gnmd Total for practlee
0.00
0.00
0.00
43.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
279'19.33
0.00
9302.56
0.00
22689.27
0.00
0.00
a93a.5'1
38.00
10198.95
0.00
'"
0
1319.00 1149.00
NIA
0.00
453.00
0.00
0.00
8468.00
0.00
8938.54
491.00
10198.95
0_00
Payments Charges
$75024.33
Mise Chargcs IlTsnrilPCC
Patient
WriteOfis Insu.... nce
Patient
$0.00 $40654.51 $1770.00 $79426.71 $246.00
" "
0
"
# Mis" # Pro" Charges
'" Powered by Medrium
003
1 , 66 II· • 81H. 774-66+ 729'00+ 3'168-50*
https:/Iwww.medrium.com/practice101Il_XG1486/Reports/finSummm)'
12/1112007
0018767
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 26 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis July, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
1,621.61 1,621.61 0.000%
$
Total 4,000.00
Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
$ 8,255.13 8,255.13 50.00000% 9,463.74
$ 4,225.65
$
14,102.39 4,825.08 18,927.47 100.000% 18,927.48
$
18,927.48
4,825.08 9,050.73 50.00000% 9,463.74
$ 9,463.74
$ 9,463.74
946.37
946.37
1,892.74
52.50
52.50
105.00
998.87
998.87
1,997.74
8,464.87
8,464.87
16,929.74
$ 2,000.00
$ 2,000.00
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credenlialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current
Ending Balance
$
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018768
.r UUllllilill
0UllUU<:u y
~
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 =r"
~countID: XG1486 User!D: JACKK _ _ I
Appolotmeo13
I ClaimS"
I
p"tleols
I
I
Fioiloclills I
Maintenance
D~ysheQt I DaY$heet Summary I In5ur~oce Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial summary I Capitatiorl Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
I ..·Records
I
Communlc:al:ion c..nter
-0- -
-- -
Page 27 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
I procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date financial Summary All pnwillers Billing Provider
!tendering Provider
David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava Loc Ten Tot'll F
Period for 06/01/Z006- 06/30/Z006 Payments
ChargeS"
MiS"c Charges InS"urance
Locat,on: All Locations
Writeofts
Patlellt
Insurance
Patient
# Mise #Proc Charges
491.00
0.00
1004.81
89.00
723.22
74B.92
10216.00
"IA
70.11
0.00
932.89
0.00
"
10707.00
0.00
1074.92
89.00
1656.11
748.92
" 0
0
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
167.00
0.00
-167.00
226.00
Jadwin LA
0.00
0.00
355.80
162.00
514.20
0.00
0
0.00
"IA
0.00
0.00
0.00
664.00
0
5751.50
"IA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
" "
0
0
0
David f Jadwin Vivek Bhllrgava LocTen Toml For JlIdwln L A
5751.50
0.00
365.80
162.00
514.20
664.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
117.84
0.00
-117.84
259.00
Lipschultz
0.00
MO
8.38
0.00
-8.38
0.00
0
0
LA 0.00
0.00
165.70
0.00
-165.70
0.00
Shertukdl!
371377.50
0.00
3553.21
49.00
13035.29
683.66
30.~
SheltuKde
11303.00
0.00
4980.52
200.00
5426.79
611.130
"
1818.00
"IA
0.00
268.00
0.00
1160.00
13121.00
0.00
4980.52
468.00
5426.79
1771.80
Costa
LA Shert.1Jkde Toml For ShertuKde L
"
117
0
A U,
Dott Dutt LA
D,. Toml For OUtt L A SlUinll Provider
Renderinll P"lVider
Grand Total for pra~tke
0.00
0.00
215.78
18.75
-215.78
49.00
1889650
0.00
2934.88
--'10.00
14435.98
278.00
8301.50
MO
5190.25
105.00
6985.75
6.25
3154.00
'IA
0.00
65.00
0.00
1528.00
11455.50
0.00
5190.25
170.00
6985.75
1534.25
Mille Charges
IOllurance
PaV'Ili'",ts Char!les
$97609.00
WriteOlts
Patient
InsuranCe
Patient
$0.00 $18774.1.8 $916.75 $41379.42 $6214.63
0
'" "
76
0
C04
0
0
'# Mise '# PrDe Charges
811
POWl!red by Medrium
0-* 1 '004-81+ 89·00+ 365 - 80'162-00+ OO~L
l ' 62'1 -6'1'"
https://wwwmedrium.com/I
12/11/2007
0018769
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ",.~.
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 28 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis August, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
Dult Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
331.29 331.29 0.000%
$
$ 6,773.75 6,773.75 50.00000% 7,663.73
$ 3,397.34
$
4,825.08 8,222.42 50.00000% 7,663.73
10,502.38 $ 4,825.08 15,327.46 100.000% 15,327.46
$ 7,663.73
$ 7,663.73
766.37
766.37
1,532.74
210.00
140.00
350.00
976.37
906.37
1,882.74
6,687.36
6,757.36
13,444.72
$
15,327.46
Medruim Total
1,162.73 1,162.73
16,490.19
$ 1,162.73
16,490.19
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Nel Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00 $
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007
0018770
J:lIOanClW
~ulllImuy
--0-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
#
«f
~count lD: XG1486 UserlD: JACKK I
Appalntm
I Claim. I Pati!!f1t:s
I • Finandals I
Malnten'lI'loe
I e-Recortls I
- -- -
Page 29 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communkation Cent",r
Day$heet I Daysheet Summary I InsuranCe Summary 1 Patient Aging 1 lnsuranc" Alling I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Finandal Summary I Capimtio'l Summary I Patler
Financial Summary By Posting Date Rnand,,1 Summary All Provld"rs Billln!! Provider
Rend..rin!! Provider
David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava l.oc Tom Toml For DaVid F JadwIn Jadwin LA DavId F JadwIn Vivek Bhargava LocTen Total For jadwIn LA Teopenge.o
PaymentB Charges
Location, All Locations
Period for 07/01/2006- 07/31/2006
Mhl: Chug"" Ins"ra"""
WriteOfls
Patient
I"'illra"~ll
Pdieltt
#Pro~
#MiBc Charge"
0
0.00
0.00
115.44
20.00
1629.20
422.00
0
16140.50
N/A
669.45
0.00
6016.94
0.00
110
16140.50
0.00
784.89
20.00
7646.14
422.00
110
0.00
0.00
195.85
0.00
116.15
462.00
0
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
214.00
0
10511.17
N/A
423.28
0.00
412.22
0.00
"
0
10511.17
0.00
619.1:3
0.00
528.37
676.00
73
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
494.13
0.00
0
CA
Upschult>:
0.00
0.00
0.00
70.00
0.00
0.00
0
Shertukde
13289.67
0.00
3263.22
+92.37
7530.04
183.43
no
Shertukda
5421.00
0.00
4713.61
0.00
5413.39
25.00
"
0
LA
997.00
NfA
0.00
337.96
0.00
2471.01
6418.00
0.00
4713.61
337.96
5413.39
2496.01
52
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
0
0
25311.11
0.00
2593.92
0.00
9239.56
1064.00
'41
0
65.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Tolal For Dutt
25376.11
0.00
2593.92
0.00
92.39.56
1064.00
Dutt LA
13078.50
0.00
4104.83
10.00
4126.17
0.00
322.8.00
'!A
0.00
65.00
0.00
2108.00
200.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
16506.50
0.00
4104.83
75.00
'1126.17
2108.00
Shertukde Total For Shertllkde L
A UO Dott Vlvek Bhargava Loc. Ten
Dott Vivek 8hargava Loe. Ten Total For Dutt L A Billing Pruvid
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for pradice
Payments Charges
$88241.95
Misc Charges !nsurilnl:e
PatIent
0
Patient
$0.00 $16079.60 $410.59 $34977.60 $7087.44
~;<
0
'4Z
0
0,,*
m
" W
Writ... ou~ Insurance
U"
#
Pro~
0
11 5 ·L~{~+ 20 -00+ 1 95-85+
0 # M~c ct'ilrglls
0'03
,<0
33'1 . 29",
Poworecl by Medrll
https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 0111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018771
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 30 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis September, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin
Dut! Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subt01al Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
$
256.14 256.14 0.000%
$
$ 5,853.94 $ 5,853.94 50.00000% 5,762.32
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
589.48 $ 4,825.08 5,414.56 50.00000% 5,762.32
$ 5,762.32 $ 5,762.32 $
6,699.56 $ 4,825.08 11,524.64 100.000% 11,524.64 11,524.64
Medruim Total
2,370.37 2,370.37
13,895.01
$ 2,370.37
13,895.01
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
576.23
576.23
1,152.46
576.23
576.23
1,152.46
5,186.09
5,186.09
10,372.18
$ 2,000.00 $ 2,000.00
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation
12/11/2007
0018772
.t'lnanCHl1 ;:'Uffiluary
~-o-----
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~<;
Main12n""~e
Filed 12/01/2008
m I e_ReCQrds
r
Page 31 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communkatilln Cent.
Daysheet I DaysheetSummary I Insurance Summary I patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjl.lsbnenl:s I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Rep<>rt
Financial Summary By Posting Date Finanoi.1 Summary All Provide",; Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
David F JadWin Vivek Bhargavil Lac Ten Total For David F Jadwin Jadwin LA Vivek Bhargavl; loc Ten
Payments Charges
loc.tlon: AIll.
Period for OS{1l1!2006- OS{31{ZOO6
Mi.c Charges Insurance
Writ
#
Patient
tnslIranCtl
Patknt
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
393.00
0.00
0
3372.00
"fA
705.57
0.00
2289.38
0.00
22
337Z.00
0.00
705.57
25.00
2682.38
0.00
22
0.00
0.00
116.14
115.00
108.86
0.011
0
"fA
1639.80
0.00
2038.87
0.00
0
0
374.00
0.00
1755.94
115.00
2147.73
0.00
20985.00
0.00
2057.79
0.00
15525.62-
0.00
Shertl.lkde
12804.50
0.00
3211.21
68.56
3113.49
0.00
LA Shertukde Total for ShertLlkde LA Liu LA Dott
Vivek Bhargllva Loc Ten
'" "
4424.00
"fA
52.00
25.00
0.00
200.00
36
0.00
3263.21
93.56
3113.49
200.00
121
0
0.00
0.00
25.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
17817.88
0.00
2250.92
69.00
9581.41
0.00
CO,
0
0.00
"fA
0.00
0.00
65.00
0.00
0
0
17817.88
0.00
1.250.92
69.00
9645.41
0.00
CO,
DllttLA
10660.00
0.00
3157.41
80.00
4181.38
0.00
5151.00
"fA
50.61
2<16.00
152.39
0.00
"
15811.00
0.00
:;1208.02
326.00
4333.77
0.00
Total For DuttL A Billing Provider
Rendering provider
Grand Total for practice
0
17228.50
Total For Dutt
Dott
0
374.00
Shertukcle
Total For Jadwin L A
Mis~
# Proc Charg".
PaYlnanl8 CIJarg~s
$75538.38
Misc Char!!a" Insurance
Patient
"
m
WriteOfis Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $13266.45 $628.56 $37449.40 $200.00
# Misc # Proc Cl,arges
'"
0
Powarnct by Medrillm
25'00+ 116'1if+ 115-00+ 003 256-1 If'"
https://www.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486lR.eports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018773
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
·
-
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 32 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis October, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees
Dull
Jadwin
Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total
$
30.00
$
30.00
$
30.00
9,186.33
$
9,186.33
$
9,186.33
$
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
4,158.44 4,825.08 8,983.52
$
8,983.52
$
13,374.77 4,825.08 18,199.85
$
18,199.85
$
Medruim Total
2,951.80 2,951.80
21,151.65
2,951.80
$21,151.65
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
3.00
918.63
898.35
1,819.99
3.00
918.63
898.35
1,819.99
27.00
8,267.70
8,085.17
16,379.86
$
$
2,000.00
$
2,000.00
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/1112007
0018774
J:<manC131
~ummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countID: _ _ _ I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
I Log out I Help I Contact 1
XG1486 User 10: JACKK
J\4>polnrtnents
J Claims
I
Page 33 of 189
P"~,,nl5
r, financial.. I
Malnb!nante
1 a-R<:<artls
I
Communloatlon Genter
Day,heet I Dayshaet Summ~ry I Insurante Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustrnants I Procedure Summ
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing
Provider
Rende.ring Provider
P"dod
r"r
Wrlte.Off.
Payments Charges
Lc,,,tion: AUl..
(I9/01/20ll6- 09j30/200fi
Mise Charges Inllnrance
Patient
Insurance
'# Mise
Patient
# Proc Charllll,.
0.00
0.00
0.00
.30.00
SOLDO
273.78
0.00
"fA
206.71
0.00
1455.09
0.00
Total For David F JadwIn
0.00
0.00
206.71
:!D.OO
1956.09
273.78
0
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.76.00
0.00
0
JadWin LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
203.80
David F Jadwin
0.00
"fA
0.00
0.00
0.00
676.00
Viv"k Bhargllva l.oc Ten
0.00
"fA
2545.09
0.00
3348.91
804.00
Total For JadWin LA
0.00
0.00
2545.09
0.00
3348.91
168).80
Lip5chultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
Shertukde
12.477.34
0.00
3836.74
0.00
8172.09
202.64
H7
Shartukde
7775.50
0.00
4659.68
116.00
7499.60
1261.50
6712..00
"fA
67.10
344.99
110.53
2905.75
144ll'7.50
0.00
4726.78
460.99
7610.13
4167.25
" "
U,
1573.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
UU LA
1687.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
834.67
"fA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
DaVid F JadWin
Vlvek Bhargava Loc Ten
0
0 0
0
0
LA
LA Shertllkde Total For Shemtkde L
0
0
130
A
Lill
Total For Liu L A Cott DuttLA Oott Vivek Bhargava Loc Ten
Total For D\.Itt L A Bimug Provid..r
Reudering Provider
Grand Tot
practlce
u
0
2521.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
!la86A4
0.00
2261.56
0.00
9889.25
8.52
113
4224.00
0.00
5338.77
10.00
7930.71
959.00
1545.00
"fA
0.00
1535.01
262..00
2623.00
"fA
200.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
" "
0
0.00
5769.00
0.00
5538.77
1545.01
8200.71
3582.00
49
0
# Proc
# Misc Cllnge"
Paymeobi ChMges $50714.95
Mise Charge",
IU80"'nc"
Patient
"
0
WriteOffs Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $19115.65 $2.036.00 $39453.18 $10042..99
434
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comJpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018775
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 34 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis November, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total
$
62.00
$
5,814.13
1,895.94 4,825.08 6,721.02
5,814.13
$ 6,721.02
$
6.20
581.41
672.10
1,259.72
6.20
581.41
672.10
1,259.72
55.80
5,232.72
6,048.92
11,337.43
$
62.00
$
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
62.00
$
5,814.13
$
7,772.07 4,825.08 12,597.15
$
12,597.15
$
Medruim Total
295.42 295.42
12,892.57
295.42
$12,892.57
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
2,000.00
$
2,000.00
$
4,000.00
KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation
12/1112007
0018776
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Pal,
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 35 of 189
Account 10: XG1486 User ID: JACKK
Appointments
Claims
~ Finandals
Patients
I
Maintenance
,A t,1 Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary )al Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run last Report financial Summary By Posting Date
...
Financial Summary AU Providers
Billing Provider
location: All Locations
PerIod for 10/01/2006- 10/31/2006 Payments
WriteOffs
# Mise Charges
Rendering
Provider
Vlvek
Charges
MlscCharges
6760.00
0.00
0.00
N/A
Bhargava lee
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Prot
0.00
196,.00
0.00
42
0
0.00
564.29
0.00
0
0
0.00
Ten
Total For David F Jadwin
6760.00
0.00
131.54
0.00
760.29
0.00
42
0
Ja:dwin L A
6999.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
48
0
1440.00
N/A
0.00
llllIl!iIIlI
0.00
-62.00
12
0
0.00
N/A
i~
.~'"
10.12
0,00
0
0
8439.50
0.00
25.88
200.00
10.12
-62.00
60
0
Sh~!it.lilkEle
15558.84
0,00
'11242;'1'4
0.00
9622.59
276.00
131
0
Shertukde L
10366.00
0.00
4'363.13
SO~'OO
6068.12
0.00
74
0
David F
Jadwin Vivek
Bhargava Loc Ten Total For JadwIn LA
'
A Shertukde Total For Shertukde LA
8908,00
N/A
0.00
' H165?75
0.00
65,50
74
0
19274.00
0,00
4363.13
1115,75
6068.12
65.50
148
0 0
Liu
p<JJt Dutt L A Outt Total For Dutt L A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
528.00
0.00
0
9872,50
0,00
\j;f7c4'f;1$ll
~tiSWO
10410.87
0.00
82
0
13513.50
0.00
ttr:M'
4665.20
0.00
100
0
7190.00
N/A
0.00
20703.50
0.00
3531.31
'3831'811' <>
!600nlG. ,. 610.00
Payments Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
$80608,34
MIse Charges
$0.00
Insurance
Patient
$11035.82
$1856.75
/
0.00
62.00
53
0
4665.20
62,00
153
0
WriteOffs Insurance
$32265.19
Patient
$341.50
# Mise Charges
# Proe
616
0
0< ~ 51
c\~>
https://www.medrium.comlpraclicel01/IJ(G1486/Reports/finSummary
Powered by Medrium
11/6/2006
0018777
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 36 of 189
KMC PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES Prof Fee 1Guarantee Fee Analysis December, 2006 Distribution Professional Fees Jadwin
Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00
Beginning Balance
Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total
$
$
807.07
$ 2,493.64
807.07
2,493.64
807.07
Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00
$ 4,081.15 $
7,381.86
4,081.15
7,381.86
$ 2,493.64 $ 4,081.15 $
7,381.86
$
$
Medruim Total
723.60 723.60
8,105.46
723.60
$ 8,105.46
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Pnor Credentialing Cost Future - to% TotalOH
80.71 50.61
249.36
408.12
738.19 50.61
131.32
249.36
408.12
788.80
Net Available(Current Mo.)
675.75
2,244.28
3,673.03
6,593.06
$ 2,000.00 $
4,000.00
Ending Balance
$
$ 2,000.00
KMc Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/1112007
0018778
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 37 of 189
~
Account ID; XG1486 User ID; JACKK
Appointments
~ Financ;lars
Patients
Claims
I
Maintenance
I
e-Records
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments 1 Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary j Patient Statements I Custom Reports 1 Run Last Report
"Financial Summary By Posting Date Finandal Summary All PrOViders
Location: All Locations
Period for 11/01/2006 11/30/2006 w
Payments
BIlUng Provider
WriteOffs
# Mise Charges
Rendering
Provider
I~.
Charges
Mise Charges
Insurance
Insurance
Patient
# Prot:
4707.68
130.46
22
1
0,00
0.00
0.00
IS
0
20.66
274.56
4707.68
130.46
37
0.00
0.00
0,00
0.00
19.66
0
0
0.00
~.
0.00
20.00
69
0
2805.00
NfA
~
21
0
49.00
NfA
13066.50
0,00
-
0.00
0.00
~ ~
2435.00
85.56
2693.00
NfA
0.00
5128.00
85,56
Teopengco
0.00
Jadwin l A
10212.50
V)vek Bhargavo Loc
Patient
Tt:ih
Total For David F Jadwin
David F Jadwin Vivek Bhargava Lac
0.00
714.75
0,00
185.70
49.00
411.90
172.25
185.70
783.75
91
0
0.00
0.00
0,00
49.00
0.00
0
0
10683.00
0.00
't24S72'5
259(00
10370.61
988.63
96
0
6820.00
0.00
'24145'9U
",,);69,,'0('1
3173,17
1436.00
46
0
Ten Total For JadwIn l A Costa
:..Sh'ertlJkd.e Shertukde LA Shertukde
Total For Shertukde L A
U, UU LA
"'A?,ill:J1!;e'
n,tt Total For Dutt L A
~
2887.00
NfA
0.00
<299;'99
0.00
3318.51
20
0
9707.00
0.00
2445.90
130.99
3173.17
4754.51
66
0
0.00
436.14
0.00
2
0
0.00
1238.56
0.00
0
0
8398.24
287.40
49
0
1511.72
1204.00
20
1
3046.99
23
0
4250,99
43
1
203.00
0.00
~&
0.00
0.00
5582,00
0.00
2373.50
15,50
2943.00
NfA
0.00
~"~,~'6~}.'
0.00
5316.50
15.50
1258.68
514.31
1511.72
d¥4'l
"''''69'B~
i:,\2$WQ:lif,'
';!,i'~&'6i3 ' "'!<;1'(J8i'8'6
e
'
Payments Billing Provider
Rendering Provider Grand Total for practice
0
Charges
$49686.00
Mise Charges
$101.06
Insuri'lnce
WriteOffs Insurance
PatIent
$30[1"'''' R")
'l:'l1?1'i·4(l
Patient
$6729.35 $1376.11
# Proe
'84
# Mise Charges
>
20·6fi+ 27l>"56+
339-00+ 172-25+ 807-07*
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/4/2006
0018779
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 38 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis January, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Shertukde
Dull
Mid level Fees
Total
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
1,319.39 $ 4,726.12 0 6,566.00 1,319.39 11,292.12
$
6,929.68 5,047.77 11,977.45
$
1,319.39
$ 11,292.12
$ 11,977.45
$
131.94
1,129.21
1,197.75
2,458.90
131.94
1,129.21
1,197.75
2,458.90
1,187.45
10,162.91
10,779.70
22,130.06
12,975.19 11,613.77 24,588.96
$
24,588.96
$
289.20
$13,264.39 $11,613.77 24,878.16
289.20
$24,878.16
289.20
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 1211112007
0018780
.... ·.l.l.lUJ.l"'laJ, U'.UUl1.i.
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~countlD;XG1486 User lD: jACKl< ~ I Appnlntments ! Clalm~ I Patients
I
Finandals I
f
MaIntenance
I
Filed 12/01/2008
,,"Records
I
Communloatkln Genter
Page 39 of 189
==
I Lag Out I Help! Contact I
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summ~ry I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Stctements I Custom RepOrts I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Finanoial Summary All Providers BiIIi,,!! Prllvider
Rende.in!! Provider
Dallid F Jadwin Vivek Bhargava LQC Ten Total For David F jadwin Jadwin LA David F Jadwin
Payments Chugeg
Location' All
Peri<>d for 12/01/2006· 12/31/2006
# Mise Patient # Proc Charges
Hisc Ctn'l1Ies
Insurance
Patient
In"urance
163.00
0.00
163.23
70.00
1278.76
0.00
0.00
N/A
289.20
G.OO
31S1.80
0.00
163.00
0.00
452.43
70.00
4430.56
0.00
0.00
0,00
1018.66
0.00
2398.84
0.00
0
0.00
N/A
67.50
0.00
7.50
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
1086.16
0.00
240634
0.00
Shertukde
1768.84
0.00
3142.77
0.00
8740.59
0.00
SheJt\Jkde
0.00
0.00
3325.55
0.00
5137.45
0.00
Total for Jadwin LA
LA Shertukde Total for Sher1:llkde L A
D" DUt! LA
loC2tion~
WrireOff>;
,
0
4
0
0 22
0 0
0.00
'/A
135.36
326.00
154.64
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
3460.91
326.00
52.92.09
0.00
0
340.00
0.00
1086.85
0.00
6599.94
0.00
0.00
0.00
3490.27
0.00
6994.19
0.00
4
0
D""
0.00
NfA
0.00
149.00
0.00
0.00
0
Total For Dutt L A
0.00
0.00
3490.27
149.00
6994.19
0.00
0
Mise Charges
Insurance
8illillg Provider
Rt.
Grand Total for practice
Payment!l Charg""
$2271.84
Patient
WriteOffs Insurance
-$0.00 $12719.39 $545.00 $34463.71
# Mise Patient # Proc Charges
$0.00
30
PowElred by Medrlum
163-23+ 70-00+ '0'1866+ 67 50+ 004 1'3<19-39*
https:llwww.rnedriurn.comlpractice10111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018781
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 40 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis February, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Dult
Total
Shertukde
Mid level Fees
Medruim Total
175.00 175.00
$10,176.83 $ 1,898.03 12,074.86
175.00
$12,074.86
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
4,008.90 1,093.03 5,101.93
$
5,101.93
$
10,001.83 1,898.03 11,899.86
$
11,899.86
$
3,512.42 $ 2,480.51 489.2 315.80 4,001.62 2,796.31
$
4,001.62
$ 2,796.31
$
400.16
279.63
510.19
1,189.99
400.16
279.63
510.19
1,189.99
3,601.46
2,516.68
4,591.74
10,709.87
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current
Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 12/11/2007
0018782
- -0- -
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~count!D: _ _ I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
I
ClaIms
1
Page 41 of 189 I Log Olit I Help I Contact!
XG1486 User!D: JACKK
Ap~olntmenl:s
-- -
r ~
Pali.mw
Financial9 j
Maintenanc",
I
,,-Records
I
C
Oaysheot 1 Daysoeet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary 1 capitation Summary I Patient srntements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Pr4llljders Bming Provider
Paymelll/l
Rendering
Provider
Charges
Location: All Locations
Period far 01/01/2007_ 01/31/2007
WrileOffs
Mlse Charge" InsDJilnce
Patient
Iosurance
Pati<ml
#MiGc # Proc Charge"
0.00
0.00
194,17
0.00
842..71
15.57
,
"1283.00
NfA
126.80
0.00
214.20
0,00
27
,
4283.00
0.00
320.97
0.00
1056.91
15".57
27
,
0.00
0.00
3318.25
0.00
7331.37
0.00
,
,
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
671.00
0
200.00
N/'
0.00
0.00
0.00
755.00
,
Total For Jadwlfl LA
200.00
0.00
3318.25
0.00
7331.37
1426.00
Silertukde
922.50
0.00
657.90
0.00
3834.69
39.82
Silertukde
0.00
0.00
2965.00
75.00
5256.00
819.00
David F Jadwin Vivak BhargaVil
loe Ten Total For David F Jadwin Jadwin L A David F J"'dwin Vivak Shargava Loc Ten
CA
Shertukde
0.00
N/A
27.00
284.00
35.00
6101.00
Total For Sherlllkde L A
0.00
0.00
2992.00
359.00
5291.00
6920.00
2125.00
0.00
'18.20
0.00
89.80
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
276.00
115.00
0.00
713.97
0.00
3239.32
1'19.20
0.00
0.00
1'108.21
20.00
2893.81
741.'15
0.00
NfA
10.33
328.00
39.67
3583.00
0.00
0.00
1'118.5'1
3'18.00
2933.'18
'132'1.'15
Uu
LluLA Dott
DuttLA Dott
Total For Dlitt L A Billing Provide.
Rendering Provider
Grand Toml for practle!!
Payltlents Charges $7645.50
Mi"e Charg"" Ing'm"lce $0.00
Patiant
,
, , ,
", , , ,
Wr~teOff"
Insurance
Patic!lt
$9'159.83 $707.00 $23776.57 $13151.0'1
,
, , , , , ,
, 0
,
# Mise # Proe Charye"
51
powered by Medrilim
0°* 194-'17+ 3'318'25·'
002
https://www.medrium.com/practice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018783
l' lIUlllCHU
y
~UllHmU
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~'O
1
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
=zm
TLl487Us.,rlD: JACKK
Appointmellts
I Claims
I
Page 42 of 189
Pa~"nts
J I Finndals I
Malntenanoe
I
"·Re~otds !
Communication Center
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Daysheet I Oeysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient AQin~ !Insuranc.. A~lng I AdjlJstm"nts I Proc",dlJre Summary Financial Summilry I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom REports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary BV Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider
Rendering Provld"r
Period for 01{01/2007·01/31/20117 PayRlents
Charges
LQOltion: All Locations WriteOffs
#His<: Hi"c Charll"" Insunmcc Patlent Insurance Pati"ml # Proe Ch ... rg"s
PhJlip Dill;!;
60453.00
0.00
315.80
0.00
453.60
0.00
<S,
S ..vltil
75160.00
0.00
1093.03
0.00
3409.97
0.00
541
18359.00
0.00
489.20
0.00
1228.80
0.00
141
Sh"rtukde David F Jadwin Billing Provider
R.endering ProvIder
Gl1lnd Total for practice
Paym,,,,ts
Charges $lS3972.00
WriteOffs
# Mise MIse Charges Insuran"e Patillnt Insurance Patient 11 Proe ellargas
$0.00
$189B.03
$0.00
$5092.37
$0.00
1132
,
P"oWf!N!d by Me.:hium
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01I1_lL1487/Reports/finSummary
12/ll/2007
0018784
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 43 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis March, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees Mid level Jadwin
Dutt
Shertukde
Fees
Total
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
735.23 $ 72.21 118.31 1,178.02 853.54 1,250.23
853.54
$ 1,425.91
$
1,426.34 2,852.25
$ 1,250.23 $ 2,852.25 $
2,233.35 2,722.67 4,956.02
$
4,956.02
$
180.11
$ 2,413.46 $ 2,722.67
180.11
5,136.13
180.11
$ 5,136.13
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund
85.35 186.52
125.02
285.23
495.60 186.52
Current
Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH
271.87
125.02
285.23
682.12
Net Available(Current Mo.)
581.67
1,125.21
2,567.02
4,273.90
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
12111/2007
0018785
L'11li1l1vli1l 0UllUIUUY
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countID:XG1486 _
I
Appointments
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
" . , . . I Log Out I Help I Contact I
UserID; JACKK
J
Claims
I
Page 44 of 189
Patients
I . Financials I
Malnlena"""
!
,,·Records
Ct>mmunlcatIDn C"nter
I
I
Daysh"Bt I OayshBBt Summary Ilm;urance Summary I Patient Aging 1InsuranCe Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Ananeial Summary I Capi!:
Financial SummalY By Posting Date Financial Summary All Provlflers Billing Provider
Re.ndering Provider
oavld F Jadwin Jadwin LA Vivek Bhargavll Loe Too
Location: All locations
Period for 02/01{2001- 02/28/2001
WrlteOlfs
Pavmenr
Mise Charge" Insurance
# Mise Patient ImiUranc" Patient #Proc Charges
0.00
0.00
686.7.1
0.00
1907.87
0.00
0.00
0.00
48.5"2.
0.00
85.48
0.00
0
0.00
NfA
32..50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
81.02
0.00
85.48
Upschultz
200.00
77.50
0.00
77.50
0.00
0_00
Upschult<:
400.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
,
shertukde
1409.34
0.00
1312.96
0.00
2.93132
0.00
15
0
Shertukde LA
C.CO
C.CC
112.95
0.00
79.C5
0.00
0
0
Totsl For JadWin LA
cA
O.CO
0.00
70.11
0.00
129.69
0.00
0
446.50
0.00
496.2.1
0.00
105S.55
0.00
4
0.00
0.00
-454.00
0.00
-25.00
0.00
0
0
Do.
0.00
NfA
0.00
30.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
Total For Dutt L A
0.00
0.00
-454.00
30.00
-2.5.00
0.00
0
0
Uo
Dott
DuttLA
8lUing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand TCltlll for pr,,-ctke
Payments ChaTllea
$2.455.64
Mise Chuges Iusurance
$77.50
P~tlent
$2305.96 $107.50
WrlteOffa
# Miac Insur"nce Patil!nt #- Proc C!larges
$6164.16
$0.00
" Powared by Medrium
686''71+
002
https:llwww.medrium.comJpractice10111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
48· 52+
12/1112007
0018786
r 1l1
y
~Ulll1lla.l
-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 8'
~cuuntID: TL1487 UserID: JACf<:K _ _ I
Appoll'ltments
I
ail;mS
I
P>o!ianls-
I . Financlal'" I
Millnll!rl
!
,,_Ril.(on!s
-0-
-
--
Page 45 of 189 I log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
I
Daysh.""t I Daysh.""-t Summary I lnstira"c,,- Summary I Patient Aging 1 r"suranc" Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Fin
Financial Summary By Posting Date Finan~lal Summary
Bining Pr"vider
All Pmviders
RenderIng Pmvider
PaymenlB Charye",
Looation: AlIl<>cations
Period for 02/01/2007- 02/28/2007
WriteOUs
MIse Charges Insurance Patient Insurance Patient
Phlllp Dutt
3471.00
0.00
1176.02
0.00
1140.10
0.00
5avlt!l Shertukdll
162'18.00
0.00
1426.34
0.00
2710.37
0.00
12405.00
0.00
'rIF.'J'1'
",,",0
219.69
0.00
David F Jl'Idwin BillIng Provider
Rendering Provider
Gr.;m
Payn,ents
Charges
$32124.00
WriteOff"
# Mise # Proc charges
"
'"
0
"
# Mise MIse Charge.. Insurance PatIent Ins"rance Patient # Proc Charges
$0.00
$2722.67
$0.00
$4070.16
$0.00
>S,
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01/1_1L1487IReportslfinSummary
12/11/2007
0018787
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 46 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee 1 Guarantee Fee Analysis April, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees Mid level Jadwin
Dull
Sheriukde
Fees
Total
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL 1487 Subtotal Special Total
$
$
395.45 $ 1366.91 1,762.36
1,762.36
732.34 423.36 1,155.70
$ 1,300.50 2,744.55 4,045.05
$ 1,155.70 $ 4,045.05 $
2,428.29 4,534.82 6,963.11
$
6,963.11
$
836.98
$ 3,265.27 $ 4,534.82
836.98
7,800.09
836.98
$ 7,800.09
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH
176.24
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
115.57
404.51
696.31
1,000.00
2,000.00
3,000.00
176.24
1,115.57
2,404.51
3,696.31
1,586.12
40.13
1,640.54
3,266.80
$
$
$
Check paid to G. E. Pathology Medical Group,
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
12111/2007
0018788
.t'luanCIW
"UII1~m:uy
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~ c o u n tID: XG1486 UserlD' JACKK ~ I Appointments- I Claims I Pa~ent:t l ' Financial.. I Mab,renanea
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 47 of 189
'"?"" I
a-Records
Communication Center
I
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Oaysheet I Oaysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Dlpltation Summary I Patient Stotements I Custom Reports I Run Last Reoort
Financial Summary By Posting Date Fin"ncl"ISumma.ry All Providers Sillin!;! Prollider
Rendering Provider
Period for 03/01/2007- 03/31/2007
Charge"
Mise Chaty". In"IlTance
0.00
David F Jadwin
0.00
Loc"tion" All Location"
WriteOn,.
Payment. Patient
Insllran<;e
0.00
0.00
2A5
Patient
# Mise # PtOC Clta rges
262.00
0
3646.50
0.00
393.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
,.
David F Jadwin
0.00
N'A
0.00
0.00
0.00
203.00
0
Viyek Elhargava Lot Ten
0.00
N'A
377.98
0.00
238.02
98.00
0
,.
Jadwin LA
Total For Jadwin LA
3646.50
0.00
770.98
0.00
238.02
301.00
Upschul~
0.00
0.00
0.00
259.00
0.00
0.00
Upschula CA
0.00
0.00
200.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Shartukde
138.00
0.00
387.52
138.00
1564.99
57.79
Shertukde LA
10985.67
0.00
749.98
0.00
30.02
405.54
"
Shartukde Total For Shertukde l A D" DuttL A
'"" Totlll For DlIt±LA Rilling Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Tornl for practice
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0.00
N'A
0.00
25.00
0.00
2703.00
0
10986.67
0.00
74<;.98
25.00
30.02
3108.S4
0.00
0.00
266·:P
0.00
1211.87
47.86
"
1873.00
0.00
431.07
35.00
725.43
·114.00
19
0
0.00
NtA
I}.CO
0.00
0.00
2759.00
0
0
1873.00
0.00
431.07
35.00
725.43
.2645.00
19
Payments Char!] ....
$16644.17
Mise
C,,~t!l"~
$0.00
Insurance
WriteOtfs
Patient Insurnncc
$2808.27 $457.00
Patient
$3770.33 $6422.19
0
0-* 0
# Hi5C # Prall Charges
1J1
2-45+ 393 - 00" 002 395-/}5*
Powered by Me!
https:l/www.medrium.comlpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018789
.!-. l!UU1\.Jl(U ':>U1UUJ.Ul Y
, Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
IC>.Mt
~tOuntID: TL1487 UserlD: JACI<J( _ _ I
Aj>poln!ments
I Claims
I
Page 48 of 189
P3tlent!;
I. Financ1"t,.1
Malnllmance
I
e-Records
I
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communkatlon C..ntar
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance SummarY I Patient Aging I 1I1surance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Firtartclal Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Pr
Re"dering Provid,"
Philip Dutt
Savlta
P",kld for 03/01/2007- 03/31/2007
Payments
CI,arge,..
Location: All Location ..
WrlteOIl,.
# Mi,.c Mise Cllarg .." Insuranee Patient Ins ....,,,,ce Patient # Proc ellarge.
10.00
0.00
42336
0.00
62.45.59
0.00
3575.00
0.00
2744.55
0.00
ZOa52.35
0.00
0.00
0.00
'1"366:91
0.00
8372.09
0.00
30
0
Shettukd.. D2Ivld F Jadwin
Bming PrBvld"r
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Paym"nts Charge,.
$3586.00
Mise Chargell Insurance Patient
$0.00
$4534.82
0
WriteOffs Jnsu"~IlC
$0.00 $35470.04
# Mi,.c PaUent #Proe eltargu
$0.00
31
0
Powered by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.comJpractice10 1/1 ~1L1487/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018790
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 49 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis MaY,2oo7 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Shertukde
Dutt
Total
Mid level
Medruim
Fees
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
132.77 $
465.94 $
604.01
1,202.72 $
95.80 $ 1,298.52
132.77
352.72 818.66
68.29 672.30
421.01 1,623.73
95.80
132.77 $
818.66 $
672.30 $
1,623.73 $
95.80 $ 1,719.53
Medrium TL1487
Subtotal Special Total
$
$
421.01 1,719.53
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentiafing Cost Future ~ 10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
13.28
81.87
67.23
162.37
13.28
81.87
67.23
162.37
119.49
736.79
605.07
1,461.36
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018791
rlIUUlliHU >'JUUUIHUY
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~c(luntJD:XG1486 UserID: _ _ 1
Appointments
I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 It'
JACKK
Claims
I
Palleob
! ~
Financial" I
Maln""nan,"
I
,,·Recome
I
Page 50 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Cent<>r
Daysheet I DaV5he."t Summary I Jnsurance Summary I Patient Aging I lnsurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient S!
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers BilHng Provider
Renderi,,!! Provider
Period For 04/01{2007- 04/:30{2007
.-
Patient
088_11
0.00
70.11
0.00
Payment/l
Cbarges
Mise Clla rges Insurance
David F Jadwin
0.00
Jadwin L A
0.00
0.00
Upschultz L
0.00
0.00
0.00
Location: Alllocati
0.00
'IF Misc Insurance Patient 'IF Proc Charges
0.00
0
0
~16.11
0.00
0
0
129.89
0.00
0
111.Z4
A Costa LA Shertukde
Shertukde L
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.69
0.00
0.00
0
0
10005.00
0.00
207.50
0_00
460.74
0.00
76
0
25.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10030.00
0.00
207.50
0.00
460.74
0.00
7861.00
0.00
346.51
50.00
544.49
0.00
0
A Total For Sherhlkde Shert\.lkde L
A
U, D", Dutt LA
0", To!
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
"
"
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
65.00
0.00
0
2208.00
0.00
223.94
0.00
230.Z0
0.00
17
464.00
0.00
77.00
0.00
106.00
0.00
,
0
0.00
NfA
0.00
165.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
464.00
0.00
77.00
165.00
106.00
0.00
PaYI"ents Charlles
$20563.00
Mise ChargM Insurance
$0.00
Patient
$1057.83 $240.69
,
WrlteOfls
# Mise Ilrsuranee Patient #Proe CII.rges
$1631.45
$0.00
'" Powered by Medrium
o~*
4t;·66+
002
88·11+ 13 2.°77'"-,.
https://www.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
1211112007
0018792
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 51 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee (Guarantee Fee Analysis
June, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
out!
Jadwin
Shertukde
Medruim
Mid level Fees
Total
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
597.87 $
Medrium TL1487 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal
597.87
827.50 $ 3,666.85
5,092.22
484.37
232.62
716.99
169.60 1,481.47
817.09 4,716.56
986.69 6,795.90
$
25.00
$ 5,117.22 $
716.99
$ 25.00
986.69 6,820.90
25.00
$ 6,820.90
Special
Total
$
597.87
$ 1,481.47 $ 4,716.56 $
6,795.90
$
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future-10% TotalOH
Net Available(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
59.79
148.15
471.66
679.59
59.79
148.15
471.66
679.59
538.08
1,333.32
4,244.90
6,116.31
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018793
rU1t1Ill;H1:1.:JUlllJUi1lY
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
~"Oll~tlD: XG1486 User lD: ]ACKK ~ I
Appalnbnent<:
I CI,"ms
I
Page 52 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Patients
I. Fu,andds I
M.nnmnance
Daysheet J Dayshe
I
I
....Rec:ords
I
Gommunkatlon CEnter
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Frnandal Summary All ProYiders Bitting Provider
Rendering Provider
David F Jadwln JadWin LA Upschullz L
payments Charg""
Location: All
Period for 05/01/2001- 05/31/2001
Mise Charge.. Insorance
WrlteOfl"
Patient
Insurance
Patjent
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
39"1-.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
59,Up
0.00
3023.63
0.00
138.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 ~o.oo
tocation~
# Mise #Proc Ch'''g"s
0
A 0.00
](1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Shertukde
21968.17
0_00
227.74
0.00
301.31
0.00
Shertukde L
34669.17
0.00
3439.11
0.00
6172.89
138.00
25'
0.00
0.00
0.00
25.00
0_00
0.00
0
5000.50
0.00
228_53
0.00
326,44
0.00
"
Costa LA
A Liu LA
0", Dutt LA
138.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total For Oult
5138.50
0.00
228.53
0.00
326.44
0.00
Dutt LA
4803.00
0.00
273.97
0.00
1782.03
0.00
"ott Tolal For Dutt L A
aillil,g P,ovider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practlee
'"
"
0.00
NlA
0.00
325.00
0.00
0.00
0
4803.00
0.00
27:3.97
325.00
1182.03
0.00
41
P~tient
# Proc
$4767.22 $350.00 $12000.30 $168.00
'"
PaYlnenlll Charges $66716.8"1-
Mise Charges Insurance
$30.00
Pallent
WrlleOffs InShanCe
0
41
#M;,;"
Charges
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comlpractice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018794
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 53 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis July,2oo7 Distribution
Professional Fees
Jadwin
Dutt
Shertukde
Total
(111.54)
3,=.35
16,701.65
19,812.47
Mid level
Medruim
Fees
Total
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 1211112007
0018795
r
Hl(Ull.iliU
Y
~UIlllHCU
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~cou~tlO: XG1486 User lD: lACKK _ I A4'l'olntments I Claims I Patients I. Financials J Mainbimanee Daysh"et I Da~sheat Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Agino I Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Raports I Run Last Report
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 54 of 189
_ _ I Log Ollt I Help I Contact I
I e_Reeon:ls
I Procedure
I
CormnunkatJon Cent<.r
I
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date !'Inanelal Summary All Provid..." Billing Provid.. r
Rendering Pr""id"r
P"ym.mts Charges
0.00
David F Jadwin
Location: All Locations
Period for 06/01{2007- 06{30{2007
Mise ChaTge.
Insurance
0.00
0.00
WTit"Offs
Patient
lnfiun"l':"
Patient
123.93
0.00
# Mise # Proc Charges
123.93
Shertukde
1160.67
0.00
7052.16
0.00
170B5.23
0.00
1Z
0
Shertukde L
5264.00
0.00
1309.04
0.00
1S65.63
0.00
"
0
A 0.00
NfA
20B.63
0.00
143.37
74.00
0
5264.00
0.00
1517.67
0.00
1709.00
74.00
C"
0.00
0.00
71.13
0.00
2.87
0.00
"
Liu LA
0.00
NfA
150,42
0.00
270.25
0.00
0
1646.00
0.00
1556.31
0.00
3292.75
0.00
1Z
0.00
0.00
46.22
0.00
51.78
138.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
6&.99
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
46.22
66.99
51.78
138.00
Shertukde
Total For Shertukde L A
D".
""
DlIttLA
0"" Total ForOl,lttLA Billing Prnvider
Payments
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
$8070.67
Mise Charges Insllranca
$0.00 $10393.91
WriteOlfs
Patient Insurance
,-
55.94
Patient
$22535.81 $212.00
0
0
0 0
0
0
# Mise #Proc ebarg"s
" Powered by Medrlllm
https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018796
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 55 of 189
· __I
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis August, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Dutt
Jadwin
Shertukde
Total
Mid level Fees- KMC
Medruim Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month
Mednum XG1466
$
Medrium TL1487
167.70 $ 1,426.81
$14,430.34
16,046.85 $
60.60
$16,107.45
50.00
635.34
3,969.53
4,674.87
$ 4,674.87
237.70
2,064.15
462.00 16,881.87
462.00 21,183.72
60.60
21,163.72 $
60.60 $21,244.32
Correcting Error from
July Subtotal Special Total
$
237.70 $ 2,064.15
$ 16,661.67 $
$ 462.00 21,244.32
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovel) Credentialing Cost Future ~ 10%
23.77
206.42
1,888.19
2,118.37
111.56
TotalOH
6.06
2,124.43
111.56
111.56
135.33
206.42
1,888.19
2,229.93
6.06
2,235.99
102.37
1,857.73
16,993.68
18,953.79
54.54
19,008.33
Net Avaiiable(Current
Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 12/1112007
0018797
r
111C1l1!,..ilt:ll ,,",UHUIULl
Y
--Q-
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~oountID: XG1485 User 10: JACKK ~ I Appointments I daims I Patients I ' Fh,andal., I Maintenance
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 56 of 189
=rm ! I
I
e-Rl!co"b
CommunIcation Center
Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
DaysheetJ Daysheet Summary) In5urante Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I ClIpitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date l'1nandal Summary All Previders BlUing prOl/lder
Rend"ring Provider
WriteOIf:l
Paytll .. ,,~
Misc Char!!",.
In5urance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
0.00
187.70
0.00
187.70
2274.36
0.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
4612.00
0.00
Total For David F ladwin
0.00
187.70
0.00
187.70
6886.36
0.00
Jadwin L A
David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava Lac Tefl
Charges
locatinn: All Locations
Perl"d for 07/01/2007- 07/31/2007
#Misc # Proe Charge.,
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.5.00
0.00
0
David F Jadwin
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
0
Total For Jadwin LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2.5.00
138.00
0
Upschultz
0.00
0.00
48.20
0.00
89.80
0.00
0
0
CA ,~~
0_00
12.40
0.00
12.40
0.00
0.00
0
Shertukd"
0.00
0.00
1464.13
0.00
22.456.2.5
0.00
0
Shertukd" LA
0.00
0.00
12.901.21
0.00
25621.99
0.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
65.00
886.00
262..00
Tornl For 5hertukde L A
0.00
0.00
12.901.21
65.00
26507.99
262.00
D".
0.00
0.00
294.36
25.00
14836.66
0.00
0
0
DllttlA
0.00
0.00
10S9AS
0.00
2152.16
0.00
0
0
0.00
NfA
0.00
50.00
0.00
130.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
1059.45
50.00
2.152.16
130.00
0
Sh"rtukde
D". Tow) For DuttLA Billing Pmvider
R.endllrinlJ Pravld"r
Grand Torn! for practice
P"ymllnra Cltargll!l $0.00
Mille Cltargll5
0 0
WriteOf/., Patient
# Proc
$200.10 $15767.35 $340.10 $72.954.22. $530.00
0
Jnsu .... n~e
Pillient
Jnsur~nce
0 #Hi~~
CIt~fgOS
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comfpractice101/1_XG1486/ReportsffinSummary
12/11/2007
0018798
r
UU1l1IJli11 L')UlllHldl Y
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~count 10: _ _ J
TLl487
AfJp~lntm"nbl
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 1t5-
Us~rlD: JACKK ) ClaIms
I
Patients
1~
Financial.. I
Maln!!!nanc!!
I
e-Rccorrls
1
Page 57 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
camm,mi,a~(ln Center
Daysh""t [ Daysheet Summary I Insurance SUmmMY I Patjent Aging I lnsurance Aglllg [ Adjustmertts I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitatlort Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date F",anci.1 Summary All Prc>viders Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Location' All l..cJcatic>ns
Period for 07/01/2007" 07/31/2007
WdtllOns
Pavme"ts ChillllllS
Mise; charge" Insurance Piltient Insnran",e
# Mise Patient # Proe Cbarges
Philip Dutt
0.00
0.00
635.34
0.00
8535.66
0.00
0
0
savita ShQrtukrle
0.00
0.00
3969.53
0.00
48660.87
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
--SOAlO
0.00
0.00
0.00
Patient '" Proc
# Mise Cbarge"
David F Jadwin Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practicE!
Payn",uts Charges
$0.00
Mise Cbarges Insurance Palient
$0.00
$4574.137
WriteOfis Illsurance
$0.00 $5719653
$0.00
0
Powered by Medrium
https:!/www.medrium.comJpracticc10111_TL1487/Rcports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018799
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 58 of 189
KMC Pathology Associatl!s Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis September,2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Shertukde
Dutt
Total
Medruim
Mid level Fees - KMC
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
$
Medrium TL1487 Correcting Error from July Subtotal
734.83 $ 2,989.74
3,724.57 $
66.96
$ 3,791.53
73.92
188.00
261.92
808.75
3,177.74
3,986.49
66.96
4,053.45
3,986.49 $
66.96
$ 4,053.45
$
261.92
$
Special
Total
$
$
808.75 $ 3,177.74 $
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
80.88
317.77
398.65
6.70
405.35
80.88
317.77
398.65
6.70
405.35
727.87
2,859.97
3,587.84
60.26
3,648.10
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018800
J.' lUQ.llVJ.CLl lJu.J.ll111(U. J
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
==
_~ountID:_ XG1486 User lD: JACKK _ _ _ I
Ap~crntments
I
claims
I
p"tien!>;
l ' Fin"n"'al,. I
Maintenance
I
,,_Records
Communication Genter
I
Page 59 of 189 I Loti Out I Help I Contact [
I
Daysheet I Daysh"et Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging [Insurance Aging I Adjustments [ Procedur.. summary Financial Summary [ capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom RepOrts I Run Last Report
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Sumrrory All Pr(lv(d"rs Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Mise
Cllarg,,~
ln~uran«:
Patient InSQr311Ce
Patient
Coo~
0.00
66.96
0.00
66.96
0.00
0.00
Sh"rtukde
0.00
0.00
212.72
8.52
552.64
0.00
276.00
0.00
2669.58
98.92
4575.92
0.00
Si'lertukde L
Locatlun~
WriteOfis
PaymelllS Charge~
location: AU
Period lor 08/01/2007- 081'31/2007
# Pruc
it Misc Charges
0
A Shertukde Tohll For Shertukde L A
D" Dl.lttLA Total For Dutt Dut\: LA
D"" Total For Dutt LA
ailii""
Provld
Renderin!! Pmvid.. r
Grand Total for practice
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
276.00
0.00
2669.5"6
98.92
4575.92
138.00
0.00
0.00
44.74
33.10
0_00
0.00
0.00
N/A
30.70
0.00
99.63
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
75.44
33.10
99.63
0.00
D D
0
0.00
0.00
551.29
0.00
960.71
0.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
75.00
0.00
0.00
0
0.00
0.00
551.29
75.00
960.71
0.00
D
Patl"nt
#Pruc
$6188.90 $138.00
2
Payments Charges
$27&.00
Millc Charges Insurance
$66.96
pnll\nr
$3509.03 $2:82..50
Writeolfs Insurance
0
D
#
Mis~
Charges
powered by Medrlum
https:llwww.medrium.com/practice101l1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018801
r
UU11ll,,;liU
Y
~Ull1lU(U
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG MED TUM.
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Ift~&lI1lLIUL£o,,~O~",-L ~lH~'~l''-.l:lC2'~'~"~",-IL
count 10: TL1487 User 10: JAcKK
I
Appointment:!;
I
Claims
Page 60 of 189
I PatJ""ts
l'
Fin~nci~[s 1
Malntenanef!
I ,,-Records
I
Communk:atlon Center
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary 1 Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adju51:ments I Procedure Summary F1I1andal Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Stiltements 1 custom Reports I Run last Report
Financial Summary By PostIng Date financial Summary All Provid"rs Bllting provid"r
Rendering Provid"r
Location: All Locations
Pe60d for 08/01/2001- OB/31/2001 payments
Charge"
Wrtt"Offs
#- Misc Mise Charges Insurance Patient Insurallce Patient # Proc Chargee
Phillp Dutt
0.00
0.00
73.92
O.OD
0.00
0.00
savlti'l Shertukde
D.OO
0.00
lB8.00
0.00
276.00
0.00
Billing Provider
Payments
Rendering Provid~r
Grand Total for practlce
Charges
$0.00
"
"
WriteOfls
#Mwc MIse Charg"" Insnrance Patient Insurance patjent #- Proc Charges
$0.00
$261.92
$0.00
$276.00
$0.00
" Pow<'.red by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.com/practice10 111_TL 1487lReports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018802
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 61 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis
October, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees Mid level Jadwin
Dull
Shertukde
Total
59.95
88.50
148.45
Medruim Total
Fees- KMC
Beginning Balance
Collections for Month Medrium XG14B6 $ Medrium TL1487
$
148.45
$
Correcting Error from July
$
Subtotal
59.95
88.50
148.45
59.95 $
8850 $
148.45 $
148.45
Special
Tota!
$
$
$
148.45
Less·
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future ~ 10%
6.00
8.85
14.85
14.85
TotalOH
6.00
8.85
14.85
14.85
53.95
79.65
133.60
133.60
Net Available{Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
1211112007
0018803
.rlnanCHll
~Umiintly
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
«5
~ c o u n t1D: XG1486 UserlD: JACKK
-*'"
I
Appointments
I
aairn~
I
Filed 12/01/2008
Patiel'll:>
I . Flnaneial,,1
Maintenance
I
I
Page 62 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
CommWllcatla" Center
Daysheet I DaysheetSummary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging t Insurancli! Aging I Adjuslments I PI"ocedure Summary Fmancial Summary I Capit
Financial Summary By Posting Date Rnandal Swmmar'l All Providers BlUing Provider
Rendering Provider
Paymenl/> Chargee
Wril"Offs
Mis.: Charg.... lllellrallee Patient Insurance
David f Jadwin
0.00
0.00
Teopengco
0.00
Jadwin LA
0.00 Vivek Bharg"va LocTen
Location: All locations
Period for 09/01/2007· 09/30/2007
Palle"t
# "'is., # Pro" Chuge..
0.00
0.00
489.63
662..38
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
138.00
62.0.04
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
0_00
168.00
0
0.00
NtA
0.00
0.00
0.00
338.00
0
Total For Jadwin L A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
506.00
Teopengto LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
0 0
0
0
C<>,~
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1070.00
Shertukde
0.00
0.00
88.50
0.00
383.54
162.6.51
Shertukr!e LA
932.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
Shertllkde
0.00
NfA
0.00
0.00
0.00
585.00
0
Total For ShertlJkde LA
932..00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0,00
585.00
10
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
74.00
1252.2.5
O~O
0.00
2..28
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
NfA
7.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
9.95
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
0
U,
Octt DuttLA Total fer Dult
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
518.00
O,tt
0.00
NfA
0.00
50.00
0.00
1443.00
Tornl For Dult L A
0.00
0.00
D.OO
50.0D
0.00
1961.00
Dutt LA
Billing
Relldll
Provider
Provider
Grand Total for practice
Paymllllts
Charge"
$932.00
$98.45 $50.00
"
Patient
$1085.17 $8303.18
0 0
0
0
0
Writ"Olfs
Mise Charge" [nsnrance Patient IlIsnran.,e
$0.00
0
# Proc
"
# Mise Charge"
0
Pow£!red by Medrium
https:l/www.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018804
r l11i:Ull..ili:U ...,UIIUUaLY
_I
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~countlD:TLi4117 AppoIntments
Document 278-2
UserrD: )ACKK
I Claims
I
Pall'mll;
~
I
FinaneJals I
MalnlBnance
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Agtng I Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report
1
Filed 12/01/2008
e-~nrds
et I
Page 63 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
I Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Flnam:i~1
Bittin\l Provider Billing Prl>"ider
Summary AU Providers
Rendering Prl>"ider n.end"rlng Prollider
Grand Total for prBctlce
Payments ella ryes
Mise Chorges
Insu",n<:"
Patient
Payments Charg"" $0.00
location: All Locationg
Period for 09/01./2007- 09/30/2007
Wrireoffs Insuran<:e
patieut
# Prl>c
'" Mise Char\les
# Pruc
# M;"c Charges
Writ"Offs
M;s<:Charges
Insurance
Patl"nr
Ins"rance
Patient
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
o
Powered by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.comlpractice101/1_TL1487/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018805
rlnanClaJ. "ummilly
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
_ _ I Log
~cnuntlO'TL14S7 Us~r!D: JII.CKK _
I
App"lntments
I
Oalms
I
Page 64 of 189
Patjenlli
I > Financial.. I
MaJnlI!nance
Daysh"et I Daysheet Summary I Insurance summary I Patient Aging I Insuranc!!! Aging I Adjustments Fmandal Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient StEltements \ Custom Reports I Run Last Report
I
I
e·Rec"rtI.
I
Commul"llcatlon CenlI!r
Cut
I Help I o.mtact I
I
Procedure Summary
Financlal Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary ,1\11 Prll"idern Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
S"Vita Shertukde.
David F JadWin Billing Provider
R/;'lodering Provider
Grand Total for prllctlce.
Location: All Locations
Perjod fo' 10/01/2007- 10/31/2007
WriteOffs
Payments
Charges
# Mise Mis" Charges wSUl1lnee Patient Insurance P"tillnt # Proc Charge"
0.00
0.00
71'1.60
0.00
0.00
0.00
39.00
0.00
Paymeuts
Charges
$0.00
124.40
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
0
0
WriteOff.
#Mlsc Mise Charges IOSlIf"""e Patient Insurance Patient # Pro" Charge..
$0.00
$117.6-0
$0.00
$124.40
$0.00
0
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.com/practice1 0111_TL1487/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018806
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 65 of 189
KMC Pathology Associates Prof Fee (Guarantee Fee Analysis November,2007 Distribution Professional Fees
Jadwin
Total
Shertukde
Dull
Mid level Fees-KMC
Medruim
Total
Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $
75.00
188.00
Medrium TL1487
39.00
Medrium ZQ 1486 Subtotal
39.00
13.42 8M2
39-00 $
8M2 $ 2,096.01
263m $
103.50 $
366.SO
$
117.60
78.60
117.60
1,829-41 2,096.01
1,842.83 2,223-43
103.50
2,223-43 $
103.50 $ 2,326.93
$ 1,842.83 2,326.93
Special
Total
$
$
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future-10% TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)
Ending Balance
$
3.90
8.84
209.60
=.34
10.35
232.69
3.90
8.84
209.60
=.34
10.35
232-69
35.10
79.58
1,886-41
2,001.09
93.15
2,094-24
$
$
$
Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007
12111/2007
0018807
l'manClal
~ummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 ==r'
~COlJntID: XG14S6 User ID: lACKK _
I
Appointments
I Claims
I
Pallents
I
t
Hnanda!" I
Maintenance
I
e-Record.
Communication Center
I
Page 66 of 189 I Log Out I Help I Contact I
1
D~Ysheet 1 OilvsheetSummary I lnsur/lnce Summary I PatJ.,ntAging (Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary finandal Summary I CapitBtlon Summary I Piltiertt S\>Itements I Custom Reports. I Run last ReDort
Financial Summary Bv Posting Date Rnancial summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Period for 10/01/2007.10/31/2007
Provider
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
Location: All locatio""
WrlteOlfs
Payme.ntll
Rendering
Patient
Ins-nunc!!
# Mise
Patient
Shllrtukde
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
338.00
20.66
Shertukde L
0.00
0.00
0.00
50.00
0.00
200.00
'#
Pro" Charges
0
0
A
Shertukde
Total For Sherwkde LA UtlLA
",
D,tt DllttLA Billing Provider
D"" Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
0.00
NfA
0.00
138.00
0.00
138.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
lS8.00
0.00
]]13.00
0.00
NfA
0.00
103.50
0.00
34.50
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
ZOO.Oo
0.00
0.00
N/A
0.00
75.00
0.00
0.00
Pnyn,enls Charges
$0.00
Hise Charges Insurance
$0.00
Patient
$0.00 $]66.50
WriteOffs
0 0 0
0
P;ollent
# Hilic #Proc Charges
$538.00 $J,)3.16
0
Insurance
Powered by Medrll.lm
https:l/www.medrium.com/practice10l/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/1112007
0018808
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 67 of 189
FACULTY PRACTICE PLAN
PROFESSIONAL FEE DISTRIBUTION NOTICE Physician:
Name
Dr. Jadwin
FOR MONTH:
Date
December. 2005
Distribution Date:
Date
01/17/06
Month Medrium
Professional Fees
·IYear To Date
$ 3,668.63
$
I
3,668.63
-
· Total Fees Group Fee Distribution Other Fees/Awards
Less: Billing Fees
$ 3,668.63
Group Overhead
3,668.63
_ _---'-01 _ _---'-01
10% Medrium
Total Fees
$
$
..J ..J
366.86
366.86
.
· ·
366.86
$
0%1'--_ _--''--
366.86
_
Deduction - Other
0018809
page I or I
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 68 of 189
~q; I Leg 0.."
F;"... "c;~I" I
Maintl!nance
I
e·RM;"nls
I
Cnmmtlni<"tion Center
i Hell-' : (ol·,tact I
I
Daysntoet 1 O"y~h",et SU",,,,My, Iln~ma"ce S"mIT,al'\' [ PatIent Aqinq I In.manee Aqinq I Adjustment, I ~rccedu'E S",nmaf'.' Financ,al Sumrnar~' 1 Capitati"" Summa,\' I Patient Stat~f"""15 I C"$(om RelX)(t~, R.." La,l R"oort
0"
'j
C·
3f:. 00.-
;)'/)"/0
63 75·-
https://www.medrium.com/practice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018810
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 69 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: November. 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 12-20-05
I
November
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Fees [==-~.~5,~18':43r=j'1If.2.691~
10% Billing Service 1% Administrative Assessment
[=:=~:~i5_~4~~±C-~~11,126.~1] L __
_.._
•• _
_ ..L
-..·..--·_.._.. ._--_·!..
Compensation I
$4,903.591
••
_•.•._ _.
-'
_---_·_--~
$100,142.401
!_.""'"""__,,_.._"""_"._,._ _,"",,_ _""_ _._,
._~
__l
'·_"-·~-"-~···_····'-'-"r-"-"·---"-""-l
Balancel....._".
$0.00 ' _ __.1.._._
_.
$0.00 ._I
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018811
Page 1 of 1
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Fin"nd"l.< I
Mainbmilnce
I
Filed 12/01/2008
"-Re<,,n:l~
r
Page 70 of 189
CLlmmunkiltion Center
D'l\"sh",,,t I Dilysheet Surmna,'y I I"",,,-a,",,,, S""lmar \' I Patient Aqinq I 111~",'ance AQ"lG ; Adlllstl'n~"ts I Pro({,rlurl> Summar'. F"'anctal Sltlnmary [ C<'!I"tatlo" S\I""n
Financial Summary By Posting Date Penod f',r 1l!Ol/2005-11!JO!2005
F1Mnoiili $umnlMY All p,.""ide,.s
iWling Pco"id",
Pily",,,nts
Rende,i,,!!
Pr""ide,
David F
Mise eha tq~s !n''''i1hc",
Charge"
LGc."U<m'
Pillie"l
Ins",.""..
Pilti",,1
265&.92
135.05
0.00
430.97
78.00
1064.37
0.00
0.00
1788.13
24.50
316-4.37
32;92
O~Q)0'OO
0.00
11513.00
0.00
Toopengw
0.00
Jadwln LA
J3Z4.QO
David F )"dwln
465.00
N/A
Total for Jadwin LA
11.11 Locill;ons
Writ"O/ls
0.00
8022.31
'It
;: Mise !'roc Ch.'g""
m
0
Jadwin 0
"
37B9.00
0.00
17BB.13
99.50
3164.37
32.92
Upsc:hultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
44.00
40.00
0.00
"0
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
259.00
0.00
0
0
COSt4 L A
0.00
0.00
48.20
0.00
628.60
0.00
0
0
C~~
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
~S94.00
0.00
Shertukde
33630.96
0.00
10879.49
384.97
30959.26
13B.OO
,2<
0
Shertukde
12867.00
0.00
3025.22
304.00
1453.61
0.00
120
0
" '"
0
LA
LA Shertukde Total For Shl!rbJkde L A Liu
Do. Dutt LA
Do. Tot!ll For Outt l A Billing I'r
2351.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
15224.00
0.00
3025.n
304.00
1453.61
0.00
0.00
140.00
73.41
140.00
161.76
0.00
25435.00
0.00
5732.57
44.50
1497'J.20
0.00
'63
8916.00
0.00
3B13.44
28.00
2914.88
0.00
"
1022.00
N/A
22.56
133.00
''<4
44.00
9938.00
0.00
3836.00
161.00
2917_32
"'4.00
Payments
a,,"dui n9 Prol/ider
Grand Total for practice
Chu"es
Hisc
$99529.96
c:hor~es
lnsu
Paliellt
WriteOfls Insur~"ee
Patient
$140.00 $28470.91 $1391.02 $63095.60 $214.92
0
0
l2
'" '# Pree
0
" Mise Ch.,ges
1001
o·
c..pi""lioII s . . . .uy For AJI P..."Id..... Provider
Capit:"ion Payme'lls
David JadWin
Average # P.. lient"
806.44
Dal/ld Jadw)n
'37.39 Totals
4
$843.83
35 '( 0 ':.'
O~ .') .. ,
Powered by Medrium
005
\--
~."
https:l/www.medrium.comJpracticel 01/1_XG1486/ReportslfinSurnmary
12/11/2007
0018812
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 71 of 189
.KERN - , : MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: OCTOBER, 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 11-22-05
I Year-To-Date I
October
.···.·.-.··..
10% Billing Service IL_.
1% Administrative Assessment L. __
.
-.----~---
. --____:;_;l
...$~2.~J.~L_J~10,5§.~J.2J *_*•...._
*.._*._
_L._ _
_••• _.!
;-...- -......----,·-·..- ------1
Compensation L_._ ~. ~~~.~_~:~~1 __ ~.~~~?~~:~.1.J
.-..__.._._.
Balance!1
,__,
__._
..
~ _
$0.00 ,.
..
_-----~
,_,".,.
$0.00. _i
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018813
Page 1 of 1
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 72 of 189
Communkation Center O"v.h"et i [)~YSh~"t Su,nrna' Y I 1;\5,"aIK~ S'''llrnar, I PMient Aqinq I ;1't$u,"",,1(C Aqif\Q I AdlU5\,nent~ I Vroc
FinantiBI Summary By Posting DlIte Finan
Billi,,!! Provider
Rend"ring Provid",
David F
All Providers
Per;nd for 10/01/2005. lO/31/201J5 W"leOlls
Paymenl s
ChoHges
'/:. Pmc
Mise Cbarges
Insllr"nCOl
Patient
6068.00
0.00
'2721.19
178.89
16711.88
173.50
29&.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
29£ rel="nofollow">.00
o
0.00
", D
o o
ladwin Jadwin L A
0.00
N/A
'\1.J2
0.00
0.00
0.00
63£><1.00
0.00
2767..51
178.89
17007.88
173.50
Teopengto
0.00
0.00
143.02
10.00
-564.25
0.00
Jadwin LA
;<693_00
0.00
na.70
50.00
1054.33
0.00
63.3<1
49.00
136.66
0.00
Outt L A Toml For D3Vld F Jadwin
David F
1:11.00
If Misc Ch",ges
o
" o
o
"
o
"
o o
JadwiO
2904.00
0.00
342.0<1
99.00
1190.99
0.00
0.00
0.00
3<1.67
10.00
371.33
0.00
Upschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
200.00
-166.00
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
9.18
0.00
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
5.17
0.00
157.83
0.00
c~~
0.00
0.00
-22'1.12
lJa.OO
106'\.72
0.00
o
o
42820.00
0.00
10396.82
618.59
34642.95
1772.52
'79
o
o.do
0.00
65.00
0.00
Total Fur Jadwin LA
Teopengco
D
CA
o o
LA
Shertukde Shertukde
65.00
LA <12885.00
0.00
10396.82
616.59
34707.95
1772.52
10686.00
0.00
3029.15
130.65
5393.93
0.00
1135.00
N/A
0.00
637.00
0.00
0.00
11621.00
0.00
3029.15
.767.85
5393.93
0.00
no
U,
0.00
0.00
150.12
0.00
1441.14
0.00
WIJ LA
0.00
0.00
999.00
0.00
25.00
25.00
o o
27102.00
0.00
8383.96
0.00
35640.11
0.00
5896.00
0.00
3404.94
0.00
<1456.76
0.00
937.00
N/A
0.00
276.00
65.00
0.00
6833.00
0.00
3404.94
276.00
4523.76
0.00
LA
"
o
"
o o
A
Dott Out!: LA
D,tt Total f
Re"deri"g
Provider
Provider
Grand Total for
practice
'" " "
"
Cha.ge~
:t!
$0.00 $29427.28 $2098.33 $l01169.57 $1605.02
50 C! (j .'. l~.9-uU·
006
D
: ~
o
Proc
Mise Charges
999
0
:J;
$97909.00
2
,eo
Total For Shertukde
Totlll For Shertukde l
iJ • "
o D
Sheltukde
Shertukde
o
50·'
006 i -
Power
..J
https://www.medrium.comlpracticeI01/1_XGI486/Reports/finSummary
12/11/2007
0018814
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 73 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: SEPTEMBER 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 10-25-05
I
September
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Fees [:::::!fi~~.~i~~[::!iQ~;§'3~.~ 10% Billin9 Service r··········$i·~133:39T-···-$1O'252~941 1.•._ ...._..••_ .. _ ••__•..•. _ ..,••_••.••_.•."•. ••••_ •. ~ 1% Adm inistrative Assessment
L
_ _* *._..
••__.L
**._
_..•_.!
,.._·....·_-_.._··_········..-1"·--·_··.....·_·_--_.._--"
Compensation I..._._
$10,200.47 _ "..__. ._.1__
_$92,276.311 ..__ _ _ ...
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018815
rage
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
1 01 1
Page 74 of 189
~1' [let;) Out I Help I CQl1t,,(t I C
,
I Davsheet S,,,nrniHI' 1 [nsuranu; Surnmar-\' [ Pntle"t Acinq !ln$,,,ance Aqir\<j f Adj<Jstment',; I ""Qc"dure SlIm,niH'Y I capitation 5un"n~' ,. I PC':',,,,,! St".wments I Cu,torn 1:"llcrtS I Run Last "eDort
Flna'\~lal Sum,..",-v
Financial Summary By Posting Date F'na ...,;"1 Summar" All Provid",.,. BiUing
Rende,ing
Provide<
?,ovider
David F
Perl"rl r,,, 09/01/20IJS.09/30/10115
Ch~rgc5
His.: Charges
{n""tOlle.,
All Locations 1:
Pal;"nt
Mise
Patient
" P,oc
1711 l'l.78
86.00
"
302.00
1075.21
0.00
0
0
D.aD
4958.66
~36.00
0.00
10.00
0,00
"
0
0.00
0
0
InsurilllC
88
5867.00
0,00
Teopenaco
0.00
0.00
333.59
Jadwin LA
1276.00
0.00
Teopengco CA
0.00
~~_:9
0.00
JadwIn
L~(.ti~"
WriteOfls
PaVI"ellts
Charge~
Lipschllitz
0.00
0.00
0.00
40.00
194.00
49.00
0
0
Costa L-A
0.00
0.00
26.57
0.00
243.13
0.00
0
0
C~~
0,00
0.00
179.70
27,55
703.34
0.00
0
0
Shertukde
40950.00
0.00
10623.69
290.50
27263.59
0.00
9294.00
0.00
533Z,44
69.00
8537.16
65.00
'"95
0
Shertukde
0
LA 1589.00
NIA
0.00
38.00
0.00
0.00
10883.00
0.00
5332.44
107.00
8537.16
65.00
" '"
0
Liu
0.00
0.00
1090.43
0.00
2807.20
0.00
0
0
Uu LA
0.00
0.00
368.39
0.00
2331.61
0.00
41744.00
0.00
8851.57
0.00
20264.57
0.00
6-5.00
NIA
0.00
0.00
26S.00
0.00
Shertukde Tol2ll For Shertukde L
A
Dott Dutt LA
'"
Tobl For Dutt
'11809.00
0.00
8851.57
0.00
20529.57
0.00
Dutt LA
14188.70
0.00
5405.S7
1.5.00
5998.43
0.00
'" m
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
O.DO
0
"
D~vjd
F
JadWin
O,tt Totill For Dutt L A BiUing-
Rendering
p,,,vitler
P,,,~id,,,
Grand Total lor
practice
~
1517.00
NIA
138.00
1.5.00
0.00
0.00
15705.70
0.00
5543.57
6S.00
5998.43
0.00
Payments Ch",ges $116490.70
Mise
el'''rge~
Insurance
Patient
'"
WrlleOffs Insurance
Pal",n!
$0.00 $431El1.J1 $1319.S5 $92.466.68 $638.00
'#
0 0
Pr"e
;: Mise ehar"es
1093
0
o'l U :;, l~ d ';
Powered
,
c'
;,.. .,
U
!
':' U
~
0 iI 5
r;
()
,',
u0 {~ I I
https:llwww.medrium.com/practicel 0 111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
, ":;
:}
12/11/2007
0018816
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"C
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 75 of 189
IKERN MEDICAL
I CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: August 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 09-27-05 August
I Year-la-Date I
Professional Feesl-- $14,186.9!ir'-$-9-1:195.391
10% Billing Service
L
$1,418.701 _-.:!:.$9~,.:..119.551
1% Administrative Assessment [ .__.~··_ _"""'_IL-_-_-_-.-.--~
c--- '---,-,. - - - - - ,
SalanceLI_ _ $0.001
' $0.00 J
0018817
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 76 of 189
Fit'l~n£';-:>l
t:: Ln
Document 278-2
.11 c
.11 C
E
E
OJ
OJ
0 0
\
N
>ro
Cl.
'"OJ .2
'-
0
'.)
~
0.
J:
~
.E:
'"ro .l!l
"0 01
c
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Page 1 of2
~u _ _ ~_
t\0
>ro
--"g 0 0
Cl. OJ
..-I
.2!
~
:§
OJ OJ
.....
en
.s
0
~
iii
OJ
>ro
...
w
Ij
~
0. ~
0
u..
...
Z
Cl
0
..-I
~
0
OJ
III
to-
Z
-0
~
,
c 0
zw & Ci".
...
-.;1
to::l
-:r
~ ':P 0.
u
c
ro
ro to ~
1
G-
...3
~
~
I
.>L. ~ OJ
'J
.2 01
c
CO
en c
~
t:
CO
*
... ""Si ::.t)
"'"
0° -
0 ('-
.
--.:r \
&
0° ,§ ..9 r-
-5}
rr-!
... ·vv
u.uu
0.00
0.00
60
C'
4350.21
41.80
3206.42
6.00
150
C'
Teopengco LA
0.00
0:00
328.43
35.00
146.77
0.00
0
(I
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
8109.00
0.00
0
(I
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0,00
0.00
0.00
562.00
0.00
0
(I
Costa LA
0.00
0,00
289.20
0.00
0.00
0.00
0
(I
Costa
0.00
35.40
127.Q1
35.40
785.99
138.00
0
l.
Shertukde
26308.00
0.00
9463.55
198.02
23843.51
52.45
243
(I
Shertukde LA
8302.00
0.00
4668.04
0.00
6978.87
0.00
97
(I
4107.00
N/A
0.00
10.00
0.00
0.00
40
(I
12409.00
0.00
4668.04
10.00
6978.87
0.00
137
(}
Total For Shertukde L A
https://www.medrium.com/practicel 0 111_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
<>. ~
.!ll
.~
~ ..r:::
~
U l."-.J
.\1./ 1 '6(".'j '6
""Si
~
a
- IO,Ollt,')lJ
r&
0.00
Shertukde
it;-
~ .'" -
-
17777.00
Total For Jadwin l A
0
I
~
Cl t::
-tl
0
..... ".
-.a
it
.l:l
u
OJ
ro
\
\
0.
...:
.~
\•
0
.2
~ ~ Z
"g
Cl. OJ
!nter
:.0..
---
E
.a
'§
CO
.l'J c
0.
0.
gOut) Help I Contact I
'!!! ,<.J
00 .... 00 00 .... 0
_ I.( J"
~f~d-U'::>'
9/6/2005
Page 2 of2
0.00
Liu
LA
0.00
44.04
112.67
2510.04
516.00
0
0.00
0.00
73.14
0.00
326.86
332.00
0
0
30353.00
0.00
·4940.57
224.18
15251.90
-1.00
293
0
200.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
0
Total For Dutt
30553.00
0.00
4940.57
224.18
15251.90
-1.00
294
0
Dutt L A
10592.00
0.00
4070.74
6874.39
0.00
107
0
15.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
1
0
4181.00
N/A
73.62
0.00
185.38
0.00
56
0
14788.00
0.00
4144.36
0.00
7059.77
0.00
164
0
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$35.40 $39796.37 $1059.96 $94395.73 $904.45
1185
1
Liu
Dutt Dutt L A
David F
0.00'
Jadwin Dutt Total for Dutt L A Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments
Charges
$124030.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs
Insurance
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
0)
..... 00 00 ..... 0 0
0
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 77 of 189
Finandal Summary
9/612005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 78 of 189
. MEDICAL • CENTER .KERN
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: July 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 08-16-05 July
I Year-To-Date I
- - - . , . . - - - - . -:l
Professional Fees! 10% Billing Service 1% Administrative Assessment
$8,153.701
$77,008.41!
L_.._ . . . $815.3..?J..__._F,70~:.?~
L--.:_--, 1-'"'''--'''''
Compensation I
••
J
,
$7,338.33i
$69,307.561
.
,-----,.---
0 .OO. i BalanceL_._.......o$c::.:
$0.00
I
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018820
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
(;(,/ (\ (
I
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 79 of 189
2005
INPATIENT:
8)
IJ3 '70
Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal OUTPATIENT: Total pro fee payments Non-pro fee payments Balance Billing fee (10%) *Billing Clerk
Subtotal Amount Due Physician ., KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018821
Page lof2
N N 00
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 80 of 189
«Xl
.....
~ c o u n tID:
I
XG1486
Appointments
C}iN
User ID: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
1'-
Financials
I
Maintenance
I
e-Records
I
j
Log Out I Help
f
Contact I
Communication Center
Daysheet J Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging j Adjustments! Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I custom Reports
Financial Summary By Posting pate Financial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering Provider
50clw 1f1
Period for 07/01/2005~ 07/31/2005
location: All Locations WriteOffs
Payments
Insurance
;':1 Mise
Patient
# Proe
Charges
10171.25
98
0
14.67
0.00
0
0
0.00
263.90
0.00
0
0
6408.52
40.00
42631.76
10171.25
98
0
0.00
334.74
75.00
4526.90
1909.00
0
0
2537.00
0.00
1870.49
137.44
8615.91
2941.48
26
0
David F Jadwin
2343.00
N!A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
23
0
Total For Jadwin LA
4880.00
0.00
1870.49
137.44
8615.91
2941.48
49
0
Teopengco LA
0.00
0.00
121.94
49.00
2600.12
429.00
0
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
20.00
2951.00
0.00
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.00
176.84
0.00
2234.74
918.00
0
0
Shertukde
32772.00
0.00
11236.20
205.00
40931.90
2870.45
302
0
Shertukde LA
17603.00
0.00
2293.26
364.00
8255.24
100.08
151
0
7546.00
N!A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
59
0
25149.00
0.00
2293.26
364.00
8255.24
100.08
210
0
Uu
0.00
0.00
348.65
-75.00
2638.92
2369.00
0
0
Uu LA
0.00
0.00
0.00
39.00
239.52
352.00
0
0
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
12117.00
0.00
6105.77
40.00
42353.19
Dutt
0.00
N!A
10.33
0.00
Dutt LA
0.00
N!A
292.42
12117.00
0.00
Teopengco
0.00
Jadwin LA
Provider
David F
Charges
Jadwin
Total For DavidF Jadwin
Shertukde Total For Shertukde L A
hltPS:!!www.medrium.com/practice I 0 1/1_XG 1486/Reports!finSummary
6'105-77+ 40-00+ 1,870-49+ 137·4 I f+ 8'153'70*
liJil C-.-76+c. I 33,605- 00 + 854-44,34'459-44*
0 " ,,..."' ..... -
o o
Page 81 of 189
Financial Summary
Dutt Dutt LA
Dutt
Total For Dutt LA Billing
Filed 12/01/2008
Provider
Page:,( ot:,(
23195.00
0.00
8751.34
0.00
29954.06
187.00
245
I)
8632.00
0.00
2063.02
0.00
4140.98
0.00
94
'J
4872.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
42
J
13504.00
0.00
2063.02
0.00
4140.98
0.00
136
0
# Proc
# Mise Charges
1040
0
Wl'"iteOffs
Payments Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
$111617.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $33605.00 $854.44 $149721.05 $22247.26
M N 00 00
..-
0 0
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Powered by Medriljm
https:llwww.medrium.com!practicelOl/l_XGI486IReports/finSummary
8/112005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 82 of 189
IKERN
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: June 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 07-19-05
I Year-To-Date I
June Professional Feesl
$10,987.341
__~68,854.?~
10% Billing Service!
$1,098.731 $6,885.481 ----------------"
1% Administrative Assessment Compensation
L__,_*_*_ _
...l-_ _*_*
I
$9,888.611
--' i
$61,969.23!
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018824
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
Dr.
9U1~
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 83 of 189
2005
_-nOall.&ldtv~'t!rl/:<...::::·'----_~ {/
INPATIENT:
10,J 98 7, .3
<j
!() If 8. t' 3
q, 6 68 ,(PI OUTPATIENT'
Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal
/ ' ~ ,tal pro fee payments
____-...,,<:.../Non-pro fee payments
___---,'Z'---_
Balance Billing fee (10%) *BilIing Clerk
/
I Subtotal Amount Due Physician
.. KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018825
Page I of2
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 84 of 189
Financial Summary ~count 10: XG1486 _ _ _ _ I Appointments
IC)i!j'M
User ID:YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
I
~
Financials
I
Maintenance
I
I
e-Records
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary 1- Patient Aging J Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Sunmary
Billing Provider
Location: All Locations
Period for 06/01/2005- 06/30/2005 Payments
Rendering
WriteOffs
# Mise Mise Charges
Insurance
21217.80
0.00
3846.82
Teopengco
0.00
0.00
Jadwin LA
9691.00
Teopengco
Patient
# Proc
Charges
67.09
10219.53
49.00
184
0
562.18
10.00
1759.81
0.00
0
0
0.00
6983.43
90.00
10990.61
0.00
64
I]
0.00
0.00
955.76
76.80
827.24
0.00
a
I)
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
-83.76
0.00
0
I)
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0.00
41.88
-19.40
96.12
0.00
a
I)
Costa
0.00
3.06
460.54
-8.10
355.08
0.00
0
:I
Shertukde
32434.00
0.00
9248.36
392.04
23116.17
177.00
279
Il
5hertukde LA
6340.00
0.00
8415.58
99.00
13165.92
0.00
51
Il
Uu
0.00
0.00
743.03
259.00
1503.36
0.00
0
0
Liu LA
0.00
0.00
580.64
0.00
539.36
0.00
0
0
Dutt
40078.44
0.00
2635.36
212.00
5146.00
0.00
375
0
Dutt LA
10054.00
0.00
2577.98
0.00
3652.22
0.00
96
0
518.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
2
0
10572.00
0.00
2577.98
0.00
3652.22
0.00
98
0
Patient
# Proc
Charge:.
$3.06 $37051.56 $1178.43 $71287.66 $226.00
1051
1
David F
Charges
Patient
Insurance
Provider
Jadwin
3,846-82+ 67'09+ 6'983-43+ 90-00+ 10'987-34."
LA
Dutt Total For Dutt LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments
WriteOffs # Mise
Charges
$120333.24
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
.38) J,;}0.
Insurance
https://www.medrium.com/practice I0 l/I_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
..... o
o
Communication Center
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
CD N CO CO
7/512005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 85 of 189
I KERN fjj!IJMEDICAL mCENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: May 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 06-21-05 May
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Feesl
$18,465.80f
$57!867.3zj
I
J '
=-.....J
CompensationL $16,619.22\
$52,080.62!
1% Administrative Assessment
L !_ _ •• _ _
I
BalanceL..i_---"'$O::..O:::.:O'-'-!_ _
$0.00
I
"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018827
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 86 of 189
2005
)1/fU
Dr.
INPATIENT:
18) 4to 5. fj 0 1/)/1 (P,.5 8 ):0 ;,'L),
J'
I (n ,1(;1 : ' ...
i
Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal
OUTPATIENT: .....~,'
"
Total pro fee",payments Non-pr
B
ee payments
nee
- - - - - - " t Billing fee (10%) *BH!ing Clerk
Subtotal
I
/
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physidans pay 50%
0018828
~
AAA~U~~~
.....
~
••••••
-.J
o
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I
User ID: YVONNEN
I,
Claims
1
I.
Patients
Financials
I
Oaysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summar)' ! Patient Statements 1 Custom Reports
Maintenance
e-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
Communication Cer:lter Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Period for 05/01/2005- 05/31/2005 Payments
Location: All Locations WriteOffs # Proe
# Mise Charges
36742.88
187.00
262
1
35.00
2495.77
0.00
12
a
287.00
14295.08
49.00
79
0
0.00
4190.08
0.00
3
0
301.54
40.00
1976.96
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
0.00
49.00
0.00
0
0
0.00
0.00
1033.83
0.00
2268.17
0.00
a
a
0.00
117.18
230.61
117.18
738.42
0.00
0
4
Shertukde
69471.00
0.00
6716.28
134.00
25040.25
0.00
557
0
Shertukde
22414.00
0.00
6718.46
67.80
14182.35
0.00
179
0
66.00
0.00
930.94
25.00
4416.92
0.00
1
0
0.00
0.00
563.11
0.00
1124.89
0.00
0
0
Dutt
23940.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
532.00
0.00
227
0
Dutt LA
10493.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
91
0
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$255.18 $37984.69 $986.12 $108052.77 $236.00
1411
5
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
29501.00
138.00
9775.52
280.14
Teopengco
551.00
0.00
1039.34
Jadwin LA
10544.00
0.00
8123.14
Teopengco
75.00
0.00
2551.92
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
Lipschultz
0.00
Costa LA Costa
David F Jadwin
Insurance
Document 278-2
Patient
Charges
9'775-52+ 280-1 11+ 8'125-1 11+ 287-00+ 18'465-80*
LA
LA
Filed 12/01/2008
LA
Liu liu LA
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for
practice
0 0
.......
00 00
II.)
to
WriteOffs
Payments Charges
$167055.00
Misc Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Page 87 of 189
Billing Provider
37,984-69+ 986-12+ 38,970-81* https://www.medrium.com/practicel 0 1/l_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~ c o u n tID: XG1486 . - - . . . . - I Appointments
6/1/2005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 88 of 189
IKERN - , : MEDICAL I CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: April 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 04-26-2005 April
I Year-To-Date I
Professional Feesl
~
10% Billing Service 1% Administrative Assessment
I _---.:::.::..::.;..:.:..::.L-, $867.751 i
i ** '---
l
$3, 949· 17 j **
J
(-------,-------,
Compensation[
$7,809.73j
BalanceL__._-,$__O_.o_o-,-l.
$35,461.401
$_0.00
I
-"Note: Payroll Deduction
0018830
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
· For posting dates in
~ Dr.
\, )
J
llpn'(
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 89 of 189
2005
'
O.ULUI tlL__----'--_
INPATIENT: Tot
ro fees payments
Billing fee (10%)
Subtotal
OUTPATIENT:
0 671
liB
...e-
Non-pro fee payments
8 te7'T. "'8
)St/r.
Total pro fee payments
74'
Balance Billing fee (10%) *Billing Clerk
~809. 73
Subtotal
1./ 8D9.
Amount Due Physician
13
KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018831
Page I of2
Financial Summary
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary Financial Summary I Capitation
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I flni'lnciills
I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Summary! Patierlt Statements I Custom Reports
I
Maintenance
Aging
I
I Adjustments I
e-Records
I
Communication Center
I
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
Payments
WriteOffs
Insurance
41434.00
0.00
7144.45
Teopengco
2840.00
0.00
2116.78
10.00
Jadwin LA
12408.00
0.00
/815.45
Teopengco LA
1103.00
0.00
Lipschultz
0.00
Lipschultz
...
Patient
Insurance
# Mise
Patient
# ProC Charges
'
David F .,
645.78 " 23260.30
361
0
5248.97
623.48
33
0
71.80
2617.96
657.00
117
0
358.80
88.00
336.13
318.00
19
a
0.00
8.38
1.50
331.39
123.19
0
a
0.00
0.00
4.83
0.00
205.17
10.00
0
0
Costa LA
0.00
0.00
254.84
0.00
576.16
0.00
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.00
854.82
0.00
1182.54
411.44
a
0
Shertukde
36230.00
0.00
8838.32
412.15
21743.64
2463.21
321
0
Shertukde LA
8435.00
0.00
3664.12
0.00
2461.18
2.00
86
0
Liu
1541.00
0.00
2112.69
0.00
4436.31
1266.11
10
0
552.00
0.00
686.34
0.00
1516.46
147.80
4
0
# PrOC
# Mise Charges
951
0
\..) adwin "."
.. ..." ,~~
~.
\,~<
LA
Liu LA
Payments
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for
o
$104543.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
,0.00 ($26859.82 $1229.23 $63916.21 $11286.00
26,859'82+ 1,229·23+ ,28,089·05,',
o......
Powered
00 00
~
Patient
https:llwww.medrium.comlpracticel 0 I/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
by Medrlum
"
~
,.:~
7' 1 44 - 45+ 645-78+ 815- lf5+ 71-80+ 8'677-48*
,'"
Page 90 of 189
practice
Charges
WriteOffs
Insurance
.......... ..... ..
Filed 12/01/2008
5263.77
Document 278-2
Mise Charges
Charges
Location: All Locations
Period for 04/01/2005- 04/30/2005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countID: XG1486 User ID: YVONNEN _ I Appointments I Claims I Patients I.
5/412005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 91 of 189
• KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: March 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 04-26-2005 ,---"CM:=a.:...:rc:..:;h=--_1 Year-la-Date r-"
I
,---.----,
Professional Feesl_. $9,561.911
$30,724.091 I
10% Billing Service!'--_-"-::c.:...::.=.::.l-_-'-'=.=-=-= $956.20[ $3,072.421 1% Administrative Assessment
L. ,~~.
'::'_
••_._--,I
_--,-_~
I
Balance!'--_--"-=.=::..J $0.00
$0.001 -"-=-'.:::.::..J
·Wole: Payroll Deduction
0018833
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 92 of 189
fI;/ rnieJI
For posting dates in
Dr.
Document 278-2
_-=J-'
_
MEDRIUM INPATIENT:
q, S fa !. qI )
Cj,5(D.
a0
--t!t"
8,, (OoS.
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
'71
Subtotal
MEDRIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee payments
(non-pro fee payments) Balance 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee *Billing Clerk Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018834
.1 Cl~v 1 Ul L
.
~
I
X(1486 Use,. IO: YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims
!
Patients
I
~
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I Financials
I
Daysheet J Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitatio-n Sumlnary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
e-Records
Communication Center
I Adjustments I Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count ID:
Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008
Powered by Medrium
....00
00 W 01
Page 93 of 189
o o
https://www.rnedriurn.comlpracticel ()111_XG 1486/Reports/finSurnrnary
41112005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 94 of 189
IKERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: February 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 03-15-05 February
10% Billing Service
I
I Year-lo-Date I
_.$1,413.321
~$2.!.!J..~}21
1% Administrative Assessment l-"---;;*---j-'---;;~l
,--------CompensationL. $12,719.901 Balance!---·----sO.OO I' i..-.--•• ._ _
,
$19,045.961
--- $0:00 1 .,_:...-1 ...
.__
"Nole: Payroll Deduction
0018836
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
(Wfa oi1.(
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 95 of 189
2004
Dr.
EDRIUM INPATIENT: Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
_ _ _ _ _ _'- Subtotal
MEDRIUM OUTPATIENT:
IIf) /3:.3. Ol~ Total prof fee payments
o 1'1)
/3.3.
I.,
z//j.
/61/, '//
(non-pro fee payments) ,?,;),
3~
q. 90
Balance 10% billing fee
-1% administrative fee *Billing Clerk
/01; 7/9· .if 0' /(4. 7;Q. qo I
Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018837
--0-----
_
I
10: XG1486 User ID; YVONNEN
ADDointme~ts
I
Claims
I
Patients
~
!
k>28 Financials
I
Maintenance
Ie-Records
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
Daysheet ! Daysheet Summary! Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments 1 Procedure Summary Financial Summary r Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers; Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Period for 02/01/200S- 02/28/2005 Payments
Location: All Locations WriteOffs
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
23875.00
0.00
11419.66
28.38
27497.37
124.00
227
a
Teopengco
8601.00
0.00
1419.83
10.00
3735.05
49.00
95
Jadwin LA
7314.00
0.00
2235.52
449.66
4457.58
-138.00
72
a a
Teopencgo
2980.00
0.00
316.73
-0.06
205.97
0.00
36
a
Lipschultz
O.C'O
0.00
224.00
0.00
672;91
0.00
a
a
Lipschultz L
O.W
0.00
36.74
0.00
213.08
0.00
0
0
O.CO
0.00
1436.16
0.00
2347.64
0.00
a
0
587.CO
0.00
2435.58
29.04
5029.47
0.00
5
a
32393.CO
0.00
5207.81
302.48
12638.29
250.00
284
a
Shertukde L A
9450.00
0.00
2261.46
0.00
5130.67
0.00
85
a
Uu
6993.00
0.00
3702.46
0.00
8276.73
0.00
57
0
Liu LA
2469.00
0.00
349.81
25.00
1198.99
0.00
20
a
Patient
# Proc
# Misc Charges
$0.00 $31045.76 $844.50 $71403.75 $285.00
881
0
David F Jadwin
11'419-66+ 28-38+ 2'235-52+ 449'66+ 14'133'22*+
Document 278-2
Mise Charges
Charges!
LA
A Costa La
Costa
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
o .....
Charges
$94662.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Page 96 of 189
o
WriteOffs
Payments
Filed 12/01/2008
Shertukde
31'045'76+ B44'50+ 31,B<}0'26*+
00
00 W 00
https://www.medrium.comlpractice J 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count
3/1/2005
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 97 of 189
.KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: January 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 02-15-05 January Professional Feesl..
I Year-To-Date I
$7,028.961
10% Billing Service
i
1% Administrative Assessment
I
__ __.-
$7,028.961 .
_-----~--_.
---'1-----' $702.90\
-_:":"'::::':'::":..1.
__ $7_02_.9QJ
••
••
1 - - - -1 ~ Compensation I $6,326.0~.L __$6,32~.0~J Balance!,
$0.00
I
1
$0.00 i
""Nole: Payroll Deduction
0018839
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 98 of 189
---- 11 11M \I ,)Q I
Dr. _ _'--",-/:1,,-"-0d=W-'-'-.i1lC---
_
MEDRIUM INPATIENT: ,. :) ,:; (;. (J (p
70a. 9rJ
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
Subtotal MEDRIUM OUTPATIENT: ./,/
Total prof
// f~l'Jr5ayments
(non-pro fee. payments)
/
.Balance / /
10% billing fee 1% administrativefee *Billing Clerk
Subtotal
/
Amount Due Physician
• KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018840
Page 99 of 189 Filed 12/01/2008 Document 278-2 Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---*'"
.....
Page 1 0[2
Financial Summary
-.::t
~ c o u n tID: I
XG1486 User ID; YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims
I
I
Patients
~
Et:;tfWB Financials
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
Ie-Records
I Adjustments I
CO 00
.....
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
o
o
Communication Center
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering Provider
Period for 01/01/2005- 01/31/2005 Payments
Charges
Location: All locations WriteOffs
Insurance
#
Insurance
Patient
16420.00
15.00
6027.77
244.43
46976.40
3219.24
182
1
Teopengco
8007.00
0.00
1251.69
0.00
11707.19
25.33
72
0
Jadwin LA
2451.00
0.00
1012.76
-256.00
10131.61
666.00
32
0
Teopencgo
2146.00
0.00
929.54
0.00
2435.47
298.00
25
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
316.80
8.38
1590.06
83.76
0
0
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0.00
70.11
0.00
203.52
0.00
0
0
4007.00
0.00
1232.72
0.00
2340.62
0.00
36
0
David F Jadwin
Patient
#
6'027-77+ 244-43+ 1,012·76+ 256-0(J7'028-96*
Mi~;c
Proc Charges
Mise Charges
Provider
LA
Costa La
Costa
16182.00
0.00
3544.44
284.62
21724.67
0.00
125
0
5hertukde
29168.00
0.00
9893;27
212.48
46497.27
639.00
231
0
Shertukde
11814.00
0.00
3127.30
0.00
8261.50
0,00
85
0
951.00
0.00
4336.60
177.50
20385.78
841.00
9
0
0.00
0.00
1652.04
25.00
6519.46
163.00
0
0
LA Liu
Liu LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for
practIce
payments
WriteOffs
$91146.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$15.00 $33395.04 $696.41 $178773.55 $5935.33
.3 Lf} OqI . "/:.r ~
# Mis·.:
Charges
. .-
# Proc
Chargf!S
797
1
'7( 0 GAQ.. ~ c) 4,'......... -'"
a 7/)(oJ.. 'J
(7;
1'-) ') (
1
l
r
9 q non- eore
"-':,"',G .2' ,..-, ".:
"
0{)[1uJ I i,l
/t) 6{;
33'395-0 1++ 696-41 + 34'09'\ -45*
https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 0 1/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
1
! Ci t,:)
2/1/2005
IH{J('~
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 100 of 189
• KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
DECEMBER 2004 Date of Distribution: 01-18-05
DR. JADWIN
I ProfessionaI Fees
December
I Year-To-Date I
C
$1 5-,-, 8;;;:2;;;:2,-,.7,. :8.....1_$'-1,.:3.:::2-'-',9:....:3'--'4,.89 i
L
$14,240.~Or-$116,"651.631
Distribution Compensation
$15,365.12J $0.9-,-0,-1_--:-$9,18. 14 1
**Faculty Practice 1%L__
- _ . _ - - - - - - - - '-----"--'-_.._'-'! [ . $0.001 $O.OO!
'---__B=.a::.:l=a:..:.nc::..:e=-**1=H",,~#ill~ _
nQ_ _?R._ftAJ
--
tho -
!:J,rlrnin;C'f,.~f;"o::tC'e-oC'c:rn.onf
-_
_
_
~-
- - - - - - ••• -
IMil1 ho -
::II -
n.:::lurnll "'-,1" - ..
deduction
0018842
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates in
I:t:cembd
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 101 of 189
2004
j{~clWin
)r.
o1EDRIUM INPATIENT:
/.?, 6 ~ 01, '7 8 I ,S8&:;' /)8
--eI
! ()
)
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
IEDRIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee paYJJ1ents
(non-p:;~f§le~ments) Balance
;/ - -_ _------r/10% billing fee
---r/-7 / / /
/
1% administrative fee *Bil/ing Clerk Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
KMC pays 50%/physidans pay 50%
0018843
Page 1 0[2
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 102 of 189
Financial Summary ~ c o u n t10: ~. I
i k ~ I Log Out! Help I Contact I
XG1486 User IO: YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims
I
I ,.
Patients
Financials
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary! Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
e-Records
I Adjustments!
Communication Center
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Rendering provider
Payments
WriteOffs
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
16785.00
0.00
7947.46
35.85
Teopengco
5078.00
0.00
1031.02
Jadwin LA
8160.00
0.00
7839.47
Teopencgo
1265.00
0.00
0.00
David F Jadwin
Charges
Location: All locations
Period for 12/01/2004- 12/31/2004
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mjs~c Charges
133
0
23155.95
3162.00
58.20
5422.41
709.59
46
0
0.00
15640.73
49.00
70
665.38
0.06
1174.62
0.00
13
a a
0.00
0.00
0.00
414.00
-84.00
a
7133.00
0.00
365.04
0.00
2331.26
0.00
62
Costa
17337.00
0.00
2850.73
74.94
8583.41
108.00
169
Shertukde
38400.00
0.00
7858.66
68.75
20030.48
1251.86
351
a a a a
Shertukde
8752.00
0.00
1660.81
17.50
3893.19
0.00
81
0
LA
Lipschultz Costa La
'Toial Jadwin
LA
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
7'947-46+ 35-85+ 7,839-47+ 15' 822 '7'8'*
Liu
8588.00
0.00
4967.33
299.53
14813.90
406.00
64
Liu LA
2182.00
0.00
4337.19
44.95
7830.71
0.00
18
a a
# Proc
Charg~~s
1007
a
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments Charges
$113680.00
Misc Charges
Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $39523.09 $599.78 $103290.66 $5602.45
/lOn· eo(fd,
40'122·87+ 15'S22-7B24'3I}O'09*
# Mis,:
39'523-09+ 599-78+ 40'122-81* Powered by Medrium
https:llwww.medrium.com/practicel 0111_XG1486/Reports/finSurnmary
113/2005
""" """
00 00
..... o o
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
.KERN MEDICAL - . : • CENTER
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 103 of 189
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
November 2004 Date of Distribution: 12-21-04
DR. JADWIN November
I Year-To-Date I
Professional FeesL.!~~$9:..'.,.::::52=-4.:.:..6::.:3::.J1~ $126,636.Z±i i
Distribution Compensation
I
Billing Service 10%L **Faculty Practice
10/01.
_ _-=B::::a.:.:::la:.:.,:n.:::;ce=--_ _
C
$8,572.171
$110,983.301
$952.461
$14,735.361
$0.001
$918.1'!J
!
--:::.$O;:.:..::.:oo:J.,I_ _--"$:..::o:..;:.O.::.:O
**Effect!ve 09-28-04, the administrative assessment wi!! be a payroll
deduction
0018845
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
=or posting dates in, /
)~
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 104 of 189
2004
~
)r.
'1EDRIUM INPATIENT: Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
Subtotal 1EDRIUM OUTPATIENT: // Total p~(ee payments
------ro
fee payments)
Balance 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
/
!
*Billing Clerk
Subtotal Amount Due Physician
KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018846
Financial Summary
Page 1 of2
1t211iJ I ~
Financials
I
MaIntenance
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging FInancial Summary I Capitation Summary: I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
I
I Adjustments I
e-Records
I
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
I
Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
David F Jadwin
Payments
Charges
15036.01) 4587.00
Mise Charges
Insurance
318.00
6519.39
0.00
2144.38
WriteOffs
Patient
0.00
# Mise
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
Charges
26188.68
318.00
157
2
25.00
7816.15
38
0
425.00 5513.00
0.00
3005.24
0.00
4450.62
0.00
56
0
Teopencgo L
2346.00
0.00
362.50
77.00
605.60
0.00
23
a
To-mt Kme--
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
465.64
0.00
1950.44
166.00
0
a
Lipschultz L A
0.00
0.00
105.29
0.00
412.71
0.00
0
0
33'912·59+ 368·80+ 34'281 ·39*
7570.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
76
a
lOta t Ilbll- core.,
0
34'281·39+ 9 ' 52 {+ • ,t] :3 .~ 2.!p '156·76*
Costa La
23005.70
0.00
535.13
0.00
2318.87
0.00
5hertukde
50983.00
0.00
7180.39
77.00
19664.32
0.00
428
0
Shertukde L A
17537.00
0.00
1106.50
51.80
1746.22
0.00
139
a
L1u
20677.00
0.00
7705.63
0.00
20652.42
0.00
136
0
9400.0(1
0.00
4782.50
138.00
6237.73
0.00
68
0
Insurance
Patient
# Proc.
# Mise Charges
$318.00 $33912.59 $368.80 $92043.76
$59.00
1364
2
Liu LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
WriteQffs
Payments Charges
$156654.70
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
o o...... 00 00
.j:>.
https://www.medrium.com/oracticel (I 1/1 XC114RlilRpnnrtolr.n".. ~~o~,
Page 105 of 189
Costa
243
Filed 12/01/2008
Jadwin L A A
......
Jadwin 6'519·39+ 3'005·24+ 9'524·63*
Document 278-2
Teopengco
location: All Locations
Period for 11/01/2004- 11/30/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count 10: XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN _ _ _ I Appointments I, Claims I Patients
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 106 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
OCTOBER 2004 Date of Distribution: 11-23-04
DR. JADWIN Payments
I Year-To-Date I
$2,824.08L_j.!1~,11~_'!JJ
Professional FeesL Distribution Compensation
I
Billing Service 10%IL
$2,541.671 $:::.:;2::..:8:=2.:...:.4.JL
__
**Faculty Practice 1%rL--
$102,411.131 $13,782.84\
$:. .:0:. :. 0, -,0,-,-1
$-:..9,-1,-8_.1,-,41
_ _.....:B=.;a::.:l=an:.:..c:.:e"--_~I= _ _ $o.oO,..Ll
. 2:.$.::co.c::.o.;:.;ol
**Effective (J9-28-04, the administrative assessment wi!! be 3 payro!! deduction
0018848
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
)r
posting dates in
odobd
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 107 of 189
2004
EDRIUM INPATIENT:
oBd-.'f· 08
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
eJ.,s LJ f. {; 7
Subtotal
EDRIUM OUTPATIENT: _ _ _ _ _ Total prof n· payments (nonJ' fee payments) B ance 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee
I
*Billing Clerk
Subtotal
Amount Due Physician
KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018849
Page I on
1'lllctll\,.;JilI ollllllllC:try
AppolntmE~nts
I
Claims
I
Patients
I
~ Financiafs
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary i Insurance Summary I Patient Aging) Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary-I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
Communication Center
Ie-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date FinanCial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
Payments Charges
Location: All Locations
Period for 10/01/2004- 10/31/2004
Mise Charges
WriteOffs
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
# Mise
Patient
# Proc
Charges
91670.00
0.00
1516.01
140.00
11537.98
1939.00
807
a
Teopengco
14271.66
0.00
453.89
20,00
6159.85
746.00
118
JadWin LA
32959.00
0.00
1011.11
156.96
3390.89
867.05
260
a a
Teopencgo
2812.00
0,00
643.60
0.00
1835040
137.00
21
0
Lipschultz
15.00
0.00
311.86
0.00
635.38
0.00
1
a
Lipschultz LA
0.00
0.00
-125.39
0,00
382.95
0,00
a
0
84.00
0.00
371.41
0.00
1986.72
0,00
3
0
5herdukde
51559.00
0.00
2824.94
494.57
18497.76
442,00
500
a
Sherdukde
7794,00
0,00
4436.47
0,00
8078.23
0.00
79
0
Uu
70632,00
0.00
3383.44
-49.00
23732.16
731.00
609
Liu LA
22047.00
0.00
2006.92
0.00
3405.83
0.00
206
a a
1'516'01+ 140·00+ 1,011·11+ 156'96+ 2' 82lf' 08';'
Document 278-2
David F Jadwin
LA
Costa
Filed 12/01/2008
LA
Writeoff5
F:'yHlf!tl'-5 iJ i11i1l';1 1'1 (~'! id,·,
l:f'ilrl('!ll!(l
F,
~l·.'id,>t
Grand Total for
o
o .....
00 00 01
o
~J!::'~
$293843.66
:I~,( 1~ll
P(lti~llt
Il1sur;inCe
Pi1tienl.
$0.00 $16834.26 $762,53 $79643.15 $4862,05
tt Prot
2604
~J t·1j!'c ChiH'ges
o Page 108 of 189
practice
ell"!
I I\SI,n',lllce
1'516-01+ 140'00+ 1'011'11+ 156·96+ 2' 824' 08,;, hlips :11\\\\ \\ .111Cd I'i lllll.CO lll i praCI icc I 0 I / I . X (i 14~6!Rcpl1l'ls/liIlS Ul1ml"l')'
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
th.:
Account ID: XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN
11/1/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 109 of 189
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004
SEPTEMBER 2004 Date of Distribution: 10-26-04
DR. JADWIN
I
Payments
I Year-To-Date I
Professional FeesL $10,707.051 Distribution
$114,288.9~
I
Compensation 1'---_$::..:9:..!..6::..:3:...:6:...;..3: . :4.: .J.!_ _$::..:9:.. :9-,-8, :. .:6:. .:9. :. .4,-=-,61 Billing Service 10% **Faculty Practice 1%
I IL...:
$1 ,070.711
$13,50~
. :. $0::. :.:. :.0. : .0.1. .1_ _..:. $:. .:9:. .:1:. :.8.:.-.1:. . :. ;4i
=====:B:a~la=n:c~e=====[======$~o:..::.oo~i'----=-_·--_-. $0.60] **Effective,09..28..04"the admjnist,.~t;lf~~ssessment will be a payroll deduction
0018851
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
For posting dates
Dr.
in.)i¥J~
_--r(kifJ,Udt
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 110 of 189
2004
_
()
MEDRIUM INPATIENT:
70 '1,
J())
{).:J
/,()70·
'r ,f
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee
/
-e-
q) CoJ~,..3'-1
1% administrative fee
Subtotal
ME RIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee payments
(non-pro fee payments) _ _ _ _ _--",' Balance
__
~ -t7--
--e-
~/o billing fee 1% dministrative fee *Billing CI
Subtotal
k
'\
Amount Due Physician
* KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018852
Page I 0[2
Page 111 of 189
Financial Summary
Filed 12/01/2008 Document 278-2
It)
CO
CO
~count ID: XG1486
~ I
APpointments
k»iiE
User 1D: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
I ~
Patients
Financials
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary J Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary! Patient statements J Custom Reports
Maintenance
Financial Summary All Providers
Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
.Jtld uJ location: All locations WriteOffs
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
Patient
I'"
5:J S'Li fl, ~ U :5-'
'169
# Mise # Proc
ChargJ~s
David F JadwIn
8305.00
0.00
5504.03
169.38
24896.12
11158.35
113
0
Teopengco
2009.00
0.00
3058.29
166.38
8687.58
4764.74
18
0
Jadwin LA
1914.00
0.00
4965.27
68.37
15017.71
5171.83
35
0
Teopencgo
163.00
0.00
2026.43
0.00
3542.07
1672.48
2
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0.00
103.61
0.00
690.89
1036.38
0
0
Lipschultz
0.00
0,00
253.08
0.00
6005.92
10.00
0
0
Costa La
0.00
0.00
0.00
10.00
724.00
9.80
0
0
Costa
0.00
0.06
70.11
0,06
2720,89
197.00
0
1
5herdukde
32255.00
0.00
2709.66
48.00
9438.59
207.00
285
0
Sherdukde LA
11053.00
0.00
1601.52
0.00
1849.88
5.00
112
0
Uu
28533.00
0.00
5208.54
49.00
15044.33
200.00
253
,0
liu LA
10616.00
0.00
3365.01
0.00
3559.99
0.00
100
0
# Proc
# Mise Charg
918
1
L~ .'
"3 ("". 9 -..; :; ~ ? 'l " 6U .. 3·-/·
i 0 ~ '/U?
Q
~U'5
LA
LA
Payments Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Charges
Misc Charges
$94848.00
Insurance
WriteOffs
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$0.06 $28865.55 $511.19 $92177.97 $24432.58
2;L3
J
d6';· 51 1 •
'j ~H-
29~3"t6~"/'
J..«~~.JJ •• "~~,,
-.--.""A ... ~ ....................-.--.1.................. ~..,.=1 n1 11
V~lIlQhJDo
........... ..-t .... lh,...C'"........................ ,
.....
o
o
I
I Adjustments I Procedure Sunmary
Period for .09/01/2004- 09/30/2004 Payments
Charges
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communlcation.Center
e~Records
Financial Summary By Posting Date
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
M
1 (Ill /"}(I{l11
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
.KERN MEDICAL • CENTER
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 112 of 189
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees· 2004 Date of Distribution: 09-28-04 Dr. Jadwin Payments
I Year-To-Date I
AUGUST
Professional Fees
r-
$-1-'-1,-=7-'-66-=-.-'-3-=7"1 ----,$-1-,-03-,-=58-0=-.--=981
Distribution Compensation! $10,354.41T
$90,233.121
Billing Service 12% 'I- - - - ' -$1,411.961 $12,429.72 J --''--._--'----'---'----'
%L
**Faculty Practice 1
L___
._-...,;$"-'0..:..;.0:...;.0
_ _--=B=.;a::.,:/.:::.an:.;..c=.;e=--_-..JL_----:$=O,_Oo_!
$918.141
$_O_.O.Q]
·*Effective 09-28-04, the administrative assessment will be a payroll deduction
0018854
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~~
For posting dates in
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 113 of 189
2004
~
0'.
IIIEDRIUM INPATIENT:
o.
~(p(e..3
7
Total prof fees payments
J,J, % _-,-IL/...:../:..;.I...:..._9--=&_ .w% billing fee i
/f-'OrEtp
!a~3('. '7.1'
1% administrative fee
Subtotal
/03$'-1.4/ EDRIUM OUTPATIENT: Total prof fee payments Non-pro fee payments
10% billing fee
~~ministrative fee Subtot1Jl
" TOTAL PRO FEES
____---=-
*Billing clerk
_ _ _ _ _ Iount Due to Physician , KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%
0018855
Page 1 of 1
r:n~nci'll Summary
Page 114 of 189
~count ___ I
e:s
ID: XG1486 User ID: YVONNEN
Appointments
I Claims
I
I) Financials I
Patients
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
Ie-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
CommunIcation Center
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I
Filed 12/01/2008
Billing Provider
Payments
Rendering
Provider
WrlteOffs
# Mise
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
Charges
8292.87
659.15
18569.45
259.00
390
1
0.00
3419.56
10.00
6263.79
0.00
151
0
10615.00
0.00
2765.84
48.51
3976.26
0.00
94
0
2805.00
0:00
1256.22
0.00
1693.98
0.00
20
0
414.00
0.00
1529.91
90.25
2997.32
0.00
3
0
0.00
0.00
237.61
85.00
139.19
0.00
0
0 0
Mise Charges
Insurance
38868.50
19.96
Teopengco
14891.00
Jadwin LA
Teopencgo LA
DavId F
Location: All Locations
Period for 08/01/2004· 08/31/2004
Charges
Document 278-2
Jadwin
Lipschultz
Lipschultz L A
0.00
0.00
12.41
56.00
36.59
0.00
0
1948.00
0.00
176.51
0.00
368.49
0.00
14
0
Sherdukde
25451.00
0.00
546.31
0.00
938.78
0.00
241
0
Sherdukde LA
8117.00
0.00
1288.94
0.00
2073.06
0.00
80
0
53667.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
452
0
7128.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
73
0
Mise Charges
Insurance
patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mlsc Charges
$19.96 $19526.18 $948.91 $37056.91 $259.00
1518
1
Costa La
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Costa
Liu
Uu LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
payments Charges
$163904.50
d;'
~~9L ~
WriteOffs
:;'!.'
659· 'j 5-:· 2 ~ 'l6:':,· ;:;/t' (I,
Sac\cviA
li
~
[~l
• :.) .j .;.
7 () 6 " 3 '7 ,~
hltps:llwww.medrium.com/practice 10111_XG 1486/Reports/finSurnmary
....o o
Summary
Financial Summary BV Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
<0
10 00 00
Powered by Medrlum
9/112004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"'C
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 115 of 189
.KERN
MEDICAL • CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Date of Distribution: 08/17/2004 Dr. Jadwin
~_-,-P-=a:.Ly.:..:m.:..:e:..:.n:..:.ts=--_-I.-_-=J-=U-=L:..:Y _ _1 Year-To-Date Professional Fees I"
I
$11 ,146.i4!-$91,814~1l
Distribution Co mpensation ,-Billing Service 12%1"
L_.
Faculty Practice 1%1,.
$9,697. 6::6~1_-_--=$c.:.7~9:,8c.:.7.=.8:.:.~7-,-,·1l $1,337.611
$11,017.76-1
...__.
$111.47,-1__ $918 ..14!
0018857
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 116 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Dr. Jadwin
J=:.cU::..:N..:..:E=--_1 Year·To·Date
_ _..:..P.=,aYL::m.:.:.=.;en:..:.:t=s
I
$10,971~
$80,667.871
Compensation LI__$-,-9-".,5_45. 03 I
$70, 181.0~
Professional Fees! Distribution
~------r-----.
Billing Service!
Billing ClerkL Faculty Practice 1%[ _ _.....:B::..:a::..:l=an:..:.:c::..:e=---__[--···-··
$1,316.561.
$9,680._'!§j
$0.001
$0.001
$109.71 i
$806.671
$0.001--····-$-0-.qgJ ymn07107104
0018858
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
-
"- lUVl 0'
For posting dates in Dr.
Filed 12/01/2008
--- J . _-''-.I..lI Q"""(J",-",,,W.l..:(n-'--
{a, /
q'1 f .3D /
Page 117 of 189
2004
_
Total prof fees payments Id,
_-!./...:::J....:..:!(p~.S',--w-,---- l:Q% Billing fee
f()
9. 'r(
q
,j"'I.$'.03
1
)
1% Administrative fee
0018859
Page 1 of2
Financial Summary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countJD; XG1486 _ _ _ I Appointments
User ID: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
I ~
Finandals
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary., Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
I
I
e-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
Communication Center
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Location: All Locations
Period for 06/01/2004- 06/30/2004
payments
WriteOffs
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
519.42
18191.61
349.50
446
0
2403.73
32.67
7964.41
0.00
174
0
0.00
5570.71
203.00
9082.47
0.00
113
0
6626.00
0.00
927.24
0.00
1271.16
0.00
50
0
lipschUltz
6306.00 .
0.00
1879.46
306.00
6261.84
0.00
60
0
lipschUltz
1339.00
0.00
1571.82
3.00
2765.17
0.00
10
0
435.00
0.00
1278.06
0.00
2150.14
0.00
5
0
Costa
7306.70
0.00
4258.08
0.00
12275.04
0.00
59
0
Sherdukde
6812.00
0.00
1766.84
10.00
5863.16
0.00
71
0
Sherdukde
2597.00
0.00
5.34
0.00
4.66
0.00
27
0
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$0.00 $24339.45 $1074 ..09 $65829.66 $349.50
1015
0
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Mise Charges
Insurance
43288.96
0.00
4678.17
Teopengco
18453.66
0.00
Jadwin LA
10468.00
Teopencgo
David F
Charges
Patient
Jadwin
Document 278-2
LA
LA Costa La
Filed 12/01/2008
LA Payments
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
. Charges
$103632.32
Mise Charges
Insurance
Insurance
10 ) CI'tI . .50 <9.5)
o
Page 118 of 189
:)GlduJin p(m0
Patient
WriteOffs
Powered by Medrium
o ...... CXl CXl
0)
o
https:l/www.medrium.com/practicel 0111_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
7/612004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 119 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Dr. Jadwin
I Year-To-Date I
MAY
Payments
Professional FeesL
$8,995.39L
$69,696.571
Distribution
.Compensation [~~~._E,?..?5:.99
L__~§.Q,,!?l6.-:.!)21
Billing Service J'-"-'$l, 079.451-'-----$8':363.591 ~"--'".
__...,,~-_ . ~-, .._~_ .._---,-_._-_.~-"" .."._,,-----j
Billing ClerkL r---
Faculty Practice 1%L,
.
;r;-;:;T------=1
---:!$~O.:.::.OOi
$Q.OOj
-....-
~89.9,~5!_
$696. 96 1
0018861
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
For posting dates in
Filed 12/01/2008
mo.Y
Page 120 of 189
2004
jo.dwin
Dr.
£$ QCf.5. J 't )
l.o~9. '15 i
89. 95
Total prof fees payments
IJ. biD W'fo Billing fee
1% Administrative fee
0018862
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 121 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004 Dr. Jadwin _ _.:. .P=..ay<..:.m.:. :.e=.:nc:..:t::;.s_ _L---:..;A:.:...P.o-R:.:.;IL=--_1 Year-To-Date r-'
-r
I
$7,421.771
$60,701.181
CompensationL $6,456.94i
$52,810.031
Professional FeesL. _ Distribution
Billing ClerklL . - . - _
$O.oDr """'---
$0.00:
,
Faculty Practice 1%\'---- $74.221 _ _.. .;$. .:.6. .:.07.:. ..:. .:.0-'-'11 Balance
0018863
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
AIuk(
For posting dates in
-<
Dr.
.
Page 122 of 189
2004
,JMQJ.LdW~'n+------
'0 4CJ,/
77
Total prof fees payments
!~
9'0
_..........J8CL....19~o:...c., CR=....LI .J:607o Billing fee
71. a:h {P)<;50. q<{
1% Administrative fee
0018864
Page 1 of 1
Page 123 of 189
Financial Summary ~countID: XG1486 _ _ I Appointments
:E}¥_
User 10: YVONNEN
I
Claims
I
Patients
I
t
Financjals
I
Maintenance
e-Records
I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Communication Center
Daysheet 1 Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements 1 Custom Reports
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Payments Charges
Location: All locations
Period for 04/01/2004- 04/30/2004
WriteOffs
# Mise
Patient
563.07
17881.43
414.00
486
2
752.26
188.00
3332.74
1.47
79
0
0.00
2233':79
286,00
2416.17
0.00
114
2594.00
0.00
630.41
0.00
507.59
0.00
24
0
Lipschultz
24397.00
0.00
4123.44
20.00
13054.56
187.00
184
0
Lipschultz
7100.00
0.00
3050.35
51.80
5920.65
0.00
50
0
°0
Insurance
52568.00
2.18
4338.91
Teopengco
9659.00
0.00
Jadwin LA
13199.00
Teopencgo
. David F
Patient
# Proc ' Charges
Insurance
Mise Charges
Jadwin
7 (
.,', DOw! ()
1) 'I JJ '17
o -'
LA
LA Costa La
2407.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
17
Costa
8724.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
580.00
0.00
66
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
$2.18 $15129.16 $1108.87 $43693.14 $602.47
1020
2
Billing Provider
Payments
Rendering
Provider
Charges
Grand Total for $120648.00 practl~e
Mise. Charges
Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs
Insurance
It;: .? P ...',\ ,
Powered by Medrium
https://www.medrium.com/practicel 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
5/4/2004
LO
c.o
co co
..... o
o
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 124 of 189
.KERN
~ • MEDICAl CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - ~004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
March
I Year-To-Date I
$29,478.081
$53,279.411
I
$25,645.931
$46,353.09/
Billing Service I
$3,537.371
$6,393.531
Professional Feesl Distribution
Compensation
Bill ing Clerk 1,--_.:...-$,,-,,0..;;..:.0,-,,-01_ _.:...-$:...;;0..:..,..0,--0I Faculty Practice 1%1 ,--_....:B::.:a:.::.:;la::.:.n:..::c.=.e
. $294. 78l_----'$:..::.53=2:.:..:.7...::..91 ---.:$::.:0c:..::.0:..::.0J_ _---.:$::.:0c:..:::.0;-=-O1
0018866
Financial Summary
Page I of I
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG ~count W: _ _ _ J
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 125 of 189 ~
XG1486 User 10: PAULW
Appointments
I
Claims
I
Patients
~
J
Financials
I
Maintenance
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary! Capitation Summary I Patient Statements 1 Custom R.eports
I
I
e-Records
I Adjustments I· Procedure
SUIl
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Location: All locations
Period for 03/01/2004-03/31/2004 Payments
WriteOffs
# Mis
Insurance
19622.00
0.00
17481,26
1921,00
91946.63
16.14
142
Teopengco
4567.00
0.00
3781,63
110.00
25419.12
77.00
45
jadwin LA
2669.00
0.00
9989.82
86.00
32813.65
0.00
28
Teopencgo
1138.00
0.00
1896.15
0.00
8608.05
20.00
11
0.00
N/A
0.00
0.00
308.00
0.00
0
1138.00
0.00
1896.15
0.00
8916.05
20.00
11
Lipschultz
46041,00
0.00
5864.39
0.00
23409.61
0.00
329
Lipschultz
16434.00
0.00
773.88
0.00
749•. 52
0.00
124
Patient
# Proc
$0.00 $39787.13 $2117.00 $183254.58 $113.14
679
David F Jadwin
Patient
Insurance
Patient
proc Chargl
Mise Charges
Charges
#
LA Teopengco Total For Teopencgo L
A
LA Billing
Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments Charges
$90471.00
Misc Charges Insurance
Patient
WriteOffs
Insurance
# Mis Chargt
red by Medrium
B6-0n·, 29' 478 -Og",
https:llwvvw.medrium.comJpracticeIOI/1 XG 14Rli/Renort
Lt!":;:j")OOA
0018867
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 126 of 189
Last- -Name -_.-.--
First Name - Insurance Name Date of Service Payment Date CPT Amount Paid Medi-CaJ Of California 12/4/2003 31212004 88305 $20.66 Medicare Of Northern ( 12/4/2003 31212004 $70.05 88307 Medicare Of Northern ( 12/12/2003 312/2004 88307 $70.05 Medi-Cal Of California 121712003 3/2/2004 88307 $70.11 Medicare Of Northern ( 12/12/2003 312/2004 88305 $33.01 12/12/2003 312/2004 --- --,,------ . __,Medicare Of Northern ( 88311 $10.68 . Medicare Of Northern ( 12/4/2003 31212004 88309 $100.37 Medi-Cal Of California 12/21/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/21/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/18/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/19/2003 312/2004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/20/2003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/19/2003 31212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 1211912003 $10.00 312/2004 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 1211812003 312/2004 $70.11 88307 Medi-Cal Of California 12122/2003 312/2004 88307 $70.11 Medi-Cal Of California 1212612003 $10.00 31212004 88300 -_._--_._.-_ Medi-Cal Of California 12/1812003 31212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/1612003 31212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/912003 312/2004 $20.66 88104 Medi-Cal Of California 1219/2003 31212004 $48.20 88305 Medi-Cal Of California 1211912003 312/2004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/1712003 312/2004 $30.40 88304 - - - .. Medi-Cal Of California 12121/2003 3/2/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-eal Of California 12/2212003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Kaiser Foundation Heal 12/1612003 312/2004 $4.76 88300 Champus 12/2012003 312/2004 $17.51 88307 Medi-Cal Of California 12/15/2003 31212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/9/2003 31212004 $20.66 88104 -- _----- Medi-Cal Of California 12131/2003 3/2/2004 88305 $48.20 Medi-Cal Of California 1212812003 31212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12/2912003 31212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12129/2003 3/212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 12123/2003 3/212004 $10.00 88300 Medi-Cal Of California 12/22/2003 31212004 $70.11 88307 - - -------Medi-Cal Of California 12/2912003 312/2004 88307 $70.11 Medi-Cal Of Cal'lfornia 12/2212003 31212004 88307 $70.11 Kaiser Foundation Heai 12123/2003 3/2/2004 $12.23 88304 ot:\., ....... 'J1"1 l"lnnA K~isp.r FoundatiQn Hea! 12/23/2003 -$13.35 UU,J I l Medi-Cal Of California 11712004 31212004 $41.58 88173 Medi-eal Of California - . -- ---------------------.".11712004 31212004 88305 $48.20 '- Medi-Cal OfCalifornia 1212912003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 lIJIedi-Cal Of California 12/2912003 31212004 88300 $10.00
..
...
,",l~IL.VV"1'
0018868
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 127 of 189
0018869
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---
MedicCal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California .. Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California ,--Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Pinnacle Clairns Mana, Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Ca! Of C3tifcrnia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California .----,-----Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Of Californ·,a Be Of California Medi-Cal Of California
~_
~~-
~--.-".
_._._-~_.
.....
---------
._--~-_
_.~~
-
.. _...
Document 278-2
_-",,-~
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 128 of 189
12/1.5/2003 12/14/2003 12/19/2003 12/30/2003 12/30/2003 12/28/2003 12/28/2003 1/2/2004 12/28/2003 1/4/2004 12/30/2003 1/8/2004 1/4/2004 12/23/2003 1/6/2004 1/7/2004 1/2/2004 12/28/2003 12/28/2003 1/6/2004 1/12/2004 1/2/2004 1/27/2004 112712004 111812004 1130/2004 1212212003 12122/2003 12/1812003 12/1812003 12/512003 12/812003 1112612003 12/2112003 12/17/2003 12/2112003 12/2312003 1212212003 1212212003
3/2/2004 312/2004 312/2004 . 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 312/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 312/2004 312/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/212004 31212004 31212004 31212004 3/212004 31212004 31212004 31212004 312/2004 312/2004 3/212004 31212004 3/212004 312/2004 312/2004 312/2004 31212004
88300 88300 88307 88307 88300 88307 88311 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 . 88300 88300 88307 88307 88311 88300 88300 88300 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88305 88304 88311 88307 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307
$10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11 $6.32 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $7011 $6.32 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $48.20 $30.40 $6.32 $207.20 $70.11 $15.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11
12/15/2003
3/2/2004
OU,JV!J
..p
1212512003 12/25/2003 12/2312003 12/3012003 12/3012003 12130/2003 1212312003 1211512003 113/2004 12/1212003 12/912003 12/912003
31212004 31212004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 312/2004 31212004 31212004 3/2/2004 3/212004 3/2/2004 3/212004 31212004
88300 88300 88305 88172 88173 88305 88300 88300 88304 88304 88300 88305
$10.00 $10.00 $48.20 $26.95 $41.58 $48.20 $10.00 $10.00 $30.40 $34.30 $7.00 $48.20
nn., .... n
".~ 1'\
nl'\
IU,VU
0018870
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 129 of 189
0018871
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG -'-,_.---,,_.-
__
. , ~ -
----------
_
_._._--~--
-
.
_
-
~
..
_
_
.
..
_
._----~-_._-
....
_._ ..-
' - - ' - " ' - - - - - - .. _--
- - - - --
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 130 of 189
..... _---
--- .. _-._----
-_.
Document 278-2
_.... ---
. -. -----,_.,----
Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cai Be Medi-Cai Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Sheet Metal Workers L, Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Combined Benefits'Adr Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-f:81 Bc Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( KernFamily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern FamHy Health Car Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Farnlly Health Car Medicare Of Northern (
12/22/2003 1/5/2004 121712003 1/1612004 1212512003 112012004 121112003 121912003 12/1012003 121412003 121912003 1/1212004 11912004 11912004 11912004 1213112003 1113/2004 111312004 112012004 111512004 111512004 11712004 11912004 1212312003 1211912003 1211912003 1211912003 11812004 1/2912004 11812004 11812004 1/1512004 111512004 1/1512004 1/1512004 111412004 1/13/2004 1/13/2004 1127/2004 1!24!200~
1114/2004 1/15/2004 811512003 1011112003 1011112003 111612003 111612003 11/6/2003 11/3/2003 11/3/2003 11/18/2003 12/4/2003
318/2004 3/812004 3/812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 31812004 3/912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 319/2004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 3/912004 319/2004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 3)912004 31912004 31912004 3/912004
88305 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88305 88300 88302 88305 88304 88305 88331 88332 88300 88305 88305 88305 88104 88305 88305 88305 88305 88172 88173 88305 88305 88305 88305 88312 88172 88173 88305 88305 88300 88307 88305 88307
$48.20 $70.11 $70.11 $15.00 $70.11 $70.11 $73.62 $248.40 $10.00 $15.00 $138.00 $30.40 $48.20 $41.32 $31.02 $10.00 $33.50 $33.50 $33.50 $50.02 $33.50 $33.50 $48.20 $33.01 $26.44 $61.16 $33.01 $134.02 $48.20 $67.01 $24.10 $26.83 $61.66 $33.50 $48.20 $10.00 $70.68 $67.01 $70.11
00')1"11::
VIVU::.. VV""
UU,,;V;,)
$48.20
3/912004 31912004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004
88305 88300 88302 88307 88302 88304 88305 88329 88305 88311 . 88300 88302
$96.40 $3.86 $57.84 $17.51 $4.27 $31.92 $101.22 $57.84 $404.88 $6.64 $10.00 $5.90
"1/01'lr'l('\A
0018872
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
--"------_._---------
-'------,-
--- --- ....
__ __ .- ...
--
.. - --'----
----------.
_.
."--'-
-~-
..
-
--_.----
_-
Document 278-2
Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern FamilyHealth Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Heaith Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car
Kern Fam:!y Hcolth Car Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern Kern
Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health Family Health
Car Car Car' . Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car Car
11/29/2003 11/25/2003 11/29/2003 12/9/2003 12/9/2003 12/9/2003 12/9/2003 12/7/2003 12/21/2003 12/20/2003 12/17/2003 12/16/2003 12/17/2003 12/17/2003 12/4/2003 12/2212003 12/19/2003 12/23/2003 1/5/2004 12/27/2003 12116/2003 12/18/2003 12/11/2003 12/30/2003 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 1/7/2004 1/6/2004 12/20/2003 12/31/2003 1/1/2004 1/1/2004 1/7/2004 1/9/2004 1/12/2004 1/14/2004 1/12/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 '" 10 l'"lt'lf"l ~
IIVILVU"t
1/8/2004 12/31/2003 1/14/2004 12/12/2003 1/13/2004 1/12/2004 1/5/2004 12123/2003 11/30/2003 12/27/2003 12/15/2003 1111/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004
3/1112004 3/1112004 3/1112004 3111/2004 311112004 3/11/2004
Page 131 of 189
88307 88307 88302 88329 88309 88307 88305 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307 88305 88311 88300 88304 88304 88300 88300 88104 88300 88304 88300 88305 88300 88304 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88302 88300 88307 88304 88304
$73.62 $73.62 $15.00 $29.42 $100.37 $124.23 $73.62 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $10.68 $10.00 $31.92 $31.92 $10.00 $10.00 $21.69 $10.00 $31.92 $10.00 $50.61 $10.00 $31.92 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $15.00 $10.00 $73.62 $31.92 $31.92
88305
$50.6i
88307 88307 88307 88305 88302 88304 88304 88304 88307 88304 88300 88307
$73.62 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $15.00 $31.92 $31.92 $31.92 $73.62 $31.92 $10.00 $73.62
0018873
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
----"-----
--"-
-._--~_.-.-
-
..-_.-.-
-----_._-~
..
-
Document 278-2
Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Farnily Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Famnv HB;:\lth Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health C;ar Kern Farnlly Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car
1/16/2004 11/26/2003 11/26/2003 12/4/2003 12/17/2003 12/15/2003 12/16/2003 12/1/2003 11/15/2003 12/2/2003 12/412003 12/4/2003 12/2/2003 12/3/2003 12/4/2003 12/412003 11/1912003 12/8/2003 12/19/2003 12/20/2003 12/17/2003 12/19/2003 12/2712003 12/14/2003 12/15/2003 12/20/2003 12/15/2003 12/17/2003 12/1912003 12/24/2003 12/5/2003 12/30/2003 12/29/2003 12/28/2003 1/4/2004 12/30/2003 1/3/2004 1/5/2004 12/23/2003 12/2412003 12/25/2003 1/7/2004 12/9/2003 1/3/2004 1/4/2004 1/8/2004 1/6/2004 1/9/2004 1/5/2004 1/4/2004 1/10/2004 1/912004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/11/2004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 3111/2004 311112004 311112004 311112004 3/1112004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004
Page 132 of 189
88305 88304 88311 88305 88300 88307 88307 88302 88305 88307 88307 88302 88302 88302 88302 88305 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88305 88304 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88300 88307 88307 88307
$50.61 $95.76 $6.64 $33.01 $3.81 $73.62 $73.62 $15.00 $50.61 $73.62 $70.05 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $50.61 $147.24 $45.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $50.61 $31.92 $50.61 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $73.62
VU,JU,
00""7
.."..;.v"-
88307 88300 88300 88307 88300 88307 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307
$73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62
co"'7'"1 1:""1
0018874
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
..
-
-
._---._'
------ ' . - - ' , - -
.J
"-----._------
--,._---,,,
Document 278-2
Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Of California Medicare Of Northern (
1/8/2004 1/5/2004 1/5/2004 1/4/2004 1/7/2004 1/13/2004 1/3/2004 12/30/2003 12/26/2003 1/2/2004 1/1512004 1/13/2004 1/14/2004
Medicare Of Northern C
9/6/2002 1013012002
Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern Medicare Of Northern
( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (
111412004 1/4/2004 1116/2004
121312003 12/10/2003 12111/2003 118/2004 8/412003 11125/2003 11125/2003 11/4/2003 1/10/2004 1/8/2004 118/2004 1/9/2004 12/21/2003 1/7/2004 1/7/2004 1/8/2004 12/18/2003 1/11/2004 1111/2004 12/16/2003 12/16/2003 1/13/2004 1115/2002
10/4/2002 9/30/2002 8/29/2002 9/24/2002 9/2412002 9/2412002
912012002 9/20/2002 9/16/2002 9/13/2002 9/13/2002
Filed 12/01/2008
3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/1112004 3/1112004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 3111/2004 311112004 3/11/2004 3111/2004 3/11/2004 311112004 3/1112004 3/1112004 311112004 311112004 3/1212004 3/1612004 .,'''' .... ',.,nru.
",)1 rU/LVU",
3/16/2004 3116/2004 3/1612004 3/1612004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
Page 133 of 189
88307 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 . 88300 88304 88307 88307 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88305 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88302 88305 88300 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88329 88304 88305 88304 88307 88304 88304 88305 88305 88104 88307 88311 88305 88302 88300 88305 88311
$73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 531.92 $73.62 $73.62 $101.22 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $50.61 $10.00 $1000 $220.86 $73.62 $30.00 $50.61 $10.00 $1000 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $73.62 $10.00 $10.00 510.00 $73.62 $10.00 $29.42 $9.78 $8.38 $9.62 $69.82 $9.62 $9.62 $32.78 $196.70 $24.55 $69.81 $10.52 $32.78 $11.62 $.3.74 $32.78 $10.51
0018875
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
------
-- -- - ------- .. -
- - ----',. ---- ..
-------_.,
.. -
------._--_. __ .'-
----
Document 278-2
Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Cn!ifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi:Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Bc Of California Medi-Cal Of California
9/12/2002 9/12/2002 9/12/2002 9/14/2002 9/14/2002 12/19/2002 12/6/2002 12/6/2002 6/2/2003 6/2/2003 6/2/2003 12/19/2003 12/19/2003 12/10/2003 1/2/2004 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 1/8/2004 1/10/2004 1/10/2004 1/7/2004 1/11/2004 1/11/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/9/2004 1/10/2004 1/9/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/8/2004 1/12/2004 1/2/2004 12/31/2003 12/30/2003 1/2/2004 1/2/2004 '" /7/"'lnnA II I tLVU""t
1/7/2004 12/30/2003 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 2/5/2004 1/16/2004 1/13/2004 1/13/2004 1/12/2004 1/12/2004 1/13/2004 12/29/2003
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 3116/2004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 311612004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004
88305 88311 88300 88305 88104 88305 88304 88311 88305 88311 88300 88307 88305 88304 88302 88104 88305 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88304 88300 88300 88300 88305 88309 88311 88307 88305 88300 88104 88104 88305 88304 88302 88300 88304 88311 88305 88307
Page 134 of 189
$163.90 $10.52 $3.75 $32.77 $24.56 $196.70 $9.63 $10.50 $231.05 $10.69 $3.81 $59.78 $37.87 $60.80 $30.00 $20.66 $48.20 $10.33 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $30.00 $10.00 $10.33 $10.00 $3040 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $96.40 $148.38 $6.32 $70: 11
$48.20 $10.00 $20.66 $20.66 $48.20 $30.40 $19.67 $10.00 $30.40 $6.32 $8.38 $70.11
0018876
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---_.'.,-_...-
------------,-
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Blmc Blmc Pinnacle Claims Mana. Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Western Growers Assu Western Growers Assu Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern C Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern C Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
12/29/2003 1/8/2004 12/22/2003 12/22/2003 12/16/2003
12/9/2003 12/5/2003
12/6/2003 12/6/2003 12/15/2003 11/11/2003 11/11/2003 1/14/2004
1/14/2004 1/15/2004 1/14/2004 1/7/2004
1/7/2004 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 1/12/2004 1/22/2004 1/20/2004 1/21/2004 1/21/2004 2/2/2004 2/2/2004 1/27/2004 1/7/2004 1/7/2004 12/11/2003 1/31/2004 1/31/2004 2/2/2004 1/19/2004 1/30/2004 1/1/2004 1/2/2004 1/2/2004
1/1/2004 12/18/2003 1/14/2004 6/6/2003 1/8/2004 4/9/2003 1/7/2004 1/15/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
1/16/2004
3/16/2004 3/16/2004
1/9/2004 1/9/2004 12/14/2003
3/16/2004 3/16/2004
3/16/2004
88302 88307 88302 88300 88300 88300 88305 88307 88305 88300 88172 88173 88307 88302 88307 88307 88304 88302 . 88305 88331 88332 88300 88300 88305 88305 88305 88307 88302 88307 88304 88304 88300 88307 88307 88307 88305 88304 88300 88304 883-12 88300 88304 88300 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88312 88302
Page 135 of 189
$30.00 $70.11 $19.67 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $48.20 $86.81 $40.83 $8.00 $26.95 $41.58 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $30.40 $15.00 $48.20 $41.32 $15.51 $10.00 $10.00 $138.00 $48.20 $96.40 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $30.40 $30.40 $10.00 $152.80 $106.20 $70.11 $48.20 $30.40 $10.00 $30.40 $52.53 $10.00 $30.40 $10.00 $33.01 $48.20 $99.02 $48.20 $48.20 $48.20 $48.20 $26.26 $12.78
0018877
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"----,-------
- , _ ..
-'-'--'--'~'--
--'
-,_
.. _---
-- ---'---'- ..
-_._,
--.
'---"----'-
-~
--'
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Madi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Madi-Cal Of California· Medi-Cal Of California Madi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Madi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
1211612003 12116/2003 12/16/2003 12/23/2003 12/23/2003
Filed 12/01/2008
3116/2004 3/1612004 311612004
311612004 311612004
11912004 11812004
3116/2004 3/16/2004
1/4/2004 1/5/2004 1/4/2004
311612004
11412004 1/9/2004 1/912004 1/9/2004 1/912004
11612004 11712004 12/3012003 1/612004
1213012003 1213012003 1/13/2004 12/30/2003 12/3/2003 12/31/2003 1212912003 12/3012003 12/29/2003 12130/2003 116/2004
11312004 112/2004
11812004 1/13/2004 1113/2004
111312004 111312004 111812004 1112/2004 1/1312004 1/1612004
111812004 111912004 12123/2003 1/14/2004
11912004 121512003 121412003 12/612003 1/15/2004 117/2004 1/3012004
311612004 311612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3116/2004 311612004
311612004 3/16/2004 3116/2004
311612004 311612004 311612004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3116/2004
3116/2004 311612004 311612004 3116/2004 311612004 .
311612004 3116/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/1612004
311612004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
311612004 311612004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004
311612004 3/1612004 3116/2004 311612004 3116/2004
311612004 311612004 311612004
88307 88302 88305 88307 88302 88307 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88307 88307
88302 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88302 88300 88300 88300
88300 88300 88300 88300 88300
88300 88302 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307
88307 88307 88302 88302 88302 88307 88300 88307
Page 136 of 189
$70.11 $3000 $144.60 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00
$10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $19.67 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00
$12.78 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00
$10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $15.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $1000 $15.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $15.00 $15.00 $15.00 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11
0018878
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
- - - - - - ._--
------"-._---._--,-
-"._-----.-.
' - - - - - _.. -.-._-- -
----------
---_._,
_ _ _ "_"
..
.. __ .. -
,.~._-
___
_
--"'--'-'---"~---'-
-
.. ·· _ _ m
_
"
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cat Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-CalOfCalifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Californ.ia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Med.1care Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern C Medicare Of Northern ( . Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medi-Cal Of California Medi-CalOf California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
1/30/2004 1/29/2004 1/19/2004 1/30/2004 12/12/2003 12/11/2003 12/12/2003 12/18/2003 12/26/2003 12/15/2003 1/27/2004 1/27/2004 1/20/2004 1/8/2004 12/27/2003 12/21/2003 12/12/2003 1/10/2004 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 12/10/2003 12/10/2003 1/8/2004 1/1/2004 1/1/2004 1/1/2004 914/2002 10121/2002 11/4/2002 11/4/2002 10/31/2002 9/26/2002 9/17/2002 8/30/2002 9/11/2002 9/11/2002 12/18/2002 12/30/2002 12/30/2002 1/812003 1/12/2003 3/4/2003 1/7/2004 1/712004 12131/2003 115/2004 1/14/2004 1/12/2004 1/11/2004 1/7/2004 1/14/2004 11/26/2003
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004
88302 88307 88300 88307 88300 88307 88300 88300 88307 88300 88307 88302 88307 88305 88300 88300 88307 88300 88304 88311 88304 88311 88305 88104 88305 88312 88307 88305 88104 88305 88305 88305 88305 88307 88304 88305 88305 88305 88307 88305 88305 88104 88302 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88305
Page 137 of 189
$30.00 $70.11 $1000 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $48.20 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $3040 $6.32 $3040 $6.32 $48.20 $20.66 $48.20 $26.26 $69.82 $32.78 $24.55 $65.57 $32.78 $32.78 $32.78 $69.82 $9.62 $32.78 $65.57 $65.56 $69.83 $33.01
$32.78 $24.64 $19.67 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $48.20
0018879
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
-----------
~---
-
-
-'- .---_.
-._.
----
- --"'--
-'----_ ... -
---
_.•------"-'._-----
--_.._ - - ' ..--
~----
-----
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medic,are Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Medicare Of Northern ( Bc Medi-Cai Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi,Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cai Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cai Of California Medicare Of Northern ( Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Western Growers Assu
1/5/2004 1/2/2004 12/10/2003 1/16/2004 1111/2004 1/2/2004 8/26/2002 8/26/2002 4/13/2003 12/19/2003 12/19/2003 4/10/2003 4/10/2003 10/29/2003 10/29/2003 10/29/2003 12/4/2003 12/4/2003 11/5/2002 11/5/2002 10/28/2002 10/28/2002 9/12/2002 1/13/2003 1/13/2003 1/13/2003 1/3/2003 2/12/2003 11/7/2002 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 11/24/2003 12/2/2003 12/18/2003 12/18/2003 12/26/2003 12/26/2003 12/19/2003 12/19/2003 12/6/2003 12/26/2003 12/20/2003 11/20/2003 11/20/2003 4/18/2003 7/25/2003 8/18/2003 12/5/2003 12/29/2003 1/6/2004 1/6/2004 1/10/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 311612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 311712004 311712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 311712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 3117/2004 3117/2004 3117/2004 311712004 311712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 311712004 311712004 311712004 3122/2004 312212004 312212004 312212004 312212004 312212004 312212004 .3/220004 312212004 3122/2004 312212004 312212004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3123/2004 312312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004
88300 88304 88300 88300 88300 88300 88305 88311 88304 88305 88331 88305 88313 68305 88305 88305 88104 88307 88305 88313 88304 88302 88305 88307 88305 88302 88305 88307 88305 88307 88305 88304 88307 88304 88302 88305 88313 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88304 88311 85060 88305 88304 88302 88300 88304 88300 88307
Page 138 of 189
$10,00 $30.40 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $32.78 $10.51 $9.78 $33.01 $52.58 $33,01 $21.36 $3301 $33.01 $68,02 $24.64 $70.05 $32,78 $10.51 $9,62 $5.81 $89.07 $70,05 $33.01 $5.90 $6.44 $69.82 $32,78 $70.05 $33,01 $9,78 $70.11 $30.40 $30.00 $48.20 $84.00 . $70.11 $30.00 $70.11
$70.11 $70,11 $30.40 $632 $12.89 $48.20 $9,78 $15.00 $10.00 $30.40 $10.00 $207.20
0018880
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
"------
--- "------- -
- -- -.--- -.-. ".- _._-_.-
Document 278-2
Western Growers Assu Western Growers Assu Kaiser Foundation Heal Kaiser Foundation Heal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Pinnacle Claims Mana£ Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern C Be Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medicare Of Northern C Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of Californ ia Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Be Medi,Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car
111012004 11612004 111512004 111512004 1/1612004 1116/2004 12/1512003 1/1412004 1/16/2004 1/1612004 1/28/2004 2/2/2004 1/27/2004 1/7/2004 12/22/2003 12/22/2003 2/2/2004 11212004 11212004 112/2004 1211712003 1/21/2004 2/1/2004 1/27/2004 1/1/2004 1/15/2004 1/15/2004 1113/2004 1/1312004 511312003 4/30/2003 413012003 12/27/2003 12/27/2003 1/18/2004 1/13/2004 1/14/2004 1/13/2004 1/14/2004 112612004 12/912003 12/1112003 2/312004 2/3/2004 1/1812004 12/412003 111412004 111312004 121212003 12/212003 11312004 111612004
Filed 12/01/2008
312312004 312312004 312312004 312312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 312312004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3123/2004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 312312004 312312004 3/2312004 3123/2004 312312004 3123/2004 312312004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3/2312004 3/2312004 3/2312004 312312004 312312004 312312004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 3123/2004 3/23/2004 312312004 3/2312004 312312004 312312004 3/2312004 3/23/2004 312312004 312312004 3/23/2004 312312004 312312004 312312004 312312004 312312004
88302 88304 88304 88311 88304 88302 88300 88300 88300 88300 88304 88307 88305 88300 88307 88311 88307 88302 88305 88311 88307 88305 88300 88304 88307 88305 88307 88305 88331 88305 85097 85060 88307 88300 88302 88305 88307 88307 88305 88300 88307 88300 88304 88309 88307 88305 88300 88309 88307 88304 88307 88307
Page 139 of 189
$24.00 $49.00 $49.00 $39.00 $30.40 $5.98 $2.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $91.20 $73.62 $50.61 $10.00 $73.62 $6.64 $73.62 $15.00 $50.61 $6.64 $73.62 $33.50 $7.00 $30.40 $70.11 $50.61 $73.62 $50.61 $43.38 $33.01 $35.25 $12.89 $70.11 $10.00 $15.00 $96.40 $73.62 $73.62 $50.61 $10.00
$73.62 $10.00 $31.92 $152.00 $73.62 $50.61 $10.00 $152.00 $73.62 $31.92 $73.62 $73.62
0018881
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.
-------'-
----_ •... --------- - ..
-- -
~_._-_.---
-._._.------
Document 278-2
Be Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California United Healtheare Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Sheetmetal Workers Sheetmetal Workers Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern ( Western Growers Assu Western Growers Assu Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California State Compensation In' Be Medi-Cal
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 140 of 189
11/9/2003 1114/2003 12/15/2003 6/3/2003 6/3/2003 5/28/2003 5/28/2003 1/1/2004 1/27/2004 1/28/2004 2/5/2004 2/7/2004 1/27/2004 2/5/2004 2/4/2004 2/4/2004 2/9/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/6/2004 2/6/2004 2/5/2004 8/4/2003 9/17/2003 2/5/2004 1/19/2004 2/8/2004 2/4/2004 1/27/2004 2/3/2004 2/2/2004 2/2/2004 1/31/2004 2/5/2004 2/11/2004 2/5/2004 12/8/2003 2/8/2004
3123/2004 3/23/2004 312312004 3/25/2004 3/25/2004 3/25/2004 3/25/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3126/2004 3/26/2004
,/5/2004
3/26/2004
88307
2/1/2004 2/3/2004 1/22/2004 1126/2004 1130/2004 2/2/2004 10/28/2003 10/28/2003 2/3/2004 5/6/2003 11/20/2003 12/19/2003
3/26/2004 3/26/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/31/2004 313112004 3/31/2004
88307 88304 88305 88305 88304 88304 88307 88305 88307 88304 88300 88300
$70.11 $30.40 $48.20 $48.20 $30.40 $9.93 $207.20 $'106.30 $70.11 $30.40 $10.00 $10.00
88305 88305 88304 85097 85060 85097 85060 88302 88307 88307 88305 88307 88104 88305 88305 88104 88305 88331 88305 88309 88304 88311 88305 88304 88311 88305 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88302 88304 88304 88307
$48.20 $5061 $31.92 $35.25 $12.89 $35.25 $12.89 $12.78 $110.00 $70.11 $289.20 $70.11 $20.66 $48.20 $48.20 $20.66 $48.20 $41.32 $48.20 $148.38 $30.40 $6.32 $289.20 $49.00 $39.00 $48.20 $19.67 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $48.20 $30.00 $60.80 $30.40 $70.11 ""
v. , ,
0018882
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
-
-
..__ . --'--_._-_._-._-
--
----_.
- ." .... -
--_._--- .... ,'-._- -- .. --.
-_._-_._-
__ .-----_-.
_.---.---.-
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 141 of 189
.,_._,._--,
-- ._---------_ . .,
-
Document 278-2
Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Superior Ins. Services Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi"Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California . Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California United Healtheare Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi,Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
12/12/2003 12/12/2003 12/17/2003 12119/2003 12127/2003 12/11/2003 1/7/2004 1/7/2004 12/9/2003 12/15/2003 12/15/2003 1/30/2004 1/29/2004 1/27/2004 1/26/2004 1/26/2004 1/26/2004 1/2612004 1/2812004 1/2812004 1/27/2004 1/2912004 1/23/2004 1/18/2004 1/21/2004 1/21/2004 1/23/2004 1/23/2004 2/28/2004 2/11/2004 2/9/2004 2/9/2004 2/11/2004 2/12/2004 2/12/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004 2/16/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/10/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/20/2004 2/13/2004 2/19/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/23/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004
313112004 313112004 313112004 3/3112004 3/3112004 313112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3131/2004 313112004 313112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 ~/~1/2004
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88104 88305 88300 88304 88300 88304 88305 88304 88304 88305 88331 88305 88307 88300 88300 88300 88305 88307 88300 88307 88304 88300 88300 88300 88307 88304 88302 88307 88307 88104 88304 88311 88307 88300 88300 88104 88305 88307 88104 88305 88313 88307 88305 88104 88304 88300 88307 88307 88302 88300 88307 88313
$44.76 $44.76 $10.00 $30.40 $10.00 $30.40 $48.20 $91.20 $49.00 $96.40 $41.32 $48.20 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $50.61 $73.62 $10.00 $70.11 $30.40 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11 $30.40 $15.00 $70.11 $137.50 $20.66 $30.40 $6.32 $70.11 $10.00 $10.00 $20.66 $48.20 $70.11 $20.66 $48.20 $28.00 $70.11 $48.20 $20.66 $30.40 $10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $45.00 $10.00 $70.11 $84.00
0018883
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
- -
-------
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Pinnacle Claims Mana, Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Bc Medi-Cai Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California - Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern FAmily Hea!thCar Kern Family Health Car Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Car Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
2/19/2004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/26/2004 2/25/2004 2/20/2004 2/23/2004 2/19/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/24/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/25/2004 2/26/2004 2/26/2004 1/20/2004 2/11/2004 1/24/2004 2/12/2004 1/22/2004 1/22/2004 1/21/2004 1/21/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/12/2004 2/18/2004 1/16/2004 12/12/2003 1/20/2004 1/23/2004 1/27/2004 1/26/2004 1/27/2004 1/28/2004 1/28/200"1 1/28/2004 1/24/2004 1/22/2004 1/22/2004 1/24/2004 1/23/2004 1/23/2004 1/23/2004 1/24/2004 2/3/2004 2/4/2004 2/15/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/3112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 313112004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88307 88304 88307 88305 88305 88307 88307 88307 88300 86304 88307 88305 88304 88311 88307 88304 88304 88305 88305 88305 88309 88305 88305 88305 88305 88172 88173 88305 88313 88305 88329 88302 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88309 88300
':II':!'! ',,)(',f"l11
00"'('\1:"
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88307
Vi'"' "L.,UU-"
UU..JU"';
Page 142 of 189
$70.11 $30.40 $70.11 $289.20 $138.00 $70.11 . $70.11 $70.11 $10.00 $30.40 $207.20 $48.20 $30.40 $6.32 $70.11 $30.40 $30.40 $48.20 $48.20 $50.61 $148.38 $96.40 $48.20 $50.61 $50.61 $26.95 $41.58 $48.20 $28.00 $96.40 $26.06 $15.00 $70.11 $50.61 $73.62 $70.11 $73.62 $148.38 $10.00 $GO.G1
$73.62 $73.62 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $73.62 $70.11 $70.11 $192.80 $70.11
0018884
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
------_ .. _ - - - -
Total Insurance Payments
Document 278-2
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Western Growers Assu Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California
2/18/2004 2/11/2004 2/10/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/22/2004 2/24/2004 2/2112004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/21/2004 2/23/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/12/2004 3/2/2004 6/23/2003 8/30/2003 1/29/2004 2/11/2004 1/13/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 ·3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
88307 88307 88307 88304 88307 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88302 88307 88307 88304 88300 88305 88307 88307 88307 88304
Page 143 of 189
$70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $30AO
$70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $207.20 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $30AO
$10.00 $3615 $52.58 $70.11 $7011 $30AO
$39,253.64
0018885
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 144 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004 Last Name
- -- - ---' - -
-----",-_.-------
First Name
-------
0'- _ _ _ _- -
------,~"._-
Primary Insurance Claim Entry Date Date of Service CPT Charges Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 $30.00 2/11/2004 88302 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88311 $39.00 2/6/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/6/2004 88304 $49.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/4/2004 88104 $62.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/1/2004 2/5/2004 88304 $49.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/9/2004 88305 $138.00 Mia 3/1/2004 88304 $49.00 2/10/2004 Gemcare 3/1/2004 88305 $138.00 2/10/2004 None 3/1/2004 88305 2/11/2004 $138.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 2/11/2004 8.8307 $259.00 Med i-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88305 $138.00 2/11/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88331 2/11/2004 $191.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 2/10/2004 88305 $1,380.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 88305 $1,380.00 2/10/2004 None 3/1/2004 88304 2/11/2004 $49.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 88302 2/12/2004 $15.00 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88309 $152.00 2/10/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88305 $138.00 2/10/2004 Medi-Cal Of California 3/1/2004 88331 2/10/2004 $191.00 Mia 3/1/2004 2/12/2004 88313 $84.00 Mia 3/1/2004 2/12/2004 88307 $259.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/1/2004 2/11/2004 88305 $138.00 Mia 3/112004 2/11/2004 88305 $276.00 . Mia 31112004 3/1/2004 88305 $276.00 Mia 31112004 2/1212004 88307 $259.00 Mia 31112004 2111/2004 88173 $152.00 Mia 3/1/2004 88172 $104.00 2/1112004 None 31112004 2/7/2004 88307 $259.00 None 3/1/2004 88305 2/9/2004 $138.00 Mia 314/2004 2/6/2004 88173 $152.00 Mia 3/412004 2/6/2004 88172 $104.00 Bc Of California 3/412004 2/10/2004 88300 $10.00 Mia 3/4/2004 2/6/2004 88332 $97.00 Mia 314/2004 2/6/2004 88331 $191.00 Mia 3/412004 88302 $15.00 2/6/2004 Mia 3/4/2004 216/2004 88305 $276.00 Mia 31412004 2/612004 88309 $152.00 Mia 3/4/2004 88307 2/6/2004 $259.00 Mia 3/4/2004 88300 2/6/2004 $10.00 Mia 3/412004 2/612004 88307 $259.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/4/2004 88305 $276.00 2/412004 Kern Family Health Care 3/4/2004 2/4/2004 88104 $124.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 88307 2/8/2004 $259.00 Bc Medi-Cal 3/412004 2/412004 88304 $49.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/4/2004 88304 2111/2004 $147.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 2/812004 88307 $259.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 2/812004 88307 $259.00 Kern Family Health Care 314/2004 218/2004 88307 $259.00 Bc Medi-Cal 3/4/2004 2/8/2004 88307 $259.00 Medi_Cal Restricted Carrier 3/4/2004 2/8/2004 88307 $259.00 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrter 3/4/2004 88307 2/6/2004 $259.00 Medicare Of Northern Calif01 3/5/2004 2/10/2004 88305 $193.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/9/2004 88302 2/12/2004 $30.00 Kern Family Health Care 3/9/2004 88307 $259.00 2/12/2004 Ccs Medi-Cal 3/9/2004 88104 $62.00 2/13/2004
0018886
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 145 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004
-"--------------
._--. - - - - - , _.. _------
Medi-Cal Of California Kern Farnily Health Care None Be Medi-Cal Kern Farniiy Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Farnily Health Care Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal Schaller Anderson Clairns Dr Mia Mia Be Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Pinnacle Claims Managemer Kern Family Health Care Mia Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care None Medi-Cal Of California None Kaiser Foundation Health PI, Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None Mia Western Growers Assurance
Medi-Cal Of Caiifornia Mia Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medicare 01 Northern CalitOl Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Be Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Breast Health Program Gsec Breast Health Program Gsec Breast Health Program Gsec Kern Family Health Care Mia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi·Cal Of California Be Medi-Cal None
31912004 31912004 3/912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 31912004 319/2004 31912004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 3/1012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 311012004 3/1012004 311012004 3/1012004
21412004 2/17/2004 214/2004 211712004 211312004 211412004 211112004 21912004 21912004 211012004 211012004 211212004 211112004 211012004 211712004 2/17/2004 2112/2004 211212004 21912004 211112004 21912004 211712004 211312004 211812004 21612004 21612004 211312004 211112004 21912004 2/1212004 211212004 211112004 21912004 21412004 21412004 211212004 211212004 211212004 112912004 211212004 21412004 21412004 211212004 211312004. 211512004 211512004 211912004 211912004 211912004 211112004 211312004 211812004 211812004 211612004 211712004 211712004
88305 88305 88304 88305 88307 88307 88104 88311 88304 88305 88104 88300 88104 88305 88304 88307 88311 88304 88307 88307 88104 88305 88305 88304 88311 88304 88305 88307 88307 88304 88309 88305 88307 88305 88305 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88331 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88173 88172 88104 88312 88305 88104 88307 88307 88305
$552.00 $276.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $62.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $62.00 $10.00 $62.00 $1,380.00 $98.00 $259.00 $39.00 $49.00 $259.00 $777.00 $62.00 $276.00 $138.00 $49.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $152.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $138.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $259.00 $10.00 $191.00 $1,104.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $152.00 $104.00 $62.00 $76.00 $138.00 $62.00 $259.00 $259.00 $414.00
0018887
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
-,._---....
-
.
- --- -
-_
------
... _------_.
-----' •....
----
---- - ----'--- .. -
. -
-
Document 278-2 Dr. Jadwin Charges by entry date March 2004
None Kern Farnily Health Care Kern Family Health Care None None Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Be Medi-Cal Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of Califomia Kern Family Health Care None None None Medi-Cal Res1ricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Pinhacle Claims Managemer Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Oi california Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern Califo! Medicare Of Northern Calif01 None Medicare Of Northern Califo! Medicare Of Northern Califo! Pinnacle Claims Managemer Kern Family Health Care
3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/1 0/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/10/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/11/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004
Filed 12/01/2008
211712004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/11/2004 2/18/2004 2/1812004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2117/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/19/2004 2/18/2004 2/17/2004 2/9/2004 2/9/2004 2/13/2004 2/16/2004 2/16/2004 2/16/2004 2/16/2004 2/14/2004 2/18/2004 2/16/2004 2/11/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/24/2004 2/25/2004 2/24/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/19/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/27/2004
Page 146 of 189
88305 88302 88307 88300 88304 88304 88305 88302 88305 88305 88311 88304 88304 88307 88309 88332 88331 88313 88307 88305 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88305 88313 88305 88173 88172 88305 88104 88305 88104 88305 88305 88307 88307 88305 88104 88307 88304
$138.00 $15.00 $259.00 $10.00 $49.00 $49.00 $138.00 $15.00 $414.00 $414.00 $39.00 $49.00 $49.00 $259.00 $152.00 $97.00 $382.00 $84.00 $259.00 $138.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $28.00 $138.00 $152.00 $104.00 $138.00 $62.00 $138.00 $186.00 $138.00 $138.00 $259.00 $518.00 $138.00 $62.00 $259.00 $49.00
0018888
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 147 of 189
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Or. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 148 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004
-------,,- .. - . " .
._~--------_.-
Bc Medi-Cal Medicare Of Northern CaiifOi Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Kaiser Foundation Health PI, Kaiser Foundation Heaith PI, Bc Medi-Cal Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Lerdo Kern Family Health Care None • None Kern Family Health Care Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Western Growers Assurance Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Mia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California None None Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal None Mia Schaller Anderson Claims 01 Schaller Anderson Cla.ims 01 Kern Family Health Care None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Kern Farnily Health Care None Lerdo Lerdo Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal
3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004
2/13/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/10/2004 2/22/2004 2/10/2004 2/21/2004 2/9/2004 2/22/2004 2/24/2004 2/21/2004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/12/2004 2/21/2004 2/24/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/13/2004 2/25/2004 2/20/2004 2/10/2004 2/20/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/26/2004 2/20/2004 2/12/2004 2/11/2004 2/23/2004 2/20/2004 2/20/2004 2/26/2004 2/20/2004 2/25/2004 2/20/2004 2/25/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/19/2004 2/23/2004 2/22/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004
88304 88311 88305 88311 88304 88307 88302 88307 88302 88307 88304 88307 88305 88307 88304 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88302 88307 88305 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88304 88304 88305 88304 88302 88304 88305 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88300 88305 88104 88305 88300 88304 88307 88304 88305 88302
$49.00 $39.00 $138.00 $39.00 $49.00 $259.00 $30.00 $259.00 $15.00 $259.00 $49.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $49.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $30.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $1,380.00 $259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $49.00 $276.00 $98.00 $15.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $62.00 $138.00 $10.00 $49.00 $259.00 $49.00 $138.00 $30.00
0018890
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2 Charges by entrY date
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 149 of 189
March 2004
-
--------,-._--
-
---
-----,------
-'.'---' -._,--
- ._--- .. ------.-.---.---_.
Bc Medi-Cal None None Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of California Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of C~lifornia Medi-Cal Of California Mia None None None Mia Gemcare Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Heaith Care Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern Califor Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cai Of California None Schaller Anderson Claims D. Schaller Anderson Claims D. Schaller Anderson Claims D. Medicare Of Northern Califor Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia Mia None Schaller Anderson Claims D. Medl-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Mia Medi-Cal Of California Mia Kern Family Health Care . None
3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/1712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3117/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/1712004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004
2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 1/20/2004 2/19/2004 2/19/2004 2/13/2004 2/13/2004 2/24/2004 2/25/2004 . 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/24/2004 2/26/2004 2/24/2004 2/25/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/26/2004 2/23/2004 2/26/2004 2/27/2004 2/26/2004 2126/2004 2/26/2004 2/26/2004 2/28/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2/29/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/24/2004 2/28/2004 3/1/2004 2/18/2004 2/27/2004 2/23/2004 3/212004 3/112004 2/25/2004 212612004
88307 88307 88304 88313 88311 88304 88305 88305 88305 88311 88304 88311 88304 88300 88305 88305 88305 88305 88300 88305 88300 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88304 88307 88304 88304 88304 88304 88311 88300 88305 88304 88300 88312 88307 88331 88305 88300 88312 88307 88331 88305 88305 88304 88329 88305 88305 88300 88305 88304 88300
$259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $28.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $39.00 $49.00 $39.00 $49.00 $10.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $10.00 $690.00 $10.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $49.00 $259.00 $49.00 $49.00 $49.00 $49.00 $195.00 $10.00 $690.00 $49.00 $10.00 $76.00 $259.00 $382.00 $138.00 $10.00 $76.00 $259.00 $382.00 $138.00 $138.00 $147.00 $101.00 $138.00 $138.00 $10.00 $138.00 $147.00 $10.00
0018891
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2 Charges by entry date
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 150 of 189
March 2004
--- --------,--------,,--
_~
None None None None Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California State Farm Medi-Cal Of California Medl-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of Califomia
None
Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of ~alifornia Amalgamated Life Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Bc Medi-Cal Schaller Anderson Claims Dl Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None None Schaller Anderson Claims D, Kern Family Health Care Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal State Comp Family Pact
3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/17/2004 3/18/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/2212004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/2212004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/2212004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3/22/2004 3123/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004
2/26/2004 2/26/2004 212412004 2/22/2004 2/24/2004 2/23/2004 2/26/2004 2/26/2004 2/24/2004 3/212004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/28/2004 2/28/2004 2/28/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 2/28/2004 2/26/2004 3/112004 3/1/2004 3/1/2004 2/26/2004 2/25/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 2/27/2004 3/112004 3/2/2004 3/1/2004 2/29/2004 3/112004 3/2/2004 2/29/2004 3/112004 2/27/2004 2125/2004 2/29/2004 2129/2004 2/27/2004 3/512004 3/5/2004 3/3/2004 3/4/2004 3/1/2004 3/1/2004 3/212004 3/212004 2/17/2004 2/17/2004 2/1712004 2/25/2004 2/23/2004 2/23/2004 2111/2004
88311 88305 88104 88104 88300 88300 88302 88307 88309 88309 88305 88305 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88331 88311 88305 88307 88307 88307 88300 88300 88307 88305 88305 88307 88305 88307 88307 88305 88307 88307 88305 88104 88104 88302 88300 88304 88304 88311 88304 88309 88305 88332 88331 88305 88305 88305 88304 88305
$39.00 $690.00 $62.00 $62.00 $10.00 $10.00 $15.00 $259.00 $152.00 $152.00 $414.00 $414.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $191.00 $39.00 $690.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $10.00 $518.00 $138.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $138.00 $62.00 $62.00 $50.00 $10.00 $49.00 $49.00 $39.00 $49.00 $152.00 $138.00 $97.00 $191.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $49.00 $414.00
0018892
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
---------._-
--'
". "--'---...-
'--
- - ' . ' - - , ...
_-
,----- --
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Charges by entry date March 2004
Mia Mia Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cai Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Bc Medi-Cal None None Schaller Anderson Claims 0, Mia Medicare Of Northern Califor Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Kern Family Health Care Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor Medicare Of Northern Califor None Mia Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Mia , Medicare Of Northern Califo! None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Of California California Children Services None None Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Modi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Bc Medi-Cal None Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Kern Family Health Care Medicare Of Northern Califo! None Medicare Of Northern Califo!
3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 312912004 312912004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 312912004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3129/2004 3/2912004 3129/2004 3/2912004 3/29/2004 . 3129/2004 3/2912004 312912004 312912004 3129/2004 3/2912004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 312912004 3/2912004
Filed 12/01/2008
3/412004 3/412004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 2/25/2004 3/112004 3/212004 3/812004 3/812004 2/27/2004 3/312004 3/312004 3/312004 3/512004 3/412004 3/412004 3/412004 3/412004 3/312004 3/412004 3/512004 3/412004 3/312004 3/412004 313/2004 3/812004 3/312004 3/412004 3/312004 3/112004 3/312004 31812004 3/612004 31412004 3/512004 31412004 3/4120Q4 31512004 31312004 3/3/2004 212812004 31312004 31112004 212812004 31312004 3/212004 31312004 3/412004 313/2004 3/312004 3/512004 3/512004 3/812004 3/912004 3/912004 3/8/2004
Page 151 of 189
88305 88307 88305 88173 88172 88307 88305 88173 88172 88305 88305 88305 88305 88302 88307 88304 88304 88304 88302 88305 88304 88302 88305 88305 88305 88305 88305 88300 88300 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88300 88302 88300 88307 88300 88300 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307 88311 88304 88305 88302 88300 88304
$138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $152.00 $104.00 $518.00 $276.00 $152.00 $104.00 $138.00 $138.00 $276.00 $276.00 $50.00 $259.00 $49.00 $49.00 $49.00 $25.00 $138.00 $49.00 $25.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $690.00 $138.00 $10.00 $10.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $50.00 $10.00 $259.00 $10.00 $10.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $15.00 $10.00 $4900
0018893
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 152 of 189
Charges by entry date March 2004
--
.-
Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California None Medi-Cal Of California Mia Medi-Cal Of California Mia Medi-Cal Of California None Schalier Anderson Claims 0, --- -_ _--,- ----,- -----,._---' Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Schaller Anderson Claims 01 Kern Farnily Health Care Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Bc Medi-Cal Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Mia Mia Kern Farniiy Health Care Mia Mia Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None - - " " - - ' - - --None Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier None Kern Family Health Care Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Mia Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier - --,-,--, Medi-Cal Restricted Carrier Medi-Cal Of California - ._-- Kern Family Health Care --Kern Family Health Care . None Mia Kern Family Health Care Medi-Cal Of California Medi-Cal Of California Medicare Of Northern Calif01 -,_._,,_. Medicare Of Northern Calif01 Medicare Of Northern Calif01
,.,"._---~~.,.
..
..
'-'-
--
_.-
-
Totai Charges
3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3129/2004 3/29/2004 3/29/2004 3/30/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004 3/31/2004
3/9/2004 3/7/2004 3/712004 3/9/2004 3/9/2004 3/9/2004 3/912004 3/912004 3/712004 3/312004 3/3/2004 3/7/2004 3/512004 3/3/2004 3/312004 3/1/2004 3/112004 3/812004 3/3/2004 3/6/2004 3/6/2004 3/8/2004 3/8/2004 3/1/2004 3/8/2004 3/8/2004 31112004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/1/2004 2/21/2004 3/3/2004 3/212004 3/212004 2/26/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/312004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/2/2004 3/4/2004 3/112004 3/3/2004 3/5/2004 3/4/2004 3/3/2004 3/312004 3/512004 3/5/2004 3/3/2004
88305 88302 88307 88300 88305 88304 88305 88305 88305 88305 88304 88305 88307 88304 88300 88311 88304 88305 88300 88311 88305 88331 88305 88307 88331 88305 88307 88331 88307 88307 88307 88300 88305 88307 88307 88300 88305 88307 88305 88307 88307 88307 88300 88305 88305 88304 88104 85060 85097 88305 88104 88104
$1,518.00 $75.00 $518.00 $20.00 $138.00 $49.00 $276.00 $138.00 $138.00 $138.00 $49.00 $138.00 $259.00 $49.00 $10.00 $39.00 $49.00 $138.00 $10.00 $39.00 $138.00 $191.00 $1,242.00 $259.00 $191.00 $1,104.00 $259.00 $191.00 $518.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $259.00 $138.00 $259.00 $259.00 $259.00 $10.00 $138.00 $414.00 $49.00 $62.00 $87.00 $213.00 $138.00 $62.00 $62.00 $90,471.00
0018894
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 153 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees March 2004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
March
I Year-To-Date I
Inpatientl
$6,326~
$23,80f33)
Outpatient I
$0.001
$0.001
$5,504.371
$20,707.161
Distribution Compensation
! ,
I
Billing ServiceL
$759.22 [
$2,856.161
Billing Clerk[
$0.001
$0.001
$63.27\
$238.01 \
$0.001
$O.OO!
'--"
Faculty Practice 1% i Balance
0018895
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 154 of 189
·KERN MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
MEMO
Date:
February 5, 2004
To:
Dr. Jadwin
From: Re:
.Paul Westover
9tLJ
January Professional Fees
Professional fees for the month of January 2004 in the amount of$8,175.47 will be included in your February 17. 2004 payroll check.
PFW/ymn
0018896
Financial Summary Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Page155 I ofof1 189 Page
Filed 12/01/2008
. ~count ID: XG1486 User1D; PAULW
___ I Daysheet
I
Appointments
Claims
I
I ~
Patients
Finandals
I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
I
Aging
Maintenance
I Adjustments
I J
e-Records
I
Procedure Sun
Fihanclal Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Frnancial Sum(TIary All Providers
Billing
Rendering
Provider
Provider
Payments Charges
Location; All locations
Period for 01/01/2004- 01/31/2004
WriteOffs
Mise Charges
Insurance
Patient
Insurance
# Mise
Patient
# Proc
David F Jadwin
71814,00
0,00
6593,00
438,00
16252,24
6173,00
674
Teopengco
10380.00
0,00
2381.01
109,59
5448,99
1690.00
106
Jadwin l A
21824,00
0.00
2189.19
176.90
3175,60
2341.00
218
Teopencgo
4370.00
0.00
833,63
0.00
1484,37
0.00
33
ChargE
LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
Grand Total for practice
Payments
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
WriteOffs
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$0.00 $11996,83 $724.49 $26361.20 $10204.00
$108388.00
# Proe
# Misl ChargE
1031
Powered by Medrium
..... 6,59 -00+ 1,3 E\ - [} 0 .,. ·176-90+
o. rel="nofollow">,,;.r::-
_._---- _ - - - .........
httns'//WVJUJ
mpt1rillTYl [",........"/........ Q
....
+: . . "'" 1 "1
11
·vn..,,, 01': In ~
...L _
I~
n
0018897
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 156 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees February 2004
0018898
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 157 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees March 2004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
March
Year-To-Date
Inpatient 1,--_ _------,$_0_.0_0-,-1 Outpatient 1'--_-"$-=.6=,3.=26.:..;0-=.86.;...;1
_ ---'
Distribution
Compensation IL...-.-----"c.=.=-=...:.:.::.:....l $5,504.37i Billing Service
$759.221 l__-",-,-==
Billing Clerk!L.-_ _------'--'--'$0.001 Faculty Practice 1%1'-------'::.=.=.:-. $63.271 Balance
_
_
J
1
. $0.001
0018899
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 158 of 189
• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
MEMO
Date:
March 8, 2004
To:
Dr. Jadwin
From:
Paul
Re:
February Professional Fees
westover~t!»J
Professional fees for the month of February 2004 in the amount of$5,504.37 will be included in your March 16, 2004 payroll check.
PFW/ymn
0018900
Page I of I
Financial Summary
I
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I
XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN
Appointments
I
Claims.
I
I
PatIents
~ Finandals
I
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary J Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports
Maintenance
I
I
e-Records
I Adjustments I Procedure
Communication Center
Summary
Financial Summary By Posting Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing proyider
Rendering Provider
Period for 02/01/2004- 02/29/2004 Payments
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance
Location: All Locations
WriteOffs
Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Proc
# Mise Charges
58677.42
0.00
3876.99
142.92
18644.07
12311.00
607
a
Teopengco
6459.00
0.00
371.10
15.00
2462.69
1683.00
68
Jadwin LA
17973.00
0.00'
2144.22
162.73
3612.63
187.00
171
a a
Teopencgo
5061.13
0.00
381.41
0.00
544.64
2196.00
47
0
Upschultz
18597.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
130
a
Lipschultz
5779.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
41
0
# Proe
# Misc Charges
1064
a
David F Jadwin
Document 278-2
LA
LA Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
practice
Charges
$112546.55
Mise Charges Insurance
$0.00
Patient
WriteOffs Insurance
Patient
$6773.72 $320.65 $25264.03 $16377.00
Filed 12/01/2008
Grand Total for
Payments
c03 ~c'O. 8<:0 '(.,J/9. 6lJ,
fa % bt"!J/ f7S / % adm Powered by Medrium
Page 159 of 189
03.a7 :$ .5j'OV. 037 J
o
o .... CO (0
....
o
https://www.medrium.com/practicel 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count 10:
3/8/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 160 of 189
IIKERN MEDICAL II CENTER Faculty Practice Plan
MEMO
Date:
March 8, 2004
To:
Dr. Jadwin
From:
Paul Westover
Re:
February Professional Fees
Professional fees for the month of February 2004 in the amount 0£$5,504.37 will be included in your March 16, 2004 payroll check.
PFW/ymn
0018902
Financial Summary
r(115~
.
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I
I ~
Financials
I
!
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statement' I Custom Reports
Maintenance
e~Records
Communication Center
I
I Adjustments I Procedure Summary
Financial Summary By postinlg Date Financial Summary All Providers
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider
David F Jadwin
Period for 02/0:L/2004- 02/29/2004
Charges
Location: All Locations
WriteOffs
Payments
,.lise Charges Insurance Patient
Insurance
Patient
# Mise # Proc Charges
0.00
3875.99
142.92
18644.07
12311.00
607
0
Teopengco
5459.00
0.00
37l.10
15.00
2462.69
1683.00
68
0
Jadwin LA
17973.00
0.00
162.73
3612.63
187.00
171
0
Teopencgo
5061.13
0.00
2144.22 I 381.41
0.00
544.64
2196.00
47
0
Lipschultz
18597.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
130
a
Lipschultz LA
5779.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
41
0
# Proc
# Mise Charges
Document 278-2
S8677.42
LA
Billing
Provider
Rendering Provider
Charges
$112S46.55
'"iscCharges Insunnce
$0.00
Patient
Insurance
Patient
$6773.72 $320.65 $25264.03 $16377.00
1064
Filed 12/01/2008
Grand Total for practice
WriteOffs
I'ayments
o
(c, ::, J, c,. 80
7S'9.
R,J,
1o 0/0
~~o .1'50 '-{. ;;7
Powered by Medrlum
Page 161 of 189
o
o .....
00
to
o
W
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
.
~count 10: XG1436 User 10: YVONNEN! _ _ I Appointments I Claims I F:atlents
1 Vi 1
https://www.medrium.comJpracticel 0 1/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary
3/8/2004
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 162 of 189
Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees January 2004 Dr. Jadwin Payments
January
,
I Year-To-Date I
Inpatient I
$8,077.381
$8,077.381
I
$0.001
$0.001
I
$7,027.321
$7,027.321
Billing Service 12%1
$969.291
$969.29\
Billing Clerk I
$0.001
$O.OOJ
$80.771
$80.771
$0.001
$0.001
Outpatient Distribution
Compensation
Faculty Practice 1%[ Balance
0018904
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 163 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR '['HI' EASTERN DI.3TRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, vs.
No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
COUN']'Y OF KERN; et a1. Defendants . ....
-~-~-----_ ..._~-~_._---_.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF IRWIN EVERETT HARRIS,
~.D.
Wednesday, August 13, 7008 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Susan R. Wood, CSR No. 6829
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free. (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
---'I"'R\
,
JADWIN VS. COUNTY -VERETI HARRIS M D., Wednesday, August 13 2008
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG 02:39:44
1
02:39:48
2
02:39:52
3
02;39;5-4
4
02:40:05
5 6
02:40:0B
7
02:40:11
8
02:40:12
9
02:40,04
02:40:13 10 02:40:17 11 02:40:21 12 02:40:22 13 0240:24 14 02:40:27 15 02:4030 16 ONO:33 17 02:40:35 18 02:40:38 19 02:40:41 20 02:40:45 21 024053 22 02:40:57 23 02:4101 24 02:4104 25
113 Document 278-2
occasions to -- to counsel him about some of his behaviors, but I feel that the purpose of this is not to talk about Dr. Roy. Q. Okay. Focusing on this letter, Dr. Harris, what do you recall saying to Dr. Roy when you received this letter? Or did you say anything to him at all? A. I don't remember. Q. You don't remember. Did you tell anybody else what you thought about Dr. Roy's letter, Exhibit 193? A. No. Q. You didn't discuss -A. No. Why would I do that? These -- these letters are total and complete confidential and private. I would never do that. Q. SO what happened to this letter after you received it from Dr. Roy? A. I believe this letter went into the private, confidential, separate, and secure file that I mentioned to you, which is called a quality file. Q. It was never -- and that letter stayed in your file permanently and never left that -A. I don't believe that letter went anywhere except to our County Counsel. WOOD & RANDALL
02:42:14
Filed 12/01/2008 1
02:42:15
2
02:42:17
3
02:42:18
4
02:42:19
5
02:42:20
6
02:42:21
7
02:42:22
8
02:42:23
9
02:42:24 10 02:42:25 11 02:42:27 12 0242:28 13 02:42:31
14
02:42:32 15 02:42:32 16 0242:36 17 0242:38 18 02:42:40 19 02:42:41
20
02:42:42 21 02:42:43 22 02:42:43 23 02:4243 24 02:42:46 25
(800) 322-4595
(800) 322-4595
02:4LD
1
02:4L13
2
02:41:15
3
02:41:15
4
02:41:17
5
02:41:20
6
02:41:22
7
02:41:23
8
0241:24
9
02:41:26 10 02:41:2611 C2:41:29 12 C2:4Ul 13 02',41:35 14 0241:41 15 C2:41:44 16 C241:4B 17 02:41:4B 18 02:41:49 19 02:41:51 20 C2:4155 21 02:42:Cl 22 02:42:D
114 Q. Okay. And when do you -- how did it get to the County Counsel? Do you recall the circumstances? A. What was the question? Q. How did this letter, Exhibit -A. The County Counsel asked me for it. Q. When did the County Counsel -- are we talking about Karen Barnes here? A. Yeah. Q. When did Karen Barnes ask you for Exhibit 193? A. I don't remember the date. Q. Was it years afterwards? A. I think -- I remember at the time that Karen had asked me for the letter. I -- I don't believe that at that time, but later I guess I learned that Dr. Jadwin's attorney had asked her for it. Q. Asked her for it? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. How did people know about Exhibit 1937 How did they know it existed, to your knowledge? A. No -- no one except for a very select few in the leadership should have known that it existed. Q. Okay. Well, you got this letter from Dr. Roy. You asked -- I mean, he came -- well, let's WOOD & RANDALL
Page 164 of 189 115
step back for a minute. Did Dr. Roy come to you after the conference with complaints -A. Yes. Q. ~- about the presentation by -- let me finish. -- by Dr. Jadwin? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And then you had the same conversation with Dr. Roy that you had with Dr. Taylor and Dr. McBride? A. That's right. Q. In other words, I recommend you go ahead and write a written complaint? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. And so then this Exhibit 193 resulted from Dr. Roy. Correct? This letter from Dr. Roy, he wrote it-A. Yeah. Q. -- after he had the conversation with you. A. Yeah. Q. Right? A. Yeah. Q. Okay. You got this letter. You put it into your top secret confidential file. WOOD & RANDALL
116 02:42:49 02:42:50 02:42:52 02:42,54 02:42:58 02:43:C4 02:43:17 02:43:20 C2:43:24 02:43:28 C2:43:32 C2:43:36 02:43:41 C2:43:43 02:43,46 02:43:46 02:43:49 02:43;53 02:43:54 02:43:55 02:43:56 C2:4358 C2:44:00 02:44:02 C2:44:C5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. Yes. Q. SO I'm asking, to your knowledge, how did other people know it existed? A. other people didn't know it existed. They -- at the time when I met with the medical staff leadership we .- I -- I prepared a summary, if you will, of some of the comments that were made from the letters that I had received and shared those with the medical staff leaders. I don't remember whether I showed them the actual letter or not, but I do remember writing a summary in the anticipation that at some point we would be meeting with Dr. Jadwin. Q. Okay. So you wrote a summary of memo. To whom did you write this memo, if you can recall? A. I wrote these -- the summary memo, if you will, to the president of the medical staff, the vice president of medical staff. Q. Okay. That's Eugene Kercher? A. Yes. Q. Is that -- Scott Ragland is vice president? Who is the vice president? A. In all honesty, I'm not sure that I remember exactly who the officers were at the time. But it was the president of the medical staff, the vice WOOD & RANDALL
(800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395·1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
(800) 322-4595
"
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 165 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN,
D.O.,
Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF EDWARD WILLIAM TAYLOR, M.D. Wednesday, December 5, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free. (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
.-
=EC
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN 0 WILLIAM TAYLOR M D., Wednesday December 5 20(
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
13 Document Q. Did you have any discussions about this deposition with anybody before coming to this deposition? A. My counsel. We essentially talked about 5 this document as I -6 MR. WASSER: Yeah. Don't -- you don't have 7 to say what we talked about. 8 MR. LEE: Yeah. 9 Q. SO Mr. Wasser is your attorney? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Okay. Have you talked with anyone else 12 besides Mr. Wasser about this deposition? 13 A. My wife knows I have it. My chief resident 14 knows I have it because I'm on call. My partner 15 knows I have it because he's covering me while I'm 16 here. That's probably about it. 17 Q. Did you have any discussions with them about 18 the deposition beyond -19 A. Oh, no. No specifics. Just that I need 20 coverage. 21 Q. Okay. Okay. Since we started on it, why 22 don't we go to Exhibit 13. Take a look at this. 23 You're saying that this letter was to clarify your 24 feedback on the oncology conference; is that correct? 25 A. Correct. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1 2 3 4
278-2
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 166 of 189 14 Q. Okay. Now, this feedback form, is this a 2 form that you filled out at the conference or 3 immediately as the conference ended? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. And which conference are we talking about? 6 Are we talking about the one that occurred on or 7 around October 12th, 2005? 8 A. On or around, and it's the oncology 9 conference. Tumor board is the other name for it. 10 Q. Okay. Can you tell me a little bit about -11 well, tell me what you know about this conference or 12 what you remember about it. 13 A. That specific one or the conference itself? 14 Q. This specific conference on October 12th or 15 around October 12th, 2005. 16 A. What I remember is essentially what I wrote 17 here because it's been a while. And most of the 18 specifics and scientific physician-type knowledge is 19 completely gone. What I remember about it is that I 20 was quite appalled that the resident who had prepared 21 the conference never got to say anything. I was -22 Q. Just to stop you for one second. 23 Are you referring to George Alkhouri? 24 A. I don't remember who it is. 25 Q. Okay. Sorry. Please continue. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1
16
15
1
A. So what I remember most is the process
2
that's been set up in oncology conferences was not followed, and the educational benefits of the conference were essentially lost. And that's kind of what I focused in on and why I wrote this letter. Q. Sure. A. Because I've been a teacher at KMC for 20 years, and I'm very interested in maintaining a good educational environment. Q. Well, actually, let's step back to what you were suggesting we should talk about, which is what is this -- what is this conference in general? This tumor board or oncology conference, what is its purpose? A. We go over -- we -- excuse me. We, being many different departments. Usually surgery is always there, medicine is always there; both residents, attendings, medical students; on occasion family practice is there; on occasion GYN is there if they have a particular case; and cancer cases are presented -- in an ideal world it's a case that hasn't been treated yet or completed treated yet, and It's an open forum to discuss the future direction for that patient. Sometimes the case has already come to fruition as far as the treatment, and WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
3 4 5 6
7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
it ends up being a bit of a retrospective discussion. Usually the resident will present the case members from the audience -- radiation, oncologists, chemotherapists, surgeons -- everybody will give their input if they were involved; or if it's still a case we're trying to figure out what to do, we'll talk about what might happen next. If there were problems along the way, delays, we talk about that; so it's -- it's a part of a quality improvement process, although that's not its main thrust. And then usually -Q. Let me stop you right there. What -- what is the main thrust? A. The main thrust is -- is to educate -- two main thrusts, and I put them both equally. One is to educate the audience in cancer-related topics; and number two, but no less important, is to discuss that particular case and decide what the plan is; or if the plan's already been carried out, if that seemed like the best idea. MR. LEE: I'd like to get a document marked for identification, please. (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 14 marked for identification.) THE WITNESS: And I have to say I don't run WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800.322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,-
=EC
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN 0 WILLIAM TAYLOR M 0 Wednesday December 5 20C
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25
Document 21 Q. Okay. A He may have said it and it didn't sink in. What sunk in is there -- there is some ratio and most of them are supposed to be current cases which refer to the 20 -- the 75 percent. Q. I'm sorry. So Dr. McBride did mention -A I never heard the 75 percent. I do remember him saying, as I said before, that -- that whatever governing bodies he had to report to preferred the cases to be ongoing current cases, not retrospective. Q. Do you recall when he told you that? A Several times during the last 15 years. Q. And how did you respond to that when he told you that? A He told the whole group. Q. I see. So it wasn't in the one-on-one conversation? A No. Q. It was him speaking to the entire group? A Correct. Q. SO to your knowledge, was there any adjustment made in the conference format in -- as a consequence of his comments? A I think everybody tried to find the most recent, fresh cases we could. WOOD & RANDALL (800)322-4595
23 BY MR. LEE; Q. Okay. You have just been handed a document that has been marked for identification as Exhibit Number 15. Do you recognize this document? A No. Q. Okay. Okay. Let me -- let me get back to your feedback on these conferences. Now, typically what has your feedback consist- -- you said that you've attended these oncology conferences and you've given feedback on them. What kind of feedback generally have you given? I mean, some people -A There's hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, and I've given feedback on every single one of them. And I couldn't possibly begin to remember all of those. Q. Okay. Of course not. But have they tended to be more In the nature of praising or have they tended to be more in the nature of offering constructive criticism? A Both. Q. Both. Okay. A Both. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 167 of 189 22 Q. Uh-huh. Uh-huh. Okay. So -- so it seems to you that the message was heard by the cancer committee? A Well, some of us already did that, whether he said it or not. Q. Okay. A Somehow I had already known that; so it wasn't ever any new news to me. But it is always a challenge to find -- when a conference occurs once a month, you don't just hold your patients' care up until -- you know, so that they can be an undecided case. Q. Uh-huh. A And so it always is -- yet you need some time to prepare the case; so it's always a challenge to get a case that everything hasn't been decided yet during the right timing to do the -- what's preferred. MR. LEE; Okay. I'd like to get this marked for identification. (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 15 ma rked for identification.) MS. HERRINGTON: Number? THE COURT REPORTER; 15. III WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
24 Q. And, for example, if you find a presentation 2 to have been below average in your experience, would 3 you clearly indicate that in the feedback? 4 A Absolutely. I hold nothing back. 5 Q. Okay. A We evaluate the res- -- usually two 6 7 different residents. There's usually two cases, and 8 each case is evaluated separately. Like I said, some 9 of it is check box, but some of it there is room for 10 comment. We evaluate the resident and how they did. 11 Some of those were great and some of those were 12 terrible and everything in between. 13 We evaluate radiology. We evaluate 14 pathology. Radiology has been all the way from why 15 weren't they there, they needed to be there, which 16 would be a terrible mark, to they did a great job. 17 Pathology, the same thing. There's 18 excellent and then there's not excellent. 19 Q. Okay. A And then the overall presentation and then 20 21 the discussion. Did you learn something? I think 22 there's a spot on there if you think it affected the 23 patient's care, but I'm not sure. I missed the last 24 couple; so I don't remember that one. 25 And then there's room for comments, and I WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free" 800~322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050: Fresno: 559-224-2223
6
~
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-,E=:D,-
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ) WILLIAM TAYLOR MO., Wednesday December 5 200
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 25 try to write comments, especially -- if the evaluation found either really good things or really bad things, then I feel it's my job to justify that or else check the box doesn't help anything. Q. Okay. MR. LEE: I didn't print this out, but I don't know, Mark, if you have this. But it's Bates Number 536. It's the -MR. WASSER: Not with me. MR. LEE: You wouldn't have it. Okay. Should I just show it to him? MS. HERRINGTON: No, you shouldn't. BY MR. LEE: Q. Well, I'm looking at a feedback form for the oncology conference dated October 12th, 2005. I'll represent to you that it states the following. It states: Pathologist should have arranged with Dr. McBride and OB/GYN -- OB/GYN presenter before conference get his, quote, extra time, end quote. Dash, he gave no one else the time to talk, including the presenter, exclamation point. Not acceptable. And in the boxes that you -- you had where you put your score -MR. WASSER: Is this -- is this the -- the WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
27 number 1, except for the last one, which is how would you rate the overall presentation from radiology, and the answer there, it looks like it's N.A., which -would that stand for not -A. Maybe there wasn't any radiology. Q. Okay. A. Can you remind me, is 1 low or is 1 high? Q. One -- according to the rating system at the top, it says performance rating, 1, very good -A. Okay. Thank you. Q. -- 2, satisfactory; 3 needs improvement. A. Okay. Q. And in the B column there's a big N.A. written, which I would -- does that mean not available? A. It means there was no time for anybody else to say anything; so I feit I shouldn't evaluate that; that, to the best of my knowledge and remembrance, is why I put that. Q. Okay. A. It was quite a while. Q. SO you do recognize this document that I'm discussing with you right now? A. I definitely remember writing the words at the bottom. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5
6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 168 of 189 26 form that the Dr. Taylor filled out? MR. LEE: Yes, it is. It's got a signature at the bottom that states Bill Taylor, and it's Bates number -- your Bates Number 536. MR. WASSER: And you don't have a copy of that so we can see what you're looking at? MR. LEE: Unfortunately, at Kinko's we had problems with that. We can try to make it there on break. I mean, I'll just show it to you, Mark, so you know what I'm talking about. Q. Now, what I've just read to you, does that sound-A. Sounds like exactly something I would write from what I remember two years ago in -- during that conference. Q. And just to continue on this Bates Page Number 536, I see there's -- you've -- well, someone's written scores in in the document, and there's an A at the top and there's a B at the top representing the A column and the B column. A. That was the two different presenters for the two different cases. Q. Okay. And there's a -- there's a bunch of criteria for which you can put a score. And for the A column I see every box has been filled in with the WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
28 Q. Okay. A. I don't remember filling the 1s and the N.A.s out, but that's my writing at the bottom. Q. Okay. And it also asks in the B column that you rate the overall presentation from pathology, and there is a 2 that is scribbled out or stricken out and it's replaced by a 3. Do you -- does that -A. I don't remember, but I can't imagine I would give it much -- a very good rating when I felt that it detracted from the other aspects of the conference that I felt should have been allowed to go on. So my guess is I would have given it a poor rating. Q. Well, not your guess, but your best recollection? A. My best recollection, yes. Q. Okay. And just to continue to finish this off, the Presenter A it states here is Dr. N. Sharkey; and presenter B is Dr. G. Alkhouri. And I'll spell those: Alkhouri is A-I-k-h-o-u-r-i. Sharkey is S-h-a-r-k-e-y. Okay. And so if I understood you correctly earlier, you were saying that this Page 536, which I've been reading to you from, was your orig',nal WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800.322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN
,
) WILLIAM TAYLOR M D Wednesday December 5 200 Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 169 of 189 30 29 feedback form. 1 wrote -- I wrote some in the evaluation, and at that And what is the connection between this 2 point they asked me ',f I would write everything I 3 thought. And I did. feedback form and Exhibit 13? 4 A. When the on- -- at the end of the conference Q. Who is "they"? I talked to Dr. -- it was still in the same room. 5 A. I know it was Dr. Harris, and I don't There were many of us that were appalied, quite 6 remember if McBride was there too. But I believe honestly, at what had gone on. I -- I first talked 7 those two were both there. 8 to the resident and said did you know this was going Q. Okay. When you say Dr. Harris, do you mean to happen; that you weren't going to get to say 9 Dr. Irwin Harris? anything. And he was, quite honestly, not very happy 10 A. Correct. about it. He said he didn't know anything about all 11 Q. Okay. This is the CMO? of this time being taken up. 12 A. Correct. Q. Just to stop you. 13 Q. What -- what can you recall the contents of What do you mean by "he"? 14 that conversation with Dr. Harris? When did it A. Dr. -- I don't even remember his name, but 15 occur? Where was it? it's the male of the two presenters. Sharkey was a 16 A. It was right in -- in the conference room at female. Alkhouri, or whoever, was the male. I know 17 the end of the conference, and I was sharing with him it was the maie that got cut short. 18 and I believe Dr. McBride and I'm not sure who eise, Q. Okay. 19 but there were attendings there, and we were all A. So I talked to him briefly. And then at 20 sharing our disbelief, as well as unhappiness with that point on the way out of the conference, after 21 the way the conference had gone. And I had mentioned turning in my evaluation, I talked to Dr. McBride and 22 to Dr. Harris that -- that I'd at least put some of Harris, who were standing right there with, I'm sure, 23 my thoughts down on the evaluation form. And he said several other attendings that were pretty unhappy 24 well, if -- if you feel it's important, please go 25 ahead and write the rest of them in legible that that happened. And I said, well, you know, I WOOD & RANDALL WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 (800) 322-4595 "ED ec
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
31 typewriter and send it to me. And I said I would be absolutely happy to do that. Q. Okay. You've made several references to being appalled by the presentation being -- disbelief because of the presentation. Can you tell us a little bit about why you were in disbelief and why you were appalled? A. In my 20 years at KMC -- and at 2005 would have been two years less, I guess; so 18 -- I had never seen -- and I'm very into education; so things like this are important. I'm also a very emotional person who carries it on my sleeve; so I have to, in my own way, be careful not to say everything I think in front of residents and students because it's not appropriate. So maybe that's why I was a little sensitive to what went on. There was essentially two major things that bothered me the most. Number one, that all of the resident's time was taken up and that he wasn't warned about it ahead of time. And residents are busy. They have a lot of -- it takes a lot of effort to prepare one of these conferences. And for them to not get to do what they have prepared to do I think is a crime -- not a discipline crime that you deal with, but it's a crime. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
32 Secondly, after the first 20 minutes of -of this -- this discussion that Dr. Jadwin was giving us, it start -- I didn't -- I had no idea what it was really about, and I didn't really know of any kind of feud or disagreement between him and Dr. Roy. I -- I was completely naive, as was most people in the room, but it became very apparent that this was an example of getting their argument out in public, in front of residents and students. And I thought that was phenomenally inappropriate and that's why I wrote the things I wrote. And I -- I tried to do it as -- with really just stating the facts and what I thought was bad and, quite honestly, I didn't have a whole lot of baggage carried beforehand, and I didn't even know any of this stuff that was going on between them, and so I felt this was the time for me to go write this memo because I could truly just state what I thought about what happened at the conference. It was unfavorable, bad for education, bad to do in front of residents and students, and that's why I wrote that. Q. Okay. MR. LEE: Can we get the actual presentation? MS. HERRINGTON: You have it right there. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free" 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395+1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
JADWIN VS, COUNTY OF KERN
,-
-'Eo,,-D
) WILLIAM TAYLOR M D., Wednesday, December 5, 20(
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
33 Document MR. LEE: The actual presentation? Can we just go off the record for just one moment? MR. WASSER: Sure. MS. HERRINGTON: Going off the record at 5 -- 4:45 p.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Okay. Back on the record at 4:51 p.m. MR. LEE: I'd like to get this marked for identification. MS. HERRINGTON: That's number? MR. WASSER: 16. THE COURT REPORTER: 16. (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 16 marked for identification.) BY MR. LEE: Q. Okay. Dr. Taylor, you've just been handed a document marked for identification as Exhibit 16. Why don't you take a moment to look at it. Do you recognize this exhibit, Dr. Taylor? A. No, I don't. Q. Do you recognize this -- well, is it possible that this is the presentation that Dr. Jadwin gave -- well, that was -- Dr. Alkhouri and WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
35 parts of the conference have run over and caused other parts -- other presenters to have less time. So I can remember generalizing -- not specific cases, but I can remember radiology spending too much time and there being no times for pathology. I can remember pathology going longer and there's almost no time for the next case. I suspect that's why Dr. McBride wrote this. Q. Exhibit is? A. Exhibit 15. Q. All right. A. So that's what I mean to this degree. So it's -- there are times where the audience members won't shut up and everybody wants to argue, and we have to -- Dr. McBride would kind of round everybody up and say okay, it's time to move along. Q. Uh-huh. A. Or we would do it to ourselves, realizing that the clock's ticking. But never to the degree -to the degree that I saw that day. Q. Okay. In other words, it had happened, but not to this amount of -- not this much time had been taken away from the student? A. Nowhere close. Q. Nowhere close. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 170 of 189 34 Dr. Jadwin were supposed to give at the October oncology conference on October 12th, 2005? A. This -- yes, it's possible. Q. Okay. Well, I'm going to direct your attention to Page DFJ559. Could you just take a look at that page and the next four or five pages ending on DFJ562. So after you've had -- now that you've had a chance to review some of the critical pages of this exhibit, does it refresh your recollection as to whether it was the presentation that was given on the October 12, 2005, oncology conference? A. My best estimate is that it is, but I don't remember many details. Q. Okay. Now, you had said earlier that this presentation -- well, Dr. Jadwin had essentially disallowed the male presenter, who you believe to be Dr. Alkhouri, from having his time to present. Had that ever happened before at any oncology conference in the past? A. Not to this degree, to my knowledge, in my presence. Q. Okay. And when you say "degree," can you be more specific? A. There have been other times that different WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
36 Okay. Did Dr. Alkhouri have a chance to make any -- well, I'm going to represent to you that Dr. Alkhouri was the male presenter that day. Did Dr. Alkhouri -- do you believe or do you recall that he had a chance to make any presentation of facts at the beginning of the conference? A. I believe he introduced the case at the beginning, and I believe that was about all he got to do, but it's been quite some time. I know he told me later he had a whole discussion he had prepared that he never got to give, and I do not know the contents of that or any details of that because he never gave it and I didn't look at what it was. I just wanted to find out if he had prepared something which he didn't get to give, and indeed he had. Q. Let -- I mean, how long -- when is -- does the conference begin or -- when did this conference end? What time? A. I can just tell you they usually start at 7:30 and .end at 8:30. Q. In the morning? A. Yes. Q. Was October 12th, 2005, any different, according to your recollection? A. I do not recollect at all. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free· 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
~
",EDe.
JADWIN VS, COUNTY OF KERN ) WILLIAM TAYLOR M 0 Wednesday, December 5 200
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Document 49 I know there was a lot of arguing, for lack of a better word, about FNAs between I think mostly radiology and pathology. I wasn't involved with any of that, but I knew there was a lot of arguing, for lack of a better word. And I didn't know anything about GYN and pathology, there being any conflicts until it became very apparent at this conference. So that's about as much as I know. Q. Were you aware that one of the issues in this lawsuit is the fact Dr. Jadwin was complaining to the hospital and raising concerns with the hospital about patient care issues in the treatment of certain patients, his concern being that the medical care and procedures might not -- might be harming patient care? A. No. I'm not aware of that right now. Q. Okay. Getting back to this conference, this October conference. Now, in the case of retrospective cases, you mentioned that some of the cases were involving current ongoing cases for which the treatment needed to be discussed, but then there were also situations where the conference discussed retrospective cases, cases that had already basically been resolved but still were good topics for training and for WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
51 At the October oncology conference, how much did you understand of the contents of the Presentation B? A. Very little. Q. Okay. A. And that's not because of my lack of knowledge. Q. Sure. A. And -- well, it's partly because of my lack of knowledge in that's not what I do. Okay? I don't do any GYN at all, but also there -- there was -after the first few minutes there was a lot of uneasiness in myself and other people that made it absolutely impossible to really focus on what we probably were supposed to be learning -Q. Uh-huh. A. -- because it was obvious that this was a conflict being played out in front of us that most of us knew nothing about, and we were all feeling nervous for the resident because there's no time and he's up there wanting to present something, and that pretty much took my -- and I even -- I wrote in Exhibit 13 that I still wasn't sure what it was all about. And I wrote this right afterwards. 1-and -- but I certainly didn't learn anything. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 171 of 189 50 discussion for these conferences. So that's what I mean when I say retrospective cases. In the case of retrospective cases, is the time for audience participation generally shorter or longer than with respect to the current cases? A. It's about the same. Sorry. It's usually about the same. It might be a little shorter, but we -- if you put five different types of physicians in the same room, they will find something to argue about, whether the case is done or not. We find things that were delayed and -- and argue about how we can make them better. Q. Uh-huh. A. We -- and there's always different ways to take care of somebody; so we still end up talking about the different options, even though one of them has already been chosen. So there's -- there's still quite a bit of talk. Q. Okay. Well, on this October 12 oncology conference where this issue arose of Dr. Jadwin taking time away from the resident's presentation time, let's just call that the October oncology conference. A. Okay. Q. I'll refer to it that way. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Q. Okay. You had said earlier that in these October -- I'm sorry. In these oncology conferences, you said typically radiology and pathology should just stand up and say their piece, and that shouldn't normally take more than 10 minutes, correct? A. Or much less than that. Q. Much less than that. Okay. Can you think of cases where pathology or radiology would require more time than that where it could even -- let me just finish -where it could be that the pathology issues or radioiogy issues may have predominant importance in the conference? A. I can think of times that in the past pathology took way too much time, quite honestly. With all due respect, pathologists, their profession is words, describing things, and it's very important that -- that they do that to the best of their ability. But quite honestly, a lot of them go overboard. I'm sure that's why Dr. McBride's letter was sent in Exhibit 15, and I imagine that that's been a problem since the beginning of time of tumor boards. So I will differentiate more time needed versus more time taken. This is not the first time a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certlfled Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-'E=O'-'
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN M D., Wednesday, December 5 200
) WILLIAM TAYLOR
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 172 of 189 54 53 1 The next bullet point says the reviewer did pathologist took more time than I think they needed, but to a much higher degree than ever seen or 2 not comment on the tubal metaplasia. Reviewer did imagined in my opinion. 3 not comment or appreciate severe active cervic1tis/ THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. I missed 4 c-e-r-v-i-c-i-t-i-s, or inflammatory component of the last part. Ever-5 this lesion. THE WITNESS: Ever-6 Do you recognize this language? THE COURT REPORTER: Ever seen -7 A. No. THE WITNESS: Or imagined in my opinion. Q. This Page DFJ559, do you recognize this -8 BY MR. LEE: 9 this slide? Q. Have there been other departments which have 10 A. No. been guilty of time overruns or taking more time than 11 Q. Is it possible that this is a page from the you think they should? 12 presentation of the October oncology conference? A. There's no other departments involved. 13 A. Yes. Q. Okay. 14 MR. WASSER: You've already asked him that. A. There could be individuals, as -- we talked 15 MR. LEE: I'm talking about this page, about this already. 16 though. Q. Okay. Well, can you take a look again at 17 MR. WASSER: Well, you asked about the whole Exhibit 16, Page 559 -- DFJ559. 18 exhibit. Okay. I'm just going to just take a look at 19 BY MR. LEE: it. And you'll notice that on the second -- well, 20 Q. Okay. Well, what does that mean to you, the second bullet point, I guess, reviewer did not 21 what I just read? comment or recognize incorrect orientation in the A. Nothing more than you just read. This is 22 colposcopic, c-o-i-p-o-s-c-o-p-i-c, biopsy that led 23 not my profession. to a missed diagnosis of severe squamous dysplasia, Q. Okay. That's fine. 24 s-q-u-a-m-o-u-s d-y-s-p-I-a-s-i-a. Do you take that to be critical of USC's 25 WOOD & RANDALL WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 (800) 322-4595
55
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
review?
A. Yes. Q. Okay. Well, can you -- can you -- how so?
A. Well, words like "incorrect" was not appreciated. Simple English, nothing scientific or doctor about it. Q. Okay. Do you think it's inappropriately critical? A. I think putting USC on it is inappropriate. Q. Can you explain why. A. Because this is a conference filled with residents and students that could go wherever they want to go in their training, and this is not a conference to -- this is not -- this is not a conference that -- I think it's important that the -an error be brought out. We do that all the time. I think it could -- simply would have been better to be stated outside review. Q. Okay. So in other words, the aspect of this Page DFJ559 that you find offensive or inappropriate is the -- the mention of USC at the top; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. SO if that term "USC" had been blacked out or left out of this slide, would this slide have WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
56 been -- would you have considered it appropriate then? A. Yes. With a qualification that my lack of knowledge in this area from a medical standpoint is not able to summarize this form. This is an awful lot of words, and most people in this audience don't know more than me about this. And in this talk it -there was so many words and so much description that essentially everybody, in my opinion, except Dr. Jadwin and Dr. Roy, was completely lost and learning nothing. And it is a challenge to get everything down in the short time you have that's important; but on the other hand, being a person that gives all sort of national presentations, it's a challenge that you have to figure out how to do it or else you lose your entire audience. I was lost in most of this case because there were too many words. Q. Do you think that -- were gynecologists in the audience at the October oncology conference? A. Yes. Q. Do you feel that -- do you have a reason to believe the gynecologists would have understood this presentation or this Page DFJ559? A. Ask them. You'll have to ask them. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
"'H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN D WILLIAM TAYLOR M D Wednesday December 5 20l
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 61 appropriateness useless in that conference because everybody saw that it was just this battle; so everybody couldn't wait to leave the room. Q. Okay. When you say everyone -- let's break that down. You made two statements there. You said everyone saw that this was a battle and everyone wanted to leave the room. A. I should say it became apparent. Can I strike the "everyone"? Q. Sure. Sure. A. It became apparent. Q. To you that people -A. No. I said it became apparent. Q. Okay. Okay. But -- it became apparent to whom? A. I believe it became apparent to the entire room. Q. Okay. Why do you say that?
A. Because it was so blatant. Q. Okay. You also said that -- were you also saying earlier that it became apparent that everyone wanted to leave the room? A. It became uneducational. It was just a fight with one person standing at the podium giving their opinion and their data -WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
A. -- which I'm sure a lot of this data's very, very important, and that's really, in my mind, not at all what I wrote about or what I thought because to me that wasn't the issue. The point was that this decompensated into one person giving their opinion and side of things and very important data, and the other person not being able to speak, which is probably good because it would have just decompensated into a screaming match, which it tried to do a couple of times. And I felt that was -- that entire thing was absolutely inappropriate in oncology. Is it inappropriate to argue about the patient care? Absolutely not. All of this stuff was very important. It was not the right venue to carry out this battle. Q. Okay. You keep mentioning the word IIbattle. ll What do you mean by battle? A. Loud voice; arguing back and forth between Dr. Roy and Dr. Jadwin; Dr. Jadwin not giving -Q. I'm sorry. Just one second. When you say Dr. Roy, do you mean Dr. William Roy? A. Correct. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
64
63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
It -- and again, I -- I didn't know anything about this. I have no sides of anything because I don't know -- I know nothing, okay, regarding the patient or any of this. But as an innocent bystander, it was very apparent to me that -- that this was not at all about education. This wasn't at all about a cordial discussion of how to take care of a patient. This -- this was an ongoing battle that was taken to a public forum with residents and students involved, which I think is absolutely inappropriate, and that's why I wrote what I wrote. Q. Okay. Do you think there's room for a difference in opinion as to what the proper purpose of the present -- oncology presentation is? A. I think there's always room for a difference of opinion on anything. Q. Sure. Do you think -- can you imagine an oncology conference where the focus is on treatment of the current case and where a presentation like this Exhibit 16 might be appropriate? A. If you give other people a chance to talk and -- and it could be very appropriate. Q. Uh-huh. A. But if your presentation is so long and WOOD & RANDALL
(800) 322-4595
Page 173 of 189 62
Q. Uh-huh.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
detailed that nobody else in the room is allowed to talk, and even if they try to talk they're cut off, that is not what an oncology conference is about. Q. When you say "cut off," is that what happened at the -A. Yes. Q. Just like that. Sure. When you say "cut off" at the oncology conference, can you be more specific who was being cut off -A. There were -Q. Who was cutting off and who was being cut off? A. Dr. Jadwin was cutting off anybody else who wanted to talk. The only people I remember trying to talk is Dr. Roy and Dr. McBride trying to get Dr. Jadwin to stop. I don't remember if other people were trying to cut in or not, but those two were completely cut off several times. Q. Okay. So getting back to my question, putting aside the cutting off and the behavior, perhaps we can call it, could you imagine a -- weil, can you envision or -- a situation where an oncology conference focuses on treatment of a current case, a current patient, and where Presentation 16 might be WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield"" 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
11
~
-,E~Do.c\
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN WILLIAM TAYLOR M D., Wednesday, December 5, 200,
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2 65
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
appropriate, that level detail that we discussed on those pages? A. I believe if I were helping a resident to get one of these ready, I would make sure that they gave some sort of little educational spiel ahead of time because 90 percent of the people in that room are not GYN or pathologists. And so I think just to -- in our oncology conference to go straight to this without letting the resident at least educate people is -- is a waste of time and is inappropriate. Q. Okay. Well, it seems like an underlying theme, what you're saying is that this presentation was -- this conference should be about education. I guess what I'm asking or what I'm trying to ask is can there be an oncology presentation -- in your opinion, can there be an oncology presentation which puts aside the education mission and focuses solely on facilitating the treatment of the current patient case? And I mean really putting aside the education issue. A. If three-quarters of the people in the room do not understand what you're talking about, you won't have a worthwhile discussion about the care of the patient. So when medicine analogies are good, when medicine has -- is doing a leukemia case -- I WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
multispecialty crossover so that we don't have to give a whole giant lecture and we can focus on the planned current care of the patient. But there are certain things in -- and I'm sure in every different department where I believe it is crucial to bring everybody up to speed, at least a bit, before moving into what would seem to be minutia but probably very important minutia. Q. Were you aware that -- that the patient care of this patient, this current case involved in the October oncology conference, Presentation B, were you aware that there was genuine disagreement about-about the proper treatment path? A. I was not aware. It became very obvious as the battle began in the conference. Q. Okay. Again, you're saying the word "battle." Can you be more specific? A. Dr. Roy tryi ng to spea k out. I rea Ily seem to remember there were other people trying to speak out and them being cut off by Dr. Jadwin. I had no idea before that, but it became very obvious that they had a disagreement, and it -- it seemed very obvious, at least to me, that it -- it wasn't a new thing, it had been going on, just because they both WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 174 of 189 66
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
don't remember anything about leukemia other than medical school. It's been a long time. They know that. They know most of the people, other than the medicine attendings and residents, need a quick refresher on what's important and what's not. So those -- when they're presenting one of those cases, the resident will give not even five minutes -- a five-minute spiel, about maybe three slides of refreshing what you should know to be able to move on so the whole room understands what everybody else is talking about so that everybody can participate in a useful discussion about the patient care. Q. Okay. Well, in follow-up to that, can you envision an oncology conference that is focused on patient care where the content of the presentation goes over the head of 90 percent of the participants but that's okay? A. No. I can't. Q. Okay. So in your opinion, the oncology conference should always -- always have as a prerequisite that it is at a comprehension level that the participants or most of them -- of the participants can comprehend it, correct? A. Fortunately for us, most of the topics are topics that repeat quite frequently, and they are WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
kind of had -- I mean, Dr. Jadwin certainly had his act together and his argument together; so I wasn't beforehand, but it became obvious during the -during the conference. Q. Okay. So when you say that Dr. Jadwin was cutting them off, how -- I mean, how did this happen? I just want to understand -- have a visual image of how that happened. A. The visual image that I still have, so I think I'm probably remembering quite well because I don't have a whole lot of it, but I have a visual image of Dr. Roy trying to say "no, no, no" to something, and Dr. Jadwin saying, "Just let me finish. Just let me finish. Just let me finish." It happened several, several times. And just let me finish went on for half an hour until the case-everybody had to leave. So again, I think -- as -- you know, everything I think is on the Exhibit 13, and I still think everything that I wrote on this paper -. because I thought I was very careful with my words. I -- I think it was a very bad example to the residents for this to go on in front of them. This just isn't the right place to do this sort of thing with students and residents, being a person who's WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
67
68
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 175 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday,
December 6, 2007
Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT
...-... _... _-_ .•..•. ---._-
WOoo-SoRANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free. (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
~
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
----.:Ce'2.H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ·S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday, December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 9 it with and what you discussed? A. Defendants' counsel. Q. You're referring to Mr. Wasser? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Mr. Wasser is representing you today as his attorney; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Is there anyone else besides Mr. Wasser you have discussed this deposition with? A. There's been no substantive discussion. I have informed people that I would be here so that I would not conflict with other responsibilities. Q. Okay. Can you tell us about your educational background briefly? A. I attended Dartmouth College, Boston University School of Medicine. Training at University of California at San Diego. National Institutes of Health. Q. Can you tell me the dates of your attendance of each of those institutions? A. Would it be more helpful for me to provide you with a curriculum vitae under separate cover? Q. No, it's not necessary. If you can just do it briefly now. A. Dartmouth, 1973-1977; Boston University, WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
11 And I just wanted to ask you how much -- how much contact have you had with Dr. Jadwin during your time at KMC? If you had to put a number on the interactions you've had with him, how many would you estimate that to be? A. Could you clarify how many years Dr. Jadwin was at Kern Medical Center? Q. He's been at Kern Medical Center since -from 2000 to 2000 and -- well, technically seven. So 2000 to 2007, so seven years. A. Can you clarify "technically"? Q. Pardon me? A. Can you clarify for me why you said he was technically there until 20077 Q. Sure. Sure. Well, physically he wasn't at KMC in the year 2007; he was on administrative leave. His contract ended on October 4, 2007. So the last time he was physically present at KMC was in December 6 or 7 of 2006. MR. WASSER: And he was only there for two months in December of 2006. BY MR. LEE: Q. Does that answer your question? A. So we are -- so we have five years -Q. Yes. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 176 of 189 10 1977 to 1981; University of California San Diego, 1981 to 1986, 1988-1990; the National Institutes of Health, 1986 to 1988. Q. Okay. And can you describe briefly your work experience since the National Institutes of Health, giving dates? A. Clinical instructor for University of California San Diego commencing 1989. And under their auspices, I have been at Kern Medical Center ever since 1991, I think. Q. What is your position at KMC? A. Neurosurgeon. Q. Have you had -- do you understand what this litigation is about, this lawsuit? A. No. Q. Okay. Is there -- have you heard anything about it? A. No. Q. Are you aware that you're not a party in this lawsuit? A. No. Q. That you're not being sued? A. No. Q. Well, I'll tell you right now, you're not being sued. You're appearing here as a witness. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
12 1 2
3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. Q. A. Q. A. Q.
-- is that correct?
Well, actually, let's see. Calendar years. Let's say five years. Yeah, that's correct. Probably ten times. Ten times. And were those interactions very significant with Dr. Jadwin or -A. No. Q. No. So were they really more in the nature of just saying hello in the hallway? A. No, they were to ask about a pathology specimen which happened, I believe, probably twice a year. Q. I'm sorry? A. It was to ask about a pathology specimen, maybe twice a year, my recollection. Q. Okay. So the conversations were strictly work-related then, correct? A. That is correct. Q. Okay. Did Dr. Jadwin ever strike you as arrogant? A. I don't remember. Q. Well, we're entitled to your best recollection. Is your best recollection that he was arrogant at any time with you? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
,-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-"C"-H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2 17
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 177 of 189 18
A. No. Q. Do you have -- have you ever used the tissue
family -- I'm sorry -- medical leave? A. No. Q. Okay. Are you aware of the American Disability -- Americans with Disabilities Act or the ADA? A. I've heard of it. I have no further comment. I have heard the term, but don't know what it means or the implications or the application or the relevance. Q. Okay. Have you ever attended any training seminars at KMC regarding discrimination or harassment or medical leave? A. I don't re member. Q. SO sitting here today you have no recollection? A. I don't remember attending any such session. Q. Have you ever been offered such a seminar at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. Okay. Have you ever received any materials, written materials, regarding discrimination, harassment, medical leave at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. All right. Okay. Now, can you tell us a little bit about the tissue bank at KMC? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
19 any other freezers like that in the -- at KMC? A. I don't know. Q. Okay. But that's the only one that you're aware of there, correct? A. That is correct. Q. Okay. Are there any other places where you might store human tissue at KMC? A. I don't know. Q. In the last two years, can you recall any places that you might have stored tissue, human tissue, besides this minus 70 freezer in the pathology department? A. I cannot recall any other. Q. Okay. What's your understanding of the requirements or regulations regarding storage of human tissue? A. I have no knowledge of those regulations. Q. Have you ever received any materials or written or oral instructions regarding the storage of human tissue at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. Okay. Dr. Wrobel, have you ever been involved in any litigation yourself as a party? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Can you recount some of those times? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
20 1 Can you describe them, times and the subject matter? 2 A. One patient alleged that he had not improved 3 from a carpal tunnel release. He had a coexistent 4 Dupuytren's -- D-u-p-y-t-r-e-n-apostrophe s (sic) -5 contracture, and he was upset that the Dupuytren's 6 had not been treated. So we went to small claims 7 court and it was dismissed. Another patient had -8 9 Q. Just let me back up. 10 A. Certainly. 11 Q. To clarify, so you were the defendant in 12 that small claims action? 13 A. Yes, I was. 14 Q. Okay. Okay. Can you proceed with the next 15 example? 16 A. A patient had a operation for a brain tumor 17 in 1998. After surgery he had a stroke on the side 18 of the surgery, and he also had a stroke in the other 19 unoperated hemisphere. And there was a lawsuit 20 involving the stroke, which was settled for $15,000. 21 Q. And, again -22 A. This was in 1998. 23 Q. Okay. And, again, you were the named 24 defendant in that action? 25 A. Amongst others, yes. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
bank at KMC? A. There is no tissue bank. Q. There is no tissue bank? A. To my knowledge. Q. SO are there -- are there ever times as a neurosurgeon you need to store tissues, body tissues anywhere for an -A. Yes. Q. Let me finish. -- extended period of time? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Can you tell me about some examples of those? A. We will save bone flaps in the minus 70 freezer. Q. Okay. Can you describe the location of this minus 70 freezer? A. It is in the pathology department. Q. Where in the pathology department is it located? A. There's a room. I cannot be any more specific than that. Q. Okay. And this minus 70 freezer, are there WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDAll, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 178 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT \,yOOD~GoRANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322·4595 Toll Free' (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
r-
"'C~H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M 0 Thursday December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Document 25 (Reporter asking for break due to technical difficulties.) MS. HERRINGTON: Going off the record at 8:26 a.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Back on the record at 8:38 a.m. BY MR. LEE: Q. Is it -- by the way, Dr. Wrobel, is it Dr. Wrobel or Wrobel? A. Either way. Thank you. Q. Either way is okay? Okay. Getting back to the minus 70 freezer, what kind of tissues have you stored in that freezer in, say, the past seven years? A. Bone flaps. Q. SO there's no other human tissue you can think of that you store in that freezer? A. No. Q. Okay. And how often do you store human tissue in that -- when I say "the freezer," by the way, just for the sake of clarity, the freezer will refer to the minus 70 freezer in the pathology department that Dr. Wrobel -- Wrobel has been referencing. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 179 of 189 26 Can you think of how often -- well, can you tell me how often or the frequency with which you store human tissue in the freezer' A. It would depend on the epoch that we are talking about. Q. Okay. A. The point in time. Q. Why don't we say the last four years then. A. Probably two or three times a year as an estimate. Q. Okay. And you said these are called bone flaps. Can you describe for us what that is? A. They are skull flaps that are removed ',n the course of performing a cranial operation, and there are occasions when you cannot put the bone flap back immediately. Q. Okay. So just as a layman, from a layman's standpoint, when you say "bone flap," you mean the top part of the human skull then? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Are there any risks associated with storing bone flaps in the freezer? A. No. Q. No. Okay. When you store bone flaps in the freezer, do you make a written record of that? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
28
27 1 2
3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. I personally do not make a written record. The nursing personnel in the operating room do make a written record of that to the best of my knowledge. Q. Okay. Well, when you say they make a written record, what kind of information would be contained in that written record? A. I have no idea. Q. Okay. Do you -- do you notify anybody in particular when you store bone flaps in the freezer? A. No. Q. When you use that freezer, is it typically empty or have you noticed that there are other contents in that freezer' A. I don't know. Q. Okay. So you can't -- whenever you open the freezer, you couldn't -- you can't recall now whether there was -- whether it was empty or not? A. No, I can't recall. Q. Now, previous to working at KMC you had been attending other institutions. Were you -- were you operating on patients prior to coming to -- prior to working at KMC? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Were you -- did there ever arise occasions where you had to store human tissue at WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
these other institutions where you were performing 2 surgery? 3 A. No. 4 Q. Are you aware of whether there is a back-up 5 system for that freezer? 6 A. I don't know. 7 Q. Don't know. Okay. Just as a hypothetical, 8 if the freezer were to fail for a couple days and 9 then come back on after the failure, let's say it was 10 repaired, how would you become -- would you -- do you 11 think -- is there a procedure for you to be notified 12 ofthat? 13 A. I don't know. 14 Q. SO since you've been -- during your time of 15 employment at KMC, have you -- can you recall of any 16 times that freezer has failed? 17 A. Don't remember. 18 Q. How long typically do you store bone flaps? 19 What length of time do you store bone flaps in the 20 freezer typically? 21 A. It would vary from a minimum of several 22 months to a maximum of -- I don't know. 23 Q. Okay. If -- now, again another 24 hypothetical. If the freezer were to fail, if the 25 power to the freezer were to fail for any reason and WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595 1
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800~322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050: Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 180 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT WOOD.oRANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322·4595 Toll Free· (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
SerVing Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
,..-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-"C"'H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEl M 0 Thursday December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 29 thus the freezer would be not op- -- non operational for a lengthy period of time, let's say one week, would that present any risk to the tissues, to the skull flaps you were storing in that freezer? A. For the purpose that I'm storing them, no. Q. SO in other words, from a layman's standpoint, these skull flaps don't necessarily need to be stored in the freezer then 7 A. They're traditionally stored in the freezer, but for the purposes that I use them, it is irrelevant. Q. Okay. So do you -- in your opinion -- well, I can't say that. Are you aware of any risks associated with storing skull flaps in the open, let's sayan a bookshelf, on an open bookshelf, at room temperature? A. It would depend upon what the -- I have a skull flap at room temperature in my office that is not posing any risk to anyone. It's used for teaching purposes. It's a skull. Q. Okay. But -- well, I'm talking -- I'm referring specifically to skull flaps which you are storing for reinsertion into a patient. MR. WASSER: He understands the statement. MR. LEE: Well, that's what I'm doing right WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
31 circumstance where placing the flap in the abdominal wall produced sufficient necrosis of the underlying muscle that the patient had what is called rhabdomyolysis. Q. Spell that. A. R-h-a-b-d-o-m-y-e-I-o-s-i-s (sic). And I published this observation in the Journal of Neuro Trauma -- Journal of Trauma, and following that publication and the recognition that this could be a significant complication leading to renal failure, there was a recognition that larger bone flaps could not be stored in the abdominal wall if the patient was thin. At that junction, storing bone flaps in the abdominal wall became an option less often, although it can still be done most of the time -most of the time it can be done. The circumstances when it cannot be done, we would store the bone flap in the minus 70 freezer. Most patients who require removal of bone flap do not survive if the bone flap cannot be put back in. Most of these patients do not survive. Q. I don't -- I'm sorry. Could you clarify for me the last statement? When you say these patients do not survive, are you saying that they do not survive because -WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008 Page 181 of 189 30 now, Mark. MR. WASSER: Okay. BY MR. LEE: Q. I'm now -- let's say we're talking strictly about skull flaps which you intend to reinsert into the patient. A. I'm sorry, you haven't established that that's my intention. Q. I'm sorry? A. You have not established that that is my intention. Q. Okay. Well, let's ask you: These skull flaps which you're storing in the freezer, what is your intent with respect to these skull flaps? A. To clarify this line of questioning for you, when I was in training we would place the bone flaps in the abdominal wall so that they would always be with the patient because our patient population is somewhat transient, they can leave. Some people come from the east coast, they have an auto accident on the 1-5, it would be impractical. So that traditionally at training facilities where I have been, we would put it in the abdominal wall, not inside the peritoneal cavity, but sometime -someplace in the subcutaneous fat. I encountered a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. They die. Q. Yeah, I understand that. When these patients die, is it because of the reinsertion process or is it because they had to have their skull flap removed in the first place 7 A. They die because the cranial trauma was so bad, of such a significant degree, that they become brain dead before we can consider any other steps down the line. The majority of patients who have so much brain swelling, you cannot put the bone flap back, which is the reason you do not put it back at the time of surgery. The majority of those patients die. Q. Can you give me some examples of why you would need to remove a patient's bone flap? A. Brain swelling. Q. Okay. So just to recount, patients who require their bone flaps to be removed in the first place are at high risk of mortality then? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Now, are there any hazards associated with -- well, are there -- is there a possibility of bacterial infection of the skull flap if you were to store it at room temperature? And again, just for the sake of clarity, whenever I say bone flap, I am WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free" 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 182 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN,
D.O.,
Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT WOOD
,RANDALL
Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free' (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
,-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-'C""H
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday.. December 6 2007
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 29 thus the freezer would be not op- -- nonoperational for a lengthy period of time, let's say one week, would that present any risk to the tissues, to the skull flaps you were storing in that freezer? A. For the purpose that I'm storing them, no. Q. SO in other words, from a layman's standpoint, these skull flaps don't necessarily need to be stored in the freezer then? A. They're traditionally stored in the freezer, but for the purposes that I use them, it is irrelevant. Q. Okay. So do you -- in your opinion -- well, I can't say that. Are you aware of any risks associated with storing skull flaps in the open, let's say on a bookshelf, on an open bookshelf, at room temperature? A. It would depend upon what the -- I have a skull flap at room temperature in my office that is not posing any risk to anyone. It's used for teaching purposes. It's a skull. Q. Okay. But -- well, I'm talking -- I'm referring specifically to skull flaps which you are storing for reinsertion into a patient. MR. WASSER: He understands the statement. MR. LEE: Well, that's what I'm doing right WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
31 circumstance where placing the flap in the abdominal wall produced sufficient necrosis of the underlying muscle that the patient had what is called rhabdomyolysis. Q. Spell that. A. R-h-a-b-d-o-m-y-e-l-o-s-i-s (sic). And I published this observation in the Journal of Neuro Trauma -- Journal of Trauma, and following that publication and the recognition that this couid be a significant complication leading to renal faiiure, there was a recognition that larger bone flaps could not be stored in the abdominal wall if the patient was thin. At that junction, storing bone flaps in the abdominal wall became an option less often, aithough it can still be done most of the time -most of the time it can be done. The circumstances when it cannot be done, we would store the bone flap in the minus 70 freezer. Most patients who require removal of bone flap do not survive if the bone flap cannot be put back in. Most of these patients do not survive. Q. I don't -- I'm sorry. Could you clarify for me the last statement> When you say these patients do not survive, are you saying that they do not survive because -WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 183 of 189 30
now, Mark. MR. WASSER: Okay. BY MR. LEE: Q. I'm now -- let's say we're talking strictly about skull flaps which you intend to reinsert into the patient. A. I'm sorry, you haven't established that that's my intention. Q. I'm sorry? A. You have not established that that is my intention. Q. Okay. Well, let's ask you: These skull flaps which you're storing in the freezer, what is your intent with respect to these skull flaps' A. To clarify this line of questioning for you, when I was in training we would place the bone flaps in the abdominal wall so that they would always be with the patient because our patient population is somewhat transient, they can leave. Some people come from the east coast, they have an auto accident on the 1-5, it would be impractical. So that traditionally at training facilities where I have been, we would put it in the abdominal wall, not inside the peritoneal cavity, but sometime -someplace in the subcutaneous fat. I encountered a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
32 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. They die. Q. Yeah, I understand that. When these patients die, is it because of the reinsertion process or is it because they had to have their skull flap removed in the first place? A. They die because the cranial trauma was so bad, of such a significant degree, that they become brain dead before we can consider any other steps down the line. The majority of patients who have so much brain swelling, you cannot put the bone flap back, which is the reason you do not put it back at the time of surgery. The majority of those patients die. Q. Can you give me some examples of why you would need to remove a patient's bone flap? A. Brain swelling. Q. Okay. So just to recount, patients who require their bone flaps to be removed in the first place are at high risk of mortality then? A. Correct. Q. Okay. Now, are there any hazards associated with -- well, are there -- is there a possibility of bacterial infection of the skull flap if you were to store it at room temperature? And again, just for the sake of clarity, whenever I say bone flap, I am WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, CertifIed Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 184 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Plaintiff, No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF CHARLES JOSEPH WROBEL, ·M.D. Thursday, December 6, 2007 Bakersfield, California
Reported by:
Sandra L. Edmonson, CSR No. 7704, RPR, CRR
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free· (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
r-
-"'Cl
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ES JOSEPH WROBEL M 0 Thursday December 6 200'
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 37 Q. Don't remember. Did the chair of surgery at 1 8:55 a.m.
KMC ever have an occasion to discuss the storage of bone flaps with you at KMC? A. Don't remember. Q. Do you think that the chair of pathology has an obligation to ensure safe practices and procedures at KMC? MR. WASSER: The whole facility? MR. LEE: Well, let's just say with regard to the handling of tissue at KMC. So if I could just rephrase the question for a clear record. Q. Is it your understanding that the chair of pathology at KMC has an obligation to ensure the safe handling of surgical specimens at KMC? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So if the chair of pathology were to advise against the storage of bone flaps in the freezer, would you -- would you consider that a part of the chair of pathology's responsibilities? A. I don't know. MR. LEE: Okay. We're going to -- pardon me. Could we just go off the record? MS. HERRINGTON: Off the record at 8:50 a.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Back on the record at WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
39 BY MR. LEE: Q. Okay. Dr. Wrobel, your attorney has suggested I ask this question, so I'm going to ask it. For what purpose do you store bone flaps in the freezer' A. There are two reasons. One reason -although this is a hypothetical and it has not -there has not been such a request, but in the operating room when we shave patients' hair before surgery, we save it in a bag in case the family wants to have an open casket ceremony. And it would make sense to have -- and these can be fairly large bone flaps -- have those available so that there can be some semblance of normality for the family afterwards, in which case the sterility or nonsterility of the bone flap would not be an issue, I don't think. And the other reason is that if we do wish to perform a cranioplasty or reconstruct the patient's skull, generally there is still a fair amount of brain swelling, and there's brain sort of pooching out underneath the scalp, and there are measures we can take to decrease that. But ultimately, analogy would be if you were to take a WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Page 185 of 189 38
MR. LEE: I'll give this -- you want to take it? MR. WASSER: Trial subpoena? Fine. MR. LEE: So let the record reflect that we've served the trial subpoena on Dr. Wrobel. MR. WASSER: The trial is -- by the way, the trial date is December 3rd, 2008. MS. HERRINGTON: We've got a copy for you as well, Dr. Wrobel. THE WITNESS: Thank you. MS. HERRINGTON: This concludes the deposition of Dr. Wrobel at 8:56 a.m. THE WITNESS: No, it does not conclude the deposition. My counsel hasn't asked his questions. MR. WASSER: Well, but -- thank you. I'm not going to ask any. THE WITNESS: But may I speak with you? Can we go off the record for a moment so we may speak? MR. LEE: Sure. MS. HERRINGTON: Of course. Off the record at 8:56 a.m. (Recess taken.) MS. HERRINGTON: Okay. Back on the record at -- back on the record at 8:57 a.m. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
40 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
pumpkin and you cut the head off of a pumpkin, and then your kids, for some reason known only to them, decide to fill it all the way to the top with ]ello, all the way to the very brim, then you want to put the top back in the pumpkin. Well, if you take that pumpkin head and put it back in there, you're going to compress the ]ello; but if you want to cover that opening in the pumpkin, you could take that pumpkin head that the kids took off, and you could mold a piece of wire mesh over it and you would get the exact same contour, and then tack that wire mesh over the top of the pumpkin without compressing the lello. So the bone flaps that are saved, sterile or not, take them to the operating room and use them to mold a piece of titanium mesh to the right specifications, sterilizing the titanium mesh in an autoclave, implant it. That would be the rationale for saving the bone flaps. But so few of these patients survive, that's the problem. But that's the reason I save the bone flaps, is to be able to have a template to perform an accurate titanium mesh cranioplasty. There's yet another variation on this thing, which is if the patient has sufficient insurance and they survive long enough, we can send them to an WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
r-
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
C"'-t
~S
JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN JOSEPH WROBEL M D., Thursday December 6 200·
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 41 outside CT scan facility to have a high resolution CT scan performed. Then there's a company that for $5,000 will mill, m-i-I-I, a custom cranioplasty that is not thick, that is just like a little shell, that you could put on there instead, which would save that step. But once again, these are trauma emergencies. So when they come in, we don't know if they have any insurance or not, and we don't want to deprive somebody that opportunity, or you don't know what your opportunities are go going to be down the road. Maybe you're going to be able to -- to provide them with a custom fit, a computer-generated, lathed, thin cranioplasty; maybe you won't. But we just don't have that information at the time that we -- we start these procedures. Q. Do you think the storage of bone flaps in the freezer present any kinds of hazards to anything else that might be stored in that freezer? A. They're wrapped up pretty good. I don't know. Q. Do you think it's possible that people store food -- their food in that freezer? A. At minus 70? I don't think so. Q. I'm sorry. WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
278-2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
43 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. I don't know. Q. Is it possible that hazardous substances could be stored in that freezer? A. That's a tautology. I won't answer that. Q. I'm sorry, I don't -A. It is a tautology, and I will not answer a tautology. Q. You know, I'm not as bright as you are. Can you explain what that means? A. A tautology is a statement that is inherently always true. For instance, when we say that secret things -- that covert operations are susceptible to discovery, what you are saying is that secret things can be found out. That's a tautology. It's a statement that's always true. Secrets can always be discovered. When you say is such a thing possible, the answer's always yes. It is possible the sun will not rise tomorrow in the east. That is possible, yes. So it's a tautOlogy, and I cannot answer a tautology. Q. Okay. So what you're saying is, as you sit here today, you cannot answer whether or not it's possible that there could be hazardous substances stored in that freezer? A. Once again, anything is possible, so I WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 186 of 189 42
A. At minus 70 degrees, I don't think so. And if somebody is storin9 food in the refrigerator in the pathology department that's a minus 70-degree freezer -- I don't mean to be flippant -- but I would consider that to be unwise. Q. SO the answer's no, you don't think it's very possible or you don't think it's possible 7 A. I can't think of everything. That's-that's beyond my comprehension somebody would do that. Q. Okay. If someone were to see bone flaps in -- I'm sorry, let me rephrase that. If a pathologist in the laboratory were to see bone flaps being stored in the freezer, do you think it would be reasonable they would be -- to become so alarmed or concerned about that? A. I don't know. Q. Well, would you find it -- if somebody were to open the minus 70 freezer and to find bone flaps, do you think that it would be reasonable for them to be concerned about that? A. Again, I don't know. Q. Don't know. Okay. Is it possible that infected specimens like hepatitis might be in that freezer? WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
44 cannot answer that question. Q. Well, if anything is possible, that suggests your answer is yes/ correct? A. Anything is possible. You're welcome to list possibilities, you're rested more in the afternoon, but anything is possible. Q. SO you don't disagree that it's possible that there could be hazardous substances stored in that freezer then, correct? A. Anything is possible. Q. Okay. Do you have any reason to believe that there might be hazardous substances stored in that freezer? A. I don't know. I have no idea. Q. Do you have any reason to believe that there would not be hazardous substances stored in that freezer? A. No basis for knOWing one way or the other. MR. LEE: Okay. This time we'll -MR. WASSER: We're done. MS. HERRINGTON: This concludes the deposition of Dr. Wrobel. The time is 9:04 a.m. (9:04 a.m.) --00000--
WOOD & RANDALL (800) 322-4595
WOOD & RANDAll, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800·322-4595; Bakersfield: 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 187 of 189
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
DAVID F. JADWIN,
D.O.,
Case No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
Plaintiff, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants.
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF COUNTY OF KERN THROUGH PERSON MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE, EUGENE KERCHER, M.D. Thursday, September 4, 2008 Pasadena, California
Reported by:
Cindee L. LeFevre, CSR No. 7974
CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT WOOD
RANDALL
Certified Shorthand Reporters A Professional Corporation
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free' (661) 395·1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com
Serving Central California· Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno
CaseKERCHER, 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG EUGENE M.D.
Document 278-2 Page 50
14:25:39
1
14:25:42
2
work the next day·· I meall, I just had a wonderful evening
14:25:44
3
with him .- he would come to work the next day, and I would
14:25:47
4
see this tightened up, controlled, and at times, suspiciolls
14:25:52
5
-
14:25:52
6
Q.
You are a psychiatrist. You observed him?
14:25:56
7
A
Yeah.
14:25:57
8
Q
Did you think he had Axis It issues? WouJdyoli
14:26:03
9
A. It was Jekyll and Hyde. But then when he came to
14:26:08
10
14:26:11
11
when I deal with people, unless
14:26:16
12
14:26:20
13
Page 18809-04-08 of 189
I
Page 52
,II 14:28:03
1
out on December 7, 2005 -- I'm solT)' -- 2007. I don't know
14:28:09
2
why I am doing this.
14:28:10
3
14:28:14
4
beginning, was David pretty nonnal, easy to get along with?
14:28:18
5
Did he have this Jekyll and Hyde aspect to him from the vel)'
I 14:28:22
6
beginning or was this something that you noticed --
I
•
I 14:28:22
Now, when did you -- was there -- in the
7
A. No, it came on It wasn't there initially.
I 14:28:26
8
Q
14:28:28
9
I
say he had some personality disorders, in your opinion?
Filed 12/01/2008
It wasn't there. So when did it start to appear,
this Jekyll and Hyde aspect'!
14:28:31
10
A. I can't tell you when. Somehow--
14:28:32
11
Q. Was it after the October tumor board conference?
don't interact with people with the DSM stutI, and I never
14:28:35
12
really assigned any axis stulfto him or diaj,,'lIOSis.
14:28:39
13
he had in his department, discontent with the fact that they
14:28:45
14
weren'l- he was --
14:28:48
15
high expectations of himself. I mean, his expectations of himself were just huge, but it was also his expectations of
A. YOll know, r·- you know, -interestingly enough,
r see them clinically, I
14:26:24
14
14:26:28
15
and I recognized somehow, he had troubles, he had some
Alii know is he was basically an insecure guy,
!
A. No, he was having problems with some of the people
YOll
know, he was one thaI really had
14:26:32
16
losses, and there was an underlying depression, but f never
14:28:51
16
14:26:35
17
went any further thalilhat.
14:28:55
17
those that worked for him were huge, and he had some issues
14:26:37
18
14:29:00
wilh one individual specilically -- actually, two, a woman
14:26:40
19
i, 14:29:04
18 19
and a man.
14:26:43
20
A
!
14:29:06
20
14:26:43
21
Q. Okay. Okay. Well, what about Axis I? You know
14:29:07
21
14:26:47
22
14:29:10
22
14:29:12
23
14:29:14
24
A. Yeah. And it seems like in dealing with those
:29:18
25
people and his frustration with them that that seemed to
I
Q. Well, okay, Let's talk about A..xis II then. Did you ever suspect he had personality disorders?
I
No
Axis I?
14:26:49
23
A. Yeah.
14:26:49
24
Q
14:26:53
25
A. No
Did you ever suspect he had Axis I issues?
Q. Dr. Shel1udke and Dr. Out!?
A. No. No. No. These are people that were on-board when he arrived.
Q Elsa Ang and Adam Lang?
Page 51
Page 53
14:26:54
1
14:27:01
2
14:27:02
3
14:27:05
4
that's just my assumption,
14:29:32
4
A. [know
14:27:07
5
Q. Based on what?
14:29:33
5
Q
14:27:07
6
A
14:29:34
6
A. I know
Q. Okay Well, Okay. When did you learn Dr. Jadwin had depression?
A
I just assumed it.
r didn't leam it.
[ mean,
14:29:23
1
14:29:25
2
14:29:30
3
Based on the fact t1mt he had issues with anger
14:27:10
7
and he had issues with getting along with people. He was
14:29:35
7
14:27:14
8
discontent. He was never happy, he was never satisfied.
14:29:38
8
14:27:17
9
There was always a reason to be upset with something, and he
14:27:20
10
I
would always be critical of something
14:27:22
11
14:27:25
12
an individual. And I sort oflay this -- you know, I am a
14:27:28
13
psychiatrist, but' am a pretty reasonable what you see is
14:27:31
14
what you get. 'don't -- when I interact With people, I
14:27:34
15
don't look at them clinically. And David is exactly how J
14:27:38
16
explained.
14:27:39
17
14:27:43
18
I mean, there is something wrong with that kind of
Q. Okay. Well, when didMR. WASSER: At one point,
YOll
asked him to
have moved him in a direction that -.
Q Well, Elsa Ang and Adam Lang were in the Department of Patholo!,.'Y from 2000 because they overlapped.
nley were there when he arrived?
Q. SO he was having problems from the time he arrived then?
14:29:38
9
A. Wet!, my lUlderstanding is that he was -- that he
14:29:41
10
worked very hard to make it clear to some of us that he
14:29:46
11
wasn't happy with the people that he inherited in that
14:29:50
12
department, and --
14:29:51
13
i 14:29:54
14
Q. Did you think there was good reason for that?
A. He didn't give a particular reason, but these were
I
14:29:57
I
14:30:04
18
would I want -- that was his depal1ment. So I didn't wan!
II
15
people we had worked with for some time, having been
14:30:00
16
there as long as we had.
14;30;01
17
So I stayed sort of away from that because why
14;27:45
19
describe the meeting, wh.ich we are kind of off the subject
I 14:30:08
19
to bother him with his department. That's not my job unless
14:27:48
20
or now.
14:30:12
20
he asked me to, and he never asked me to.
14:27:48
21
BYMR. LEE:
14;30:15
21
14:27:50
22
14:30:18
22
already with Ang, Lang, and I guess there was Fang Luo Liu;
14:30:18
23
right, Fang Luo Liu?
14:30:18
24
A. Yeah.
14:30:18
25
Q. There were three pathologists there. He seemed to
Q. I understand. Now, getting back to Dr. Jadwin, he
14:27:52
23
was hired - I am going to represent to you that he began
14:27:55
24
his employment in October of2004
14:28:00
25
October 12 of2000, and he was there until his contract rail
~~
I'm sorry -- 2000,
Q. Okay. But then
14
JADWIN WOOD & RANDALL
vs.
-~
so there were some issues
(Pages 50 to 53)
COUNTY (800 ) 322-4595
CES Job Classfication Change Form
Page I of 1
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 278-2
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 189 of 189
Change of Employee Status DEPARTMENT #
8997 EMPLOYEE
II)
999-00-2739 EFFECTIVE DATE 09/26/2008
I
DATE PREPARED DEPARTMENT NAME 09/17/2008 KERN MEDICAL CENTER EMPLOYEE NAME MARTINEZ GILBERT R CLASSiFICATION 0657 MGR, CLiN LAB SV
APPOINTMENT CHANGES TYPE OF APPOINTMENT TYPE OF CIIANGE Pennanent 35 Retirement RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE DATE 09/27/2008
I
RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE 09127108. COMMENTS
DATE
SIG~ATURE
ACKNOWI.EDGMENT BY TilE EMPLOYEE: IACKNOWI.EDGE AND CERTIFY THAT TIlE STt\TEMENTS ON TillS fORM ARE TRUE ANDCORREcr TO TltE
BEST OF MY KNOWI.EDGE DEPARTMENT HEAD OR OTIIER AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE REQUESTED CHANGE IS: RECOMMENDED
NOT RECOMMENDED
DIRECTOR OF PI.:RSONNEL AND SECRETARY. CIVil. SERViCE COMMISSION
APPROVED
NOT APPROVED
Keyed By ARMIDA SMITH
Approved By ARMIDA SMITH
Personnel Approval JUDY BEGGS
Dale To ITS 09/2412008 3:02:00 PM (Reconciled )
Warnings: 1. This Transaction closes out Leave Type 60 effective from 06/20/2008 to 09/26/2008.
https:llauditor-wcb/cesnoe/reports/CES_display.asp?trans_00=09/17/2008%202 :24:00%20... 1211/2008
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 280
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 2
1 Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 2 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 3 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 4 E-mail: [email protected] 5 Bernard C. Barrnann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL 6 Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor 7 Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 8 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected] 9 10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
14
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
15
Plaintiff,
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
16 17 18 19
vs. COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,
Defendants.
Date: January 12,2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
REQUEST FOR WDICIAL NOTICE
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 280
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 2
1
Defendants hereby requests, under section 201 of the Rules of Evidence, that the Court
2
take judicial notice of the records of this proceeding identified below. This request for judicial
3
notice is made in connection with the January 12 hearing in this matter.
4
Defendants requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following records:
5
1.
Defendants' Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Motion for
6
Summary Judgment andlor Summary Adjudication on All Claims in the Second Amended
7
Complaint, filed on November 13,2008.
8 9 10 II
12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19
2.
Statement of Undisputed Facts In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication on All Claims in the Second Amended Complaint ("DSUF"), also filed on November 13,2008. 3.
Declaration of Michael J. Rubio In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13, 2008. 4.
Declaration of Rayrnond A. Watson In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13, 2008.
S.
Declaration of Mike Maggard In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
andlor Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13, 2008. 6.
Declaration of Jon McQuiston In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
and/or Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13,2008. 7.
Declaration of Don Maben In Support of Motion for Summary Judgment andlor
20
Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13,2008.
21
Dated: December 1, 2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
22 23
24
By: lsi Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.
2S 26 27
28 -1REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Document 281
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 2
Mark A. Wasser CA SB #060160 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2640 Sacramento, California 95814 Phone: (916) 444-6400 Fax: (916) 444-6405 E-mail: [email protected] Bernard C. Barmann, Sr. CA SB #060508 KERN COUNTY COUNSEL Mark Nations, Chief Deputy CA SB #101838 1115 Truxtun Avenue, Fourth Floor Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 868-3800 Fax: (661) 868-3805 E-mail: [email protected]
9 10
Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris
11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13 14
DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
15 16 17 18
Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
Plaintiff, vs.
COUNTY OF KERN, et aI., Defendants.
Date: January 12, 2009 Time: 10:00 a.m. Place: U.S. District Court, Courtroom 3 2500 Tulare Street, Fresno, CA Date Action Filed: January 6, 2007 Trial Date: March 24, 2009
19 20 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
1 2 3 4
5 6 7
Document 281
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 2
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendants have lodged, pursuant to LR 5-133(j), the following deposition transcripts for the Court's convenience in the above matter: Exhibit 1:
Deposition of Edward Taylor, M.D., taken December 5, 2007, condensed
transcript; Exhibit 2:
Deposition of Charles Wrobel, M.D., taken December 6, 2007, condensed
transcript and Exhibit 3:
Deposition of Eugene Kercher, M.D., taken September 4,2008, condensed
8
transcript;
9
Dated: December 1, 2008
LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER
10 11
12
By: /s/ Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 285
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
Document 285
Filed 12/01/2008
Page 2 of 2
Related Documents
278 P Msj - Opp - Ss
May 2020 5
276-281 P Msj Opp
May 2020 5
281 P Msj - Opp - Lodging Transcripts
May 2020 5
Habanos Opp To Xikar Msj
June 2020 17
275-283 D Msj Opp
May 2020 7More Documents from "Eugene D. Lee"
141 Request For Recon - Kc Opp
May 2020 3
56 Kc Mx Protective Order
May 2020 11
137 Stip & Order Re Privacy Po - Signed
May 2020 3
110 Kc Msc Notice Of Statement
May 2020 4
275-283 D Msj Opp
May 2020 7