Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Coventry Health Care Inc Fixation on Untruths

                                          



The prayer of St. Francis


Lord, make me an instrument of your peace,

Where there is hatred, let me sow love;
where there is injury, pardon;
where there is doubt, faith;
where there is despair, hope;
where there is darkness, light;
where there is sadness, joy;


O Divine Master, grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
to be understood as to understand;
to be loved as to love.

For it is in giving that we receive;
it is in pardoning that we are pardoned;
and it is in dying that we are born to eternal life.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  


IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF OHIO COUNTY, WEST VIRGINIA  

CHRISTINE STENGER
Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action NO 07-C-466
(Judge .Martin  Gaughan)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
CARELINK HEALTH PLANS, INC.
and PATRICK W. DOWD
Defendants.

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO “DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE TO REMOVE PLAINTIFF’S BLOG DURING THE COURSE OF TRIAL”

Defendants’ fixation upon plaintiff’s blog is itself worthy of psychoanalysis. They contend that jurors will defy the Court’s standard directive against exposing themselves to the media for information germane to the case, they claim that those defiant jurors will be tainted against Carelink, and they claim that this risk justifies trammeling plaintiff’s constitutional right to free speech. They bolster their claim with the revelation that the blog has been accessed in Ohio County as many as 51 times over the last two years or so. To put it in perspective, in a county of more than 44,000 people, as many as 51 people (more likely than not, the same person re-entered the blog over and over again) opened the blog. This is hardly a chilling and dispositive statistic. Defendants even resort to claiming that, in resolving defendants’ initial motion to stifle plaintiff, the Court ordered plaintiff to cease blogging about the case. (See Def’s Mot, para. 3) However, the ORDER resolving that motion just simply, succinctly, and wholly denied defendant’ motion, devoid of this order which defendants mis-allege. (See, EXHIBIT A ) Meanwhile, posing an equivalent threat, if any, Carelink itself has as internet site on which, among other boasts, it touts its claims processing practices.

Inconsistent with defendants’ anxiety over the blog is the fact that they presented it all to their expert psychologist, Dr. David Clayman, for use in accessing and opining about Mrs. Stenger. (See Exhibit B, p. 3, item 35) They apparently wish to use the blog selectively to cross-examine plaintiff or to support their expert’s opinion, yet they decry its caustic effect.

Plaintiff proposes the following: She will refrain from blogging from the point of the Court’s ruling on this motion until the verdict is received. However, defendants have no right to an additional relief they seek. If the Court orders the blog to be removed or blocked 1, then Carelink’s own internet site should be similarly removed or blocked.

WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays that the Court enter an order resolving this motion in accordance with the arguments set forth above.

Respectfully submitted,
Anthony Werner
Counsel for Plaintiff

PAUL T. TUCKER, ESQ.
W. Va. State Bar No. 5203
ANTHONY I. WERNER, ESQ.
BACHMANN, HESS, BACHMANN & GARDEN, P.L.L.C.
1226 Chapline Street
P O Box 351
Weeling WV 26003
(304) 233-3511
(304) 233-3199 (fax)

1 Having insufficient computer knowledge, counsel for plaintiffs themselves do know how to carry out such an order.

NOTE:

PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO “DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE TO REMOVE PLAINTIFF’S BLOG DURING THE COURSE OF TRIAL was submitted to the Court on October 13, 2010.

FOR ACCESS TO ALL PUBLIC COURT DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED  IN THIS CASE, CONTACT:

Ohio County Courthouse

Brenda L. Miller, Circuit Clerk

1500 Chapline Street

City County Building

Wheeling, WV 26003

Ph. 304-264-3611

1 comment:

Tor Hershman said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.