Docstoc

276-281 P MSJ Opp

Document Sample
276-281 P MSJ Opp Powered By Docstoc
					Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 1 of 29

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9

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: mnations@co.kern.ca.us Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan, and Irwin Harris

10
11

12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
---------------DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.

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

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

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 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES INTRODUCTION

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 2 of 29

TABLE OF CONTENTS
11

1 1
1

LEGAL STANDARD ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ARGUMENT A. DEFENDANTS TOOK NO ADVERSE EMPLOYMENT ACTIONS AGAINST PLAINTIFF 1.
2.

6
7
8

1

9 10

3. 4.

5. B.

October 17,2005 Letter of Reprimand Full-Time Leave Removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology Paid Administrative Leave Nonrenewal of Employment Agreement

3 5 6
8

9
10

11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

DEFENDANTS NEVER RETALIA TED AGAINST PLAINTIFF 1. 2. 3. 4. Oncology Conference Blood Product Chart Copies Skull Flaps Radical Prostatectomy

11 12 13 15
16

C.

DEFENDANTS DID NOT VIOLATE PLAINTIFF'S RIGHTS UNDER FMLA AND CFRA DEFENDANTS DID NOT DISCRIMINATE, DID NOT FAIL TO ACCOMMODATE AND DID NOT FAIL TO ENGAGE IN THE INTERACTIVE PROCESS DEFENDANTS DID NOT VIOLATE PLAINTIFF'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS DEFENDANTS DID NOT RETALIATE AGAINST PLAINTIFF FOR ASSERTING HIS RIGHTS UNDER FMLA, CFRA AND FEHA

D.

17 20 24 25

E.
F.

CONCLUSION

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 3 of 29

1

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
United States Supreme Court Cases

2
3

4 5
6

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

20,21,22,23 23 15 10,20,21,22,23

7
8

9
10

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
District Court Cases

14 8 19 2 19

2

11

12
13

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
California Supreme Court Cases

8

5
8

14

15
16

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

20 1,2,3

17
18

19 20 21

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
United States CodelUnited States Code Annotated 29 U.S.C. §2612(a)(I)(D) Code of Federal Regulations 29 C.F.R. §825.214, subd. (b) California Statutes California Government Code §12945.2(a) California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d)
II

24

9, 10
8 25 17,24 14, 16 19 7,21,22

9

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

17

17,24

17 2,3

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
4

Document 276
§1278.5(d)(l) §1278.5(d)(2) §1602.5 §l602.5(a) §1635.1 §1635 (d)

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 4 of 29

California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health & California Health &

Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code Safety Code

3 3 12 12 13 14

5
6

California Labor Code §1102.5 California Labor Code §2924 California Labor Code §6400(a) California Code of Regulations

11
7,23 19

7 22 C.C.R §7075l
8

12

9
10 CACI §2600 Restatement (Second) of Contracts §268 16 13

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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 5 of 29

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12
13

INTRODUCTION Defendants have filed a separate request that the Court take judicial notice of Defendants' Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and lor Summary Adjudication On All Claims In The Second Amended Complaint ("Defendants' Memo"), Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication on all Claims in the Second Amended Complaint ("DSUF") and other documents, filed November 13,2008. Defendants will cite to both documents, as well as Plaintiffs Memorandum of Point and Authorities in Support of Corrected Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment Against Defendants ("Plaintiffs Memo") and Plaintiffs Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of Plaintiffs Corrected Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment Against Defendants ("PSUF"), throughout this memorandum. Plaintiff s moving papers misstate and mischaracterize both the law and the facts relevant to Plaintiffs claims. Most of the discussion that follows is focused on those misstatements and mischaracterizations. 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.
I

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

ARGUMENT
A.

Defendants Took No Adverse Employment Actions Against Plaintiff.

Plaintiff correctly notes that California has adopted the "materiality" test for the purpose of determining whether an employment action is adverse. Yanowitz v. L'Oreal (2005) 36 Cal.4 th 1028, 1036. However, Plaintiff attempts to connect the Yanowitz materiality test with the "deterrence" test that the California Supreme Court has rejected for claims arising under California statutes. Id. at 1036. (See, Plaintiffs Memo at pg. 5:2-4.) Having erroneously expanded the test beyond what the California Supreme Court has endorsed, Plaintiff asserts that a reprimand is an adverse employment action. (Plaintiffs Memo 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

materially affects the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. Yanowitz, 36 Ca1.4 th at 1052. A reprimand, by itself, does not materially affect the terms, conditions or privileges of employment and, consequently, is not an adverse employment action. Id. at 1055. After the California Supreme Court outlined the contours of the materiality test, it adopted a "totality of the circumstances" approach to determine when a series of employment actions, taken together, will be construed as an adverse employment action. Id. at 1052, fh. 11. In this context, thc Court cited Wideman v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
(lIth

Cir. 1998) 141 F.3d 1453,

which held that written reprimands in conjunction with an employer's solicitation of negative comments by coworkers coupled with a one-day suspension constituted an adverse employment action. Yanowitz, 36 CaI.4th at 1061, citing Wideman
(lIth

Cir. 1998) 141 F.3d at 1456.

Wideman stands for the proposition that courts should look at patterns of employment actions as well as individual employment actions to determine what is truly adverse. No authority supports Plaintiffs assertion that a written reprimand, by itself, is an adverse employment action. Plaintiff improperly relies on Ulrich v. City and County ofSan Francisco (9th Cir. 2002) 308 FJd 968. Dr. Ulrich resigned his position knowing his hospital had begun an investigation into his patient care practices. Id. at 972-973. Because the hospital had already begun its investigation, it reported Dr. Ulrich's resignation to the National Practitioner Data Bank (NPDB). Id. at 973. The NPDB is typically accessed by potential employers to perform background checks on physicians. Id. at 974. So, the hospital's report to the NPDB presented a threat to Dr. Ulrich's career. Those facts are quite distinct from what happened to Plaintiff. The letters Plaintiff complains of were confidential and were not distributed beyond the medical staff officers at KMC. (Harris Depo., 8113/08, pgs. 113:14-16 and 116:4). They did not threaten Plaintiffs career. In fact, Plaintiff was actively looking for a new job during much of the time he was on leave and there is no evidence any prospective employer knew anything about what was gong on with Plaintiff at KMC. (DSUF
~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 2

the threatened placement of letters of reprimand in Plaintiff s medical records file is sufficient to support a retaliation claim. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 5:22-23.) That is not what the statute says. There are two parts to California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d). The first part, §1278.5(d)(l), contains the rebuttable presumption that an adverse employment action occurring within 120 days of whistleblowing is retaliation. The second part, §1278.5(d)(2), describes what constitutes an adverse employment action. Subdivision (d)(2) states: [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. California Health & Safety Code §1278.5(d)(2) is essentially a codification of the "materiality" test that the California Supreme Court adopted in Yanowitz. See, Yanowitz at 1036. Nothing in the statute supports Plaintiffs contention that an employment event that does not materially effect an employee's status is sufficient to support a retaliation claim.

3
4 5

6 7
8 9

10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1.

October 17, 2005 Letter of Reprimand

In keeping with Plaintiff s habit of mischaracterizing the facts to try to make them fit his unsupported theories, he has labeled the October l7'h, 2005 letter admonishing and counseling him for his behavior at the October 12, 2005 oncology conference the "Credential Threat." This is specious. There is no evidence that Plaintiff s credential was ever threatened. None of the Defendants ever took any action to jeopardize or "threaten" Plaintiff s credentials as a physician at KMC. As Plaintiff admits, the letter was confidential and was never even placed in his medical records file. (Harris Depo., 8/13/08, pgs. 113:14-16 and 116:4). Plaintiffmakcs no attempt to explain how a confidential letter that was never placed in his file constituted a threat to his credential. The fact is, Plaintiff continued to enjoy all the privileges of a credentialed physician at KMC until November 10,2008 -long after his employment contract expired. (Letters to Jadwin, dated 8/14/01 to 9/12/08, attached to Defendants' response to Plaintiffs 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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 8 of 29

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

the requisite renewal application to KMC. Id. Oncology conferences are held monthly. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 22:9-10. They are an hour long and are routinely devoted to a discussion of two cases. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 24:7-8 and pg. 36:19-20. There are usually 70-80 people - mostly residents and medical students - in attendance. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 32:8-9. There had been previous issues with Plaintiffs presentations at the conferences. In 2003, Plaintiff was counseled to prioritize information and present it succinctly. (DSUF ~I 0I). In 2004, he was warned that a presentation he wanted to make, consisting of 52 slides, would take more time than was allotted. (DSUF
~102).

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.
It greatly exceeded the allotted time, contained too many slides, did not conform to the

instructional purpose of the conference, included unprofessional criticisms of both the University of Southern California and Stanford University, deteriorated into an argument between Plaintiff and Dr. Roy over a specific case and monopolized the conference to such an extent that no one else was able to make their presentations. (Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 14:19-21; pg. 15:1-4; pg. 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; 68:9-17 and DSUF ~~104, 105, 106 and III and PSUF ~89). After Plaintiff finally relinquished the podium and sat down, he continued to argue with Dr. Roy. (DSUF ~112). Three physicians who attended the conference wrote confidential letters to the Chief Medical Officer about Plaintiffs behavior. (DSUF ~107; PSUF ~91). They were not the only attendees who complained. The chief of surgery also voiced a complaint. (DSUF ~I 08). The past-president of the medical staff testified she was embarrassed by several things Plaintiff had said - such as his criticisms of outside consultants. (DSUF ~III). Several residents and medical students noted Plaintiff s unprofessional behavior on their performance evaluations. (DSUF
~109).

A few days after the conference, the Executive Board of the medical staff presented Plaintiff with a confidential letter that both admonished and counseled him regarding his 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11

failure to cooperate with the conference coordinator's instructions regarding time and his use of the conference as a platfonn from which to advance his personal agenda. (DSUF
~113).

Plaintiff s behavior during the oncology conference and afterwards eroded his relationships with other members of the medical staff. In a meeting with KMC's Chief Executive Officer about a week later, Plaintiff made loud, angry and derogatory comments about other members of the medical staff. (DSUF ~116). He refused their conciliatory efforts to bring resolution to the issue. (DSUF ~~166-174). Rather than accept the comments in the spirit in which they were given, Plaintiff chose to become increasingly antagonistic and hostile. (DSUF
~~114;

166-174). He told Dr. Abraham she was nothing but a "fat doctor." (DSUF ~166). He
~173).

told Dr. Ragland, he was unfit to be president of the medical staff. (DSUF

This

ultimately destroyed the collegiality necessary to build professional trust and respect. (DSUF
~~133,

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

134). Without supporting legal authority, Plaintiff asserts his criticisms of virtually every

physician at KMC were all cloaked with a mysterious "protected" status but, when other physicians complained about his behavior, they were motivated by malice and retaliation. 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 attempt to transform the County's deferential and supportive decision into an act of retaliation. This is also specious.
An employer may require an employee to stay at home and recuperate, regardless of the

employee's wishes. Swanke v. Sprint, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2004) 327 F.Supp.2d 1128, 1138. It is not an adverse employment action to place an employee on a leave the employee did not request. Here, the facts are not favorable to Plaintiff. Plaintiff s physician wrote that Plaintiff should be restricted to part-time work or less. (DSUF
~~14

and 21). Defendant Peter Bryan

testified that he gave Plaintiff the option of taking full-time leave. (DSUF ~21). Plaintiff obviously disputes that. However, the dispute does not defeat summary judgment because full-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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

time leave represents a less demanding work schedule than part-time. Whether Plaintiff chose full-time leave as Bryan says he did or the County decided to place Plaintiff on full-time leave, the full-time leave was consistent with what Plaintiffs physician specified. And, importantly, Plaintiff did not object to it. (DSUF
~21).

There is no basis for his contention it was adverse.

Plaintiff asserts the full-time leave, although paid, was an adverse employment action because it deprived him of the opportunity to earn professional fees from April 28, 2006 until June 17,2006. However, Plaintiff put himself on leave in December 2005. (DSUF ~15). And, he decided which duties he would perform and which he would not. (Second Amended Complaint ~80). The duties Plaintiff decided to not perform were his duties as a pathologist. Id.
It was Plaintiff s routine work as a pathologist that generated professional fees, not his

administrative work. Professional fees result from billable medical work. (Plaintiffs Memo, pgs.6:27-7:2). Thus, Plaintiffs decision to stop working as a pathologist damaged his ability to earn professional fees. The County's decision to follow his physician's directive and put him on less than part-time work had no appreciable affect on his ability to earn professional fees. This is borne out by a review of the professional fees Plaintiff billed. His fees declined substantially after he put himself on leave in December, 2005. 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. Defendants request a finding that the County's decision to comply with Plaintiffs physician's request that Plaintiff work part-time or less by placing Plaintiff on full-time leave was not an adverse employment action.

3.

Removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology.

Plaintiff chooses to describe his removal as Chair of the Department of Pathology as a "demotion." This, again, is misleading. Plaintiff was not "demoted" as that term is used in the KMC Medical Staff Bylaws. (The Medical Staff Bylaws were submitted, in their entirety, as 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. (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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

membership status." Id. The categories of medical staff are also defined in the Bylaws (See, Article V, "Categories of Membership." (DSUF
~4,

pgs.l8-28).) The categories are Active,

Courtesy, Consulting, Provisional, Honorary, Retired, Advisory, Administrative, and Associate. (DSUF ~4, pgs. 18-28). Plaintiff was always in the "Active" category with full rights of membership and clinical privileges. (KMC Letter to Jadwin, dated 8/14/01 to 9/12/08). He was never "demoted" to any other category. Plaintiff s removal from his position as Chair of the Department of Pathology is covered by a different provision of the Bylaws. (DSUF ~4, Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319». Peter Bryan recommended that Plaintiff be removed as department chair because of Plaintiffs "continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing member of the medical staff leadership group" and because Plaintiff "has provided no indication that he is committed to return to work or resume his duties as chairman." (DSUF subsequent removal were in accordance with the Bylaws. (DSUF
~~31 ~33).

The report and

and 37). The removal

had no effect on Plaintiff s employment status or the term of his employment agreement. Plaintiffs reason for wanting to treat his removal as a demotion is clear because, under the Bylaws, demotions carry certain procedural rights whereas removal does not. (DSUF
~4,

Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319) versus Article XII, Section 12.2, pg. 66 (0000337». Plaintiff also relies on Shoemaker v. County ofLos Angeles (1995) 37 Cal.AppA th 618 but it is
0

little application to this issue. The question in Shoemaker was whether the plaintiff was entitled to pre-disciplinary procedures before he was relieved of his dual positions as chief of the county medical center's emergency medicine services department and chair of the university's department of emergency medicine. Shoemaker sheds no light on the question of what constitutes a demotion. The County's actions are further supported by California Labor Code §2924 which authorizes an employer to rescind an employment contract under certain conditions. Section 2924 states "an employment for a specified term may be terminated at any time by the employer in case of any willful breach of duty by the employee in the course of his employment, or in the 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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 12 of 29

I 2 3 4 5 6
7

Plaintiff was not only physically absent from the hospital for over 7 months, he ignored the County's inquiries about when he would return to work. (DSUF
~23).

Whether properly

termed "inability" or "unwillingness", Plaintiff was not doing the job he was hired to do. Defendants request a finding that the County removed Plaintiff as Chair of the Department of Pathology consistent with the terms of his employment agreement and the removal was not an adverse employment action.

4.

Paid Administrative Leave

8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22

Plaintiff contents that his placement on paid administrative leave was an adverse employment action. In Defendants' Memo, pg. 5:22-28, Defendants cited authority that paid administrative leave is not an adverse employment action because it does not materially affect the employment relationship. Gannon v. Potter (N.D. Cal. 2006) __F.3d_ _, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85995 at 13-14; Tomczakv. Safeway, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 1997) _ _F.3d~_, 1997 LEXIS 13247; Joseph v. Leavitt (2 nd Cir. 2006) 465 F.3d 87, 91. The employee retains the same position at the same base pay and there is no negative evaluative comment. This rationale is consistent with the Yanowitz "materiality" rule: An action is not adverse ifit does not materially affect the terms, conditions and privileges of employment. Plaintiff cites Hammond v. County ofLos Angeles (2008) 160 Cal.AppA th 1579 for the proposition that "extended leave, even when paid, is an adverse action where it impairs an employee's job performance or prospects for advancement or promotion." (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 6: 17-18). Although the Hammond court mentioned adverse employment actions, the court was referring to a passage out of Yanowitz, which it cited. Hammond, 160 Cal.AppA,h at 1599, citing
Yanowitz, 36 Cal.4th at 1054-1055. The Hammond opinion does not discuss extended leave, paid

23 24 25 26 27 28

or otherwise, because that was not relevant to the facts in Hammond. The plaintiff in Hammond was never put on leave. She was a nursing instructor who sued because she was given less teaching time and more curriculum-development time by her new supervisor. The case has no application to the facts here and it does not support Plaintiffs position. 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25

Regina Levison, who testified that a pathologist is at risk oflosing his or her skills within a few months if not engaged in pathology work. (PSUF ~53). However, as mentioned above, Plaintiff put himself on leave in December, 2005 and practiced no pathology until September, 2006, during which time-ten months-he probably did suffer a self-induced erosion of his skills. (DSUF
~~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 year. (PSUF ~57). In fact, Plaintiffs professional fees for 2004 were $131,709.58; for 2005, they were $103,444.13; and for 2006, they were $28,596.64. (Bates Numbers 00187550018917). Plaintiff s professional fees varied greatly according to his performance. They were not guaranteed by his employment agreement. They were merely a potential. (DSUF
~6).

He

did not earn them if he did not work. Plaintiff s decision to stop practicing pathology in December, 2005 substantially impacted his ability to earn professional fees. 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 opinion, the Daly court expressed its agreement with the result in Tollefson v. Roman Catholic
Bishop (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 843. Tollefson stands for the proposition that an employment

26 27 28

contract that expires on its own terms is not the basis for a claim. The court wrote, "Plaintiff could not transmute an express, one-year employment contract into an implied contract for an 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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 14 of 29

1 2
3

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.
Daly, 55 Cal.AppA th at 42. When it was not renewed, she alleged retaliation for having reported

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13

what she believed to be Cal-OSHA violations to her employer. Id. The Daly court reversed an award of summary judgment in favor of the employer, holding that proof of retaliation by the employer entitled her to statutory damages. However, nothing in the opinion holds that nonrenewal of an employment contract is, by itself, an adverse employment action. 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 Memo, pg. 8:12 and pg. 30:5). He bases this argument on language he extracted from Perry v.
Sindermann (1972) 408 U.S. 593,601. Perry does not support Plaintiff. (See, discussion below

at page 21 :8-17). There was no "mutually explicit understanding" that Plaintiffs employment agreement would be renewed. 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). Plaintiff cannot establish that his contract was not renewed for retaliatory reasons. Supervisor Ray Watson only remembered a discussion about removing Plaintiff from the department chair position. (DSUF '\[34). He did not remember (and Plaintiff asked him three times!) any discussion about Plaintiffs termination, resignation or denial of privileges. (DSUF '\[34). He also did not recall a vote on the nonrenewal of the contract but he speculated there must have been one. (DSUF '\[35). In fact, no vote was ever taken on whether to renew Plaintiffs contract. (DSUF '\[36a). There is no evidence to support Plaintiffs allegation of retaliation with regard to the nonrenewal of his contract and Defendants request a finding that the County's nonrenewal of his employment agreement was not an adverse employment action and was not retaliatory.
B.

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 15 of 29

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 26 27 28

Plaintiffs First and Second Claims are commonly referred to as "whistleblower" claims. Plaintiff was not a "whistleblower" or ever engaged in "whistleblowing" while employed at KMC. (Def.'s Answer to Second Amended Complaint '\1'\117,41,74, and 78). To be a "whistleblower," an employee must report information to a government or law enforcement agency that the employee reasonably believes discloses a violation oflaw. California Labor Code §11 02.5. Plaintiff claims he "blew the whistle" four times.
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, presentation about a medical case to an audience of approximately 70-80 members of the KMC staff, who were mostly residents and medical students. (Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 24:6-18 and pg. 32:8-9). This was the normal format for the oncology conferences. Id. A resident would introduce the case and give a brief overview, a physician from radiology would report the radiologic findings, a pathologist would report the pathology, the treating physician would comment on treatment and there would be a few minutes of general discussion about the case. Each presentation was limited to 30 minutes. (Taylor Depo., pg. 36:16-20). Otherthan Plaintiffs behavior, the October, 2005 oncology conference followed the routine fOlmat. Plaintiff asserts he "blew the whistle" on a plan of care for a patient that was "based on inaccurate outside pathology reports." Those pathology reports were from the University of Southern California and Stanford University. (PSUF '\189). Plaintiffs assertion that the outside pathology reports were "inaccurate" is at odds with other statements Plaintiff made about the nature of pathologic diagnoses. For example, in an e-mail to Dr. Dutt, (which Plaintiff wrote to defend his own work) Plaintiff stated, "As you well know, there are frequent disagreements between pathologists, even expert pathologists, about a given diagnosis. These are customarily resolved by referee opinions by outside consultants and the results are widely published." (PSUF '\1114). In a 2005 letter to Dr. Roy, Plaintiff wrote, "Pathology diagnoses are consensus based, with few gold standards to affirm accuracy. Consultants offer opinions, not accurate diagnoses. 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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 16 of 29

I

(DSUF -,r74). Plaintiffs criticisms of the work done by USC and Stanford were no more than his opinions of a diagnosis rendered by another pathologist. Disagreement between physicians over diagnoses and patient care is not "blowing the whistle" because it lacks all the elements of "whistleblowing." There is no violation oflaw and there is no enforcement agency to report to. Plaintiff asserts he also "blew the whistle" during the conference regarding "unsafe conditions created for other patients by the lack of a KMC policy requiring internal pathology review of all outside pathology reports prior to treatment." Yet, again, there is no law that requires the practice he was advocating. This is not "whistleblowing." It is disagreement. Defendants request a finding that Plaintiffs statements at the October oncology conference did not constitute whistleblowing.

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 I0
II

12 13
14

2.

Blood Product Chart Copies

The second incident of Plaintiff s alleged whistleblowing concerns Blood Product Chart Copies ("PCCs"). PCCs are the paper records of blood usage and cover such things as transfusions. Plaintiff asserts he made a "protected" report to Peter Bryan, the Chief Executive Officer ofKMC, on January 9, 2006, that Plaintiff "reasonably suspected" transfusion documentation at KMC was not being processed in compliance with state regulations. Although California Health and Safety Code §1602.5(a) applies to the preparation, labeling and storage of blood products, violation of §1602.5 was not Plaintiffs original concern. Instead, Plaintiff had argued aggressively with Toni Smith and others that the original copies of all PCCs should be filed and stored in the Pathology Department. (DSUF -,r118). However, 22 C.C.R. §70751 requires that patient medical record be maintained in an easily accessible marmer and in accordance with policies that insure their integrity. Plaintiffs desire to file PCCs in the Pathology Department would have fragmented medical records by causing records of blood usage to be housed separate from the rest ofthe patient's medical record. Toni Smith correctly vetoed Plaintiffs request, thereby insuring that KMC's medical records continued to be maintained as required by law (and, of course, earning Plaintiffs enmity in the process). (DSUF -,r129).
-12DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PARTIAL OR FULL SUMMARY mDGMENT

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 17 of 29

I

Plaintiffs campaign to force Toni Smith to change KMC policy and store the PCCs in the Pathology Department was persistent and unpleasant. (DSUF nl17-131). Plaintiff refused to acknowledge that there was an opposing viewpoint. (DSUF ~~117, 128, 130 and 131). Plaintiff was so stubborn that, when he was confronted with the repmi from the Joint Committee on Accreditation of Hospital Organizations ("JCAHO") that found no problem with KMC's PCCs, Plaintiff dismissed the report as being based on too small a sample. (DSUF ~~123 and 124). While the California Department of Health found minor lapses in KMC's regulatory compliance (for example, the blood usage committee did not meet often enough (PSUF
~98»,

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
II

KMC was never found to be out of compliance with the legal requirements. (DSUF ~132). In sum, Plaintiffs concerns about pecs were not reasonable. No enforcement agency ever found a basis for his complaints. His concerns were frivolous. Defendants request a findin that Plaintiffs statements about PCCs did not constitute whistleblowing.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

3.

Skull Flaps.

The third incident of alleged whistleblowing concerns the issue of "skull flaps." (A skull flap is a piece of skull that is removed, usually to relieve swelling in the brain following head trauma. (Wrobel Depo., 12/6/07, pg. 32: 14-20». Plaintiff alleges he "reasonably believed" skull flaps were being stored in the freezer in the Pathology Department laboratory in violation of California Health & Safety Code §1635.1, which imposes licensing standards on the storage of tissue that will be reimplanted. Plaintiffs belief was not reasonable. Dr. Charles Wrobel is the neurosurgeon at KMC responsible for brain surgery. (Wrobel Depo., 12/6/07, pg. 10: 11-12). He is the physician who removes skull flaps from patients and he is the surgeon who put the skull flaps in the freezer in the pathology laboratory. (Wrobel Depo., 12/6/07, pg. 18:7-24). Plaintiff deposed Dr. Wrobel but, curiously, omitted reference to Dr. Wrobel's testimony from his Statement of Undisputed Facts. Dr. Wrobel testified that he put the skull flaps in the freezer, that the skull flaps were not reimplanted into patients, and that he stored the skull flaps in the freezer to preserve them so he could use them as molds for titanium mesh patches that are 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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 18 of 29

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 26 27 28

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 place, establishment, or institution that collects, processes, stores, or distributes tissue for transplantation into human beings." Since the undisputed evidence is that the skull flaps stored in the KMC freezer were not stored for "transplantation into human beings", the freezer was not a "tissue bank" and no license was required. Defendants acknowledge that proof of an actual violation is not required in order for a person to be a whist1eblower because he only needs to show that he had a good faith belief that the reported activity was in violation oflaw. Freund v. Nycomed Amersham (9 th Cir. 2003) 347 F.3d 752. However, the undisputed facts show that Plaintiff could not have had a reasonable, good faith belief that KMC was storing skull flaps in violation of the statute. As Chair of the Department of Pathology, Plaintiff supervised the pathology laboratory where the freezer was located. (DSUF
~6a).

He knew skull flaps were being stored in the freezer

because Gilbert Martinez, the laboratory manager and one of Plaintiffs subordinates, told Plaintiff on three different occasions, beginning in 2004, that skull flaps were being stored in the laboratory freezer. (PSUF
~1 02).

Thus, Plaintiff knew, for over two years while he was in

charge of the laboratory that there were skull flaps in the freezer in his Department. Plaintiff has acknowledged he did not report any concerns about the skull flaps during those years. After all, reporting a suspected violation while he was Chair of the Department might have reflected badly on him. He did not report any concerns until November 28, 2006 after he had been removed as Chair. (PSUF
~11 0).

In reporting what he had known and ignored for over two years and alleging it was a violation oflaw, Plaintiff was not blowing the whistle, he was seeking revenge. He had no good faith belief there was a violation. He knew exactly what Dr. Wrobel was using the skull flaps for and he knew they were not being reimplanted. He falsely alleged they were being stored in violation oflaw just to get back at the County for removing him from his chairmanship. 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) 134 Ca1.App.4th 1378,1384. (See, Defendants' Memo, pg. 6:21-27.)
It is impossible for Defendants to have subjected Plaintiff to an adverse employment

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
II

action as a result of his alleged "whistleblowing" because Defendants did not know about it until December 13, 2006 - after Plaintiff was placed on paid administrative leave. (DSUF ~41). No other employment actions occurred until October 4, 2007, when Plaintiffs employment agreement expired. It is not possible for Defendants to have "retaliated" against Plaintiff for complaints they did not know he had made. As the Supreme Court has written, "If the factual inference sought by the nonmoving party is objectively impossible, the proffered facts do not create a factual dispute." Matsushita Elec. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp. (1986) 475 U.S. 574, 593. Plaintiff asserts he informed Gilbert Martinez, the manager of the pathology laboratory, that he intended to blow the whistle on the County (Second Amended Complaint ~20) but there are three problems with that argument. First, Mr. Martinez was not in management. He was, in fact, one of Plaintiffs subordinates. (DSUF ~6a). Second, that is not actually what Plaintiff told Mr. Martinez. Plaintiff told Mr. Martinez to be prepared for an inspection (DSUF ~55) and Mr. Martinez had no idea why Plaintiff told that. (DSUF
~55).

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Instructing a subordinate to be prepared for an inspection is not the same as

"blowing the whistle" to either management or an outside enforcement agency. Third, there is no evidence Plaintiff ever told anyone about the skull flap issue. Defendants request that the Court find the storage of skull flaps in the pathology department freezer did not violate the law, that Plaintiff had no good faith belief that it did and that Defendants did not take any adverse employment action against Plaintiff in response to his alleged "whistleblowing" regarding the skull flaps.

4.

Radical Prostatectomy

The fourth incident of Plaintiffs alleged "whistleblowing" concerns a radical prostatectomy. Plaintiff asserts that "at 12:54 p.m. on December 6,2006," he "formally" reported his concerns on this issue to the County. (Plaintiff's Memo, pg. 12:11-13). The "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

Page 20 of 29

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

the Department of Pathology, covering a wide range of topics. (PSUF

~114).

Plaintiff discusses

the radical prostatectomy in the third paragraph of the e-mail and admits he and Dr. Dutt had discussed it before. Id. Discussions between physicians about the care and treatment of a patient are not "whistleblowing"- even if they involve disagreement. Taylor Depo., 12/5/07, pg. 62:1314. More importantly, Plaintiff has never identified the law that was violated by this incident. 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 showing a legitimate, non-retaliatory business reason for any adverse employment action that was taken. Patten, 134 Cal.App.4th at 1384. The County's extensive non-retaliatory business reasons for getting Plaintiff out of the hospital before he could further damage the working enviromnent are described in the Defendants' Memo at pages 18:10-22;12. That discussion is incorporated herein. (See, also, DSUF ~~80, 82-86, and 176-190). 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.

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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
II

leave on December 16, 2005. (DSUF ~15). He notified the County of this leave in January, 2006, while he was already out. (DSUF ~7). He did not submit a request for leave or inform the County of the expected length of his leave until over a month after he took leave. (DSUF ~13). The County's Human Resources department had to prompt Plaintiff to submit this paperwork. (DSUF
~~11

and 12).

Because Plaintiff s notice of his need for medical leave was not timely, Plaintiff cannot establish the first element of his prima facie case. For this reason alone, Defendants submit they are entitled to summary judgment on both the Fourth and Fifth Claims. Plaintiff also misstates when he was granted personal necessity leave. FMLA and CFRA grant 12 workweeks' leave in a 12-month period. 29 U.S.C. §2612(a)(l)(D); Gov't Code §12945.2(a). Once the 12 weeks ofleave have been taken, an employee's rights under FMLA expire. Neisendorfv. Levi Strauss & Co., (App. 1 Dist. 2006) 143 Cal.AppA th 509, 518; 29 C.F.R. §825.214, subd.(b)(2003). All parties agree that Plaintiff had exhausted his 12 weeks by Jtme 2006. (DSUF ~~30, 32, and 38). Personal necessity leave did not begin until June 14, 2006. (DSUF ~24). There is no evidence that Plaintiffs rights under either FMLA or CFRA were violated. Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiffs Fourth and Fifth Claims.
D.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

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

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 22 of 29

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
II

within the meaning of either the ADA or FEHA; that he is not substantially limited in the major life function of work; that he is not a qualified person because he cannot perform the essential functions ofajob at KMC; and that the California's Workers Compensation system is his exclusive remedy. (See, discussion in Defendants' Memo at pgs. 15:21-17:7.) Plaintiff argues that he could have performed the essential functions of his job and that his "unavailability was largely manufactured" by Defendant Peter Bryan. This is unsupported. Plaintiffw1ilaterally put himself on leave beginning in December, 2005. (DSUF
~15).

He

unilaterally decided what part of his job he would continue to do and what part he would not do. (Second Amended Complaint ~80). He continued to perform administrative duties but he stopped practicing pathology. Jd. Although his position is inconsistent with the clear provisions of his employment agreement, Plaintiff asserts that his duties as Chair comprised only 10-20% of his job. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 23: 11-12). Accepting this for the sake of argument, this means Plaintiff stopped doing 80% to 90% of this job when he put himself on leave. Plaintiff offers no evidence to support his assertion that the essential functions of his job took only 10-20% of his time. Thus, Plaintiff offers no evidence that he could do the essential functions of his job. Even if his duties as Chair were the only essential functions of his job, Plaintiff has admitted he was not able to do them. For example, he notes Dr. Dutt had to cover for him when Plaintiff could not perform his administrative duties. (Plaintiff s Memo, pg. 23: 1214). The fact is that Plaintiff could not perform the essential functions of even the limited administrative duties he kept. In April, 2006, the Chief Executive Officer counseled Plaintiff that he must improve his relationships with staff or step down as Chair of the Department of Pathology. The CEO wrote to Plaintiff, "this apparent lack of insight on your part is at the heart of your inability to meaningfully contribute as a member of the medical staff leadership group." (DSUF
~~

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

"indication that he is committed to return to work or resume his duties as chairman." (DSDF '\133). This was manifestly a legitimate business reason. Likewise, Defendants had legitimate business reasons for putting Plaintiff on paid administrative leave. After finally returning to work in October, 2006, Plaintiffs behavior toward his co-workers substantially deteriorated. Because the employer is responsible for the work environment (California Labor Code §6400(a).), Plaintiff left the County no choice but to remove him from the hospital. 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." But Plaintiff argues his limitation is that he can only work part-time. Thus, the real issue is whether KMC could reasonably accommodate his limitation. An employer is not obligated to make turn a full-time job into a part-time job, if the parttime position did not exist before. Raine v. City ofBurbank (2006) 135 Cal.App.4 th 1215, 12231228, citing Watkins v. Ameripride Services (9 th Cir. 2004) 375 F.3d 821, 828. Plaintiffs position was full-time. 11 required 48 hours (on average) of work in a week and 2112 hours per year. (DSDF '\I'\I6a and 6b). Plaintiff s unilateral reduction of this work by 80% to 90% is an unnecessary and unreasonable accommodation. Plaintiff asserts Defendants failed to engage in a good faith interactive process with him to reach an accommodation of his disability. But the evidence shows it was Plaintiff who obstructed the interactive process. Plaintiff, without informing either KMC management or the County's Human Resources department, unilaterally put himself on part-time leave in December 2005. (DSDF '\115). Without any input from his employer, Plaintiff unilaterally chose which duties he would continue to perform and which he would not while he was on part-time leave. (Second Amended Complaint '\180). Plaintiff never broached the subject with his employer. KMC did its best to accommodate Plaintiffs unilateral determination of his schedule and work duties. However, Plaintiff clearly intended for his self-imposed schedule to continue indefinitely. He had already been on leave for seven months when he requested more even more 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

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 24 of 29

1

to work with Plaintiff but he did not reciprocate. Defendants request findings they did not discriminate, did not fail to accommodate Plaintiff and did not fail to engage in the interactive process.
E.

2
3 4 5

Defendants Did Not Violate Plaintifrs Dne Process Rights.

In determining whether procedural safeguards are required in response to a particular employment action, a court must first determine whether the employee had a property interest that was adversely affected by the employer's action. Skelly v. State Personnel Bd (1975) 15 Cal.3d 194, 206-207. Although Plaintiff acknowledges Board ofRegents v. Roth, (1972) 408 U.S. 564, he relies on the "mutually exclusive understanding" language in Perry v. Sindermann (1972) 408 U.S. 593. Roth and Perry were both decided by the Supreme Court on June 29, 1972. Both cases involved teachers at state institutions of higher learning. Both teachers did not have tenure. Both state schools had a policy that nonrenewal of a nontenured teacher's employment contract required neither a hearing nor an explanation. Both teachers were notified, without explanation, that their employment contracts would not be renewed. Both teachers believed that their employment contracts were not renewed because they had criticized their respective school administrations. Both teachers sued, asserting violation of their 14th Amendment rights to procedural due process and alleging a violation of their 1st Amendment rights. Yet, the outcomes were different. The plaintiff in Roth was found to have no 14th Amendment right to procedural due process while the plaintiff in Perry was found to have had his 14th Amendment right to procedural due process violated. The different outcomes were driven by slight difference in the facts. The plaintiff in Perry had worked in the Texas university system for ten years, the last four under a series of one-year contracts at the same school. He alleged he had de facto tenure based on two documents. The first document was the school's Faculty Guide which stated that the college wanted each faculty member to "feel that he has permanent tenure as long as his teaching services are satisfactory ... " The second document was a set of guidelines adopted by the Coordinating Board of the Texas College and University System which stated that a teacher
-20-

6
7 8

9 10 11 12
13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 25 of 29

who worked in the system for seven years or more had some form of tenure. 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. The plaintiff in Roth did not have similarly helpful evidence. He had only an employment agreement that expired according to its terms. Without more, he could not establish his claim that its nonrenewal had deprived him of a property interest. The Supreme Court wrote that property interests are not created by the Constitution. Rather, they are created and defined by independent sources, such as state law. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577. A plaintiff must have more than a unilateral expectation. He must have a legitimate entitlement based on an independent source. Id. Although he invokes it frequently, Perry's "mutually explicit understanding" does not aid Plaintiff. Plaintiffs employment contract clearly explains when due process applies and when it does not. (DSUF ~~4 and 6; Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319); Article XII, Section 12.2, pg. 66 (0000337». There is no evidence of other understandings, explicit or implicit. Plaintiff attempts to use Peter Bryan's testimony that a core physician is a "permanent" employee and the fact that KMC has allowed only one other physician's contract to expire to establish an understanding that is contrary to his employment agreement. The concept of "permanent" status means only that the employee was not "temporary." It does not mean the employee has life tenure. The fact that another physician's contract expired without renewal simply proves it happens. Neither argument established the kind of "understanding" Plaintiff asserts. Plaintiff does not cite Shoemaker, 37 Cal.AppAth 618. Shoemaker discussed both Roth and Perry in determining the due process rights of an employee who was removed from a position but not discharged from his employment. Shoemaker, 37 Cal.AppA th at 630, fn. 12. In addition to being employed at two facilities as an emergency room physician, the plaintiff in Shoemaker held two positions. He was Chief of Emergency Medicine Services at the county medical center and Chair of a university Department of Emergency Medicine. After 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 2 3 4 5 6 7
8

from either institution and remained employed as an emergency room physician at both. He sue to restrain his removal and alleged that his due process rights had been violated. The county medical center personnel were, by contract, part of the county civil service system. Pursuant to those rules, if an employee was demoted or discharged, the employee was entitled to notice and a pre-deprivation hearing. However, the plaintiff had not been discharged. The Court determined that his removal as Chief of Emergency Services was a mere reassignment or transfer - actions that did not trigger the requirement of notice and a pre-deprivation hearing.
Id. at 627.

9 10
II

His position at the university, on the other hand, was not included in a civil service system. The university had bylaws and the bylaws gave the university president "full power of appointment, direction and supervision of the Faculty." The Court found the plaintiff was not entitled to notice or a pre-deprivation hearing under the bylaws. Plaintiffs position at KMC combined elements of both positions in Shoemaker. Like
Shoemaker's county medical center, KMC is a department of County government. Like Shoemaker's university, civil services rules do not apply to core physicians at KMC. (DSUF
~6b).

12 13
14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Plaintiff's employment was governed by the KMC Medical Staff Bylaws (Id.) and they

vest the KMC Chief Executive Officer with the power to recommend removal of a department chair, with or without cause, subject to approval by the KMC Joint Conference Committee. (DSUF
~~4

and 37).

From a constitutional standpoint, the analysis in Roth, Perry and Shoemaker supports the conclusion that Plaintiff was not entitled to notice or a hearing on his removal from the Chair position. That conclusion is equally supported by simple contract law. Plaintiff s employment agreement was subject to the Bylaws and they provided he could be removed without cause. (DSUF ~4, Article IX, Section 9.7-4, pg. 48 (0000319». The KMC Bylaws do afford due process for certain types of employment actions. (See, e.g., PSUF ~167.) For example, demotion to a lower staff category triggers a right to a hearing. (DSUF
~4,

Article XII, Section 12.2, pg. 66 (0000337». Although Plaintiff alleges he was

demoted, he was not. Under the Bylaws, staff categories are defined by the employee's clinical
-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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
II

privileges or staff membership. The highest staff category - Active - carries full clinical privileges and staff membership. (DSUF ~4). Plaintiff was always a core pathologist in the Active staff category. (KMC Letter to Jadwin, dated 8114/01 to 9112/08). He was not demoted. Plaintiff quotes Gilbert v. Homar (1997) 520 U.S. 924, for the proposition that an employee has a "significant private interest in the uninterrupted receipt of his paycheck" and, therefore, is entitled to procedural due process. Gilbert, 520 U.S. at 931. However, in Gilbert, the employee lost. While the Supreme Court acknowledged the obvious - that a paycheck is important - it ruled against Gilbert, finding a pre-suspension hearing would have been futile because the evidence Gilbert had been arrested on drug charges was so compelling. Id. Plaintiffs absence from the hospital and unavailability for over 8 months is as compelling as the evidence in Gilbert. KMC needed - and was entitled to have - someone who could provide on-site leadership and administrative support. What would a hearing have established even if one had been required? Plaintiff would have probably used it as another opportunity to attack the medical staff and hospital management. (DSUF ~~166-174). Plaintiff asserts he had a property interest in his base compensation that was independent from his position as Chair. (Plaintiffs Memo, pg. 27:7-10). This argument does not survive thc application of basic principles of contract. (Which is appropriate. In Perry, the Supreme Court cited Corbin on Contracts when it discussed implied contract terms. Perry, 408 U.S. at 602.) The purpose of Plaintiff s employment contract was to pay him a salary in return for his performance of specified duties. Nothing in Plaintiffs contract guaranteed him a specific salary even ifhe did not do his job. Since Plaintiff stopped performing his specified duties, the purpose of the contract was frustrated and the County's duty to pay him the contract price was discharged. Restatement (Second) of Contracts, §268. This rule is incorporated in California Labor Code §2924 which allows an employer to rescind a written employment contract for, among other reasons, continued nonperformance. Again, as the Supreme Court wrote in Roth, property rights do not spring from the Constitution. They are based in state law. Roth, 408 U.S. at 577. California law 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

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 276

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 28 of 29

1 2 3
4 5 6

Defendants request the Court grant swnmary judgment for the Defendants on Plaintiff s Ninth Claim.

F.

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).

7
8 9
10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

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
-24~34).

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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27

In addition, he testified that he was unable to recall whether a vote was taken on the nonrenewal of Plaintiffs contract, although he guessed that there must have been a vote. (DSUF '\[35). In fact, neither the JCC nor the Board of Supervisors decided to let Plaintiffs contract expire. (DSUF '\[36a). When asked about the reasons for the nonrenewal, Supervisor Watson speculated that it might have been because of Plaintiffs continued absence from his job and the fact that he was suing the County. (DSUF '\[36; PSUF '(124). Since Supervisor Watson was not a decision maker on the nonrenewal of Plaintiffs contract, his after-the-fact speculation is not evidence of retaliatory motive. No law requires employers to renew contracts of employees who are suing them. Without evidence of a link between the protected activity and the allegedly adverse employment action, Plaintiffs claims of retaliation fail. Morgan v. Regents of University ofCal. (2000) 88 Cal.App.4 th 52, 69. Defendants request that the Court grant summary judgment for the Defendants on Plaintiff s Third, Tenth and Eleventh Claims. II

CONCLUSION
Defendants went out of their way in an attempt to tolerate, counsel and assist Plaintiff in adapting to the KMC medical community. Plaintiff resisted every effort and, oblivious to his own behavior and the ways it contributed to his problems, decided everyone was out to get him. They were not. Plaintiff was simply not able to work productively at KMC. Defendants never retaliated against Plaintiff or denied him any rights and they are entitled to summary judgment. Respectfully submitted, Dated: December 1,2008 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER

By :._---'-"/s'!.../~M:!<a'!!r~k..£A~._.:W~as~s"'er'__ _ Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.

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

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 1 of 38

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

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: mwasser@markwasser.com 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: mnations@co.kern.ca.us Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris

11
12
13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
-1DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
Plaintiff, vs.

COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,
Defendants.

DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
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

Defendants submit this Response to Plaintiffs Statement of Undisputed Facts in Opposition to Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Summary Adjudication pursuant to LR 56-260(a).

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 2 of 38

1

2
3 4

Disputed Facts

Supporting Evidence

1.
2. 3. 4. 5. Plaintiff is the former Chief of Pathology at Kern Medical Center ("KMC" or "the hospital"), an acute care teaching hospital and health care facility that is owned and operated by Defendant County of Kern ("Defendant County" or "the County"). Deny. Plaintiff is the former Chair of the Department of Pathology. See Defendants' Statement of Undisputed Facts (hereinafter "DSUF") 1a, (DFJOO043-46). 6. 7. 8. In October 2000, Dr. Jadwin began full-time employment at KMC as chair of the pathology department. Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant County from October 24, 2000 to October 4,2007. 9. Throughout the course of his employment at KMC, Dr. Jadwin tried to ensure that patient care was based on adequate and accurate pathology. Deny. See DSUF 152b (DFJ00592), 74 (DFJ00364366),76 (0027069-27070), 78 (0000506), 80 (Dutt Deposition, 8/20108, pg. 285 :623). 10. In May 2005, Dr. Jadwin began formally expressing his concerns that KMC was not complying with state regulations regarding blood transfusion documentation. -2DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY WDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADWDICATlON

5
6
7 8

9
10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Admit.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. See DSUF 118 (DFJ00408-409).

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 3 of 38

I 2 3 4

II. In October 2005, Dr. Jadwin presented at an intrahospital conference where he reported on uncaught pathology report errors that potentially jeopardized the care

Deny. See DSUF 107 (DFJ00580), 74 (DFJ00364366) and Plaintiffs Statement

of a hysterectomy patient and the need for a policy to address of Undisputed Facts the problem. (hereinafter "PSUF") 114 (Jadwin Dec!., Exh. 10 (Jadwin's email to Dutt, Culberson et a!. of 12/6/06 at DFJ1479; Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at 13:1925); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 24 (Rog 67 at 14:22-23 (noting difficulties outside reviewers had reaching conclusions about the diagnosis)). 12. Defendants responded by calling him into a meeting, severely reprimanding him, and informing him that letters of reprimand would be placed in his physician credentials file. Deny. See DSUF 113 (DFJ00588), 114 (0000094). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8114/01 - 9112/08. 13. Defendants retaliatory conduct exacerbated Dr. Jadwin's Deny. Defendants' conduct

5
6 7 8
9

10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
-3-

chronic depression and proved so disabling that, at the end of was not retaliatory. See DSUF 2005, he was forced to take a reduced work schedule medical 62 (Jadwin Deposition, 1/9/08, leave as an accommodation and seek psychiatric therapy. 14. In April 2006, Dr. Jadwin requested an extension of his reduced work schedule leave. pgs.414:24-418:12). Deny. Plaintiff requested an extension of his Leave of Absence. See DSUF 19 (DFJOI158).

DEFENDANTS' 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 2 3 4 5
6

15. On April 28, 2006, Defendant Bryan responded by placing him on full-time "personal necessity leave" under the County's leave policy and, a few months later, ordered him not to contact anybody at KMC or he would be fired ("Forced FT Leave").

Deny. See DSUF 20 (DFJOI121), 24 (DFJOI141), 27 (0001424), 29 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 244:616),30 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 280:21-281 :4). See Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21, Interrogatory 36.

7
8

9 10
11

16. On June 4, 2006, Defendant Bryan told Dr. Jadwin that he had decided to "rescind your appointment at chairman" and that "this decision is effective June 17,2006."

Deny. See DSUF 24 (DFJOI141), 28 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 257:915).

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17. On July 10,2006, Defendant Bryan recommended to KMC's Joint Conference Committee ("JCC") that Plaintiff be removed from his position as Chair of the pathology department "based on Dr. Jadwin's unavailability for service because of extended medical leaves for non-work related ailments" and "solely based on his continued non-availability to provide the leadership necessary for a contributing member of the medical staffleadership group....Dr. Jadwin has provided no indication that he is committed to return to work or resume his duties as chair. Other than his latest written communication requesting an extension of his medical leave, Dr. Jadwin has made no attempt in the last two months to contact me concerning his employment status or how the Department of Pathology should be managed during his absence."
-4-

Deny. The quoted material is not an accurate quotation; see DSUF 33 (0001476-1565, 0000073-75).

DEFENDANTS' 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 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

18. At a meeting of the JCC on July 10,2006, Defendant County approved the demotion ofPlaintifffrom chair of the pathology department for "unavailability." Members of the JCC based their vote on his unavailability due in part to his medical leave. 19. Defendant County then conditioned Dr. Jadwin's return to work as a regular pathologist on his medical release to full time work and entry into an amendment to his contract that contained restrictive terms and conditions and reduced Dr. Jadwin's base pay from roughly $300,000 to $200,000. 20. When demoting Dr. Jadwin, Defendants Bryan and the County did not notify Dr. Jadwin of the hospital committee vote to demote him or give him a chance to defend himself prior to, at or after the vote.

Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 33 (0001476-1565,0000073-75). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08. Deny. See DSUF 44 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and 581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08,974:3-976:12). Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 28 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 257:9-15), 31 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 258:716). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08.

21. On his return to work as a demoted pathologist in late 2006, Dr. Jadwin was placed beneath a former subordinate whom he had hired and trained the year before.

Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 9/12/08.

22. After about two months, Dr. Jadwin decided to go outside the hospital and report his ongoing suspicions of legal noncompliance and illegal and/or unsafe care and
-5-

Deny. See DSUF 56 (DFJ02540-2541, DFJ01454, DFJ01459), 57 (DFJ02538-

DEFENDANTS' 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 accreditation agencies, as well as KMC senior management. 23. Plaintiff also complained to KMC's senior management about the harsh treatment he was receiving.

2539).

2
3

Deny. See PSUF 114 ((Jadwin Dec!., Exh. 10 (Jadwin's email to Dutt, Culberson et a!. of

4 5
6
7
8

12/6/06 at DFJ1479; Lee Supp.
Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at 13:19-25); Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 24 (Rog 67 at 14:22-23 (noting difficulties outside reviewers had reaching conclusions about the diagnosis). 24. The following day, on December 7, 2006, Defendant County placed Dr. Jadwin on administrative leave "pending resolution of a personnel matter." 25. The leave denied Plaintiff the opportunity to ear patientbased professional fees, which had amounted to roughly $100,000 per year ("Professional Fees") prior to his taking of reduced work schedule leave. 26. Dr. Jadwin formally notified KMC of his whistleblowing reports to the outside regulatory and accreditation agencIes. 27. Dr. Jadwin remained on administrative leave for another ten months until his contract expired on October 4,2007. 28. During six of those months, Dr. Jadwin was physically restricted to his home during work hours. -6DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY WDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

9 10
11

12 13 14 15 16
17

Admit.

Deny. 0018755-0018917.

18 19 20 21

Admit.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Admit.

Deny. Plaintiff was required by County policy to be

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 7 of 38

1

"available by telephone." See DSUF 41a (0016941). 29. The county decided not to renew Dr. Jadwin's contract, which expired on October 4,2007. 30. From October 2000 to the present, KMC - a hospital with roughly 60 full-time faculty physicians - had failed to renew the contract of only 1 other KMC physician. 31. Plaintiff s position had been that of a permanent, core physician, whose contracts are customarily renewed. 32. Defendant County based its nonrenewal decision on Dr. Jadwin's medical and recuperative leave, and the fact he had brought a lawsuit opposing employment practiced prohibited by the Family & Medical Leave Act ("MFLA"), and the California Family Rights Act ("CFRA"), and the Fair Employment & Housing Act ("FEHA"). Deny. See Response to #30 above. Deny. See DSUF 36a (Declaration of Michael Rubio, Deny. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 22, Interrogatory #28. Admit.

2
3 4

5
6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

11110/08, '12; Declaration of
Raymond Watson, 11110/98,

'1'13, 4 and 5; Declaration of
Mike Maggard, 11110108, '12; Declaration of Jon McQuiston,

11110108, '12; Declaration of
Don Maben, 11/10108, '12). 33. To this day, Dr. Jadwin has not personally received an explanation from Defendants as to why he was placed on administrative leave or why his contract was not renewed, despite repeated requests for an explanation. Defendants never notified Dr. Jadwin of the charges against him or permitted him to defend himself. 34. 35. 36. During the entire tenure of Plaintiffs employment, Admit. Admit. There were no charges against Plaintiff.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

-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

Page 8 of 38

I

Defendant County was continuously an employer within the meaning ofFMLA [29 C.F.R. § 825.105©], CFRA [Gov't C
§ 12945.2(b)(2)], and FEHA [Gov't C § 12926(d)] engaged

2
3

4
5

in interstate commerce, and regularly employing more than fifty employees within seventy-five miles of Plaintiffs regular workplace at KMC. 37. Defendant County is a government agency. 38. 39. 40. On October 12,2005, Defendant Harris solicited and received letters of dissatisfaction from three KMC core physicians, criticizing Dr. Jadwin's presentation at a KMC monthly Oncology Conference. 41. On October 17, 2005, KMC's senior medical staff wrote to Dr. Jadwin notifying him that these letters of dissatisfaction would be placed in his credentialing file ("Credential Threat"). Deny. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21, Interrogatory #34. (Harris Deposition, 8/13/08, pgs. 113:14-16,116:4). Deny. Plaintiff s Corrected Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment Against Defendants, pg. 6:1. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 Admit.

6
7
8 9

10 11 12
13

14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21

- 9112/08.
42. Some of the medical staff involved later apologized to Dr. Jadwin. Deny. 166 (Abraham Deposition, 8/18/08, pgs. 198:24-207:17), 167 (Bryan Deposition, 8114/08, pgs. 109:12-111:10),168 (Bryan Deposition, 8114/08, pgs. 156:22-157:12),169 (Harris Deposition, 8/13/08, pg. 159:2-8DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 9 of 38

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11

13), 170 (Harris Deposition, 8113/08, pg. 196:7-20), 171 (Harris Deposition, 8113/08 pgs. 230:4-232:13),172 (Harris Deposition, 8113/08, pgs. 234:24-235:23 and 305:20-308:22), 173 (Ragland Deposition, 8/22/08, pg. 16:1216), 174 (0000507).

1--------------------+------------1 1--------------------+------------1
45. Dr. Jadwin's employment contract expressly provided that Dr. Jadwin would be chair of the KMC pathology department and paid base compensation of$287,529 ("Base Pay"). 46. On July 10,2006, Bryan recommended and the JCC approved Jadwin's demotion from department chair to staff pathologist ("Demotion"). Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 9/12108. 47. 1t is uncontested that Defendants considered a portion of Dr. Jadwin's pay to be tied to his chair position, and that the demotion therefore made the paycut a foregone conclusion. The JCC vote to demote Plaintiff was effectively a vote to reduce his Base Pay as well. Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319), 44 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 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

43. 44.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Admit.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 10 of 38

1

581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08,974:3-976:12). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08. 48. Defendants County and Harris informed Dr. Jadwin that his return to work at KMC was conditioned on his entry into an amendment to his employment contract, instituting a reduction in Base Pay from $287,529 to $186,687 ("Paycut"). 49. On October 3, 2006, Plaintiff executed the amendment to his employment contract. 50. 51. 52. A pathologist is valued according to the efficacy of his "eye," i.e., the training and experience that allows him to spot minute patterns and telltale abnormalities in microscopic and gross tissue samples. Deny. This is not a fact; it is an expression of opinion. The opinion is not relevant to Plaintiffs administrative duties as Chair. 53. Developing and maintaining the pathologist "eye" requires years of daily pathology work; however, it takes only a few months of being away from work to lose enough efficacy to threaten a pathologist's career. Deny. This is not a fact; it is an expression of opinion. The opinion is not relevant to Plaintiffs administrative duties as Chair. 54. Moreover, Dr. Jadwin's contract expressly provided that he was to earn patient billing-based professional fees, separate and apart from his fixed Base Pay. 55. In order to earn Professional Fees, Dr. Jadwin needed to -10DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3 4

5 6
7
8

Deny. See DSUF 44 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and 581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08,974:3-976: 12). Admit.

9
10

11
12

13
14 15 16
17

18 19 20 21

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. See DSUF 6 (00014791499).

Admit.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 11 of 38

1

process and bill patient cases. 56. Restriction to his workplace at KMC by placement on leave denied him the opportunity to earn such fees. Deny. Defendants do not know what "restriction to his workplace at KMC" means. 57. Dr. Jadwin's professional fee income amounted to approximately $100,000 per year. 58. On December 7, 2007, Defendant County placed Plaintiff on paid administrative leave "pending resolution of a personnel matter" ("Admin Leave"). Admit. Deny. 0018755-0018917.

2
3 4

5
6
7 8

9 10
11

59. Defendant County further ordered Plaintiff to "remain at horne and available by telephone during normal business hours" and not to contact anyone at KMC, else he could be terminated. There was no further indication of what Plaintiff was being charged with, whether he would be permitted to respond to charges, or when the leave would end. 60. No investigation, explanation or resolution ensued.

Deny. See DSUF 41 (DFJOI482,0016941).

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. Defendants deny there was anything to investigate, explain or resolve.

61. On April 4, 2007, Plaintiff notified Defendant County that the long leave was exacerbating his depression, eroding his pathology skills and employability, and denying him the opportunity to earn professional fees. 62. On April 30, 2007, Defendant County informed Dr. Jadwin that he remained on administrative leave but removed the home restriction.

Admit.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. Defendants informed Plaintiff that he was relieved of the obligation to be available 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
2 3 4

63. On May 1,2007, Defendant County informed Dr. Jadwin that they intended to keep Dr. Jadwin on leave and "let his contract run out."

Deny. Defendants tried to negotiate a settlement by buying out Plaintiff s contract and lifting restrictions on Plaintiffs leave. See PSUF 63 (Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21 (Rog No. 43 at 53:3-9); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 22 (Rog No. 44,28: 17-22); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 6 (Wasser Email to Lee of 5/1/07 at DFJOI705)).

5
6 7
8

9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 64. Dr. Jadwin remained on administrative leave until his employment contract expired on October, [sic]4, 2007.

Admit.

f------------------+-------------1

65.

1-6:...::6~.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f - - - - - - - - - 67. Supervisor Ray Watson, then-Chair of the Board of Supervisors, voted as a member of the JCC to demote Dr. Jadwin and effectively cut his pay, and also participated in the decision not to renew Plaintiff s employment contract. Deny. See DSUF 36a (Declaration of Michael Rubio, 11/1 0/08,
~2;

Declaration of

Raymond Watson, 11/1 0/98,
~~3,

4 and 5; Declaration of
~2;

Mike Maggard, 11/1 0/08,

Declaration of Jon McQuiston, 11/1 0/08,
~2;

Declaration of
~2).

Don Maben, 11/1 0/08,

Plaintiff was not demoted. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/0 I - 9/12/08. -12DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

27
28

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 time of the Nonrenewa1, testified in deposition: "My understanding was that [Plaintiff] had - he had been on medical leave, family leave, and had requested even more leave, and that for that reason and the fact that he was suing us, that we decided not to renew his contract." C'Nonrenewal") 69. Moreover, Dr. Jadwin was a "core physician" at KMC, a permanent position. 70. There was a mutually explicit understanding that, as a core physician, Plaintiff s contract would be continuously renewed.

Admit.

2
3 4

5
6 7

8
9 10
11

Deny. See DSUF 6 (00014791499). Deny. This is not a fact; "mutually explicit understanding" is one of Plaintiff s legal arguments.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

71. In fact, from October 2000 to present, only one other physician besides Dr. Jadwin has not had his contract renewed.
72.

Deny. See Response to #30 above.

73. 74. Credential Threat was a substantial cause of Dr. Jadwin's emotional distress leading to recurrence of his chronic major depressive disorder. Deny. Plaintiff s credential was never threatened. See DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-53:18).
~'Substantial

22
23 24 25 26 27 28 75. Credential Threat was a substantial cause of Dr. -13-

cause," "chronic"

and "major" are subj ective terms. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01- 9/12/08. Deny. Plaintiff s credential

DEFENDANTS' 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 2 3
4 5

Jadwin's reduced work schedule medical/recuperative leave and loss of opportunity to earn Professional Fees from December 16,2005 to on or around April 28, 2006.

was never threatened. See DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:5-53:18). Plaintiff s Second Amended Complaint '80. "Substantial cause" is a subjective term. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01-9/12/08.

6 7
8

9
10

76. Forced FT Leave was a was a substantial cause of Dr. Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr. Jadwin's major depression.

Deny. See DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:553: 18), 21 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 250:15-251 :6, Exhibit 303). "Substantial

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

cause" and "major" are
subjective terms. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21, Rog #36.
77. Forced FT Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs

Deny. See DSUF 7A (Dutt Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 52:553:18),21 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 250: 15-251 :6, Exhibit 303). Second Amended Complaint '80. "Substantial cause" is a subjective term. Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21, Rog #36.

loss of opportunity to earn Professional Fees as provided for in his employment contract from on or around April 28, 2006 to June 17, 2006.

78. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of Dr. Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr. -14-

Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4

DEFENDANTS' 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 15 of 38

1 2
3 4

Jadwin's major depression.

(0000272-358, specifically 0000319). "Substantial cause" and "major" are subjective terms. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12108.

5
6 7 8
9

79. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of Base Pay reduction from $287,529 to $186,687 from October 3, 2006 onward.

Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319), Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21, Rog #41. "Substantial causes" is a subjective term. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 9/12108.

10
11

12 13
14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22

80. Demotion and Paycut were substantial causes of termination of Plaintiffs career as a pathology department chair due to unemployability.

Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319), 8 (DFJ02422-2459). See Levison Decl., pg. 6, ~6. KMC letters to Jadwin dated
8/14/01 - 9/12108.

81. Admin Leave, during 5 months of which Plaintiff was restricted full-time to his home, was a substantial cause of Dr. Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr. Jadwin's major depression. 82. Admin Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs loss ofopportnnity to earn Professional Fees as provided for in -15-

Deny. See DSUF 41 (DFJ01482,0016941). "Substantial cause" and "major" are subjective terms. Deny. See DSUF 6 (00014791499). "Substantial cause" is a

23 24 25 26 27 28

DEFENDANTS' 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, 2006 to October 4, 2007. 83. Admin Leave was a substantial cause ofloss of Plaintiffs pathologist "eye," causing him to become unemployable as a pathologist.

subjective term.

2
3

Deny. See DSDF 10 (DFJ00726), 15 (DFJ00746). Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint ~80.

4
5

6
7 8

84. Nonrenewal was a substantial cause of Dr. Jadwin's emotional distress, leading to worsening of Dr. Jadwin's major depression. 85. Admin Leave was a substantial cause of Plaintiffs lost Base Pay of$186,687 and Professional Fees of roughly $100,000 per year, as provided for in his employment contract, from on or around October 4, 2007 onward. 86. 87. 88. 89. Dr. Jadwin made a protected report to KMC's medical staffleadership about (a) the medical appropriateness of a radical hysterectomy for a KMC patient (Patient No. 1142693) based on inaccurate outside pathology reportswhich case was the subject of Plaintiff s presentation at the monthly KMC oncology conference held on October 12, 2005 ("October Conference") - and (b) the unsafe conditions created for other patients by the lack of a KMC policy requiring internal pathology review of all outside pathology reports prior to treatment ("IPR").

Deny. "Substantial cause" is a subjective term.

9 10
11

Deny. Admin Leave was paid. See DSDF 41 (DFJOI482). "Substantial cause" is a subjective term.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. Nothing about Plaintiff s statements was "protected." See DSDF 105 (DFJ00508-574), 106 (DFJ00578), 107 (DFJ00580), 108 (Harris Deposition, 8/13/08, pgs. 126:8-127: 19), 109 (Exhibit 190), 110 (Ragland Deposition, 8/22/08, pgs. 106:18-109:14 and 156:14-25), III (Abraham

22
23 24 25 26
27

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. 14:10-21:17 and 131:5-133:23 and 135:24-138:22), 112 (Dutt Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 292:25-293:20),74 (DFJ00364-366). See PSUF 114 (Jadwin Decl., Exh. 10 (Jadwin's email to Dutt, Culberson et al. of 12/6/06 at DFJl479); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 61 at 13:1925); Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 24 (Rog 67 at 14:22-23 (noting difficulties outside reviewers had reaching conclusions about the diagnosis)). Taylor Depo., 12/5/07 pgs. 14:19-21, 15:1-4, 22:9-10; 24:7-8, 27:16-17, 31:17-32:21,36:19-20,51:1225,55:7-23,62:19-25,63:4-11, 64:12-19,68:9-17. 90. Defendant County knew of Dr. Jadwin's whistleblowing report at the October Conference since Defendant Harris, then CMO ofKMC, and Jennifer Abraham, then-Immediate Past President, were in attendance. Deny. See DSUF 113 (DFJ00588). Plaintiffs presentation at the October Oncology Conference was not "whistleblowing." 91. Each of the letters of reprimand which Defendant
-17DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3 4 5

6
7 8

9 10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. Plaintiff's Corrected

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 18 of 38

1 2
3 4

County decided to place into Plaintiff s medical credential file specifically reference Dr. Jadwin's presentation at the October Conference.

Motion for Partial or Full Summary Judgment, pg. 6:1. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01
~

9/12/08.

5
6
7 8

92. 93. 94. On January 9, 2006, Dr. Jadwin made a protected report to Bryan regarding KMC's noncompliance with state regulations regarding blood transfusion related documentation called product chart copies ("PCCs"), jeopardizing patient safety. 95. Improper documentation of blood transfusions creates patient risk of morbidity and mortality. 96. Dr. Jadwin reasonably suspected that KMC's ongoing failure to maintain accurate and complete records of patient blood transfusions did not comply with H&S § 1602.5, which requires PCC documentation to conform to AABB accreditation standards. Deny. See DSUF 118 (DFJ00408-409), 121 (0000572), 123 (DFJOO788), 124 (DFJ00793), 126 (Harris Deposition, 8/13/08, pgs. 268:8-23), 127 (Smith Deposition, 8/19/08, pgs. 59:460: 13), 129 (Smith Deposition, 8/19/08, pg. 71 :2-21). 97. During his reduced work schedule medical leave, Dr. Jadwin audited PCCs, and continued to report noncompliant incomplete or missing PCCs to Defendant Bryan, Toni Smith, KMC Nurse Executive, and Risk Management and Quality Assurance through at least April 17, 2006, when -18DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDlSPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

Deny. Nothing about Plaintiff s statements was "protected." See DSUF 7 (DFJOO723).

9 10

11
12
13

Admit.

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. See DSDF 117 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 205:6-206:25 (Exhibit 291», 124a (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 226:10-16).

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
3 4

Bernard Barmann, County Counsel, to discuss his concerns regarding PCC noncompliance. 98. The California Department of Health Services later determined during the course of an inspection that KMC was indeed failing to comply with PCC-re1ated regulations. 99. On April17, 2006, Defendant Bryan threatened to demote Plaintiff. Deny. See DSUF 132 (Smith Deposition, 8/19/08, pgs. 84: 11-85:7). Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 160 (DFJ00794-795; Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 231 :9-237:25). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 9/12/08. 100. 101. 102. Dr. Jadwin reasonably believed that storage of patient skull caps occurring in an unlicensed laboratory freezer at KMC violated H&S § 1635.1. Deny. No License was required for the freezer and Plaintiff knew it. Wrobel Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12, 18:7-24,25: 13-26:20,30:431:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6. See PSUF 102 (Lee Supp. Dec!. Exh. 9 (Martinez Depo at 14:2-22); Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 12 (Dutt Depo at 244:69». 103. Unlicensed skull flap storage could give rise to a risk of -19DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

5
6 7

8

9
10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. Storage is not a risk.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 20 of 38

1

patient morbidity or mortality.

Reimp1antation of improperly stored tissue is the risk.

2

3 4 5 6
7 8 9

104. Gilbert Martinez, the Manager of Laboratory Services at KMC ("Martinez") confirmed that there were typically seven to nine skull flaps being stored in the lunlicensed [sic] aboratory [sic] freezer.

Deny. KMC's freezer did not need a license. Wrobel Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12, 18:7-24,25:13-26:20,30:431 :21,32:14-20,39:5-41 :6.

105. At times, upwards of 15 to 20 skull flaps were being stored in KMC's unlicensed freezer.

Deny. KMC's freezer did not need a license. Wrobel Deposition, pgs. 10: 11-12, 18:7-24,25:13-26:20,30:431:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6.

10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 107. When Dr. Jadwin discovered skull flaps being illegally stored in the laboratory freezer, he discussed the problem with Gilbert Martinez, the Manager of Laboratory Services atKMC ("Martinez"). 106. Martinez shared Plaintiff s concerns about unlicensed skull flap storage in the laboratory freezer.

Deny. KMC's freezer did not need a license. Wrobel Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12, 18:7-24,25: 13-26:20, 30:431:21,32:14-20,39:5-41:6. Deny. The storage was not illegal. Wrobel Deposition, pgs. 10:11-12, 18:7-24,25:1326:20,30:4-31:21,32:14-20, 39:5-41 :6. Plaintiff supervised the pathology laboratory and was in charge of the freezers. See DSUF 6a (0001479-1499).

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

108. Around Thanksgiving 2006, Dr. Jadwin tipped Martinez Deny. The storage did not off that he intended to blow the whistle about his unresolved -20DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

need a license. See DSUF 55

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 21 of 38

1 2 3

complaints about unsafe patient care and conditions, including unlicensed skull flap storage, and that inspections ofKMC by regulatory and accreditation agencies was likely.

(Martinez Deposition, 4/16/08, pgs. 111: 12-118:22). Plaintiff only told Martinez to expect inspections.

4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13

109. Within a few days, Martinez relayed this information to his supervisor, David Hill, the Director of Ambulatory Care; who in turn relayed it to a pathologist, Philip Dutt, and/or Defendant Harris. 110. Beginning November 28,2006, Dr. Jadwin formally reported his suspicions of illegal and/or unsafe care and conditions of patients at KMC - including unlicensed skull flap storage, noncompliance PCCs, and an inappropriate radical prostatectomy (see below) - to the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospital Organizations ("JCAHO"), the College of American Pathologists ("CAP"), and the California Department of Health Services ("DHS"). ("Outside WB Reports).

Deny. There is no evidence that David Hill communicated with either Dr. Dutt or Dr. Harris. Deny. Plaintiff has not produced his alleged letters to CAP or DHS. Defendants have never seen them. See DSUF 56a (DFJ02540-2541). See PSUF 110 (Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 35 at 8:10-14)); Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 21 at 5:2224 (DHS)); Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 22 at 5:256:2 (JCAHO)); Lee Supp!. Dec!., Exh. 20 (RFA No. 23 at 6:3-6 (CAP)).

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

111. On January 4,2007, Dr. Dutt received confirmation that Dr. Jadwin had in fact complained to CAP about the unlicensed tissue storage and noncompliant PCCs, and shared this with then-CEO Mr. Culberson. 112. -21-

Deny. See PSUF 111 (Jadwin Supp. Dec!., Exh. 2 (Dutt's Email to Culberson of 1/4/07 at 0001330)).

DEFENDANTS' 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. 114. At 12:54 p.m. on December 6, 2006, Dr. Jadwin formally reported to KMC leadership his concerns regarding a KMC patient who was scheduled for immediate radical prostatectomy to treat possible cancer. Plaintiff had recommended the attending physician delay the prostatectomy because he believed the pathologic findings of cancer were inconclusive. Instead, Plaintiff had recommended the findings be validated by outside experts. 115. Radical prostatectomies pose numerous risks to patient care, including incontinence, impotence and other morbid factors. 116. In his report to KMC leadership, Dr. Jadwin also complained of a pattern of non-transparent "peer review" being conducted against him and asked that the Board of Supervisors be apprised of his concerns and initiate a formal reVIew. 117. Four minutes later, at 12:58 p.m., Dr. Dutt emailed Mr. Culberson complaining about Dr. Jadwin's competency, and insistence on outside review of numerous cases after Dr. Dutt had counseled him on failing to send a case out for consultation. Dr. Dutt also complained about alleged "other Problems" involving Dr. Jadwin which he worried might lead to loss of staff and the pathology department's ability to serve patients and doctors in a timely manner. 118. 119. -22DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3 4

Deny. See DSUF 190 (DFJ01479-1480). See Jadwin Dec., Exh. 10.

5
6

7
8

9 10
11

Admit.

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. See DSUF 189 (Dutt Deposition, 8/20/08, pgs. 296:20-297: 13). See Jadwin Dec!., Exh. 10.

Dcny. Dutt's e-mail to Culberson does not refer to Plaintiffs "competency." See Lee Dec!., Exh. 23.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

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 December 16,2006. [sic] 121. Plaintiff requested and took reduced work schedule CFRA medical leave from December 16, 2005 to at least March 15, 2006. 122. Members of the JCC subsequently voted to demote Plaintiff, basing their decision on his unavailability due in part to his medical leave. Mr. Bryan told the JCC at the removal vote: "This recommendation [for removal] is based on Dr. Jadwin's unavailability for service because of extended medical leaves ...." 123. Previously on April 17, 2006, 4 months into Plaintiffs reduced work schedule medical leave, Bryan admitted to Dr. Jadwin, "Yes the Department of Pathology continues to function well as it has for many years, and yes, you have made many positive changes in the department." 124. Plaintiff also has direct evidence that Plaintiffs medical leave was a negative factor in the Nonrenewal.

Deny. Plaintiff was eligible on December 15, 2005. Admit.

2
3
4

5
6 7 8

Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 -

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

9112/08.
Deny. See DSUF 160 (DFJ00794-795; Bryan Deposition, 8114/08, pgs. 231 :9-237:25).

Deny. See DSUF 36a (Declaration of Michael Rubio, 11110/08, ~2; Declaration of Raymond Watson, 11110/98,
~~3,

4 and 5; Declaration of
~2;

22
23 24 25 26 27 28 125. 126. -23-

Mike Maggard, 11/1 0/08,

Declaration of Jon McQuiston, 1111 0/08,
~2;

Declaration of
~2).

Don Maben, 1111 0/08,

DEFENDANTS' 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 24 of 38

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 26 27 28

127. On April 28, 2006, Defendant Bryan represented to Dr. Jadwin that he was still entitled to 137 hours of medical leave. 128. Sandra Chester, Defendant County's Director of Human Resources, testified in deposition that Plaintiffs request for medical leave in his email to Bryan and herself on March 16, 2006; and provision by Dr. Jadwin's treating therapist, Dr. Riskin, ofleave certification on April 29, 2006 was timely under Defendant County's customary practice.

Admit.

Deny. See DSUF 9 (Chester Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs. 135: 12-137:6), 11 (Chester Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs. 75:19-76:10),12 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 195:9-196:14),13 (Chester Deposition, 8/28/08, pgs. 113:23-114:12).

129. Dr. Riskin's certifications notified it that Plaintiff s depression was serious enough to require a reduced work schedule leave and regular treatment from December 16, 2006 to September 15,2006. 130. Nonetheless, Defendant Bryan denied Plaintiff reduced work schedule medical leave, and forced him to take fulltime "personal necessity leave" under the County's leave policy.

Admit.

Deny. Peter Bryan gave Plaintiffthe option to take fulltime leave. See DSUF 20 (DFJOI121), 21 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 250: 15-251 :6, Exhibit 303), 24 (DFJOI141), 29 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 244:616), 30 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 280:21-281 :4).

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. 133. 134. Dr. Jadwin was an individual with a mental disability because of his chronic major depressive disorder. Dr. Reading, Plaintiff's forensic psychologist, diagnosed Dr. Jadwin as having Major Depressive Disorder. Dr. Reading also noted Dr. Jadwin reported developing depressed mood, pervasive anhedonia, suicidal ideation, sleep disturbance, and other symptoms while working at KMC. 135. Dr. Jadwin's depression limited his ability to take pleasure from life, and to engage full-time in, and take pleasure from, the medical work to which he had devoted his life. Deny. Dr. Reading never used the word "chronic." See PSUF 134 (Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at "Diagnostic Impressions" on p. 58; Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at "Structured Clinical Interview" at p. 57-58.). Deny. See PSUF 135 (Reading Dec!., Exh. 1 at "Structured Clinical Interview" at p. 57-58). Dr. Reading does not comment on the effect Plaintiff's depression had on his life. 136. Likewise, Defendant County has admitted, by and through the PMK deposition testimony of its representative, Eugene Kercher, a psychiatrist, that it was familiar with the symptoms of depression and believed that Dr. Jadwin was depressed over several years during his tenure of his employment at KMC. 137. Plaintiff also required sinus surgery and required a few weeks to recover from it during May of 1005. 138. Further, Plaintiff suffered an avulsed ankle at the end of May of 2005 that limited his ability to walk. Admit. Deny. See PSUF 136 (Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 17 (Kercher Depo at 95:13-22, 96:3-8». Dr. Kercher never diagnosed Plaintiff. (Kercher Depo 9/4/08, atpg. 51:1-16). Admit.

2
3

4 5
6

7
8

9

10

11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22
23 24 25 26 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 contributed to Plaintiff s limitations from his chronic depression during May through the first part of June of 2005.

Deny. See PSUF 139 (Riskin Dec., Exh. 3 atDFJl814.). There is no evidence that Plaintiff s sinus surgery and broken ankle contributed to his depression.

2
3
4

5
6

7 8 9 10
11

140. 141. 2. Plaintiff Was "Otherwise Qualified" Deny. See PSUF 141 (Lee Dec!., Exh. 19 (Bryan's Letter to DHS of?/25/06 at 0001619); Exh. 18 (Bryan's Letter to JCC of 7/10/06 at top of 001476 and end of 001457 [sic. Should be 001477]); Exh. 14 (Bryan's Memo to Jadwin of 4/28/06 at DFJ01152, DFJOl155-1159, DFJOll64); Exh. 16 (Nunn's Cover Email to Jadwin of 6/26/06 at DFJ01346); Exh. 10 (Bryan's Letter to Supervisors of 1/17/06 at No. 10 on 0001567)). None of Plaintiffs evidence establishes that he was a qualified person under either the ADA or FEHA. 142. -26DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 27 of 38

1

143. 144. Plaintiffs physician, Dr. Lempel, disclosed Plaintiffs depression when he faxed his medical report to KMC's HR Department on November 30, 2000, around the time of Plaintiff shire. 145. Defendant Bryan admitted knowing that Dr. Jadwin needed leave because of his depression. 146. Dr. Riskin's certifications stated that Plaintiff needed medical/recuperative leave for depression from December 16, 2005 to September 16, 2006. 147. Supervisor Watson testified in deposition that he knew Dr. Jadwin was in continuous need of extensions of his medical leave. Deny. See PSUF 147 (Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 14 (Watson Depo. at 80:22-81 :2)). The page numbers are incorrect and Supervisor Watson did not express an opinion about Plaintiff s need for continuous extensions of his leave. 148. On April 4, 2007, during Plaintiff s Admin Leave, Plaintiff expressly notified Defendant County in writing that Plaintiff was depressed and that the Admin Leave was exacerbating his chronic depression. 149. 150. 4. Disability Was A Motivating Factor in Demotion, Pay Cut & Nonrenewal. Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 33 (0001476-1565,0000073-75), 36a (Declaration of Michael -27DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3 4

Deny. See DSUF 65 (Jadwin Deposition, 1/9/08, pgs. 452:4455:19). See Reading Dec!., pg. 59, ~3, last two lines. Admit.

5
6
7 8

Admit.

9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Admit.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 28 of 38

1

Rubio, 11110/08, '12; Declaration of Raymond Watson, 11/10/98, '1'13, 4 and 5; Declaration of Mike Maggard, 11/10/08, '12; Declaration of Jon McQuiston, 11/10/08, '12; Declaration of Don Maben, 11/1 0/08, '12). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08. 151. 152. 153. On January 9, 2006, Dr. Jadwin asked Defendant Bryan to allow him to work part-time and at home while he was recovering from his disabling depression. 154. Dr. Riskin, Plaintiff s psychiatrist, certified that parttime work was medically necessary. 155. KMC accommodated Jadwin's disability from December 16, 2005 to April 16, 2006 by providing him with the reduced work schedule medical/recuperative leave and ability to perform work at home that he requested during his meeting with Defendant Bryan on January 9, 2006. 156. As customary, a Locum Tenens pathologist covered Plaintiff s clinical pathologist duties, while plaintiff performed the remaining 10-20% of his administrative duties as Chair of Pathology. 157. As usual, if Dr. Jadwin was unable to attend to an -28DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSlTION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3
4

5
6 7 8 9 10
11

12
13

Admit.

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. See DSUF 14 (DFJOl150). Deny. See DSUF 7 (DFJOO723).

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. There is no evidence to support this fact.

Deny. There is no evidence to

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 in for him. 158. On March 16, 2006, Dr. Jadwin requested an extension of his reduced work schedule leave. Dr. Jadwin submitted Dr. Riskin's certification of his continuing need for a reduced work schedule within three days of learning that Defendant County required it. 159. On April 28, 2006, Bryan refused to accommodate Jadwin's disability. Instead he forced him to take full-time leave, and refused to hold his job open for him any longer while he was on recuperative leave, and refused to allow Dr. Jadwin to return to work until he could work full-time. As a result, Dr. Jadwin was prevented continuing to carry out his duties as Chair of Pathology. 160. 161. 162. Defendant Bryan acted in bad faith when he tmilaterally denied Dr. Jadwin's request for continuing accommodation in the form of part-time work, and refused to allow him to return to work until he could work full time. 163. Defendant Bryan also acted in bad faith when he represented to the JCC that Dr. Jadwin's lack of communication with him led him to believe that Dr. Jadwin had essentially abandoned his job. 164. 165. 166. -29-

support this fact.

2
3
4

Deny. See DSUF 14 (DFJO 1150).

5
6

7
8 9

Deny. See DSUF 21 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pgs. 250:15-251:6, Exhibit 303). There is no evidence to support this fact.

10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. See DSUF 14 (DFJOlI50). There is no evidence to support this fact.

Deny. See DSUF 33 (0001476-1565,0000073-75). There is no evidence to support this fact.

22
23 24 25 26
27

28

DEFENDANTS' 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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

167. The Bylaws of Kern County Medical Center as in effect between June 13,2006 and October 4,2007 ("Bylaws") provided for due process for core physicians in numerous scenarios like loss of hospital privileges, but not for (i) removal of physicians from department chairmanship, (ii) placement of physicians on administrative leave, or (iii) nonrenewal of physician employment contracts with Defendant County. According to Bylaws Section 12.2 GROUNDS FOR HEARING, due process is provided in the following situations: "A. Denial of medical staff membership. B. Denial of requested advancement in staff membership status, or category. C. Denial of medical staff reappointment. D. Suspension of staff membership or clinical privileges for more than thirty (30) days in any twelve (12) month period. E. Demotion to lower staff category or membership status. F. Summary suspension of staff membership or clinical privileges for more than fourteen (14) days. G. Revocation of medical staff membership. H. Denial of requested clinical privileges.
1. Involuntary reduction of current clinical privileges. 1. Termination of all clinical privileges.

Deny. See DSUF 37 (DFJ01359-1361).

K. Involuntary imposition of significant consultation or monitory requirements excluding monitoring incidental to provisional status and Section 7.3)." -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 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

The due process afforded by the Bylaws in the above cases is robust, as contained in Bylaws Section 12.3-1 NOTICE OF ACTION OR PROPOSED ACTION: "In all cases in which action has been taken or a recommendation made as set forth in Section 12.2, the president of staff or designee on behalf of the medical executive committee shall give the member prompt written notice of (1) the recommendation or final proposed action and that such action, if adopted, shall be taken and reported to the applicable licensing or certifying authority and/or the National Practitioner Data Bank if required; (2) the reasons for the proposed action including the acts or omissions with which the member is charged; (3) the right to request a hearing pursuant to Section 12.3-2." 168. The Board of Supervisors of Defendant County ratified the Bylaws on December 13,2004. 169. When the defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with adequate due process in connection with the Demotion, Admin Leave and Nonrenewal, they were acting pursuant to the Bylaws. Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358), 31 (Bryan Deposition, 8/14/08, pg. 258:716). There is no evidence Defendants failed to comply with the By-Laws. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08. 170. 171. -31DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

Admit.

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 omissions of the individual Defendants were under color of

Admit.

2
3 4

law." See Scheduling Order, 9:22-23.
173. 174. 175. 176. Plaintiffs employment contract expressly set forth a mutually explicit understanding with Defendant County that Plaintiff would receive Base Pay of$287,529, and that Plaintiff would be chair ofKMC's pathology department. 177. Moreover, the employment contract barred Defendant County from reducing Plaintiffs Base Pay, removing Plaintifffrom chair or terminating or otherwise modifying the Contract at will, without cause, or without Plaintiffs consent. 178. Defendant COlmty has not removed a department chair without cause since at least October 2000. 179. Defendants County and Harris told Plaintiff several times that the Demotion "necessitated" the Paycut, and that he would have to agree to it to continue working at KMC. Deny. See DSDF 44 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and 581)),45 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12). Plaintiff was not demoted. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08. 180. Having no other choice, Plaintiff executed the Paycut amendment to his employment contract. -32DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADmDICATION

5
6

7
8

Deny. See DSDF 6 (00014791499).

9
10

11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. See DSDF 6 (00014791499).

Admit.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. See DSDF 44 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs.

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 581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12). 181. Defendant County was subjectively aware of Plaintiff's contractual interest in Base Pay, as evidenced by the numerous reminders by Defendants Bryan and County that Plaintiff would have to expressly amend his employment contract to implement the Paycut resulting from his Demotion. Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319), 44 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 969:1-974:2 (Exhibits 644 and 581»,45 (Jadwin Deposition, 3/12/08, pgs. 974:3-976:12). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08. 182. There was nearly a month gap between the time Defendant Bryan informed Plaintiff he was initiating demotion procedures to the time the JCC voted to demote Plaintiff. Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 9/12/08. 183. Defendants never notified Plaintiff of the time or place of the JCC vote to demote Plaintiff gave him an explanation of the evidence against him, or provided him an opportunity to tell his side ofthe story. Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 9/12/08. 184. Before the JCC vote occurred, Plaintiff sent a letter to Defendant County legally challenging the Demotion.
-33DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2 3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 34 of 38

I

(0000272-358, specifically 0000319). See PSUF 184 (Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 2 (Lee Letter to Barnes of 6/29/06 at DFJl349). There is no evidence to support this. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 - 9/12/08. 185. Nor did Defendant County ever offer Plaintiff a postdeprivation hearing. 186. More importantly, the JCC did not constitute an impartial tribunal since it comprised individuals who had been harassing and retaliating against Dr. Jadwin and/or individuals on whom Dr. Jadwin was blowing the whistle. 187. Nor was Defendant Bryan - who invited Plaintiff to contact him, and only, him regarding the Demotion he himself had instigated - an impartial adjudicator given his demonstrated bias against Plaintiff. Deny. Plaintiff was not demoted. See DSUF 4 (0000272-358, specifically 0000319). KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/0 I 9/12/08. 188. 189. 190. Plaintiffs employment contract expressly set forth a mutually explicit understanding with Defendant County that Plaintiff would be paid Professional Fees. 191. Defendant County was subjectively aware of Plaintiffs contractual interest in Professional Fees as evidenced by the -34DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3
4

5
6

7
8 9

Deny. See DSUF 4 (0000272358, specifically 0000319). Deny. See Lee Decl., Exh. 17.

10
11

12
13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Deny. See DSUF 6 (00014791499).

Deny. See DSUF 6 (00014791499). Plaintiff was not

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. Culberson explained that, as a demoted staff pathologist with a drastically reduced base salary, Plaintiff would nevertheless be able to take advantage of his reduced administrative duties in order to increase his Professional Fees-based income. 192. Mr. Culberson participated in the decision to place Plaintiff on Admin Leave, which denied Plaintiff the opportunity to earn Professional Fees. 193. Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff any pre- or postdeprivation procedure when placing him on Admin Leave. 194. When Defendant County sent a letter to Plaintiff placing him on Admin Leave, the letter stated only that the Admin Leave was "pending resolution of a personnel matter." 195. At no time did Defendants County or Harris inform Plaintiff of the nature of the charges against him, give him and explanation of the evidence against him, or provide him an opportunity to tell his side of the story. 196. Even when Plaintiff protested the lack of due process, Defendant County refused to respond.

demoted. KMC letters to Jadwin dated 8/14/01 9/12/08.

2
3 4

5
6
7
8

Deny. See DSUF 41 (DFJO 1482).

9 10
11

Deny. See DSUF 4 (0000272358).6(0001479-1499). Deny. See DSUF 41 (DFJ01482).

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. There was no "charge" against Plaintiff.

Deny. See PSUF 196 (Lee Supp. Dec!., Exh. 4 (Lee Letter to Barnes of 4/4/07 at DFJ01619». There is no evidence to support this.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28 197. Since 1995, only one other department chair had ever been placed on administrative leave in excess of 1 month. 198. -35-

Admit.

DEFENDANTS' 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. 200. Defendant County customarily renews the contracts of all of its KMC medical staff. 201. When Plaintiff asked Defendant County to identify all members of the KC medical staff - which comprises roughly 60 full-time faculty physicians at any given time - who had employment contracts which were not renewed during the period from October 24, 2000 to the present, Defendant County was able to name only one doctor. 202. At no time did Defendant County inform Plaintiff of the nature of the charges against him, give him an explanation of the evidence against him, or provide him an opportunity to tell his side of the story. 203. Defendant County denies that anyone even participated in a decision not to renew Plaintiff's employment contract. Deny. See PSUF 203 (Lee Supp. Decl., Exh. 21 (Rog No. 45,53:16-20)). 204. Even when Plaintiff protested the lack of due process, Defendant County refused to respond. 205. 206. 207. Defendant County itself admits that no relevant event occurred on or before January 6, 2005. Deny. See DSUF 6 (00014791499), 48 (0000623-630), 65 (Jadwin Deposition, 119/08, pgs. 452:4-455:19), 71 (0001059-1072), 90 (0000260 (Exhibit 560)), 91 (000003170),92 (DFJ00246), 97 -36DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3
4

Deny. See Response to #30 above. Admit.

5
6 7
8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Deny. See Response to #195 above.

This is the same as #196. See Response to #196 above.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 37 of 38

I

(DFJ0025 1-270), 98 (DFJ00289-290), 101 (DFJ00241-242),102 (DFJ00248), 147 (DFJ00243245). 208. 209. 210. Defendant County admits that Plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies as to all claims except for the new FMLAlCFRAlFEHA retaliation claim added via the Second Amended Complaint, filed on October 7, 2008 (Doc. 241). 211. Plaintiff exhausted his CRFA & FEHA oppositional/participation retaliation claims by filing a timely complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment & Housing ("DFEH") on September 3, 2008, and obtaining a right to sue letter that same day. 212. 213. 214. Defendant Bryan was the Chief Executive Officer at KMC from September of 2004 until September of 2006. 215. Eugene Kercher, M.D. was the President ofKMC Medical Staff from July 2004 to July 2006, and a member of the JCC. 216. Defendant Irwin Harris, M.D., was Chief Medical Officer at KMC from July of2005 to September of2007, and a non-voting member of the JCC. -37DEFENDANTS' RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND/OR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

2
3

4
5

6
7 8

Admit.

9
10

11
12

13
14 15 16

Admit.

17
18 19 20 21

Admit.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Admit.

Admit.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 38 of 38

1

217. Jennifer Abraham, M.D. was Immediate Past President ofKMC Medical Staff during 2004-2006, and President Elect in July 2006 to December of 2007. 218. Scott Ragland, D.O. was President-Elect of the KMC Medical Stafffrom 2004-2006, Chair of the Quality Management Committee, and a member of the JCC. 219. Toni Smith was the Chief Nurse Executive ofKMC, and a member of the Jec. 220. William Roy, M.D., was Chief of the Division of Gynecologic Oncology at KMC. 221. Marvin Kolb, M.D. was former Chief Medical Officer at KMC who left in September of 2004. 222. Phillip Dutt, MD., became Chair of Pathology at KMC in August of2006. 223. David Culberson was Interim Chief Executive Officer from September of2006 to May of2007. 224. Paul Hensler became Chief Executive Officer at in [sic] May of2007. 225. Gilbert Martinez was and is the Manager of Laboratory Services at KMC.

Admit.

2
3
4

Admit.

5
6

7
8

Admit.

9 10

Admit.

11
12
13

Admit.

Deny. Dr. Dutt was the interim Chair. Admit.

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Admit.

Deny. Gilbert Martinez retired on September 27,2008. Change of Employee Status.

22
23 24 25 26 27 28

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: December 1, 2008

LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER

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
August 14,2001

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

David F Jadwin, DO Kern Medical Center 1830 Flower Street Bakersfield CA 93305 Dear Doctor Jadwin: 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

~

I

\

~

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

AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
.KERN
September 28,2001

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 3 of 189

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

• KERN MEDICAL - . : • CENTER

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

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

AFFILIATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
.KERN
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
11/1/2004 to 10/31/2006

Period:

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,

~

Peter K. Bryan f Chief Executive Officer
Enclosure: Current Privileges

fJ~lvDt:)RJfl~ rM

OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUNTY OF KERN
1830 FLOWER STREET· BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93305-4197 • TELEPHONE (66') 326·2000

AFAUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE

~

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

.

• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 6 of 189

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

AFFlUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGELES. SAN DIEGO. AND IRVINE

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
.KERN
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

AFAUATED WITH UNIVERSITY OF CAUFORNIA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AT LOS ANGElES, SAN DIEGO, AND IRVINE

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
September 12, 2008 David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

.KERN

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 9 of 189

CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

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

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

! •

Rem 4 If Restricted ,Delivery Is desired.

Complete IIems 1, 2, and 3. Also complete

A.SIgnatwe

-. 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.
1. Miele Addl1lS!llld to:

X
B.

CJ Agent CJ Addressee

-b)'(--J

C. Dale of DelIvery

D.lsdellwry _ _ 1Icm_l?

'IfYES,.-delMHy_below:

~

David Jadwin. DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207
3.

Document 278-2

llejb l\'P8
cenIlled Mall

CJ RegIstwecI
C11nswed Mall
2. ArtIcle Number

CI El<presa Moll CI R..... _ p l f o r _ CI C.O.D. CI Yes

4. _lloIloery'I (Em8 Fes)
I
(IIansfer ""'" setvlce_

7005 3110 0001 7095 7501
llomostJc Return RsceJpl
'lJ2595<l2oMolll4O

i PS Fenn 3811. February 2004

I

Filed 12/01/2008 Page 10 of 189

Page 11 of 189

--.~--.

__

.,.,..,,-

..

-.~,--_._._-,-~._-

...

_--_._-~_.

-_.._-_.__ ..-

t05L 5bOL tooo DttE 500L
Filed 12/01/2008

. . . . KERN

. . . . ~~L

OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE COUI<lTY OF KERN

MEDICAL STAFF OFFICE
1830 Flower Street Bakersfield. CA 93305-4197
-------3;no3uoa~~o;~3~~;~nu~3~~------LH!)fli 31il. Qt 3dOHIIN;J:lO dOl. l" ti:i)t:)Us 3~"'d

"'7/fJW 01/://1H13

, II
~
~
.
•
: -__ r.J
~

~1.fSPo.s1:

0';':)

... . f/!!

~r'"'"·~?j~~'::'_~l~.~~:~~_~~ :<;:."t1"""""I"'"!~"'~'''''
4

~

~,""T."""~'

l .. ''''trlll ...........

•..-: 0004 02 '"

232550 SEP,; 2DG6 MAltED FROM ZIPCOOE 9330.5

$ 05.320

Document 278-2

cpa,at'
1s1 NO"S!: ._-

David Jadwin, DO 1635 Heather Ridge Glendale CA 81207

",. ,~ ~11'"'> f" 'J" .--<:",0,....
•.".

Y/~~/@ 1l: 4."
0

~r",,.,

,

1:(\' .. :.:}-'-h"~\:

q'2.J_
If) -(),i
::i i 2CY7$ i 0:::15
eCl();

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

'.

;;:-:·U~:-! - - -

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)

-

•

U S IE

1blllI_..... $
~ddW\~

.-

U1

l:l _ro l:l
r'-

f1·h2.1~
Sec Ro.:y,:r:;c 101 InSlrl,lclloos

~.1jji"lWii""""-""'''-''''''

_.-...................................-._.

CiIji,·sWO:JIj,;;;;..••..__..••..••..........•....__•..••..·····_·..•..•••••••••..
PS FOfm 3600. June 2002

tJT PO BoJr No.

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

Shertukde

Subtotal

(4,000,00)

$

3,668,63 3,668,63

$
4,825,08 4,825,08

$
4,825,08 4,825,08

$

3,668,63 9,650.16 13,318.79

Total Less: Medrium Billing Cos Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future -10% TotalOH

$

3,668.63

$ 4,825,08 $ 4,825.08

$

13,318.79

366.86

366.86

366.86

366.86

Net Available Amount Distributed Ending Balance

(698.23)

4,825,08 4,825,08

4,825,08 4,825.08

8,951,93 9,650,16 (698.23)

(698,23)

0018755

l'manClai

1'iummary

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countID:
_ _ _ I
XG1485 User ID: JACKK

Document 278-2
1
I

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 14 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Cont~ct I

=mm
Pallent!< Fillancials I Malumnance I ,,-Records I Communlcation Center

Appointments

1 Claims

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

Po<!rlod for 12/01/2005·12/31/2005
Payments

location: All WritoOff.,

Location~

Provider

Reudering Provider

Charges

!'lise Charges
0,00

Insorance
24B9.66 162.00 971.20 0.00 971.2.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 252..60
9677048

Patient

Insurance

Patillo.

#Pmc

# Mise Charges

DaVid F jadWin
Teopllngco Jadwin l A DaVid F JadWin Total For Jadwin L A Teopengco

9555.00 0.00 3419.00 453.00 3012.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49101.00 Shertukde 1]8.00 49239.00 14113.00 Shertukd.. 4tlB1.00 16194.00 0.00 0.00 25550.00 7146.70
Dott

134;00 0.00 63.75 10.00 73.75 0.00 2.5.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 95.00 95.00 106.14 0.00 0.00 180.00 25.00 205.00 Patient

11054.76
660.2.0

4421.04 991>.00 465.13 1197.00 166-2.13 2&.2.0 0.00 22.9.97 2.86.13 2.4]0.00 0.00 2430.00 16ROO 998.00 1166.00 1993.21 25.00 334.07 :ZOO.OO 0.00 :Z00.00 Patient

m
0

0

0.00

0.00

1746.00 0.00 174&.00 0.00 276.00 0.00 911.65 33501.32 138.00 33639.32 645tl.07 0.00 6458.07 1084.20 0.00 18691.09 4062.88 0.00 4062.88

N/A
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

"5

0

"

0 0

LA
Upschult;r. Costa LA
c~~

0 0
0

Shertukde

NfA
0.00 0.00

0.00
96nA8

""

LA
Total For Shertukde Shertukde 4639.18 0.00 4639.18 144.60 0.00 6535.17 3013.90 0.00 3013.90

LA N/A
0.00 106.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 Total For Shertllkde L

'" '"
37 '64 0 0

A

",
Liu LA
Dott

m

DI.lttLA

1433.00 8579.70
Ch;<rge~

N/A
0.00

Total For Dutt L A Elilling Provider Rendering Provider
pr'<lctlce

Payments Hi.." Cbarge.. In"uranc"

WriteOffs Insoran""

" " "
#

0 0
Mi!l~

# Pro"

C~"rges

Grand Total for

$114989.70

$106.14 $27885.81 $663.89 $78584.17 $13769.75

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 Less: Medrium Billing Cos Overhead Current Future - 10% TotalOH 541.96 1,354.91 1,354.91 3,251.78 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

3,301.33 3,843.29

2,500.00 2,000.00 5,854.91

1,500.00 2,000.00 4,854.91

7,301.33 4,000.00 14,553.11

Net Available Ending Balance $

793.27

40,598.71 $ 2,000.00

16,052.55 $ 2,000.00 $

58,142.76 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 I e-R<:corns

Filed 12/01/2008
I Q>mm""lcation Center

Page 16 of 189
I Log Out I Heip I Contact I

mzr ,

oayshalilt I oaysh<i!et Summary t Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustments AMnci,,1 Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Reoort

I Procedure summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
flnan"i,,1 Summary All Provider" Silling Provider D<lvid F Jadwin Teopengco Jadwin LA David F Jadwin Total For Jadwin LA Toaopengco
CA

f'erlod for 01/01/1Q06_ 01/31/2006 Payments

location, AlIl<lcations

Rendenn!! Provider

WrlteOfls Insllran.:.e 10984.98 1581.oCl 3283.13 0.00 3183.13 4B1.08 241.76 4.90 259.00 866.53 29424.72 8080.06 0.00 BOBO.06 3377.07 163.00 12947.41 SZSBAl 0.00 528B.41 Writ"Ofls Inf/lIrunee Patient Pallent 17S4.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 259.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 553.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Charges 7462.00 0.00 1756.00 476.00 2232.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35975:00 1292.7.00

MIlOI' Charges 62.00 0.00 0.00

Illsu.""ee 3543.08 5.34 2044;67 0.00 2044.67 31.92 0.00 44.10 0.00 140.2Z 9784.86 55B.17 0.00 5513.17 153.39 49.00 6390.28 3737.60 0.00 3737.60

Patienl 245.00 0.00 200.00 25.00 lZ5.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 75.00 733.00 B08.00 BB.OO 0.00 0.00 25.00 201.00 226.00 Patient

# Mise #Proc Charge"

"
0

NfA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

"
17

0 0

0

O·
0 0 0 0 0 0 0

,', "'i'

Lipschultz Lipsehultz LA Costa LA Costa Shertukde SlIertukde LA She.rtukde Tot<ll For Shertukde L A

3J 5A·3- 08+
2,OAI,

,eo
m

0

2121.00 15048.00 0.00 0.00 23002.00 7519.00

NfA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

c,
Uu LA
Dott

'"
0

"

0 0 0 0

245-00+ 67+ 200'00, 25'00+

005 6'057 . 75';'

Dutt LA

'"
" 18 "
763

0

O,tt
Total For Dutt L A lIilling Provider RenderIng Provider

1918.00 9437.00 Cllargeg $93156.00

NfA
0.00

0
# His.:.

Paymenls Mise Charges Illsuran.:.e

# Proe Charge"

Grand Total for practice

$62.00 $31437.63 $1667.00 $76983.05 $2.621.00

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 Jadwin Beginning Balance Shertukde Dult 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total 4,000.00

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH

$

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 $12,659.81

$ 12,282.45 $
4,825.08 17,107.53 41.66667% 12,659.81 $ 12,659.81

20,733.38 9,650.16 30,383.54 100.000% 30,383.54 30,383.54

$

5,063.92

$

506.39 1,000.00

1,265.98

1,265.98

3,038.35 1,000.00

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

Ending Balance

$

$ 2,000.00

$ 2,000.00

$

4,000.00

0018759

1" llli:UlvI(U .:JUllUl1(l.1 y

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~c"untID: XG14B6 User 10: lACKK

Document 278-2
I ' Flnancials] Maintenance I

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 18 of 189
I Leg Out I Help I ecntaet I

m:r
Patients

_ _ _ _ ! Ap~ointm""ts

I Claims

I

,,~Recorns

I

Comml,lllk"tkln Center

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 David F Jadwin Teopengw JadWin LA David F Jadwin Total for JadWin LA Teopengco CA Lipschultz
Co>~ Summ~1Y

All Providers

Period for 02/01/2006- 02/28/2006 Payments Mise Charges [nsuranee [usura"e,", 12476.45 707.24 916.63 0.00 916.63 200.00 606.33 2266.00 29953.93 5754.17 0.00 5754.17 34B.BO 1107.00 2.0553.03 12B4.37 0.00 lZS4.37

location: All LoeatlQM WriteOfis Patient 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.Co 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 103.50 10350 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 25.00 0 129
# Mise # Proe Charges

R"nd"dng Provld"r

charges

Patient 15B.00 0.00 197.35 148.00 345.35 0.00 0.00 20.00 410.00 496.00 456.00 952.00 0.00 0.00 115.00 90.00 335.00 425.00

4926.00 0.00 1999.00 75.00 L074.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 35425.00 11134.00 Shertukde 1126.00 122.60.00 0.00 0.00 16712.00 52.86.00

n.oo
0.00 0.00

3156.02 86.76 528.97 65.00 593.97 0.00 133.67 0.00 10335.60 5409.93 0.00 5409.93 4B.20 132.87 7374.13 110B.54 0.00 110B.54

"
,.

N/A
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

,
0

0

"

0

0 0 0 0 0

Shertukde Shertukde CA

'69

"
10

'IA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total For Sherwkde L

A LI,
Lill LA

"
",
"
# Proe

0 0 0 0

D,tt
Putt LA

D,tt
Total for Dlltt L A
BlJ1ing Pro\lider Rendering Provid ..r prnctic<!

B89.00 6175.00

'/A
0.00

0 0
# Mise Charge"

Paymeot$
Chargolls
Mise Ch at!!""

WrlteOfls Insurance Patient

Insurance

Patient

Grand Total for

$77572.00

$72.00 $28379.69 $2425.35 $76173.95 $12850

630

,
3'"156'02+ 158-00+ 528-97+ "197· 35+ 65 - 00+ 11,8-00+

Powered by Medl

006

https://www.medrium.comJpracticel0111_XG1486/ReportsifinSummary

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 Beginning Balance Dut! Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total 4,000.00

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH

$

$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 4,715.02 $11,787.55 $ 11,787.55 $

3,331.21

18,639.97 9,650.16 28,290.13 100.000% 28,290.12 28,290.12

$

471.50

1,178.76 5,000.00

1,178.76

2,829.02 5,000.00

471.50

6,178.76

1,178.76

7,829.02

Net Avaiiable(Current

4,243.52

5,608.79

10,608.79

20,461.10

Ending Balance

$

$ 2,000.00

$ 2,000.00

$

4,000.00

KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation

12/11/2007

0018761

Financial Summary

/

Account ID: XG1486 User m: JACKK

II:IilIIIL
Patients
~ Flnancials

Appointments

Claims

I

Maintenance

a-Records

CommunIcation C

-' ~
W
Cu.

0·*
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

~~

1 '6.4.. 3'93+
29c1'23+

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 PrccedUl'e Summary

\

'426"05+
30-003'331~21~d"

Financial Summary By Posting Date
finanCial Summary All Providers

Penod fOr

I/01I2006~ 03/31[2006
Payments

Location: All Locations

WriteOffs

Billing
ProVider

Rendering

# Mise
Charges

Provider

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance
4456.34

PatIent
1629.84 372,00 718.00 225,00 943.00 226.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1572,18 38.00 1129,00 1167.00 50.00 178.00 422.00 138.00 908.00 1046.00

# Proc

Charges

" :d~$i\:I't-F'-­
Jadwirt~;,

4055.00 0.00 1301.00
David F Jadwin

2.48%1

·~·1'643,93·'"
0.00
_co.

- '291'.;'2:311
i

34

I
0.00
I

Teopengco Jadwin LA

17.67

397.00 2167.75 0,00

o
8
4

o
o

0.00 ! NfA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

I

~;',1426.0_5

625,00 1926.00 0,00 0,00 0.00 0.00 0,00 44645.00 19913.00

0,00 1426.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 8828,81 -30.00 -42.00 55.00 51.80 0.00 0.00 202,37 0.00 301.00 301.00 0.00 0.00
- '3'3"f¥'i¥

~/

'7,;,

Total For Jadwin LA Teopengco L A

2167.75 0.00 0,00 0.00 0,00

12

o
o

o o
o

X

8,828·81+ 202-37+

t~

7' 255·11 +
301 -00+

lipschUltz
Lipschultz L A Costa LA Costa Shertukde Shertukde L A Shertukde Total For Shertukde LA Liu Uu LA
Dutt Dutt L A

,IS'587.29'd

Document 278-2

o o o
362
153 51

o o o o o

441.00
37651.06 8809.20

7255.11
0.00 7255.11 0.00 0.00 I; l4AiI
~5248.34

8'371 -S3+ 1 07 - I; 7 + 28' 397 - 60'd

Filed 12/01/2008

5963.00 25876.00 0.00 0.00 31580.00 17183.00

NfA
0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00

0.00 8809.20 455.60 0.00

204

o
o
232
140
50
190

o o o o
o o
o o
# Mise Charges

15659.49
4982.53 0.00 4982.53

Page 20 of 189

J/3iii'1iM'f

Dutt
Total For Dutt l A

5841.00 23024.00

NfA
0.00

0.00 3248.34

ifft?'tP9n
223.00

o

o .....
00

Payments

WrlteOffs
Insurance
Patient

Billing
Provider

Rendering ProvideI'

Charges

Mise Charges

;Insurance

Patient

# Proc

0)

......

N

~t3'f(,bQ, https:llwww.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486IReports/finSummary

4/312006

Page 2 of2

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Grand Total for practice

$131106.00

$2.48

$27144.33

$1253.27

$75019.97

$7606.02

1034

Powered by Medrlum

Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 21 of 189

o ......
O'l W

o

......

(Xl

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 Jadwin Beginning Balance Shertukde DUll 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total 4,000.00

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH

$

$ 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 5,101.30 $12,753.23

1,885.00

20,957.60 9,650.16 30,607.76 100.000% 30,607.76 30,607.76

$

$ 12,753.23 $

510.13

1,275.32

1,275.32

3,060.77

510.13

1,275.32

1,275.32

3,060.77

Net Avaiiable(Current

4,591-17

11,477.91

11,477.91

27,546.99

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
~countID: XG1486 U~er lD: JACKK ~ I A/>pclnbnenls I Claims I Patlen!l;

Document 278-2
I. Finandal$ I MillnlImanCf'l I
a_Records

Filed 12/01/2008
="ft"
1
Comrnunko"tion Center

Page 23 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

I

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<ltements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report

I Procedure summary

Financial Summary BV Posting Date
financial Summary All Providers Billing Proyider
David F Jadwin

Period for 04{01/2006· 04{30/2006 Pay.""nls

Location: All U1eations Writ"Offs
# Mise # Proc Charges

Rendering ProvIder

Charges

Mise Charges Insurance

Patient

Insoranc"

Patient

2040.00 0.00 90.00
DB~ld F Jadwin

62.00 0.00 0.00

1490.54

-188.07 138.00 100.00 0.00 100.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3&.58 0.00 182.80 1332.00 1514.80 25.00 0.00 133.73 20.00 43.00 63.00

6275.12 25.00 910.47 0.00 910.47 a4.00 138.00 0.00 294.00 33&25.16 5788.31 0.00 5788.31 129.75 112.38 24071.69 2650.57 0.00 2650.57

3557.63 138.00 2199.93 200.00 2399.93 0.00 0.00 276-.00 0.00 3231.98 199.21 3816.00 4015.21 570,44 598.13 824.13 325.00 602.00 92.7.00
Patient

17

Tecpengco Jadwin LA

482.53 0.00 482.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7941.64 6391.86 200.00 6591.86 0.00 25.62 8677.79 3599.94 0.00 3599.94

'"'

,
,
2

, ,

0.00 90.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 34727.00 12415.00

NIA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

,

Tot.<ll For Jadwin LA Teopengco
CA

, ,
",
'"
'"

Lipschultz
Costa LA

,

""~
Shertukde

Shertukde

LA
Shertukde Total Fer Shertl.lkde L

6622.00 19037.00 0.00 0.00 29307.00 12751.00

NIA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

"

, , , , , ,

A
Uo Liu L A Dott

,
0

,
, ,
It Mise

m

Dutt LA
Dott

3515.00 16266.00

NIA
0.00

"
m

Total for Dutt L A
Siliing PrOllider

"

Rend"rlng Prnllider

Pav menl1i
Chuges

WriteOff$ Insurance

Hi",,,, Charg.... In50ran<;e

Patient

# Pro" t:1t:HfJCS

Grand Total fer $101467.00 practice

$62.00 $29009.92 $1823.04 $74104.45 $16538.45

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 Jadwin Beginning Balance Shertukde Dult 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total 4,000.00

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Previous distribution Future - 10% TotalOH

$

$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 7,000.73 $17,501.88 $ 17,501.88 $

3,168.50

32,354.36 9,650.16 42,004.52 100.000% 42,004.49 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

Net Avaiiable(Current

6,300.66

15,751.69

15,751.69

37,804,04

Ending Balance

$

$ 2,000.00

$ 2,000.00

$

4,000.00

KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007

0018766

.1.' U.1U.llV1(W. lJLUU.ll1u,1

J

-

--0-

-

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count 10: XG1486 User 10: jACKK

Document 278-2
I ~
FIQand"ls

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 25 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Cont<'lct I

=z=m
I
Malnb,manc,e

_ _ I

Al'1'''intmomt§

I aalms I Pati~N"

I e_Reoords

I

C<Jmmunkation C<!nl:l!l"

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

Period for 05/01/2006- 05/31/1006
Pavrn.",ts Mise Charges Insurance Patient Insurance

Ln,.tinn: An l<Ications

Provider David f Jadwin Tl!opengco Jadwin LA

Rendering Providllr

WriteOlfs Paticnt

Charges

# Mlllc # Proc Charges 0

203.00 0.00 425.00
David f' Jadwin

0.00 0.00 0.00

1,964.84 10.33 '},7A:.66 0.00 774.66 0.00 50.61 153.05 11209.87 8550.05 0.00

0.00 138.00 729.00 0.00 729.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 112.00 0.00 232.00 232.00 43.00 0.00 38.00 453.00 491.00

5040.16 704.67 1361.89 0.00 1361.89 0.00 -50.61 105.95 27404.69 11919.70 52.04 11971.74 0.00 22689.27 10198.95 0.00 10198.95

128.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.00
0.00 0

0 0

65.00 490.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 23922.00 11359.00

NIA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Total For Jadwin L A Ups<;hultt Costa LA Costa Shertukde Shatukde

4
0

0 0

0 0 0 0

204
9S

LA

Shertukde Total For Shertukde L
A

2633.00 139Sl2.00 0.00 279'19.33 1319.00

NIA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6g.00 69.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0_00

asso.os
0.00 9302.56 a93a.5'1 0.00 8938.54

121 0
0 0

"

U,
Dutt

Dutt LA
0",

'"
" "

1149.00 8468.00
Charges

NIA
0.00

0

Total For Dutt L A Billing Provider Rendering Provider

Payments Mise Chargcs IlTsnrilPCC Patient

WriteOfis Insu.... nce Patient

"

# Mis" # Pro" Charges

Gnmd Total for practlee

$75024.33

$0.00 $40654.51 $1770.00 $79426.71 $246.00

'"
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 Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total 4,000.00

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credenlialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH

$

1,621.61 1,621.61 0.000%

$ 8,255.13
8,255.13 50.00000% 9,463.74

$ 4,225.65
4,825.08 9,050.73 50.00000% 9,463.74

$

14,102.39 4,825.08 18,927.47 100.000% 18,927.48 18,927.48

$

$ 9,463.74

$ 9,463.74

$

946.37

946.37

1,892.74

52.50 998.87

52.50 998.87

105.00 1,997.74

Net Available(Current

8,464.87

8,464.87

16,929.74

Ending Balance

$

$ 2,000.00

$ 2,000.00

$

4,000.00

KMC Pathology Assoc 2006 Fee Allocation 12/11/2007

0018768

.r UUllllilill

0UllUU<:u y

~

-0- -

-- -

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countID: XG1486 User!D: JACKK
_ _ I Appolotmeo13 I ClaimS" I p"tleols

Document 278-2
I
I

Filed 12/01/2008
=r"
I Communlc:al:ion c..nter

Page 27 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

Fioiloclills I

Maintenance

I ..·Records

I

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 procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
financial Summary All pnwillers Billing Provider David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava Loc Ten Tot'll F<lr David F Jadwin Teopengco Jadwin LA David f Jadwin Vivek Bhllrgava LocTen Toml For JlIdwln L A Lipschultz Lipschultz !tendering Provider

Period for 06/01/Z006- 06/30/Z006
Payments

Locat,on: All Locations

Writeofts Insurance Patient

ChargeS"

MiS"c Charges InS"urance

Patlellt

# Mise #Proc Charges

491.00 10216.00

0.00

1004.81 70.11

89.00 0.00

723.22
932.89

74B.92 0.00

"IA

"

10707.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5751.50

0.00 0.00 0.00

1074.92 167.00 355.80 0.00 0.00

89.00 0.00 162.00 0.00 0.00

1656.11 -167.00 514.20 0.00 0.00

748.92 226.00 0.00 664.00 0.00

"
0 0 0

0

0

"IA "IA

" "
0

0

5751.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 371377.50 11303.00

0.00 0.00

365.80 117.84 8.38 165.70 3553.21 4980.52 0.00 4980.52 215.78 2934.88 5190.25 0.00 5190.25

162.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 49.00 200.00 268.00 468.00 18.75 --'10.00 105.00 65.00 170.00

514.20 -117.84 -8.38 -165.70 13035.29 5426.79 0.00 5426.79 -215.78 14435.98 6985.75 0.00 6985.75

664.00 259.00 0.00 0.00 683.66 611.130 1160.00 1771.80 49.00 278.00 6.25 1528.00 1534.25

0

MO
0.00 0.00 0.00

LA
Costa

Shertukdl! SheltuKde

30.~

0

LA
Shert.1Jkde Toml For ShertuKde L

"
117

1818.00 13121.00 0.00 1889650 8301.50

"IA
0.00 0.00 0.00

"

0 0

A
U,

Dott
Dutt LA

MO
'IA
0.00
Mille Charges

D,.
Toml For OUtt L A SlUinll Provider Renderinll P"lVider
pra~tke

3154.00 11455.50

'" "

76

0 0 0

C04

PaV'Ili'",ts Char!les
IOllurance

WriteOlts InsuranCe Patient

Patient

'# Mise '# PrDe Charges

Grand Total for

$97609.00

$0.00 $18774.1.8 $916.75 $41379.42 $6214.63

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 Dult Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00

Medruim Total

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH

$

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 15,327.46

1,162.73 1,162.73 16,490.19

$

$ 7,663.73

$ 7,663.73

$

$ 1,162.73

16,490.19

766.37

766.37

1,532.74

210.00 976.37

140.00 906.37

350.00 1,882.74

Nel Available(Current Mo.)

6,687.36

6,757.36

13,444.72

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
I • Finandals I
Malnten'lI'loe

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 29 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

~count lD: XG1486 UserlD: JACKK
I
Appalntm<lnls

«f
I e-Recortls I
Communkation Cent",r

I Claim. I Pati!!f1t:s

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<t Statemer<ts I Custom Reports I Run Last Report

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Rnand,,1 Summary All Provld"rs Billln!! 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
CA

Period for 07/01/2006- 07/31/2006 PaymentB

Location, All Locations WriteOfls #MiBc Charge"

Rend..rin!! Provider

Charges

Mhl: Chug"" Ins"ra"""

Patient

I"'illra"~ll

Pdieltt

#Pro~

0.00 16140.50

0.00

115.44 669.45

20.00 0.00

1629.20 6016.94

422.00 0.00

0 110

0

N/A
0.00 0.00

16140.50 0.00 0.00 10511.17

784.89 195.85 0.00 423.28

20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

7646.14 116.15 0.00 412.22

422.00 462.00 214.00 0.00

110 0 0

N/A N/A

"
73 0

0

10511.17 0.00 0.00 13289.67 5421.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

619.1:3 0.00 0.00 3263.22 4713.61 0.00 4713.61 0.00 2593.92 0.00

0.00 0.00 70.00 +92.37 0.00 337.96 337.96 0.00 0.00 0.00

528.37 494.13 0.00 7530.04 5413.39 0.00 5413.39 0.00 9239.56 0.00

676.00 0.00 0.00 183.43 25.00 2471.01 2496.01 138.00 1064.00 0.00

0 0

Upschult>: Shertukde Shertukda

no

LA
Shertukde Total For Shertllkde L

"
52 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

997.00 6418.00 0.00 25311.11

NfA
0.00 0.00 0.00

A
UO
Dott Vlvek Bhargava Loc. Ten Tolal For Dutt Dutt LA Dott Vivek 8hargava Loe. Ten Total For Dutt L A Billing Pruvid<lr Rendering Provider

U"

~;<

'41

65.00

N/A

25376.11 13078.50 322.8.00 200.00

0.00 0.00

2593.92 4104.83 0.00 0.00

0.00 10.00 65.00 0.00

92.39.56 4126.17 0.00 0.00

1064.00 0.00 2108.00 0.00

'4Z
m

0

0,,* 11 5 ·L~{~+ 20 -00+ 1 95-85+
0'03 33'1 . 29",

'!A
N/A

"
W

0

16506.50
Charges

0.00

4104.83

75.00

'1126.17

2108.00

0 # M~c ct'ilrglls

Payments Misc Charges !nsurilnl:e PatIent

Writ... ou~ Insurance Patient
#
Pro~

Grand Total for pradice

$88241.95

$0.00 $16079.60 $410.59 $34977.60 $7087.44

,<0

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 Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00 Medruim Total

Beginning Balance

Normal Guaranteed Subt01al Allocation % Allocated $ Special Total
Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH

$

256.14 256.14 0.000%

$ 5,853.94 $
5,853.94 50.00000% 5,762.32

589.48 $ 4,825.08 5,414.56 50.00000% 5,762.32

6,699.56 $ 4,825.08 11,524.64 100.000% 11,524.64 11,524.64

2,370.37 2,370.37 13,895.01

$

$ 5,762.32 $ 5,762.32 $

$ 2,370.37

13,895.01

576.23

576.23

1,152.46

576.23

576.23

1,152.46

Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)

5,186.09

5,186.09

10,372.18

Ending Balance

$

$ 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

Page 31 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

~<;<lunt XG1486 User lD: JACKK lD: _ _ 1 Apll<lintments 1 C1~im. r Patients- I ' Financlal,,!

m
I e_ReCQrds
r
Communkatilln Cent.<!r

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 David F JadWin Vivek Bhargavil Lac Ten Total For David F Jadwin Jadwin LA Vivek Bhargavl; loc Ten Total For Jadwin L A Shertukcle Shertl.lkde Rendering Provider Period for OS{1l1!2006- OS{31{ZOO6 Payments Charges Mi.c Charges Insurance Patient loc.tlon: AIll.<lcatlon. Writ<!Offs tnslIranCtl Patknt
#
Mis~

# Proc Charg".

0.00 3372.00

0.00

0.00 705.57

25.00 0.00

393.00 2289.38

0.00 0.00

0

"fA

22

0

337Z.00 0.00 374.00

0.00 0.00

705.57 116.14 1639.80

25.00 115.00 0.00

2682.38 108.86 2038.87

0.00 0.011 0.00

22
0 0

"fA

374.00 20985.00 12804.50

0.00 0.00 0.00

1755.94 2057.79 3211.21 52.00 3263.21 25.00 2250.92 0.00

115.00 0.00 68.56 25.00 93.56 0.00 69.00 0.00

2147.73 15525.623113.49 0.00 3113.49 0.00 9581.41 65.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 200.00 200.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0

'"
"
36 121 0

0

LA
Shertukde Total for ShertLlkde LA Liu LA
Dott

4424.00 17228.50 0.00 17817.88

"fA
0.00 0.00 0.00

0 0
0

CO,
0

Vivek Bhargllva Loc Ten Total For Dutt
DllttLA
Dott

0.00

"fA

0

17817.88 10660.00 5151.00 15811.00

0.00 0.00

1.250.92 3157.41 50.61 :;1208.02

69.00 80.00 2<16.00 326.00

9645.41 4181.38 152.39 4333.77
WriteOfis Insurance

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Patient

CO,

"fA
0.00

"
m

Total For DuttL A Billing Provider Rendering provider

"

PaYlnanl8
CIJarg~s

# Misc
# Proc Cl,arges

Misc Char!!a" Insurance

Patient

Grand Total for practice

$75538.38

$0.00 $13266.45 $628.56 $37449.40 $200.00

'"

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
Jadwin

Dull

Beginning Balance

Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00

Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00

Medruim Total

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH

$

30.00 30.00

$

9,186.33 9,186.33

$

4,158.44 4,825.08 8,983.52

$

13,374.77 4,825.08 18,199.85

$

2,951.80 2,951.80 21,151.65

$

30.00

$

9,186.33

$

8,983.52

$

18,199.85

$

2,951.80

$21,151.65

3.00

918.63

898.35

1,819.99

3.00

918.63

898.35

1,819.99

Net Available(Current Mo.)

27.00

8,267.70

8,085.17

16,379.86

Ending Balance

$

$

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 XG1486 User 10: JACKK
J Claims
J\4>polnrtnents

Document 278-2
r, financial.. I
Malnb!nante

Filed 12/01/2008
I Communloatlon Genter

Page 33 of 189
I Log out I Help I Contact 1

I

P"~,,nl5

1 a-R<:<artls

Day,heet I Dayshaet Summ~ry I Insurante Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging I Adjustrnants I Procedure Summ<lry Finandal Summary I capitation Summary I Pilti"nt Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers
Billing

P"dod

r"r

(I9/01/20ll6- 09j30/200fi
Payments

Lc,,,tion: AUl..<l<:atlpns Wrlte.Off.
'# Mise

Provider
DaVid F JadWin

Rende.ring Provider

Charges

Mise Charges Inllnrance

Patient

Insurance
SOLDO

Patient 273.78 0.00

# Proc Charllll,.

0.00
Vlvek
Bhargava Loc Ten

0.00

0.00

.30.00
0.00

0

0 0

0.00

"fA

206.71

1455.09

Total For David F JadwIn
Teopengco JadWin LA David F Jadwin Viv"k Bhargllva l.oc Ten Total For JadWin LA Lip5chultz

0.00

0.00

206.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 2545.09

:!D.OO

1956.09 2.76.00 0.00 0.00 3348.91

273.78
0.00 203.80 676.00 804.00

0 0

0

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

"fA "fA

0

0.00 0.00 12.477.34 7775.50

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2545.09 0.00 3836.74 4659.68 67.10 4726.78 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2261.56 5338.77 0.00 200.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 116.00 344.99 460.99 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 1535.01 0.00

3348.91 0.00 8172.09 7499.60 110.53 7610.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9889.25 7930.71 262..00 0.00

168).80 100.00 202.64 1261.50 2905.75 4167.25 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.52 959.00 2623.00 0.00

LA
Shertukde Shartukde

H7

0

LA
Shertllkde Total For Shemtkde L 6712..00 144ll'7.50 1573.00 1687.00
Lill

"fA
0.00 0.00 0.00

130

" "
u

0

A
U,

UU LA

0

834.67 2521.67 !la86A4 4224.00

"fA
0.00 0.00 0.00

Total For Liu L A Cott DuttLA Oott
Vivek Bhargava Loc Ten

113

"

1545.00 0.00

"fA "fA

" "

0

0

Total For D\.Itt L A Bimug Provid..r Reudering Provider practlce

5769.00 ChMges $50714.95

0.00
Mise Charge",

5538.77

1545.01

8200.71

3582.00 Patient

49

0
# Misc Cllnge"

Paymeobi IU80"'nc" Patient

WriteOffs Insurance
# Proc

Grand Tot<ll ror

$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 Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00

Medruim Total

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total

$

62.00 62.00

$

5,814.13 5,814.13

$

1,895.94 4,825.08 6,721.02

$

7,772.07 4,825.08 12,597.15

$

295.42 295.42 12,892.57

$

62.00

$

5,814.13

$ 6,721.02

$

12,597.15

$

295.42

$12,892.57

Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Overhead Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH 6.20 581.41 672.10 1,259.72

6.20

581.41

672.10

1,259.72

Net Available(Current Mo.)

55.80

5,232.72

6,048.92

11,337.43

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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 35 of 189

Pal,

Account 10: XG1486 User ID: JACKK

Appointments

Claims

Patients

~ Finandals

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

...
A Liu

Financial Summary AU Providers Rendering

PerIod for 10/01/2006- 10/31/2006
Payments WriteOffs

location: All Locations
# Mise Charges

Billing Provider

Provider

Charges

MlscCharges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance
196,.00

Patient

# Prot

6760.00
Vlvek

0.00
N/A

0.00

0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

42 0

0 0

0.00

Bhargava lee
Ten

<i!lf,iljS'il!t '-. ~f
131.54 0.00

564.29

Total For David F Jadwin

6760.00 6999.50

0.00

0.00 0.00

760.29 0.00 0.00
10.12

0.00 0.00

42 48 12 0

0 0 0 0

Ja:dwin L A
David F

0.00
N/A N/A

1440.00
0.00

0.00

Jadwin
Vivek

llllIl!iIIlI

-62.00
0,00

Bhargava Loc
Ten Total For JadwIn LA
Sh~!it.lilkEle

i~
25.88

.~'"
200.00 0.00
'
SO~'OO

8439.50 15558.84 10366.00

0.00 0,00 0.00
N/A

10.12 9622.59 6068.12 0.00 6068.12 528.00 10410.87 4665.20
0.00

-62.00 276.00 0.00 65,50 65.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 62.00 62,00

60 131 74 74 148 0 82 100 53 153

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0

'11242;'1'4
4'363.13
0.00

Shertukde L Shertukde Total For Shertukde LA

8908,00 19274.00 0.00 9872,50 13513.50

' H165?75 1115,75 0.00
~tiSWO

0,00 0.00 0,00 0.00
N/A

4363.13 0.00
\j;f7c4'f;1$ll
'3831'811'

p<JJt
Dutt L A Outt Total For Dutt L A
Billing Provider Rendering Provider

ttr:M'
<>

7190.00

0.00 3531.31

!600nlG. ,.
610.00

20703.50

0.00

4665.20
WriteOffs Insurance

0
# Mise Charges

Payments Charges MIse Charges Insurance Patient

Patient

# Proe

Grand Total for practice

$80608,34

$0.00

$11035.82

$1856.75

$32265.19

$341.50

616

0

/

0< ~ 51

c\~>

Powered by Medrium

https://www.medrium.comlpraclicel01/IJ(G1486/Reports/finSummary

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 Beginning Balance Dull Shertukde 2,000.00 2,000.00 Total Mid level Fees 4,000.00

Medruim Total

Normal Guaranteed Subtotal Special Total

$

807.07 807.07

$ 2,493.64
2,493.64

$ 4,081.15 $
4,081.15

7,381.86 7,381.86

$

723.60 723.60 8,105.46

$

807.07

$ 2,493.64 $ 4,081.15 $

7,381.86

$

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

Ending Balance

$

$ 2,000.00

$ 2,000.00 $

4,000.00

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

~
Patients
~ Financ;lars

Appointments

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

Period for 11/01/2006 11/30/2006
w

Location: All Locations
WriteOffs

Payments

BIlUng Provider

Rendering

Provider

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient 130.46

# Prot:

# Mise Charges

I~.
V)vek Bhargavo Loc
Tt:ih

2435.00 2693.00

85.56

~ ~
0.00 0,00 274.56 0,00 0.00

4707.68
0.00

22

1

NfA
85,56
0.00 0.00

0.00 130.46 19.66 20.00 714.75 49.00 783.75 0.00 988.63 1436.00 3318.51 4754.51 0.00 0.00 287.40 1204.00 3046.99 4250,99

IS

0

Total For David F Jadwin
Teopengco Jadwin l A David F Jadwin Vivek Bhargava Lac

5128.00
0.00 10212.50 2805.00 49.00 13066.50 0.00 10683.00 6820.00

20.66
0.00

4707.68
0.00 0.00 0.00 185.70 185.70 49.00 10370.61 3173,17 0.00 3173.17 436.14 1238.56 8398.24 1511.72
0.00

37
0 0 0 0 0

~.
~

NfA NfA
0,00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Ten
Total For JadwIn l A
Costa

411.90

0.00 0.00 0.00

69
21

~
0,00 172.25 0,00

91
0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0

:..Sh'ertlJkd.e Shertukde LA Shertukde

't24S72'5

259(00
",,);69,,'0('1 <299;'99

96 46
20

'24145'9U

2887.00 9707.00 203.00 0.00 5582,00 2373.50

NfA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15,50

Total For Shertukde L A

2445.90
~&

130.99 0.00 0.00

66
2

U,
UU LA

"'A?,ill:J1!;e'

"''''69'B~

d¥4'l

0

i:,\2$WQ:lif,'
e '

49
20 23

';!,i'~&'6i3 ' "'!<;1'(J8i'8'6

1
0

n,tt
Total For Dutt L A
Billing Provider Rendering Provider Grand Total for practice

2943.00 5316.50

NfA
15.50

~"~,~'6~}.'
514.31

1258.68

1511.72

43

1
# Mise Charges

Payments Charges Mise Charges Insuri'lnce Patient

WriteOffs Insurance PatIent 'l:'l1?1'i·4(l
# Proe

$49686.00

$101.06

$6729.35 $1376.11

$30[1"'''' R")

'84

>

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 Mid level Fees Medruim Total

Jadwin Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH 131.94

Dull

Shertukde

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

$

12,975.19 11,613.77 24,588.96

$

289.20 289.20

$13,264.39 $11,613.77 24,878.16

$

1,319.39

$ 11,292.12

$ 11,977.45

$

24,588.96

$

289.20

$24,878.16

1,129.21

1,197.75

2,458.90

131.94

1,129.21

1,197.75

2,458.90

Net Available(Current Mo.)

1,187.45

10,162.91

10,779.70

22,130.06

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 1211112007

0018780

.... ·.l.l.lUJ.l"'laJ, U'.UUl1.i.<d.1Y

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countlD; XG1486 User lD: jACKl< ~ I Appnlntments ! Clalm~ I Patients

Document 278-2
I
f

Filed 12/01/2008
I Communloatkln Genter

Finandals I

MaIntenance

I

,,"Records

I

==

Page 39 of 189
I Lag Out I Help! Contact 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 Dallid F Jadwin Vivek Bhargava LQC Ten Total For David F jadwin Jadwin LA David F Jadwin Total for Jadwin LA Shertukde SheJt\Jkde Rende.in!! Provider
Peri<>d for 12/01/2006· 12/31/2006

Location' All WrireOff>;

loC2tion~

Payments
Chugeg

Hisc Ctn'l1Ies

Insurance

Patient

In"urance

# Mise Patient # Proc Charges

163.00 0.00

0.00
N/A

163.23 289.20

70.00
G.OO

1278.76 31S1.80

0.00 0.00

,
4

0

163.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1768.84 0.00

0.00 0,00
N/A

452.43 1018.66 67.50 1086.16 3142.77 3325.55 135.36 3460.91 1086.85 3490.27 0.00 3490.27
Insurance

70.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 326.00 326.00 0.00 0.00 149.00 149.00
Patient

4430.56 2398.84 7.50 240634 8740.59 5137.45 154.64 52.92.09 6599.94 6994.19 0.00 6994.19
WriteOffs Insurance

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 0.00

22

0 0 0 0

LA
Shertukde Total for Sher1:llkde L A
0.00

'/A
0.00 0.00 0.00
NfA

0.00 340.00 0.00

D"
DUt! LA

4

0

D""
Total For Dutt L A 8illillg Provider Rt.<ndering Provider

0.00 0.00

0 0

0.00
Mise Charges

Payment!l Charg""

# Mise Patient # Proc Charges

Grand Total for practice

$2271.84

-$0.00 $12719.39 $545.00 $34463.71

$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 Mid level Fees Medruim Total

Jadwin Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current 400.16

Dult

Shertukde

Total

$

3,512.42 $ 2,480.51 489.2 315.80 4,001.62 2,796.31

$

4,008.90 1,093.03 5,101.93

$

10,001.83 1,898.03 11,899.86

$

175.00 175.00

$10,176.83 $ 1,898.03 12,074.86

$

4,001.62

$ 2,796.31

$

5,101.93

$

11,899.86

$

175.00

$12,074.86

279.63

510.19

1,189.99

Prior
Credentialing Cost Future - 10% TotalOH

400.16

279.63

510.19

1,189.99

Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)

3,601.46

2,516.68

4,591.74

10,709.87

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 12/11/2007

0018782

- -0- -

-- -

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count!D:
_ _ I
XG1486 User!D: JACKK

Document 278-2
r ~
Financial9 j Maintenanc", I

Filed 12/01/2008
I
C<!mmunkation Center

Page 41 of 189
I Log Olit I Help I Contact!

Ap~olntmenl:s

I

ClaIms

1

Pali.mw

,,-Records

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 Rendering Period far 01/01/2007_ 01/31/2007 Paymelll/l
Charges

Location: All Locations

WrileOffs

Provider

Mlse Charge" InsDJilnce
0.00

Patient

Iosurance
842..71 214.20

Pati<ml
15.57 0,00

#MiGc # Proc Charge"

David F Jadwin
Vivak BhargaVil

0.00 "1283.00

194,17 126.80

0.00
0.00

,

NfA

27

,
,

loe Ten
Total For David F Jadwin Jadwin L A David F J"'dwin Vivak Shargava Loc Ten Total For Jadwlfl LA Silertukde Silertukde
CA

4283.00 0.00 0.00 200.00

0.00

320.97 3318.25 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

1056.91

15".57

27

0.00

7331.37 0.00 0.00

0.00 671.00 755.00

,

,
0

NfA N/'

,
,

200.00 922.50 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

3318.25 657.90 2965.00 27.00 2992.00 '18.20 0.00 713.97 1'108.21 10.33 1'118.5'1

0.00 0.00 75.00 284.00 359.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 328.00 3'18.00 Patiant

7331.37 3834.69 5256.00 35.00 5291.00 89.80 0.00 3239.32 2893.81 39.67
2933.'18

1426.00 39.82 819.00 6101.00 6920.00 0.00 276.00 1'19.20 741.'15 3583.00
'132'1.'15

Shertukde Total For Sherlllkde L A
Uu

0.00 0.00 2125.00 0.00 115.00 0.00

N/A
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

, ,
,

,

LluLA
Dott

DuttLA
Dott

0.00 0.00 Charges $7645.50

NfA
0.00

Total For Dlitt L A Billing Provide. Rendering Provider

", , , ,
51

, , , , ,
0

, ,

,

Payltlents Mi"e Charg"" Ing'm"lce $0.00

Wr~teOff"

# Mise # Proe Charye"

Insurance

Patic!lt

Grand Toml for practle!!

$9'159.83 $707.00 $23776.57 $13151.0'1

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

~UllHmU

y

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~'O<lntlD:
~
1
TLl487Us.,rlD: JACKK

Document 278-2
J I Finndals I

Filed 12/01/2008
Communication Center

Page 42 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

=zm
Pa~"nts
Malntenanoe I

Appointmellts

I Claims

I

"·Re~otds !

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 PhJlip Dill;!; S ..vltil Rendering Provld"r Period for 01{01/2007·01/31/20117 PayRlents LQOltion: All Locations WriteOffs

Charges 60453.00 75160.00 18359.00

#His<: Hi"c Charll"" Insunmcc Patlent Insurance Pati"ml # Proe Ch ... rg"s 0.00 0.00
0.00

315.80 1093.03 489.20 Paym,,,,ts

0.00 0.00 0.00

453.60 3409.97 1228.80 WriteOffs

0.00 0.00 0.00

<S,
541 141

Sh"rtukde
David F Jadwin Billing Provider R.endering ProvIder

Charges $lS3972.00

# Mise MIse Charges Insuran"e Patillnt Insurance Patient 11 Proe ellargas

Gl1lnd Total for practice

$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 Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special Total Less: Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund
Current

Dutt

Shertukde

Total

Fees

Medruim Total

$

735.23 $ 72.21 118.31 1,178.02 853.54 1,250.23

$ 1,425.91
1,426.34 2,852.25

$

2,233.35 2,722.67 4,956.02

$

180.11 180.11

$ 2,413.46 $ 2,722.67
5,136.13

$

853.54

$ 1,250.23 $ 2,852.25 $
125.02

4,956.02

$

180.11

$ 5,136.13

85.35 186.52

285.23

495.60 186.52

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 UserID; JACKK

Document 278-2
I . Financials I Malnlena"""

Filed 12/01/2008
I Ct>mmunlcatIDn C"nter

Page 44 of 189

" . , . . I Log Out I Help I Contact I Patients

J

Claims

I

!

,,·Records

I

Daysh"Bt I OayshBBt Summary Ilm;urance Summary I Patient Aging 1InsuranCe Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Ananeial Summary I Capi!:<ltlon Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last ReDort

Financial SummalY By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Provlflers Billing Provider oavld F Jadwin Jadwin LA Vivek Bhargavll Loe Too
Totsl For JadWin LA

Period for 02/01{2001- 02/28/2001 Pavmenr<l

Location: All locations

Re.ndering Provider

Charges

Mise Charge" Insurance

# Mise Patient ImiUranc" Patient #Proc Charges

WrlteOlfs

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00

686.7.1 48.5"2. 32..50

0.00 0.00 0.00

1907.87
85.48

0.00 0.00 0.00

0

0 0 0

NfA

0.00

0.00 200.00 400.00 1409.34 C.CO O.CO 446.50 0.00

0.00 77.50 0.00 0.00 C.CC 0.00 0.00 0.00

81.02 0.00 0.00 1312.96 112.95 70.11 496.2.1 -454.00 0.00 -454.00

0.00 77.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.00 30.00

85.48

0.00 0_00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Upschultz Upschult<:

0.00 0.00 2.93132 79.C5 129.69 105S.55 -25.00 0.00 -2.5.00
WrlteOffa

,
15 0 0
4 0

cA
shertukde Shertukde LA
Uo

0 0

Dott

DuttLA

0 0
0

Do.
Total For Dutt L A 8lUing Provider Rendering Provider

0.00 0.00

NfA
0.00

0 0

Payments ChaTllea Mise Chuges Iusurance
P~tlent

# Miac Insur"nce Patil!nt #- Proc C!larges

Grand TCltlll for pr,,-ctke

$2.455.64

$77.50

$2305.96 $107.50

$6164.16

$0.00

"
Powared by Medrium

686''71+

002

48· 52+

https:llwww.medrium.comJpractice10111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

12/1112007

0018786

r 1l1<UlvnU

~Ulll1lla.l

y

-

-0-

-

--

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~cuuntID: TL1487 UserID: JACf<:K
_ _ I Appoll'ltments I

Document 278-2
I . Financlal'" I Millnll!rl<In("

Filed 12/01/2008
8'
I Communication Center

Page 45 of 189
I log Out I Help I Contact I

ail;mS

I

P>o!ianls-

!

,,_Ril.(on!s

Daysh.""t I Daysh.""-t Summary I lnstira"c,,- Summary I Patient Aging 1 r"suranc" Aging I Adjustments I Procedure Summary Fin<lnclal Summ<lry I Capit<ltiQn Summary I Patient Stl!l:(!ments I Custom Reports I Run Last Report

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Finan~lal Summary

All Pmviders

Period for 02/01/2007- 02/28/2007

Looation: AlIl<>cations WriteOUs
# Mise # Proc charges

Bining Pr"vider Phlllp Dutt 5avlt!l Shertukdll David F Jl'Idwin BillIng Provider

RenderIng Pmvider

PaymenlB Charye",

MIse Charges Insurance Patient Insurance Patient

3471.00 162'18.00 12405.00
Rendering Provider

0.00 0.00 0.00

1176.02 1426.34
'rIF.'J'1'

0.00 0.00
",,",0

1140.10 2710.37 219.69
WriteOff"

0.00 0.00
0.00

'"

" "

0

Charges

# Mise MIse Charge.. Insurance PatIent Ins"rance Patient # Proc Charges

Payn,ents

Gr.;m<l Total I'or practice

$32124.00

$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 Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 Medrium TL 1487 Subtotal Special Total
Less:

Dull

Sheriukde

Total

Fees

Medruim Total

$

395.45 $ 1366.91 1,762.36

732.34 423.36 1,155.70

$ 1,300.50
2,744.55 4,045.05

2,428.29 4,534.82 6,963.11

$

836.98 836.98

$ 3,265.27 $ 4,534.82
7,800.09

$

1,762.36

$ 1,155.70 $ 4,045.05 $

6,963.11

$

836.98

$ 7,800.09

Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH

176.24

115.57 1,000.00

404.51 2,000.00

696.31 3,000.00 Check paid to G. E. Pathology Medical Group,

176.24

1,115.57

2,404.51

3,696.31

Net Available(Current Mo.)

1,586.12

40.13

1,640.54

3,266.80

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007

12111/2007

0018788

.t'luanCIW

"UII1~m:uy

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2
I

Filed 12/01/2008
I
Communication Center I

Page 47 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

~ c o u n t XG1486 UserlD' JACKK ID: ~ I Appointments- I Claims I Pa~ent:t l ' Financial.. I Mab,renanea

'"?""
a-Records

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 David F Jadwin Jadwin LA David F Jadwin Viyek Elhargava Lot Ten Total For Jadwin LA
Upschul~

Period for 03/01/2007- 03/31/2007 Payment.

Loc"tion" All Location"

Rendering Provider

WriteOn,. Insllran<;e Patient

Charge"

Mise Chaty". In"IlTance

Patient

# Mise # PtOC Clta rges

0.00 3646.50 0.00 0.00

0.00
0.00

2A5

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 238.02

262.00 0.00 203.00 98.00

0

0

393.00 0.00 377.98

,.
0

N'A N'A

0

3646.50 0.00 0.00
138.00

0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00

770.98 0.00 200.00 387.52 749.98 0.00 74<;.98
266·:P

0.00 259.00 0.00 138.00 0.00 25.00 25.00 0.00 35.00 0.00 35.00

238.02 0.00 0.00 1564.99 30.02 0.00 30.02 1211.87 725.43 0.00 725.43

301.00 0.00 0.00 57.79 405.54 2703.00 3108.S4 47.86 ·114.00 2759.00 .2645.00

,.
0

0 0 0
0

Upschula CA Shartukde Shertukde LA Shartukde Total For Shertukde l A D"
DuttL A

10985.67 0.00 10986.67
0.00

0.00
N'A

"
0

0

0.00 0.00 0.00

"

0-*
0
0 0

0

1873.00 0.00 1873.00

431.07
I}.CO

19
0 19

'"" Totlll For DlIt±LA
Rilling Provider Rendering Provider Grand Tornl for practice

NtA
0.00
Mise
C,,~t!l"~

431.07

2-45+ 393 - 00" 002 395-/}5*

Payments Char!] .... Insurance

WriteOtfs Patient

Patient Insurnncc

# Hi5C # Prall Charges

$16644.17

$0.00

$2808.27 $457.00

$3770.33 $6422.19

1J1

Powered by Me!

https:l/www.medrium.comlpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

12/11/2007

0018789

, Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~tOuntID: TL1487 UserlD: JACI<J(
_ _ I Aj>poln!ments I Claims I P3tlent!;

.!-. l!UU1\.Jl(U ':>U1UUJ.Ul Y

Document 278-2
I. Financ1"t,.1 Malnllmance I

Filed 12/01/2008
I Communkatlon C..ntar

Page 48 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

IC>.Mt
e-Records

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<lvider Philip Dutt Re"dering Provid,"
P",kld for 03/01/2007- 03/31/2007
Location: All Location ..

CI,arge,..

# Mi,.c Mise Cllarg .." Insuranee Patient Ins ....,,,,ce Patient # Proc ellarge.

Payments

WrlteOIl,.

10.00 3575.00 0.00
Rendering Provider Charge,.

0.00 0.00 0.00

42336 2744.55
'1"366:91

0.00 0.00 0.00

62.45.59 ZOa52.35 8372.09
WriteOffs
Jnsu"~IlC<l

0.00 0.00 0.00 30
0 0

Savlta
Shettukd..
D2Ivld F Jadwin

Bming PrBvld"r

Paym"nts Mise Chargell Insurance Patient

# Mi,.c PaUent #Proe eltargu

Grand Total for practice

$3586.00

$0.00

$4534.82

$0.00 $35470.04

$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 Mid level

Medruim

Jadwin Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $ Medrium TL1487

Dutt

Shertukde

Total

Fees

Total

132.77 $

465.94 $ 352.72 818.66

604.01 68.29 672.30

1,202.72 $ 421.01 1,623.73

95.80 $ 1,298.52
$

Subtotal
Special Total
Less:

132.77

95.80

421.01 1,719.53

$

132.77 $ 13.28

818.66 $ 81.87

672.30 $ 67.23

1,623.73 $ 162.37

95.80 $ 1,719.53

Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentiafing Cost Future ~ 10% TotalOH

13.28

81.87

67.23

162.37

Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)

119.49

736.79

605.07

1,461.36

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007

1211112007

0018791

rlIUUlliHU >'JUUUIHUY

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~c(luntJD: XG1486 UserID:
_ _ 1 Appointments I JACKK I Palleob Claims

Document 278-2
! ~
Financial" I Maln""nan," I

Filed 12/01/2008
It'
I Communication Cent<>r

Page 50 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

,,·Recome

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!<l~ment5 I Custom Reports I Run Last Report

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers BilHng Provider David F Jadwin Jadwin L A Upschultz L Renderi,,!! Provider Period For 04/01{2007- 04/:30{2007

Cbarges

Mise Clla rges Insurance

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10005.00 Shertukde L 25.00 10030.00 7861.00 0.00 2208.00 464.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

.088_11

Location: Alllocati<lJ1s WriteOfts

Payment/l Patient

'IF Misc Insurance Patient 'IF Proc Charges

0.00 0.00 0.00 25.69 0_00 0.00 0.00 50.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 165.00 165.00

111.Z4
~16.11

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0

0

0
0

0

70.11 0.00 207.50 0.00 207.50 346.51 0.00 223.94 77.00 0.00 77.00

129.89 0.00 460.74 0.00 460.74 544.49 65.00 230.Z0 106.00 0.00 106.00
WrlteOfls

A
Costa LA Shertukde

0
76

0 0
0

NfA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

A
Total For Sherhlkde Shert\.lkde L

A

"
0

"

U,
D",
Dutt LA

17

,
0

0

0",
To!<ll For Dl.ltt LA Billing Pmvider Rendering Provider

0.00 464.00

NfA
0.00

,
'"

0

PaYI"ents Charlles Mise ChargM Insurance Patient

# Mise Ilrsuranee Patient #Proe CII.rges

Grand Total for practice

$20563.00

$0.00

$1057.83 $240.69

$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
Mid level Fees

Medruim

Jadwin

out!

Shertukde

Total

Total

Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $ Medrium TL1487 Medrium TL1487 Subtotal Special

597.87 $

827.50 $ 3,666.85 484.37 169.60 1,481.47 232.62 817.09 4,716.56

5,092.22 716.99 986.69 6,795.90

$

25.00

$ 5,117.22 $ $ 716.99 986.69 6,820.90

597.87

25.00

Total
Less:

$

597.87

$ 1,481.47 $ 4,716.56 $

6,795.90

$

25.00

$ 6,820.90

Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Prior Credentialing Cost Future-10% TotalOH

59.79

148.15

471.66

679.59

59.79

148.15

471.66

679.59

Net Available(Current Mo.)

538.08

1,333.32

4,244.90

6,116.31

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007

1211112007

0018793

rU1t1Ill;H1:1.:JUlllJUi1lY

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~"Oll~t XG1486 User lD: ]ACKK lD:
~ I
Appalnbnent<:

Document 278-2
I. Fu,andds I M.nnmnance I

Filed 12/01/2008
I Gommunkatlon CEnter

Page 52 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

I CI,"ms

I

Patients

....Rec:ords

Daysheet J Dayshe<lt Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Agin(J I Insurance Aging I Adjustments Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report

I

Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Frnandal Summary All ProYiders
Bitting Provider

Period for 05/01/2001- 05/31/2001 payments

Location: All

tocation~

Rendering Provider

WrlteOfl" Insurance
39"1-.00 3023.63 0.00 0.00 301.31 6172.89 0_00 326,44 0.00

Charg""
0.00 0.00 138.00 0.00 21968.17 34669.17 0.00 5000.50

Mise Charge.. Insorance

Patient
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 325.00 325.00

Patjent
0.00 0.00 0.00
~o.oo

# Mise #Proc Ch'''g"s

David F Jadwln JadWin LA
Upschullz L

0.00 0.00 0.00
](1.00

0.00 59,Up

0

0.00
0.00 227.74 3439.11 0.00 228_53 0.00 228.53 273.97 0.00 27:3.97

A
Costa LA Shertukde Shertukde L

0_00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 138.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

A
Liu LA

25'
0

'"
"

0",
Dutt LA

138.00 5138.50 4803.00

NfA
0.00 0.00

Total For Oult
Dutt LA

326.44
1782.03 0.00 1182.03

"

0

41 0 41
#M;,;"

"ott
Tolal For Dutt L A

0.00 4803.00

NlA
0.00

aillil,g P,ovider

Rendering Provider

PaYlnenlll Charges
$66716.8"1Mise Charges Insurance

WrlleOffs InShanCe
P~tient

Pallent

# Proc

Charges

Grand Total for practlee

$30.00

$4767.22 $350.00 $12000.30 $168.00

'"
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 Mid level Jadwin Dutt Shertukde Total
Medruim

Fees

Total

Net Avaiiable(Current
Mo.)

(111.54)

3,=.35

16,701.65

19,812.47

Ending Balance

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007 1211112007

0018795

r

Hl(Ull.iliU

~UIlllHCU

Y

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2
I e_Reeon:ls

Filed 12/01/2008
I
CormnunkatJon Cent<.r

Page 54 of 189

~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

_ _ I Log Ollt I Help I Contact I

I

I Procedure

Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
!'Inanelal Summary All Provid..." Billing Provid.. r David F Jadwin
Shertukde Shertukde L

Period for 06/01{2007- 06{30{2007 P"ym.mts

Location: All Locations WTit"Offs
# Mise # Proc Charges

Rendering Pr""id"r

Charges

Mise ChaTge.

Insurance

Patient

lnfiun"l':"

Patient

0.00 1160.67 5264.00
Shertukde

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 123.93 7052.16 1309.04
20B.63

123.93
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6&.99 66.99 170B5.23 1S65.63 143.37 1709.00 2.87 270.25 3292.75 51.78 0.00 51.78

0.00 0.00 0.00 74.00 74.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 138.00 0.00 138.00
0 0

1Z

0 0

A
0.00 5264.00 0.00

"
0

NfA
0.00 0.00

Total For Shertukde L A

1517.67 71.13 150,42 1556.31 46.22 0.00 46.22

C"
Liu LA

"

0 0

0

D".
DlIttLA

""
0""

0.00 1646.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

NfA
0.00 0.00

1Z

0 0

NfA
0.00

Total ForOl,lttLA Billing Prnvider

Rendering
Provider
Charges

Payments Mise Charges Insllranca

WriteOlfs

Patient Insurance

Grand Total for practice

$8070.67

$0.00 $10393.91

55.94

,-

Patient

# Mise #Proc ebarg"s

$22535.81 $212.00

"
Powered by Medrlllm

https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

12/1112007

0018796

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
· __I

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 55 of 189

KMC Pathology Associates
Prof Fee I Guarantee Fee Analysis August, 2007 Distribution Professional Fees Mid level Fees- KMC Medruim Total

Jadwin Beginning Balance Collections for Month

Dutt

Shertukde

Total

Mednum XG1466
Medrium TL1487 Correcting Error from

$

167.70 $ 1,426.81 50.00 635.34

$14,430.34 3,969.53

16,046.85 $ 4,674.87

60.60

$16,107.45 $ 4,674.87

July
Subtotal Special Total
Less:

237.70

2,064.15

462.00 16,881.87

462.00 21,183.72

60.60

$ 462.00 21,244.32

$

237.70 $ 2,064.15 23.77 206.42

$ 16,661.67 $

21,163.72 $ 2,118.37

60.60 $21,244.32 2,124.43

Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovel) Credentialing Cost Future ~ 10%

1,888.19

6.06

111.56

111.56

111.56

TotalOH
Net Avaiiable(Current

135.33

206.42

1,888.19

2,229.93

6.06

2,235.99

Mo.)

102.37

1,857.73 $

16,993.68

18,953.79

54.54

19,008.33

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
I e-Rl!co"b

Filed 12/01/2008
I
CommunIcation Center

Page 56 of 189
Log Out I Help I Contact I

~oountID: XG1485 User 10: JACKK ~ I Appointments I daims I Patients I ' Fh,andal., I Maintenance

=rm !
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 David F Jadwin Vlvek Bhargava Lac Tefl Total For David F ladwin Jadwin L A David F Jadwin Total For Jadwin LA Upschultz
CA
,~~

Perl"d for 07/01/2007- 07/31/2007
Paytll .. ,,~

locatinn: All Locations WriteOIf:l #Misc # Proe Charge.,

Rend"ring Provider

Charges 0.00 0.00

Misc Char!!",. 187.70

In5urance 0.00 0.00

Patient 187.70 0.00

Insurance 2274.36 4612.00

Patient 0.00 0.00

NfA

0

0

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0_00 0.00 0.00

187.70 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.20 0.00 1464.13 12.901.21 0.00 12.901.21 294.36 10S9AS 0.00 1059.45

187.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.40 0.00 0.00 65.00 65.00 25.00 0.00 50.00 50.00

6886.36 2.5.00 0.00 2.5.00 89.80 0.00 22.456.2.5 25621.99 886.00 26507.99 14836.66 2152.16 0.00 2.152.16

0.00 0.00 138.00 138.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 262..00 262.00 0.00 0.00 130.00 130.00 0 0
0

0 0 0 0 0 0

NfA
0.00 0.00 12.40 0.00 0.00

Shertukd" Shertukd" LA Sh"rtukde Tornl For 5hertukde L A

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

NfA
0.00 0.00 0.00

0
0 0

D".
DllttlA

0 0
0
#Hi~~

D".
Tow) For DuttLA Billing Pmvider R.endllrinlJ Pravld"r

0.00 0.00

NfA
0.00 Mille Cltargll5

0

P"ymllnra Cltargll!l $0.00 Jnsu .... n~e Pillient

WriteOf/.,
Jnsur~nce

Patient

# Proc

CIt~fgOS

Grand Torn! for practice

$200.10 $15767.35 $340.10 $72.954.22. $530.00

0

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

Document 278-2
1~
Financial.. I Maln!!!nanc!!

Filed 12/01/2008
1t51

Page 57 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

TLl487

Us~rlD: JACKK
) ClaIms I Patients

AfJp~lntm"nbl

I

e-Rccorrls

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 Philip Dutt savita ShQrtukrle David F Jadwin Billing Provider Rendering Provider Rendering Provider Period for 07/01/2007" 07/31/2007 Pavme"ts ChillllllS Location' All l..cJcatic>ns WdtllOns
# Mise Patient # Proe Cbarges

Mise; charge" Insurance Piltient Insnran",e

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

635.34 3969.53
--SOAlO

0.00 0.00 0.00

8535.66
48660.87

0.00 0.00 0.00

0 0

0 0

0.00
WriteOfis Illsurance

Payn",uts Charges Mise Cbarges Insurance Palient

Patient '" Proc

# Mise Cbarge"

Grand Total for practicE!

$0.00

$0.00

$4574.137

$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 Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $

Dutt

Shertukde

Total

Mid level Fees - KMC

Medruim

Total

$

734.83 $ 2,989.74 73.92 188.00

3,724.57 $ 261.92

66.96

$ 3,791.53 $

Medrium TL1487
Correcting Error from July Subtotal

261.92

$

808.75

3,177.74

3,986.49

66.96

4,053.45

Special

Total

$

$

808.75 $ 3,177.74 $ 80.88

3,986.49 $

66.96

$ 4,053.45

Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future -10% TotalOH

317.77

398.65

6.70

405.35

80.88

317.77

398.65

6.70

405.35

Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)

727.87

2,859.97

3,587.84

60.26

3,648.10

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007

1211112007

0018800

J.' lUQ.llVJ.CLl lJu.J.ll111(U. J

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
_~ountID:_ XG1486 User lD: JACKK
_ _ _ I

Document 278-2
l ' Fin"n"'al,. I Maintenance I ,,_Records

Filed 12/01/2008
I Communication Genter I

Ap~crntments

==

Page 59 of 189
I Loti Out I Help I Contact [

I

claims

I

p"tien!>;

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
Coo~

Period lor 08/01/2007- 081'31/2007 PaymelllS

location: AU WriteOfis Patient

Locatlun~

Rendering Provider

Charge~

Mise

Cllarg,,~

ln~uran«:

Patient InSQr311Ce

# Pruc

it Misc Charges

0.00 0.00 276.00
Shertukde

66.96 0.00 0.00

0.00 212.72 2669.58 0.00 2669.5"6
44.74

66.96 8.52 98.92 0.00 98.92 33.10 0.00 33.10 0.00 75.00 75.00
pnll\nr

0.00 552.64 4575.92 0.00 4575.92 0_00 99.63 99.63 960.71 0.00 960.71
Writeolfs Insurance

0.00 0.00 0.00 138.00 138.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0 0 0 0

Sh"rtukde Si'lertukde L

A
0.00 276.00 0.00
Dl.lttLA Total For Dutt Dut\: LA

N/A
0.00 0.00

Tohll For Shertukde L A

D"

0.00 0.00 0.00

N/A
0.00 0.00

30.70 75.44 551.29 0.00 551.29

D D
0

D""
Total For Dutt LA

0.00 0.00
Charges

NfA
0.00

D

D

Provld<tr

ailii""

Renderin!! Pmvid.. r

Payments Millc Charges Insurance

#
#Pruc

Mis~

Patl"nt

Charges

Grand Total for practice

$27&.00

$66.96

$3509.03 $2:82..50

$6188.90 $138.00

2

powered by Medrlum

https:llwww.medrium.com/practice101l1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

12/1112007

0018801

r

UU11ll,,;liU

~Ull1lU(U

Y

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
MED TUM.
count 10: TL1487 User 10: JAcKK

Document 278-2
l'
Fin~nci~[s 1

Filed 12/01/2008
I
Communk:atlon Center

Page 60 of 189

Ift~&lI1lLIUL£o,,~O~",-L ~lH~'~l''-.l:lC2'~'~"~",-IL
Malntenanef!

I

Appointment:!;

I

Claims

I PatJ""ts

I ,,-Records

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 Pe60d for 08/01/2001- OB/31/2001 payments Location: All Locations Wrtt"Offs

Charge"

#- Misc Mise Charges Insurance Patient Insurallce Patient # Proc Chargee

Phillp Dutt
savlti'l Shertukde
Billing Provider Rendering
Provid~r

0.00
D.OO

0.00 0.00

73.92 lB8.00

O.OD

0.00 276.00
WriteOfls

0.00 0.00

0.00

"

"

Charges

#Mwc MIse Charg"" Insnrance Patient Insurance patjent #- Proc Charges

Payments

Grand Total for practlce

$0.00

$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
Beginning Balance

Dull

Shertukde

Total

Fees- KMC

Medruim Total

Collections for Month Medrium XG14B6 $ Medrium TL1487 Correcting Error from July

59.95

88.50

148.45

$
$

148.45

$

Subtotal
Special

59.95

88.50

148.45

148.45

Tota!
Less·

$

$

59.95 $ 6.00

8850 $ 8.85

148.45 $ 14.85

$

148.45 14.85

Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future ~ 10%
TotalOH

6.00

8.85

14.85

14.85

Net Available{Current Mo.)

53.95

79.65

133.60

133.60

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007

1211112007

0018803

.rlnanCHll

~Umiintly

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2
I . Flnaneial,,1 Maintenance I

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 62 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

-*'"

~ c o u n t XG1486 UserlD: JACKK 1D:
I Appointments I

«5
Patiel'll:>

aairn~

I

<!.-Recard~

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<ltion Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports I Run Last Report

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Rnandal Swmmar'l All Providers
BlUing Provider Rendering Provider Chargee Period for 09/01/2007· 09/30/2007 Paymenl/> Location: All locations Wril"Offs
Palle"t
# "'is., # Pro" Chuge..

Mis.: Charg.... lllellrallee Patient Insurance

David f Jadwin

0.00 0.00 0.00
Vivek Bharg"va LocTen

0.00 0.00 0.00 NtA

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

489.63 138.00 0_00 0.00

662..38 62.0.04 168.00 338.00

0 0
0

Teopengco
Jadwin LA

0.00

0

Total For Jadwin L A Teopengto LA
C<>,~

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 932.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NfA 0.00 0.00 0.00 NfA 0.00 0.00 NfA 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 88.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2..28 7.67 9.95 0.00 0.00 D.OO

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 50.00 50.0D

0.00 0.00 0.00 383.54 0.00 0.00 0,00 74.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

506.00 10.00 1070.00 162.6.51 0,00 585.00 585.00 1252.2.5 0.00 0.00 0.00 518.00 1443.00 1961.00 0
# Proc

0

0 0 0 0

Shertukde Shertukr!e LA Shertllkde Total For ShertlJkde LA
U,

"
0 10 0 0 0 0 0
0

0.00 932..00 0.00
O~O

Octt
DuttLA Total fer Dult Dutt LA

0.00 0.00 0.00

0 0

O,tt
Tornl For Dult L A
Billing

0.00 0.00

Relldll<ing

Paymllllts

Writ"Olfs Patient

Provider

Provider

Charge"

Mise Charge" [nsnrance Patient IlIsnran.,e

# Mise Charge"

Grand Total for practice

$932.00

$0.00

$98.45 $50.00

$1085.17 $8303.18

"

0

Pow£!red by Medrium

https:l/www.medrium.com/practice101/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

12/1112007

0018804

r l11i:Ull..ili:U ...,UIIUUaLY

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~countlD: TLi4117
AppoIntments
UserrD: )ACKK

_I
Flnam:i~1

Document 278-2
I

Filed 12/01/2008
et
I
Communication Center

Page 63 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

I Claims

I

Pall'mll;

~

FinaneJals I

MalnlBnance

1

e-~nrds

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

I Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Summary AU Providers
Period for 09/01./2007- 09/30/2007

location: All Locationg Wrireoffs '" Mise Char\les
# M;"c Charges

Bittin\l Provider Billing Prl>"ider

Rendering Prl>"ider n.end"rlng Prollider

Payments ella ryes Mise Chorges Insu",n<:" Patient

Insuran<:e

patieut

# Prl>c

Payments Charg""
$0.00

Writ"Offs Ins"rance
$0.00

M;s<:Charges
$0.00

Insurance
$0.00

Patl"nr
$0.00

Patient
$0.00

# Pruc

Grand Total for prBctlce

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
~cnuntlO' TL14S7 Us~r!D: JII.CKK
_ I App"lntments I Oalms I Patjenlli

Document 278-2
I > Financial.. I MaJnlI!nance I e·Rec"rtI.

Filed 12/01/2008
I Commul"llcatlon CenlI!r

Page 64 of 189
Cut

_ _ I Log I

I Help I o.mtact I

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

Procedure Summary

Financlal Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary ,1\11 Prll"idern Billing Provider
S"Vita Shertukde.

Perjod fo' 10/01/2007- 10/31/2007 Payments

Location: All Locations

Rendering Provider

Charges

# Mise Mis" Charges wSUl1lnee Patient Insurance P"tillnt # Proc Charge"

WriteOffs

0.00 0.00
R/;'lodering Provider

0.00 0.00

71'1.60 39.00
Paymeuts

0.00 0.00

124.40 0.00
WriteOff.

0.00 0.00

0 0

0 0

David F JadWin Billing Provider

Charges

#Mlsc Mise Charges IOSlIf"""e Patient Insurance Patient # Pro" Charge..

Grand Total for prllctlce.

$0.00

$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 Beginning Balance Collections for Month Medrium XG1486 $ Medrium TL1487

Dull

Shertukde

Total

Mid level Fees-KMC

Medruim

Total

75.00 39.00 39.00 13.42 8M2

188.00 78.60 1,829-41 2,096.01

263m $ 117.60 1,842.83 2,223-43

103.50 $
$

366.SO 117.60

Medrium ZQ 1486 Subtotal
Special

103.50

$ 1,842.83 2,326.93

Total
Less:
Medrium Billing Cost Prof Fee Refund Current Overhead Contribution Overpayment recovery Credentialing Cost Future-10% TotalOH

$

39-00 $ 3.90

8M2 $ 2,096.01 8.84 209.60

$

2,223-43 $

103.50 $ 2,326.93 232.69

=.34

10.35

3.90

8.84

209.60

=.34

10.35

232-69

Net Avaiiable(Current Mo.)

35.10

79.58

1,886-41

2,001.09

93.15

2,094-24

Ending Balance

$

$

$

$

Pathology Prof Fee distribution 2007

12111/2007

0018807

l'manClal

~ummary

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~COlJntID: XG14S6 User ID: lACKK
_ I
Appointments

Document 278-2
I
t

Filed 12/01/2008
==r'
I
Communication Center 1

Page 66 of 189
I Log Out I Help I Contact I

I Claims

I

Pallents

Hnanda!" I

Maintenance

I

e-Record.

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

Period for 10/01/2007.10/31/2007

Location: All locatio""

Billing Provider

Rendering

Payme.ntll
Charges 0.00
Mise Charges Insurance

WrlteOlfs

# Mise
'#

Provider

Patient

Ins-nunc!!
338.00

Patient

Pro" Charges

Shllrtukde
Shertukde L
A

0.00
0.00
NfA

0.00 0.00
0.00

0.00 50.00 138.00 lS8.00 103.50 0.00 75.00

20.66 200.00
138.00 ]]13.00 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00
Shertukde 0.00

0.00
0.00

Total For Sherwkde LA UtlLA

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00
NfA

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00
ZOO.Oo

",
D""
Rendering Provider

34.50 0.00 0.00

D,tt
DllttLA
Billing Provider

0.00

0.00

N/A

0.00
WriteOffs Insurance

Pnyn,enls Charges Hise Charges Insurance Patient

P;ollent

# Hilic #Proc Charges 0

Grand Total for practice

$0.00

$0.00

$0.00 $]66.50

$538.00 $J,)3.16

Powered by Medrll.lm

https:l/www.medrium.com/practice10l/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

12/1112007

0018808

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 67 of 189

• KERN MEDICAL • CENTER

FACULTY PRACTICE PLAN

PROFESSIONAL FEE DISTRIBUTION NOTICE Physician: FOR MONTH: Distribution Date: Name Date Date Dr. Jadwin December. 2005 01/17/06

Month Professional Fees Medrium

·IYear To Date

I

$ 3,668.63

$

3,668.63

·
Total Fees Group Fee Distribution Other Fees/Awards

-

$ 3,668.63

$

3,668.63
..J ..J

_ _---'-01 _ _---'-01
366.86

Less: Billing Fees

10% Medrium

366.86

.
Total Fees Group Overhead Deduction - Other

· ·
$
366.86

$

366.86

0%1'--_ _--''--

_

0018809

Financial Summary

page I or I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2
F;"... "c;~I" I
Maintl!nance I

Filed 12/01/2008
I Cnmmtlni<"tion Center I

Page 68 of 189
i Hell-' : (ol·,tact I

~q; I Leg 0.."

e·RM;"nls

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"

C·

'j

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

~ • MEDICAL CENTER

.KERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: November. 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 12-20-05

I
10% Billing Service
1% Administrative Assessment

November

I Year-To-Date I

Professional Fees [==-~.~5,~18':43r=j'1If.2.691~

[=:=~:~i5_~4~~±C-~~11,126.~1]
L __ _ .._

•• _

_ ..L

_•.•._ _.

••
._~

-'

Compensation I

-..·..--·_.._.. ._--_·!..
$4,903.591

_---_·_--~

!_.""'"""__,,_.._"""_"._,._ _,"",,_ _""_ _._,

$100,142.401
__l

Balancel....._".
"Note: Payroll Deduction

'·_"-·~-"-~···_····'-'-"r-"-"·---"-""-l

$0.00 ' _ __.1.._._

_.

$0.00 ._I

0018811

Financial Summary

Page 1 of 1

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2
"-Re<,,n:l~

Filed 12/01/2008
r

Page 70 of 189

Fin"nd"l.< I

Mainbmilnce

I

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<lr~ I I'iltl"'" 5t«temen(s I CCl\tom Report, I Run LilH R""or,

Financial Summary By Posting Date
F1Mnoiili $umnlMY All p,.""ide,.s
Penod f',r 1l!Ol/2005-11!JO!2005 Pily",,,nts
LGc."U<m'

11.11 Locill;ons

iWling Pco"id",

Rende,i,,!!

Writ"O/ls

Pr""ide,

Charge"
11513.00

Mise eha tq~s !n''''i1hc", 0.00

Pillie"l

Ins",.""..
8022.31

Pilti",,1

'It

;: Mise !'roc Ch.'g""

David F

265&.92

135.05
78.00 24.50

0.00
0.00

m

0 0

Jadwin

Toopengw
Jadwln LA
David F )"dwln Total for Jadwin LA Upsc:hultz Lipschultz

0.00
J3Z4.QO

0.00 0.00
N/A

430.97 1788.13

1064.37 316-4.37

32;92

465.00 37B9.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33630.96 12867.00

O~Q)0'OO
17BB.13 0.00 0.00 48.20 0.00 10879.49 3025.22 0.00 3025.n 73.41
5732.57

0.00 32.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 13B.OO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 44.00 "'4.00

"
"0
0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N/A

99.50 44.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 384.97 304.00 0.00 304.00 140.00 44.50 28.00 133.00 161.00

3164.37 40.00 259.00 628.60
~S94.00

LA
COSt4 L A
C~~

Shertukde Shertukde

30959.26 1453.61 0.00 1453.61 161.76 1497'J.20 2914.88

,2<
120

0 0 0 0

LA
Shertukde Total For Shl!rbJkde L A Liu

2351.00 15224.00 0.00 25435.00 8916.00

0.00 140.00 0.00 0.00
N/A

" '"
'63

Do.
Dutt LA

3B13.44 22.56 3836.00

Do.
Tot!ll For Outt l A Billing I'r<lvider

1022.00 9938.00

''<4
2917_32

"
'# Pree

l2
0

0.00
c:hor~es

a,,"dui n9
Prol/ider

Payments

WriteOfls
Insur~"ee

'"
1001

Chu"es

Hisc

lnsu<anee

Paliellt

Patient

" Mise Ch.,ges

Grand Total for practice

$99529.96

$140.00 $28470.91 $1391.02 $63095.60 $214.92

o·

c..pi""lioII s . . . .uy For AJI P..."Id.....
Provider David JadWin Dal/ld Jadw)n Totals Capit:"ion Payme'lls Average # P.. lient"

806.44 '37.39 $843.83
4

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
October

I Year-To-Date I
. --____:;_;l
* .._*._ _••• _.!

10% Billing Service I L_.

.···.·.-.··..

...$~2.~J.~L_J~10,5§.~J.2J *_*•...._
_L._ _

-.----~---

1% Administrative Assessment L. __

Compensation L_._ ~. ~~~.~_~:~~1 __ ~.~~~?~~:~.1.J

.

;-...- -......----,·-·..- ------1
.-..__.._._.
,__,

Balance!1
"Note: Payroll Deduction

__._

..

~ _

..

_ ~

$0.00 ,.

,_,".,.

$0.00_i .

0018813

Financial Summary

Page 1 of 1

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<?dure S"mm<lfv FtI1anc'al Sw11tnar, I C~Pltclion Sl"'Hl1~'V I PM,e.l\l srMemeqt, I C,,~(O,,' f.:.",,)("t~ 1 R.e", L~Sl f{"p"r\

FinantiBI Summary By Posting DlIte
Finan<iaIS~mm"''y

All Providers

Per;nd for 10/01/2005. lO/31/201J5
Paymenl s

Billi,,!! Provider

Rend"ring Provid",

W"leOlls '/:. Pmc

ChoHges

Mise Cbarges

Insllr"nCOl

Patient

If Misc Ch",ges

David F

6068.00
Jadwin L A
Outt L A

0.00 N/A
N/A

'2721.19 0.00 '\1.J2 2767..51 143.02 na.70 63.3<1

178.89 0.00 0.00 178.89 10.00 50.00

16711.88 29£>.00

173.50 0.00

ladwin
29&.00

",
D

o
o

0.00
63£><1.00 0.00
;<693_00

0.00
17007.88 -564.25 1054.33 136.66 1190.99 371.33 200.00 9.18 157.83 106'\.72 34642.95 65.00 34707.95 5393.93 0.00 5393.93 1441.14 25.00 35640.11 <1456.76 65.00 4523.76

0.00
173.50 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00

Toml For D3Vld F Jadwin

0.00 0.00 0.00

"
o

o o

Teopengto
Jadwin LA

o
o

David F
JadwiO
Total Fur Jadwin LA

1:11.00
2904.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00

49.00
99.00 10.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 lJa.OO 618.59 0.00 616.59 130.65 637.00 .767.85
0.00 0.00

"
"
D

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

342.0<1 3<1.67 0.00 0.00 5.17 -22'1.12 10396.82

Teopengco
CA

o o

Upschultz
Lipschultz

-166.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1772.52
0.00

LA
Costa LA
c~~

o o o
'79

o
o
D

iJ • "

o

2

Shertukde
Shertukde

42820.00
65.00 <12885.00 10686.00

o

LA
Total For Shertukde 0.00 0.00
N/A

o.do
10396.82 3029.15 0.00 3029.15 150.12 999.00 8383.96 3404.94 0.00 3404.94

1772.52
0.00

,eo

Sheltukde

LA
Shertukde
Totlll For Shertukde l
A U,

"
no
o o

o o o

50 C! (j .'.
l~.9-uU·

1135.00 11621.00 0.00 0.00 27102.00 5896.00

0.00
0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
N/A

"

006

0.00 25.00
0.00 0.00 0.00

WIJ LA Dott
Out!: LA

0.00 0.00 276.00 276.00

D,tt
Total f<lr Dult L A
lIi1ling
Provider

937.00 6833.00

0.00

0.00

'" " "
:t!

D

: ~

Re"deri"g
Provider
Cha.ge~

"

o
Mise Charges
:J;

50·'

006
i -

Proc

Grand Total for

practice

$97909.00

$0.00 $29427.28 $2098.33 $l01169.57 $1605.02

999

0

Power<ld by

..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

~ • MEDICAL CENTER

.KERN

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

**._

_..•_.!

Compensation I ..._._

,.._·....·_-_.._··_········..-1"·--·_··.....·_·_--_.._--"
$10,200.47 _ "..__. ._.1__

$92,276.311 _ ..__ _ _ ...

"Note: Payroll Deduction

0018815

Financial Summary

rage

1 01 1

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008
C<lmm"nl<~tian Center

Page 74 of 189

~1' [let;) Out I Help I CQl1t,,(t I
,

Da~'sheet

Flna'\~lal Sum,..",-v

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

Financial Summary By Posting Date
F'na ...,;"1 Summar" All Provid",.,.
BiUing
Provide<

Perl"rl r,,, 09/01/20IJS.09/30/10115 PaVI"ellts

L~(.ti~"

All Locations
1:

Rende,ing
?,ovider
Ch~rgc5

WriteOfls
InsurilllC<!

Mise

His.: Charges
0,00

David F

5867.00

JadwIn
Teopenaco Jadwin LA Teopengco CA Lipschllitz

88
333.59 302.00
D.aD

{n""tOlle.,

Pal;"nt

Patient

" P,oc

Charge~

1711 l'l.78

86.00 0.00
~36.00

"
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0.00
1276.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 40950.00 9294.00 Shertukde 1589.00 10883.00 0.00 0.00 41744.00 Dutt LA 6-5.00 '11809.00 14188.70
D~vjd

0.00

1075.21 4958.66
10.00 194.00 243.13 703.34 27263.59 8537.16 0.00 8537.16 2807.20 2331.61 20264.57 26S.00 20529.57 5998.43 0.00 0.00 5998.43 WrlleOffs Insurance

0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

~~_:9
0.00
0.00 26.57 179.70 10623.69 533Z,44 0.00 5332.44 1090.43 368.39 8851.57 0.00 8851.57 5405.S7 0.00 138.00 5543.57 Payments

0.00
40.00 0.00 27,55 290.50 69.00 38.00 107.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.5.00

0,00 49.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65.00 0.00 65.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 O.DO 0.00 0.00

"

0 0 0 0

Costa L-A
C~~

Shertukde Shertukde

'" 95 " '"
0

LA NIA
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Tol2ll For Shertukde L

0 0

A
Liu
Uu LA

Dott

NIA
0.00 0.00

'"

Tobl For Dutt Dutt LA F
JadWin

'" m
0

0.00 1517.00 15705.70

N/A NIA
0.00

~
1.5.00 6S.00 Patient

O,tt
Totill For Dutt L A
BiUing-

Rendering
P,,,~id,,,

'"
'#

"

0 0 ;: Mise ehar"es 0

p,,,vitler

Ch",ges $116490.70

Mise

el'''rge~

Insurance

Pal",n!

Pr"e 1093

o'l U :;, l~ d
';

Grand Total lor

practice

$0.00 $431El1.J1 $1319.S5 $92.466.68 $638.00

;,.. .,
!

,

U
r;

c'

':' U

Powered

~

0 iI 5

()

,',

u0 {~
I I

, ":;

:}

https:llwww.medrium.com/practicel 0 111_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

12/11/2007

0018816

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 75 of 189

"C

I CENTER

IKERN MEDICAL
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-_-_-_-.-.--~ _

SalanceLI_ _ $0.001

c--- '---,-,. - - - - - ,
' $0.00 J

0018817

Fit'l~n£';-:>l

~u _ _ ~_

Page 1 of2
t::

Page 76 of 189

Ln

.11 c

0 0

OJ

.11 C

N

\

E

>ro

Cl.

''.)

OJ '" .2
0

--"g 0 0
..-I
~

E

OJ

.l'J c

'!!! ,<.J

gOut) Help I Contact I
!nter

00 .... 00 00 .... 0

OJ

iii

>ro

E

Filed 12/01/2008

0.

~

.....

OJ OJ

:§

.2!
0

Cl. OJ
~

>ro

--"g
0

.2
0

Cl. OJ
~

0

..-I

~

.>L. ~ OJ

J:
.E:
"0 01

~
~ Z

.s

en

'§

.a

ro
~

0.

OJ

0.

CO

III

-0

c
Z
0

,

u

.2
c
01

OJ

u

c

en c

.a
.l:l
-tl

it

:.0..

I

0

Cl t::

... "" Si
::. t)

~

it;.~

to-

ro to
G~

ro

CO
0
('-

*

CO

~

t:

'" .l!l ro
c

Document 278-2

t\ 0
0

Ij
Cl
.~

w
Z

...

0.
~

~

\•

\
0.00 0:00 0.00 0,00 0,00 35.40 0.00 0.00
N/A

\

z & w Ci".

~

...
0

.

~ ':P 0.
to::l

-.;1

1
I

...3

&

u..

...:

0.

...
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

:r
u.uu
41.80 35.00 20.00 0.00 0.00 35.40

~

- \ -.:r
0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 60 150 0 0 0 0 0 243 97 40 137

0° -5}

0°
,§
..9 rr&

"'"

.!ll

<>. ~
~
U l."-.J

~ ..r:::

.\1./ 1 '6(".'j '6

"" Si

~

'J
0.00 3206.42 146.77 8109.00 562.00 0.00 785.99

.' - ~" C' C'
(I

rr-!

a

- IO,Ollt,')lJ

..... ".
17777.00

... ·vv

Total For Jadwin l A

4350.21 328.43 0.00 0.00 289.20 127.Q1 9463.55 4668.04 0.00 4668.04

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Teopengco LA
Lipschultz Lipschultz LA Costa LA
Costa Shertukde

_ I.( J"

(I (I

~f~d-U'::>'

(I

138.00 52.45 0.00 0.00 0.00

l.
(I (I

26308.00 8302.00
Shertukde

198.02 0.00 10.00 10.00

23843.51 6978.87 0.00 6978.87

Shertukde LA

4107.00 12409.00

(I

Total For Shertukde L A

0.00

(}

https://www.medrium.com/practicel 0 111_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary

9/6/2005

Finandal Summary

Page 2 of2

Page 77 of 189

Liu
Liu

0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00
N/A

112.67 73.14 ·4940.57 0.00 4940.57 4070.74 0.00 73.62 4144.36
Payments

44.04 0.00 224.18 0.00 224.18 0.00' 0.00 0.00 0.00

2510.04 326.86 15251.90 0.00 15251.90 6874.39 0.00 185.38 7059.77

516.00 332.00 -1.00 0.00 -1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0 0 293 1 294 107 1 56 164

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
# Mise Charges

..... 00 00 .....
0 0

0)

LA

0.00 30353.00
Dutt L A

Dutt

200.00 30553.00 10592.00

Total For Dutt

0.00 0.00
N/A N/A

Filed 12/01/2008

Dutt L A
David F

15.00 4181.00 14788.00

Jadwin
Dutt
Total for Dutt L A
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider

0.00

WriteOffs

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

Document 278-2

Grand Total for practice

$124030.00

$35.40 $39796.37 $1059.96 $94395.73 $904.45

1185

1

Powered by Medrium

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
https://www.medrium.comlpracticel 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary

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 Professional Fees! 10% Billing Service 1% Administrative Assessment

I Year-To-Date I
$77,008.41!

- - - . , . . - - - - . -:l

$8,153.701

L_.._ . . . $815.3..?J..__._F,70~:.?~

L--.:_--,
1-'"'''--''''' ,

••

J
.

Compensation I

$7,338.33i

$69,307.561 $0.00

0 BalanceL_._.......o$c::.:.OO. i
"Note: Payroll Deduction

,-----,.---

I

0018820

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 79 of 189

For posting dates in

(;(,/ (\ (

I

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

«Xl

Page 80 of 189

.....
o
o

~count ID:

XG1486

User ID: YVONNEN

C}iN
1'Financials

j

Log Out I Help

f

Contact I

I

Appointments

I

Claims

I

Patients

I

Maintenance

I

e-Records

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 Period for 07/01/2005~ 07/31/2005
Payments
Charges

50clw 1f1
location: All Locations
WriteOffs
;':1 Mise

Filed 12/01/2008

Billing
Provider

Rendering Provider

Mise Charges

Insurance
6105.77 10.33 292.42 6408.52 334.74 1870.49 0.00 1870.49 121.94 0.00 176.84 11236.20 2293.26 0.00 2293.26 348.65 0.00

Patient

Insurance 42353.19 14.67 263.90 42631.76 4526.90 8615.91 0.00 8615.91 2600.12 2951.00 2234.74 40931.90 8255.24 0.00 8255.24 2638.92 239.52

Patient 10171.25 0.00 0.00 10171.25 1909.00 2941.48 0.00 2941.48 429.00 0.00 918.00 2870.45 100.08 0.00 100.08 2369.00 352.00

# Proe

Charges

David F
Jadwin

12117.00 Dutt Dutt LA 0.00 0.00 12117.00 0.00 2537.00
David F Jadwin

0.00 N!A N!A 0.00 0.00 0.00 N!A 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N!A 0.00 0.00 0.00

40.00 0.00 0.00 40.00 75.00 137.44 0.00 137.44 49.00 20.00 0.00 205.00 364.00 0.00 364.00 -75.00 39.00

98 0 0 98 0 26 23 49 0 0 0 302 151 59 210 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

6'105-77+ 40-00+ 1,870-49+ 137·4 I f+ 8'153'70*

Document 278-2

Total For DavidF
Jadwin

Teopengco
Jadwin LA

liJil C-.-76+c. I
33,605- 00 + 854-44,34'459-44*

2343.00 4880.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32772.00 17603.00

Total For Jadwin LA
Teopengco LA

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Lipschultz

Costa
Shertukde Shertukde LA Shertukde Total For Shertukde L A Uu
Uu LA

7546.00 25149.00 0.00 0.00

0
0 0

hltPS:!!www.medrium.com/practice I 0 1/1_XG 1486/Reports!finSummary

0 " ,,..."' ..... -

Financial Summary

Page:,( ot:,(
M N 00 00

Page 81 of 189

Dutt
Dutt LA

23195.00 8632.00
Dutt

0.00 0.00

8751.34 2063.02 0.00 2063.02
Payments

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

29954.06 4140.98 0.00 4140.98
Wl'"iteOffs

187.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

245 94 42 136

I)

'J

4872.00 13504.00

N/A
0.00

0 0

..-

J
0
# Mise Charges

Total For Dutt LA
Billing
Provider
Rendering Provider

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

Filed 12/01/2008

Grand Total for practice

$111617.00

$0.00 $33605.00 $854.44 $149721.05 $22247.26

1040

0

Powered by Medriljm

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
https:llwww.medrium.com!practicelOl/l_XGI486IReports/finSummary

Document 278-2

8/112005

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 82 of 189

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
IKERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: June 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 07-19-05
June Professional Feesl

I Year-To-Date I
__~68,854.?~

$10,987.341

10% Billing Service!
1% Administrative Assessment Compensation

$1,098.731 $6,885.481 ----------------"
...l-_ _ *_*

L__,_*_*_ _
I

--'
i

$9,888.611

$61,969.23!

"Note: Payroll Deduction

0018824

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 83 of 189

For posting dates in

9U1~

2005

Dr.

_-nOall.&ldtv~'t!rl/:<...::::· '----_~
{/

INPATIENT:

10, 98 7, .3 J

<j

Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)

!() If 8. t' 3

q, 6 68 ,(PI
OUTPATIENT'

Subtotal

/ '
~ ,tal pro fee payments

____-...,,<:.../Non-pro fee payments

___---,'Z'---_
I

Balance Billing fee (10%) *BilIing Clerk

/

Subtotal
Amount Due Physician

.. KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%

0018825

Financial Summary

Page I of2

Page 84 of 189

~count 10: XG1486 _ _ _ _ I Appointments

User ID:YVONNEN

IC)i!j'M
I

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

CD N CO CO

I

Claims

I

Patients

~

.....
o
o

Financials

I

Maintenance

I

e-Records

I

Communication Center

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

Sunmary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers

Filed 12/01/2008

Period for 06/01/2005- 06/30/2005
Payments

Location: All Locations
WriteOffs

Billing Provider

Rendering
Provider

# Mise

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance 3846.82 562.18 6983.43 955.76 0.00 41.88 460.54 9248.36 8415.58 743.03 580.64 2635.36 2577.98 0.00 2577.98

Patient 67.09 10.00 90.00 76.80 0.00 -19.40 -8.10 392.04 99.00 259.00 0.00 212.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

Charges

David F

21217.80 0.00 9691.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32434.00 6340.00 0.00 0.00 40078.44 10054.00 Dutt 518.00 10572.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00

10219.53 1759.81 10990.61 827.24 -83.76 96.12 355.08 23116.17 13165.92 1503.36 539.36 5146.00 3652.22 0.00 3652.22
WriteOffs

49.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 177.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

184 0 64

0 0
I]
I)

Jadwin

Teopengco
Jadwin LA

3,846-82+ 67'09+ 6'983-43+ 90-00+ 10'987-34."

Document 278-2

Teopengco
LA
Lipschultz Lipschultz LA

a
0

I) I)

a
0 279 51 0 0 375 96 2 98

Costa
Shertukde 5hertukde LA Uu Liu LA Dutt Dutt LA

:I

Il Il
0 0

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

0
0 0
0
# Mise

Total For Dutt LA
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider

Payments

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

Charge:.

Grand Total for practice

$120333.24

$3.06 $37051.56 $1178.43 $71287.66 $226.00

1051

1

.38) J,;}0.

qq
7/512005

https://www.medrium.com/practice I0 l/I_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary

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
$57!867.3zj

Professional Feesl

$18,465.80f

1% Administrative Assessment

I
L !_ _ • •_ _

J
'

=-.....J
$0.00

I

CompensationL $16,619.22\

$52,080.62!

BalanceL..i_---"'$O::..O:::.:O'-'-!_ _
"Note: Payroll Deduction

I

0018827

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 86 of 189

2005

Dr.

)1/fU

INPATIENT:

18) 4to 5. fj 0 1/)/1 (P,.5 8
I (n ,1(;1 : '
... i

Total pro fees payments Billing fee (10%)

J'

):0 ;,'L),

Subtotal

OUTPATIENT:
.....~,'

Total pro fee",payments Non-pr ee payments

"

B

nee

- - - - - - " t Billing fee (10%)
*BH!ing Clerk

Subtotal

* KMC pays 50%/physidans pay 50%

I

/

Amount Due Physician

0018828

~

AAA~U~~~

.....

~

••••••

-.J

o

~ c o u n t XG1486 ID: . - - . . . . - I Appointments

User ID: YVONNEN

~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I,

Claims

1

Patients

I.

Financials

I

Maintenance

e-Records

Communication Cer:lter Summary

Oaysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summar)' ! Patient Statements 1 Custom Reports

I Adjustments I Procedure

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider Rendering Provider Period for 05/01/2005- 05/31/2005 Payments Charges Mise Charges Insurance Patient Location: All Locations WriteOffs Insurance Patient
# Proe

# Mise Charges

David F Jadwin Teopengco
Jadwin LA
Teopengco

29501.00 551.00 10544.00 75.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 69471.00 22414.00 66.00 0.00 23940.00 10493.00
Rendering Provider

138.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 117.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

9775.52 1039.34 8123.14 2551.92 301.54 0.00 1033.83 230.61 6716.28 6718.46 930.94 563.11 0.00 0.00

280.14 35.00 287.00 0.00 40.00 0.00 0.00 117.18 134.00 67.80 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

36742.88 2495.77 14295.08 4190.08 1976.96 49.00 2268.17 738.42 25040.25 14182.35 4416.92 1124.89 532.00 0.00

187.00 0.00 49.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

262 12 79 3 0 0

1

9'775-52+ 280-1 11+ 8'125-1 11+ 287-00+ 18'465-80*

a
0 0 0 0

Document 278-2

LA
Lipschultz Lipschultz

LA
Costa LA Costa

a
0 557 179 1 0 227 91

a
4 0 0 0 0 0 0
# Mise Charges

Shertukde
Shertukde

Filed 12/01/2008

LA

Liu
liu LA
Dutt

Dutt LA
Billing Provider

Payments Charges Misc Charges Insurance Patient

WriteOffs Insurance Patient
# Proc

Page 87 of 189

Grand Total for

practice

$167055.00

$255.18 $37984.69 $986.12 $108052.77 $236.00

1411

5

0 0

.......
to

00 00

37,984-69+ 986-12+ 38,970-81* https://www.medrium.com/practicel 0 1/l_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary 6/1/2005

II.)

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 Professional Feesl

I Year-To-Date I

~

10% Billing Service
1% Administrative Assessment

I _---.:::.::..::.;..:.:..::.L-, $867.751
i ** '--$7,809.73j
i

$3, 949· 17 j
**

l

J
$_0.00

Compensation[

(-------,-------,
$35,461.401

BalanceL__._-,$__ O_.o_o-,-l.
-"Note: Payroll Deduction

I

0018830

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 89 of 189

· For posting dates in

llpn'(
'

2005

~
Dr. \, )

O.ULUI tlL__----'--_

J

INPATIENT:
Tot ro fees payments

Billing fee (10%)

Subtotal

OUTPATIENT:

0 671
...e-

liB

Total pro fee payments

Non-pro fee payments Balance Billing fee (10%) *Billing Clerk

8 te7'T. "'8

)St/r.

74'

~809. 73

Subtotal

1. 8D9. /

13

Amount Due Physician

KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%

0018831

Financial Summary
~countID: XG1486 User ID: YVONNEN _ I Appointments I Claims I Patients I.
Daysheet I Daysheet Summary Financial Summary I Capitation
flni'lnciills

Page I of2
~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I

Maintenance

I

e-Records

I

Communication Center

I

I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Summary! Patierlt Statements I Custom Reports

Aging

I Adjustments I

Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers Billing

Period for 04/01/2005- 04/30/2005

Location: All Locations

Rendering

Payments Charges Mise Charges

WriteOffs

# Mise

Provider
...
'

Provider

Insurance
7144.45 2116.78 /815.45 358.80 8.38 4.83 254.84 854.82 8838.32 3664.12 2112.69 686.34

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# ProC Charges

.......... ..... ..
"
~

,.:~

,'"

David F .,

41434.00 2840.00 12408.00 1103.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 36230.00 8435.00 1541.00 552.00
Rendering Provider

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

645.78 " 23260.30 10.00 71.80 88.00 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 412.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 5248.97 2617.96 336.13 331.39 205.17 576.16 1182.54 21743.64 2461.18 4436.31 1516.46

5263.77 623.48 657.00 318.00 123.19 10.00 0.00 411.44 2463.21 2.00 1266.11 147.80

361 33 117 19 0 0 0

0 0 0

\..) adwin
"."

.. ..."
,~~

~.

Teopengco
\,~<

Jadwin LA

Teopengco LA
Lipschultz Lipschultz

a a
0 0 0 0

7' 1 44 - 45+ 645-78+ 815- lf5+ 71-80+ 8'677-48*

Document 278-2

LA Costa LA
Costa

a
321 86 10 4

Shertukde Shertukde LA Liu Liu LA
Billing
Provider

Filed 12/01/2008

0 0 0
# Mise Charges

Payments

WriteOffs

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# PrOC

Grand Total for
practice

$104543.00

,0.00 ($26859.82 $1229.23 $63916.21 $11286.00

951

0

Page 90 of 189

o ......
00 00

o

26,859'82+ 1,229·23+ ,28,089·05,',
Powered

by Medrlum

~

https:llwww.medrium.comlpracticel 0 I/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

5/412005

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 91 of 189

MEDICAL • CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan

• KERN

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
$0.001 -"-=-'.:::.::..J

Balance!'--_--"-=.=::..J $0.00 ·Wole: Payroll Deduction

I

0018833

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 92 of 189

For posting dates in

fI;/ rnieJI
_

Dr.

_-=J-'<!a""",w"'-C1'-LiJ

MEDRIUM INPATIENT:

q, S fa !. qI
)

Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee

Cj,5(D.

a0
'71

--t!t"

8, (OoS. ,

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

~count ID:
.

~

X(1486 Use,. IO: YVONNEN

I

Appointments

I

Claims

!

Patients

I

~

~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I
Financials

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I

Maintenance

e-Records

Communication Center

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

I Adjustments I Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date

Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 93 of 189

o o

00 W 01

.... 00
https://www.rnedriurn.comlpracticel ()111_XG 1486/Reports/finSurnrnary

Powered by Medrium

41112005

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 94 of 189

~ • MEDICAL CENTER

IKERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: February 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 03-15-05
February

I Year-lo-Date I
~$2.!.!J..~}21

10% Billing Service

I

_.$1,413.321

1% Administrative Assessment l-"---;;*---j-'---;;~l

,--------CompensationL. $12,719.901
Balance!---·----sO.OO I i..-.--•• ._ _ '
"Nole: Payroll Deduction

$19,045.961
... .__

,

--- $0:001 .,_:...-1

0018836

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 95 of 189

For posting dates in

(Wfa oi1.(

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)

(non-pro fee payments)
,?,;),

/3.3.
z//j.

Balance 10% billing fee

I. ,

3~

/61/ '// ,

q. 90

-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-----

~count

_

I

ADDointme~ts

10: XG1486 User ID; YVONNEN

I

Claims

I

Patients

!

~

k>28
Financials

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I

Maintenance

Ie-Records

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 Charges! Mise Charges Insurance Patient Location: All Locations WriteOffs Insurance Patient
# Mise Charges

# Proc

David F
Jadwin Teopengco Jadwin LA Teopencgo

23875.00
8601.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

11419.66 1419.83 2235.52 316.73 224.00
36.74

28.38 10.00 449.66 -0.06 0.00
0.00

27497.37 3735.05 4457.58 205.97 672;91 213.08 2347.64 5029.47 12638.29 5130.67 8276.73 1198.99

124.00 49.00 -138.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 250.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

227 95
72

a a a
a

7314.00 2980.00 O.C'O
O.W

11'419-66+ 28-38+ 2'235-52+ 449'66+ 14'133'22*+

Document 278-2

36

LA
Lipschultz
Lipschultz L

a
0

a
0 0

A
Costa La

O.CO 587.CO 32393.CO 9450.00 6993.00 2469.00
Rendering Provider

1436.16 2435.58 5207.81 2261.46 3702.46 349.81

0.00 29.04 302.48 0.00 0.00 25.00

a
5 284 85 57 20

Costa Shertukde Shertukde L A
Uu
Liu LA Billing Provider

a
a

Filed 12/01/2008

a
0

a
# Misc Charges

Payments Charges Mise Charges Insurance Patient

WriteOffs Insurance Patient
# Proc

Grand Total for practice

$94662.00

$0.00 $31045.76 $844.50 $71403.75 $285.00

881

0

Page 96 of 189

o

o .....
00 W 00

31'045'76+ B44'50+ 31,B<}0'26*+

00

https://www.medrium.comlpractice J 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary

3/1/2005

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 97 of 189

MEDICAL • CENTER
Faculty Practice Plan

.KERN

Distribution of Professional Fees Month of: January 2005 Dr. Jadwin Date of Distribution: 02-15-05
January Professional Feesl.. 10% Billing Service

I Year-To-Date I
$7,028.961 .

_ ~ _ .

$7,028.961

__ __.-

i

---'1-----'
-_:":"'::::':'::":..1.

$702.90\

__ $7_02_.9QJ

1% Administrative Assessment

I

••

••

1 - - - -1 ~ Compensation I $6,326.0~.L __ $6,32~.0~J
Balance!,
""Nole: Payroll Deduction

$0.00

I

$0.00 i

1

0018839

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 98 of 189

For posting dates in

---,)Q 11 11M \I
I

Dr. _ _'--",-/:1,,-"-0d=W-'-'-.i 1lC---

_

MEDRIUM INPATIENT:
,. :) ,:; (;. (J (p

Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee

70a. 9rJ

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

Financial Summary

Page 1 0[2

.....
CO 00

-.::t

Page 99 of 189

---*'"

~ c o u n tID:
I

XG1486 User ID; YVONNEN

Appointments

I

Claims

I

Patients

I

~

Et:;tfWB
Financials

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

.....
o
o

I

Maintenance

Ie-Records

Communication Center

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 Adjustments I

Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers

Filed 12/01/2008

Period for 01/01/2005- 01/31/2005
Payments

Location: All locations WriteOffs

Billing
Provider

Rendering Provider

#
#

Mi~;c

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance 46976.40 11707.19 10131.61 2435.47 1590.06 203.52 2340.62 21724.67 46497.27 8261.50 20385.78 6519.46

Patient

Proc Charges
182 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~

David F Jadwin

16420.00 8007.00 2451.00 2146.00 0.00 0.00 4007.00 16182.00 29168.00 11814.00 951.00 0.00
Rendering Provider

15.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6027.77 1251.69 1012.76 929.54 316.80 70.11 1232.72 3544.44 9893;27 3127.30 4336.60 1652.04

244.43 0.00 -256.00 0.00 8.38 0.00 0.00 284.62 212.48 0.00 177.50 25.00

3219.24 25.33 666.00 298.00 83.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 639.00 0,00 841.00 163.00

Teopengco Jadwin LA

72
32 25 0 0 36 125 231 85 9 0

6'027-77+ 244-43+ 1,012·76+ 256-0(J7'028-96*

Document 278-2

Teopencgo
LA Lipschultz Lipschultz LA
Costa La

Costa
5hertukde
Shertukde

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

LA
Liu
. .1

Liu LA
Billing Provider

.3 Lf} OqI . "/:.r
'7 0 GAQ.. ......... ~ c) 4,'-'" (

! Ci t,:)
1
r

l
"

payments

WriteOffs
# Mis·.:

0{)[1uJ I i,l

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

Chargf!S

Grand Total for

practIce

$91146.00

$15.00 $33395.04 $696.41 $178773.55 $5935.33

797

1

a 7/)(oJ..
(7;

9 q non- eore
/t) 6{;

'J

1'-) ') (

"-':,"',G .2' ,..-, ".:

IH{J('~

33'395-0 1 ++ 696-41 + 34'09'\ -45*

https://www.medrium.comlpractice1 0 1/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

2/1/2005

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 100 of 189

MEDICAL • CENTER

• KERN

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,.:3.:::2-'-',9:....:3'--'4,.89 i 1

Distribution
Compensation

L

$14,240.~Or-$116,"651.631
$15,365.12J

**Faculty Practice 1%L__
'---__B=.a::.:l=a:..:.nc::..:e=-**1=H",,~#ill~
_ --

$0.9-,-0,-1_--:-$9,18. 14 1

- _ . _ - - - - - - - - '-----"--'-_.._'-'! [ . $0.001 $O.OO!
!:J,rlrnin;C'f,.~f;"o::tC'e-oC'c:rn.onf
_ _
~-

nQ_ _?R._ftAJ

tho -

-_

- - - - - - ••• -

IMil1 - ho

::II -

n.:::lurnll "'-,1" - ..

deduction

0018842

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 101 of 189

For posting dates in
)r.

I:t:cembd

2004

j{~clWin

o1EDRIUM INPATIENT:

/.? 6 ~ 01, '7 8 ,
I ,S8&:;' /)8

Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee
1% administrative fee

--eI <f
! ()

)

</0 !.;J0 Subtotal

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

Financial Summary

Page 1 0[2

Page 102 of 189

~count 10: ~. I

XG1486 User IO: YVONNEN

i k ~ I Log Out! Help I Contact I

.....
o o

00 00

""" """

Appointments

I

Claims

I

Patients

I ,.

Financials

I

Maintenance

e-Records

Communication Center

Daysheet I Daysheet Summary! Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports

I Adjustments!

Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers

Filed 12/01/2008

Period for 12/01/2004- 12/31/2004
Payments

Location: All locations
WriteOffs

Billing Provider

Rendering provider

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance 7947.46 1031.02 7839.47 665.38 0.00 365.04 2850.73 7858.66 1660.81 4967.33 4337.19

Patient 35.85 58.20 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 74.94 68.75 17.50 299.53 44.95

Insurance
23155.95 5422.41 15640.73 1174.62 414.00 2331.26 8583.41 20030.48 3893.19 14813.90 7830.71

Patient

# Proc

# Mjs~c Charges

David F Jadwin

16785.00 5078.00 8160.00 1265.00 0.00 7133.00 17337.00 38400.00 8752.00 8588.00 2182.00
Rendering Provider

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3162.00 709.59 49.00 0.00 -84.00 0.00 108.00 1251.86 0.00 406.00 0.00

133 46 70 13

0 0

7'947-46+ 35-85+ 7,839-47+ 15' 822 '7'8'*

Teopengco
Jadwin LA

Document 278-2

Teopencgo
LA

a a a a a a
0

Lipschultz
Costa La Costa

a
62 169 351 81 64 18

Shertukde Shertukde
LA
Liu

'Toial
Jadwin
/lOn· eo(fd,

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Liu LA
Billing Provider

a a
# Mis,:
Charg~~s

40'122·87+ 15'S22-7B24'3I}O'09*

Payments Charges Misc Charges Insurance Patient

WriteOffs Insurance Patient # Proc

Grand Total for practice

$113680.00

$0.00 $39523.09 $599.78 $103290.66 $5602.45

1007

a

39'523-09+ 599-78+ 40'122-81*
Powered by Medrium

https:llwww.medrium.com/practicel 0111_XG1486/Reports/finSurnmary

113/2005

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 103 of 189

.KERN MEDICAL - . : • CENTER

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
i

Professional FeesL.!~~$9:..'.,.::::52=-4.:.:..6::.:3::.J1~ $126,636.Z±i

Distribution
Compensation

I

$8,572.171 $952.461 $0.001

$110,983.301 $14,735.361 $918.1'!J

Billing Service 10%L **Faculty Practice

10/01.

_ _-=B::::a.:.:::la:.:.,:n.:::;ce=--_ _

C

--:::.$O;:.:.::.:oo:J.,I_ _--"$:..::o:..;:.O.::.:O .

!

**Effect!ve 09-28-04, the administrative assessment wi!! be a payroll

deduction

0018845

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 104 of 189

=or posting dates in / ,

)~

2004

)r.

~

'1EDRIUM INPATIENT:
Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee

Subtotal
1EDRIUM OUTPATIENT:

------ro
Balance

// Total p~(ee payments fee payments)

10% billing fee 1% administrative fee

/

!

*Billing Clerk

Subtotal
Amount Due Physician

KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%

0018846

Financial Summary
~count 10: XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN _ _ _ I Appointments I, Claims I Patients

Page 1 of2

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

1t211iJ
I ~
Financials

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

I

MaIntenance

I

e-Records

I

Communication Center

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

I Adjustments I

Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers
Billing Rendering

Period for 11/01/2004- 11/30/2004
Payments

location: All Locations WriteOffs

# Mise
# Proc

Provider

Provider

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance
26188.68 7816.15

Patient

Charges 2 0 0

David F Jadwin Teopengco Jadwin L A
Teopencgo L

15036.01) 4587.00 5513.00 2346.00 0.00 0.00 7570.00 23005.70 50983.00 17537.00 20677.00 9400.0(1
Rendering Provider

318.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6519.39 2144.38 3005.24 362.50 465.64 105.29 0.00 535.13 7180.39 1106.50 7705.63 4782.50

0.00 25.00 0.00 77.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 77.00 51.80 0.00 138.00

318.00

157 38

Jadwin
6'519·39+ 3'005·24+ 9'524·63*

Document 278-2

425.00 4450.62 605.60 1950.44 412.71 0.00 2318.87 19664.32 1746.22 20652.42 6237.73
WriteQffs

0.00 0.00 166.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

56 23 0 0 76 243 428 139 136 68

a a
0

To-mt Kme-33'912·59+ 368·80+ 34'281 ·39*

A Lipschultz Lipschultz L A
Costa La

a
0 0

lOta t Ilbll- core.,
34'281·39+ 9 ' 52 {+ • ,t] :3 .~ 2.!p '156·76*

Filed 12/01/2008

Costa 5hertukde Shertukde L A L1u Liu LA
Billing
Provider

a
0 0
# Mise Charges

Payments
Charges Mise Charges

Page 105 of 189

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc.

Grand Total for practice

$156654.70

$318.00 $33912.59 $368.80 $92043.76

$59.00

1364

2

o o ......
.j:>.

00 00

......

https://www.medrium.com/oracticel (I 1/1 XC114RlilRpnnrtolr.n".. ~~o~,

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 106 of 189

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
OCTOBER 2004

.KERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004

Date of Distribution: 11-23-04

DR. JADWIN
Payments Professional FeesL Distribution Compensation

I Year-To-Date I

$2,824.08L_j.!1~,11~_'!JJ

I

$2,541.671
__

$102,411.131 $13,782.84\ $-:..9,-1,-8_.1,-,41
. 2:.$.::co.c::.o.;:.;ol

Billing Service 10%IL

$:::.:;2::..:8:=2.:...:.4.JL $:. .:0:. :. 0, -,0,-,-1

**Faculty Practice 1%rL--

_ _.....:B=.;a::.:l=an:.:..c:.:e"--_~I= _ $o.oO,..Ll _

**Effective (J9-28-04, the administrative assessment wi!! be 3 payro!! deduction

0018848

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 107 of 189

)r

posting dates in

odobd

2004

EDRIUM INPATIENT:

oBd-.'f· 08
eJ.,s LJ f. {; 7

Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee

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

1'lllctll\,.;JilI ollllllllC:try

Page I on
Account ID: XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN
AppolntmE~nts

th.:
I
~ Financiafs

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

I

Claims

I

Patients

I

Maintenance

Ie-Records

Communication Center

I

Daysheet I Daysheet Summary i Insurance Summary I Patient Aging) Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary-I Patient Statements I Custom Reports

I Adjustments I Procedure

Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
FinanCial Summary All Providers

Period for 10/01/2004- 10/31/2004

Location: All Locations

Billing
Provider

Rendering
Provider

Payments
Charges
Mise Charges

WriteOffs

# Mise
# Proc

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

Charges

David F Jadwin

91670.00 14271.66 32959.00 2812.00 15.00 0.00 84.00 51559.00 7794,00 70632,00 22047.00
l:f'ilrl('!ll!(l

0.00

1516.01 453.89

140.00

11537.98 6159.85 3390.89

1939.00

807 118

a
a a
0

Teopengco
JadWin LA

0.00
0.00

20,00
156.96 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 494.57 0,00 -49.00 0.00

746.00
867.05 137.00 0.00 0,00 0,00

1011.11
643.60 311.86 -125.39 371.41 2824.94 4436.47 3383.44 2006.92

260
21 1

Teopencgo
LA
Lipschultz

0,00
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00

1835040
635.38 382.95 1986.72 18497.76 8078.23 23732.16 3405.83

1'516'01+ 140·00+ 1,011·11+ 156'96+ 2' 82lf' 08';'

Document 278-2

a
0 0

Lipschultz LA
Costa

a
3 500 79 609

5herdukde
Sherdukde

442,00
0.00 731.00 0.00

a
Filed 12/01/2008
0

LA
Uu

Liu LA
iJ i11i1l';1 1'1 (~'! id,·,

206

a a
~J t·1j!'c ChiH'ges

F:'yHlf!tl'-5 F,
~l·.'id,>t

Writeoff5
Il1sur;inCe
Pi1tienl.

ell"!

~J!::'~

:I~,( 1~ll<n'':2~~S

I I\SI,n',lllce

P(lti~llt

tt Prot

Grand Total for

practice

$293843.66

$0.00 $16834.26 $762,53 $79643.15 $4862,05

2604

o
Page 108 of 189

o ..... o

o

00 00 01

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')'

11/1/2004

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 109 of 189

.KERN MEDICAL • CENTER

Faculty Practice Plan

Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004

SEPTEMBER 2004
Date of Distribution: 10-26-04

DR. JADWIN

I
Distribution

Payments

I Year-To-Date I
$114,288.9~

Professional FeesL $10,707.051

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

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 110 of 189

For posting dates

in.)i¥J~

2004

Dr.

_--r(kifJ,Udt<l&!<',()~'l/JV~'
()

_

MEDRIUM INPATIENT:
J())
/

70 '1,

{).:J
'r ,f

Total prof fees payments 10% billing fee 1% administrative fee

/,()70·

-e-

q) CoJ~,..3'-1

Subtotal

ME RIUM OUTPATIENT:
Total prof fee payments

(non-pro fee payments) _ _ _ _ _--",' Balance

__

~
-t7--

~/o billing fee
1% dministrative fee *Billing CI k

--e-

Subtotal

'\

Amount Due Physician

* KMC pays 50%/physicians pay 50%

0018852

Financial Summary

Page I 0[2

M

It)

Page 111 of 189

CO

CO

~count ID: XG1486

User 1D: YVONNEN

k»iiE
I ~
Financials

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

o

.....
o

~ I

APpointments

I

Claims

I

Patients

I

Maintenance

e~Records

Communlcation.Center

I

Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary J Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary! Patient statements J Custom Reports

I Adjustments I Procedure Sunmary

Financial Summary By Posting Date

Filed 12/01/2008

.Jtld uJ
location: All locations
WriteOffs
Payments

I'"
Q

Financial Summary All Providers

Period for .09/01/2004- 09/30/2004

5:J S'Li fl, ~ U :5-'
L~ .'

Billing

Rendering

# Mise # Proc
ChargJ~s

Provider

Provider

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

David F JadwIn Teopengco Jadwin LA

8305.00 2009.00 1914.00 163.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 32255.00 11053.00 28533.00 10616.00
Rendering Provider

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5504.03 3058.29 4965.27 2026.43 103.61 253.08 0.00 70.11 2709.66 1601.52 5208.54 3365.01

169.38 166.38 68.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 0,06 48.00 0.00 49.00 0.00

24896.12 8687.58 15017.71 3542.07 690.89 6005.92 724.00 2720,89 9438.59 1849.88 15044.33 3559.99

11158.35 4764.74 5171.83 1672.48 1036.38 10.00 9.80 197.00 207.00 5.00 200.00 0.00

113 18 35 2 0 0 0 0 285 112 253 100

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 ,0 0
# Mise Charg<!s

"3 ("". 9 -.; :; ~ ? 'l " . 6U .. 3·-/·
~U'5

'169

i 0 ~ '/U?

Document 278-2

Teopencgo

LA
Lipschultz Lipschultz

LA
Costa La Costa

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

5herdukde Sherdukde LA Uu liu LA
Billing Provider

Payments Charges Misc Charges Insurance Patient

WriteOffs Insurance Patient

# Proc

Grand Total for practice

$94848.00

$0.06 $28865.55 $511.19 $92177.97 $24432.58

918

1

2;L3

J

d6';· 51 1 •
'j ~H-

29~3"t6~"/'

J..«~~.JJ •• "~~,,

-.--.""A ... ~ ....................-.--.1.................. ~..,.=1 n1 11

V~lIlQhJDo

........... ..-t .... lh,...C'"........................ ,

1 (Ill /"}(I{l11

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 112 of 189

.KERN MEDICAL • CENTER

Faculty Practice Plan

Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees· 2004 Date of Distribution: 09-28-04 Dr. Jadwin Payments Professional Fees Distribution Compensation! $10,354.41T $90,233.121 AUGUST

I Year-To-Date I

r-

$-1-'-1,-=7-'-66-=-.-'-3-=7"1 ----,$-1-,-03-,-=58-0=-.--=981

Billing Service 12% ' - - - - ' - - - ' ' - - . _ - - ' - - - - ' - - - ' - - - - 'J I $1,411.961 $12,429.72 **Faculty Practice 1

%L

._-...,;$"-'0..:..;.0:...;.0

L___

$918.141

_ _--=B=.;a::.,:/.:::.an:.;..c=.;e=--_-..JL_----:$=O,_Oo_!
deduction

$_O_.O.Q]

·*Effective 09-28-04, the administrative assessment will be a payroll

0018854

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 113 of 189

For posting dates in

~~

2004

0'.

~
~(p(e..3

IIIEDRIUM INPATIENT:

J,J, % _-,-IL/...:../:..;.I...:..._9--=&_ .w% billing fee
i

o.

7

Total prof fees payments

/f-'OrEtp

1% administrative fee

!a~3('. '7.1'

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

r:n~nci'll Summary

Page 1 of 1
ID: XG1486 User ID: YVONNEN

Page 114 of 189

~count
___ I

e:s
I) Financials I
Maintenance

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

Appointments

I Claims

I

Patients

Ie-Records

CommunIcation Center

I

10 00 00

<0

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 Adjustments I Procedure

.... o
o

Summary

Financial Summary BV Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers

Period for 08/01/2004· 08/31/2004

Location: All Locations

Filed 12/01/2008

Billing Provider

Rendering

Payments
Charges
Mise Charges Insurance

WrlteOffs

# Mise # Proc

Provider

Patient

Insurance

Patient

Charges

DavId F

38868.50 14891.00 10615.00 2805.00 414.00 0.00 0.00 1948.00 25451.00 8117.00 53667.00 7128.00
Rendering Provider

19.96 0.00 0.00 0:00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

8292.87 3419.56 2765.84 1256.22 1529.91 237.61 12.41 176.51 546.31 1288.94 0.00 0.00

659.15 10.00 48.51 0.00 90.25 85.00 56.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

18569.45 6263.79 3976.26 1693.98 2997.32 139.19 36.59 368.49 938.78 2073.06 0.00 0.00

259.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

390 151 94 20 3 0 0 14 241 80 452

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
# Mlsc Charges

Jadwin

Teopengco

Jadwin LA

Teopencgo LA

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Lipschultz

Lipschultz L A Costa La

Costa

Sherdukde

Sherdukde LA Liu

Uu LA Billing Provider

73
# Proc

payments Charges Mise Charges Insurance patient

WriteOffs Insurance Patient

Grand Total for practice

$163904.50

$19.96 $19526.18 $948.91 $37056.91 $259.00

1518

1

d;'

~~9L ~

:;'!.'

659· 'j 5-:· 2 ~ 'l6:':,· ;:;/t'
(I,
[~l

• :.) .j .;.

Sac\cviA

li

~

7 () 6 " 3 '7 ,~

Powered by Medrlum

hltps:llwww.medrium.com/practice 10111_XG 1486/Reports/finSurnmary

9/112004

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 115 of 189

"'C

MEDICAL • CENTER

.KERN

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" Distribution Co mpensation ,-Billing Service 12%1" Faculty Practice 1%1,.
L_.

I

$11 ,146.i4!-$91,814~1l

$9,697. 6::6~1_-_--=$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

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Dr. Jadwin

.KERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004

_ _..:..P.=,aYL::m.:.:.=.;en:..:.:t=s Professional Fees!
Distribution

J=:.cU::..:N..:..:E=--_1 Year·To·Date

I

$10,971~

$80,667.871

Compensation LI__$-,-9-".,5_45. 03 I Billing Service! $1,316.561. $0.001 $109.71 i

$70, 181.0~ $9,680._'!§j $0.001 $806.671

~------r-----.

Billing ClerkL Faculty Practice 1%[ _ _.....:B::..:a::..:l=an:..:.:c::..:e=---__[--···-··

$0.001--····-$-0-. gJ q
ymn07107104

0018858

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 117 of 189

For posting dates in
Dr.

"- lUVl 0'

-

2004

--- J . _-''-.I..lIQ"""(J",-",,,W.l..:(n-'--

_

{a,
/

q'1 f .3D
/

Total prof fees payments
Id,

_-!./...:::J....:..:!(p~. S',--w-,---- l:Q% Billing fee

f()

9. 'r(
,j"'I.$'.03

1% Administrative fee

q
)

1

0018859

Financial Summary
~countJD; XG1486 _ _ _ I Appointments
User ID: YVONNEN

Page 1 of2

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I

Claims

I

Patients

I ~

Finandals

I

Maintenance

I

e-Records

I

Communication Center

Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary., Patient Statements I Custom Reports

I Adjustments I Procedure

Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers

Period for 06/01/2004- 06/30/2004

Location: All Locations
WriteOffs
# Mise Charges

Billing Provider

Rendering Provider

payments
Charges Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

David F

43288.96 18453.66 10468.00 6626.00 6306.00 . 1339.00 435.00 7306.70 6812.00 2597.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4678.17 2403.73 5570.71 927.24 1879.46 1571.82 1278.06 4258.08 1766.84 5.34

519.42 32.67 203.00 0.00 306.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 10.00 0.00

18191.61 7964.41 9082.47 1271.16 6261.84 2765.17 2150.14 12275.04 5863.16 4.66

349.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

446 174 113 50 60 10 5 59 71 27

0 0

Jadwin

Teopengco
Jadwin LA

Document 278-2

0 0 0 0 0 0

Teopencgo

LA
lipschUltz
lipschUltz

LA
Costa La

Costa
Sherdukde Sherdukde

Filed 12/01/2008

0 0

LA
Payments WriteOffs Insurance Patient

Billing Provider

Rendering Provider

. Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

# Mise Charges

Grand Total for
practice

$103632.32

$0.00 $24339.45 $1074 ..09 $65829.66 $349.50

1015

0

:)GlduJin p(m0
o ......
0)

10 ) CI'tI . .50 <9.5) <US . .5'1
Powered by Medrium

Page 118 of 189

o

CXl CXl

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

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Dr. Jadwin Payments

.KERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004

MAY

I Year-To-Date I
$69,696.571

Professional FeesL
Distribution

$8,995.39L

.Compensation [~~~._E,?..?5:.99
~"--'".

L__~§.Q,,!?l6.-:.!)21
$Q.OOj

Billing Service J'-"-'$l, 079.451-'-----$8':363.591
__...,,~-_ . ~-, .._~_ .._---,-_._-_.~-"" .."._,,-----j

Billing ClerkL
r---

---:!$~O.:.::.OOi

.

;r;-;:;T------=1
-....-

Faculty Practice 1%L,

~89.9,~5!_

$696. 96 1

0018861

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 120 of 189

For posting dates in

mo.Y
IJ. biD
W'fo Billing fee

2004

Dr.
)

jo.dwin
Total prof fees payments

£$ QCf.5. J 't

l.o~9. '15
i

89. 95

1% Administrative fee

0018862

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 121 of 189

~ • MEDICAL CENTER
Dr. Jadwin

.KERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - 2004

_ _.:. .P=..ay<..:.m.:. :.e=.:nc:..:t::;.s_ _L---:..;A:.:...P.o-R:.:.;IL=--_1 Year-To-Date

I

Professional FeesL. _
Distribution

r-'

$7,421.771

-r

$60,701.181

CompensationL $6,456.94i

$52,810.031

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

Page 122 of 189

For posting dates in

Dr.

'0 4CJ,/

,JMQJ.LdW~'n+------

-<

.

Auk( I
9'0

2004

77

Total prof fees payments

_..........J8CL....19~o:...c., CR=....LI .J:607o Billing fee

!~

71. a:h {P)<;50. q<{

1% Administrative fee

0018864

Financial Summary

Page 1 of 1
User 10: YVONNEN

Page 123 of 189

~countID: XG1486 _ _ I Appointments

:E}¥_
I
t

I Log Out I Help I Contact I

.....
o
o

co co

c.o

LO

I

Claims

I

Patients

Financjals

I

Maintenance

e-Records

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

Financial Summary By Posting Date

Filed 12/01/2008

Financial Summary All Providers Billing Provider Rendering Provider

Period for 04/01/2004- 04/30/2004
Payments

Location: All locations

WriteOffs

# Mise

Charges

Mise Charges

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc ' Charges

. David F
Jadwin Teopengco

52568.00 9659.00 13199.00 2594.00 24397.00 7100.00 2407.00 8724.00
Rendering

2.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4338.91 752.26 2233':79 630.41 4123.44 3050.35 0.00 0.00

563.07 188.00 286,00 0.00 20.00 51.80 0.00 0.00

17881.43 3332.74 2416.17 507.59 13054.56 5920.65 0.00 580.00

414.00 1.47 0.00 0.00 187.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

486 79 114 24 184 50 17 66

2 0

7
(

.,', DOw! ()

1) 'I JJ '17

Jadwin LA

Document 278-2

o -'
0 0 0

Teopencgo

LA Lipschultz
Lipschultz

LA Costa La

Costa
Billing Provider
Provider
practl~e

° 0
# Mise Charges

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Payments Charges Mise. Charges

WriteOffs

Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

Grand Total for $120648.00

$2.18 $15129.16 $1108.87 $43693.14 $602.47

1020

2

It;: .? P
...',\ ,

Powered by Medrium

https://www.medrium.com/practicel 01/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary

5/4/2004

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 124 of 189

~ • MEDICAl CENTER

.KERN

Faculty Practice Plan

Receipt and Distribution of Professional Fees - ~004 Dr. Jadwin Payments March

I Year-To-Date I
$53,279.411

Professional Feesl
Distribution

$29,478.081

Compensation

I

$25,645.931 $3,537.371

$46,353.09/ $6,393.531

Billing Service I

Bill ing Clerk 1,--_.:...-$,,-,,0..;;..:.0,-,,-01_ _.:...-$:...;;0..:..,.. I 0,--0 Faculty Practice 1%1 ,--_....:B::.:a:.::.:;la::.:.n:..::c.=.e

. $294. 78l_----'$:..::.53=2:.:..:....::..91 7 ---.:$::.:0c:..::. J_ _---.:$::.:0c:..:::. 0:..::.0 0;-=-O1

0018866

Financial Summary

Page I of I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
~count W:
_ _ _ J

Document 278-2
I I
~

Filed 12/01/2008
I

Page 125 of 189
~
I I
SUIl

XG1486 User 10: PAULW
Claims Patients
J

Appointments

Financials

Maintenance

e-Records

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 Adjustments I· Procedure

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers Period for 03/01/2004-03/31/2004
Payments Charges

Location: All locations
WriteOffs

Billing Provider

Rendering Provider

# Mis
#

Mise Charges

Insurance 17481,26 3781,63 9989.82 1896.15 0.00 1896.15 5864.39 773.88

Patient 1921,00 110.00 86.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Insurance

Patient 16.14 77.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 0.00

proc Chargl 142 45 28 11 0 11 329 124

David F Jadwin Teopengco

19622.00 4567.00 2669.00 1138.00
Teopengco

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

91946.63 25419.12 32813.65 8608.05 308.00 8916.05 23409.61 749•. 52
WriteOffs

jadwin LA

Teopencgo
LA

0.00 1138.00 46041,00 16434.00

N/A
0.00 0.00 0.00

Total For Teopencgo L

A
Lipschultz Lipschultz

LA
Billing

Provider

Rendering Provider

Payments
Charges

Misc Charges Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

# Mis Chargt

Grand Total for practice

$90471.00

$0.00 $39787.13 $2117.00 $183254.58 $113.14

679

red by Medrium

B6-0n·, 29' 478 -Og",

https:llwvvw.medrium.comJpracticeIOI/1 XG 14Rli/Renort</finSllmmorv

Lt!":;:j")OOA

0018867

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 126 of 189

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 <aiser Foundation Heal 1212212003 31212004 88300 $4.76 lIIedi-CalOf California 1211212003 31212004 88304 $30.40 Medi-Cal Of California 12112/2003 312/2004 88311 $6.32 ---------_._---. Aarp 12/19/2003 31212004 88304 $2.45 Aarp 1211912003 31212004 88311 $2.67 Medi-Cal Of California 121212003 31212004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 1213012003 312/2004 88300 $10.00 Medi-Cal Of California 11512004 312/2004 88300 $10.00
.•..... .. ...
,",l~IL.VV"1'

Last -Name- - -_.-.

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

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 128 of 189

---

~_

~~-

~--.-".

---------

._--~-_

_.~~

-

.. _...

_-",,-~

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
_ . _ . _ ~ _ .

.....

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
12/15/2003

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
3/2/2004

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
OU,JV!J

$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
..p
".~ 1'\

nn., .... n

IU,VU

nl'\

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

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
-'-,_.---,,_.-

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 130 of 189

..... _---

--- .. _-._----

-_.

__

. , ~ -

----------

._----~-_._-

_._._--~--

..

_

..

....

_._ ..-

' - - ' - " ' - - - - - - .. _--

_.... ---

- - - - --

. -. -----,_.,----

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~

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
"1/01'lr'l('\A
VIVU::.. VV""

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
UU,,;V;,)
00')1"11::

$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

_

.

_

~

-

_

.

-

_

$48.20
$96.40 $3.86 $57.84 $17.51 $4.27 $31.92 $101.22 $57.84 $404.88 $6.64 $10.00 $5.90

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

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

0018872

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 131 of 189

--"------_._---------

-'------,-

--- --- ....

__ __
.- ...

.. - --'----

--

----------.

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

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 ~

_.

-

--_.----

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

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

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

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
88305

$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
$50.6i

3/1112004 3/1112004
3/1112004 3111/2004 311112004 3/11/2004

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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 132 of 189

----"-----

-._--~_.-.-

--"-

..-_.-.-

-

-----_._-~

..

-

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

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

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
VU,JU,

$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
.."..;.v"co"'7'"1 1:""1

00""7

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

0018874

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 133 of 189

..

-

._---._'

-

------ ' . - - ' , - -

.J

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

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

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
",)1 rU/LVU",

Medicare Of Northern C
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 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (

9/6/2002 1013012002
10/4/2002 9/30/2002 8/29/2002 9/24/2002 9/2412002 9/2412002

.,'''' .... ',.,nru.

"-----._------

--,._---,,,

912012002
9/20/2002 9/16/2002 9/13/2002 9/13/2002

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

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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 134 of 189

------

-- -- - ------- .. -

- - ----',. ---- ..

-------_.,

.. -

------._--_. __ .'-

----

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

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

$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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 135 of 189

---_.'.,-_...-

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

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

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

1/7/2004 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

------------,-

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

1/1/2004 12/18/2003 1/14/2004 6/6/2003 1/8/2004 4/9/2003 1/7/2004 1/15/2004
1/16/2004

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

1/9/2004 1/9/2004 12/14/2003

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

$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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 136 of 189

"----,-------

- , _ ..

-'-'--'--'~'--

--'

-,_

.. _---

-- ---'---'- ..

-~

-_._,

--.

'---"----'-

--'

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

3116/2004 3/1612004 311612004

311612004 311612004
3116/2004 3/16/2004

11912004 11812004
1/4/2004 1/5/2004 1/4/2004

311612004
311612004

311612004
3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3116/2004 311612004

11412004
1/9/2004 1/912004 1/9/2004 1/912004

88307 88302 88305 88307 88302 88307 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300
88307 88307

$70.11 $3000 $144.60 $70.11 $30.00 $70.11 $70.11 $10.00
$10.00 $10.00

311612004
3/16/2004 3116/2004

11612004 11712004
12/3012003 1/612004

311612004
311612004 311612004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3116/2004

1213012003 1213012003
1/13/2004 12/30/2003 12/3/2003 12/31/2003 1212912003 12/3012003 12/29/2003 12130/2003 116/2004

88302 88300 88300 88300 88307 88300 88302 88300
88300 88300

$10.00 $70.11 $70.11 $19.67 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $70.11
$10.00

3116/2004
311612004 311612004 3116/2004 311612004 .

88300 88300 88300 88300
88300

$12.78 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00 $10.00
$10.00

311612004
3116/2004 3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/1612004

11312004
112/2004

11812004
1/13/2004 1113/2004

311612004
3/1612004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004

111312004 111312004 111812004
1112/2004 1/1312004 1/1612004

311612004 311612004
3116/2004 3/16/2004 3/16/2004 3/1612004

111812004 111912004
12123/2003 1/14/2004

88300 88302 88300 88300 88307 88300 88300 88300 88300 88302 88307 88307 88307 88307 88307
88307

311612004
3/1612004 3116/2004 311612004 3116/2004

11912004 121512003 121412003
12/612003 1/15/2004 117/2004 1/3012004

311612004 311612004 311612004

88307 88307 88302 88302 88302 88307 88300 88307

$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

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 137 of 189

- - - - - - ._--

------"-._---._--,-

-"._-----.-.

' - - - - - _.. -.-._-- -

----------

.. __ .. -

--"'--'-'---"~---'-

---_._,

..

,.~._-

-

_ _ _ "_"

___

_

.. ·· _ _ m

_

"

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

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

$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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 138 of 189

-----------

~---

-

-

-'- .---_.

- --"'--

-'----_ ... -

-._.

----

---

_.•------"-'._-----

--_.._ - - ' ..--

~----

-----

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

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

$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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 139 of 189

"------

--- "------- -

- -- -.--- -.-. ".- _._-_.-

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

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

$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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 140 of 189

.

-------'-

----_ •... --------- - ..

-- -

~_._-_.---

-._._.------

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

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
3/26/2004

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
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
<t7ri '11
"" v. , ,

,/5/2004
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

0018882

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
..__ . --'--_._-_._-._-

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 141 of 189

-

-

- ." .... -

.,_._,._--,

--

--_._--- .... ,'-._- -- .. --.

-_._-_._-

----_.

__ .-----_-.

-- ._---------_ . .,

-

_.---.---.-

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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 142 of 189

- -

-------

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

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
':II':!'! ',,)(',f"l11
Vi'"' "L.,UU-"

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
00"'('\1:"

$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

UU..JU"';

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

$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

Document 278-2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 143 of 189

------_ .. _ - - - -

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

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

$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

Total Insurance Payments

$39,253.64

0018885

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Dr. Jadwin Document 278-2 Charges by entry date March 2004

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 144 of 189

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 Charges by entry date March 2004

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 145 of 189

-"--------------

._--. - - - - - , _.. _------

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
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

Page 146 of 189

-,._---....

-

.

- --- -

------

-_

... _------_.

-----' •....

----

---- - ----'--- .. -

. -

-

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

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

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 Charges by entry date March 2004

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 148 of 189

-------,,- .. - . " .

._~--------_.-

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 March 2004

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 149 of 189

-

---

--------,-._--

-

-----,------

-'.'---' -._,--

- ._--- .. ------.-.---.---_.

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 entry date 278-2 Charges by March 2004

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 150 of 189

--- --------,--------,,--

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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 151 of 189

---------._-

--'

". "--'---...-

'--

- - ' . ' - - , ...

_-

,----- --

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

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

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 Charges by entry date March 2004

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 152 of 189

--

.-

,.,"._---~~.,.

--

_.-

-

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
.. ..
'-'-

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

Totai Charges

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 Inpatientl Outpatient I Distribution Compensation March

I Year-To-Date I
$23,80f33) $0.001

$6,326~
$0.001

!
,

$5,504.371 $759.22 [ $0.001 $63.27\ $0.001
I

$20,707.161 $2,856.161 $0.001 $238.01 \ $O.OO!

Billing ServiceL Billing Clerk[ 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:
To:

February 5, 2004 Dr. Jadwin .Paul Westover

From:
Re:

9J tL

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

Filed 12/01/2008

Page I of 1 Page 155 of 189

. ~count ID: XG1486 User1D; PAULW

___ I
Daysheet
Fihanclal Summary

Appointments

I

Claims

I

Patients

I ~

Finandals

I

Maintenance

I
J

e-Records

I

I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary I Patient Aging I Insurance I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports

Aging

I Adjustments

Procedure Sun

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Frnancial Sum(TIary All Providers Period for 01/01/2004- 01/31/2004

Location; All locations
WriteOffs
# Mise # Proc

Billing
Provider

Rendering

Payments
Charges
Mise Charges

Provider

Insurance
6593,00

Patient

Insurance

Patient

ChargE

David F Jadwin

71814,00 10380.00 21824,00 4370.00

0,00 0,00 0.00

438,00 109,59

16252,24 5448,99

6173,00 1690.00

674 106 218 33

Teopengco
Jadwin l A

2381.01
2189.19 833,63

176.90 0.00

3175,60
1484,37

2341.00 0.00

Teopencgo
LA
Billing Provider
Rendering Provider

0.00

Payments

WriteOffs

Charges

Mise Charges Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proe

# Misl ChargE

Grand Total for practice

$108388.00

$0.00 $11996,83 $724.49 $26361.20 $10204.00

1031

Powered by Medrium

.....
6,59 -00+ 1,3 E\ - [} 0 .,.
·176-90+

o. >,,;.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: To:

March 8, 2004 Dr. Jadwin Paul

From: Re:

westover~t!»J

February Professional Fees

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

Financial Summary
~count 10:
XG1486 User 10: YVONNEN

Page I of I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I

I

Appointments

I

Claims.

I

PatIents

I

~ Finandals

I

Maintenance

I

e-Records

I

Communication Center

Daysheet I Daysheet Summary I Insurance Summary J Patient Aging I Insurance Aging Financial Summary I Capitation Summary I Patient Statements I Custom Reports

I Adjustments I Procedure

Summary

Financial Summary By Posting Date
Financial Summary All Providers

Period for 02/01/2004- 02/29/2004
Payments

Location: All Locations

Billing
proyider

Rendering Provider

WriteOffs

Charges

Mise Charges Insurance

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

# Mise Charges

David F
Jadwin

58677.42 6459.00 17973.00 5061.13 18597.00 5779.00

0.00 0.00 0.00' 0.00 0.00 0.00

3876.99 371.10 2144.22 381.41 0.00 0.00

142.92 15.00 162.73 0.00 0.00 0.00

18644.07 2462.69 3612.63 544.64 0.00 0.00

12311.00 1683.00 187.00 2196.00 0.00 0.00

607 68 171 47 130 41

a a a
0

Teopengco
Jadwin LA
Teopencgo

Document 278-2

LA Upschultz
Lipschultz

a
0

LA
Billing Provider Rendering Provider Payments Charges Mise Charges Insurance Patient WriteOffs Insurance Patient

# Proe

# Misc Charges

Filed 12/01/2008

Grand Total for

practice

$112546.55

$0.00

$6773.72 $320.65 $25264.03 $16377.00

1064

a

c03 ~c'O. 8<:0
'(.,J/9. 6lJ,

03.a7
:$ .5j'OV. 037
J

fa % bt"!J/ f7S / % adm Powered by Medrium

Page 159 of 189

o .... CO o

o

....

(0

https://www.medrium.com/practicel 01/1_XG 1486/Reports/finSummary

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: To:

March 8, 2004

Dr. Jadwin
Paul Westover February Professional Fees

From:
Re:

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
~count 10: XG1436 User 10: YVONNEN! _ _ I Appointments I Claims I F:atlents
!

r(115~

1 Vi 1

.

.

~ I Log Out I Help I Contact I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

I ~

Financials

I

Maintenance

e~Records

Communication Center

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

I Adjustments I Procedure Summary

Financial Summary By postinlg Date
Financial Summary All Providers

Period for 02/0:L/2004- 02/29/2004
Payments

Location: All Locations

Billing
Provider

Rendering Provider

WriteOffs
Insurance Patient

Charges

,.lise Charges Insurance Patient
0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3875.99 37l.10 2144.22 I 381.41 0.00 0.00
I'ayments

# Mise # Proc Charges

David F Jadwin Teopengco Jadwin LA

S8677.42 5459.00 17973.00 5061.13 18597.00 5779.00

142.92 15.00 162.73 0.00 0.00 0.00

18644.07 2462.69 3612.63 544.64 0.00 0.00

12311.00 1683.00 187.00 2196.00 0.00 0.00

607 68 171 47 130 41

0 0 0 0

Document 278-2

Teopencgo
LA Lipschultz Lipschultz LA
Billing Rendering Provider

a
0

WriteOffs

Provider

Charges

'"iscCharges Insunnce

Patient

Insurance

Patient

# Proc

# Mise Charges

Filed 12/01/2008

Grand Total for practice

$112S46.55

$0.00

$6773.72 $320.65 $25264.03 $16377.00

1064

o

(c, ::, J, c,. 80

~~o
.1'50 '-{. ;;7

7S'9.

R,J,

1o 0/0
Powered by Medrlum

Page 161 of 189

00

o .....
to
https://www.medrium.comJpracticel 0 1/1_XG1486/Reports/finSummary 3/8/2004

o

o

W

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
$8,077.381 $0.001

Inpatient I Outpatient
Distribution

,

$8,077.381 $0.001

I
I

Compensation

$7,027.321 $969.291 $0.001 $80.771 $0.001

$7,027.321 $969.29\ $O.OOJ $80.771 $0.001

Billing Service 12%1 Billing Clerk I 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. COUN']'Y OF KERN; et a1. Defendants .
....

No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

-~-~-----_ _~-~_._---_. ...

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 02:39:48 02:39:52 02;39;5-4 02:40,04 02:40:05 02:40:0B 02:40:11 02:40:12 1 2 3 4

113 Document 278-2
02:42:14 02:42:15 02:42:17 02:42:18 02:42:19 02:42:20 02:42:21 02:42:22 02:42:23 1 2

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 164 of 189 115

5 6
7
8 9

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

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

3
4

5
6 7

8
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

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

(800) 322-4595

(800) 322-4595

02:4LD<! 02:4L13 02:41:15 02:41:15 02:41:17 02:41:20 02:41:22 02:41:23 0241:24

1

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

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

2
3 4 5 6 7 8 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<! 23 C2:42:09 24 02:42:11 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

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

(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 165 of 189

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID F. JADWIN,

D.O.,

Plaintiff, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants. No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

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(

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

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

278-2
1

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

15

16
1 2

1
2

A. So what I remember most is the process
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

3
4 5 6 7 8

7

8
9

10
11 12 13 14 15 16
17

9 10
11 12 13 14

15 16
17

18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25

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

,-

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

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

=EC

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN 0 WILLIAM TAYLOR M 0 Wednesday December 5 20C

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

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

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

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

~

-,E=:D,-

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ) WILLIAM TAYLOR MO., Wednesday December 5 200

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

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

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 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

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

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

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

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

,

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

) 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

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(

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

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

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 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

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

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

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

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

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

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

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

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

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

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

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

-'E=O'-'

) WILLIAM TAYLOR

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN M D., Wednesday, December 5 200

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

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?

"'H

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN D WILLIAM TAYLOR M D Wednesday December 5 20l

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 173 of 189 62

Q. Uh-huh.

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

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

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

64
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

(800) 322-4595

WOOD & RANDALL, Certified Shorthand Reporters Toll Free: 800-322-4595; Bakersfield"" 661-395-1050; Fresno: 559-224-2223

11

~

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

-,E~Do.c\

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN WILLIAM TAYLOR M D., Wednesday, December 5, 200,

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

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

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

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

67
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 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

68
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

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, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants. No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

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
Main Office: 423 Truxtun Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 (800) 322-4595 Toll Free. (661) 395-1050 www.bakersfieldcourtreporter.com

WOoo-SoRANDALL
Certified Shorthand Reporters
A Professional Corporation

Serving Central California - Bakersfield, Visalia & Fresno

~

----.:Ce'2.H

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ·S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday, December 6 2007

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

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

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

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

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

12 1 2 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

3
4 5 6 7

A. Q. A. Q. A. Q.

-- is that correct?

8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

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

-"C"-H

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday December 6 2007

Document 278-2 17
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 177 of 189 18

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

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

A. No. Q. Do you have -- have you ever used the tissue
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

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

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, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants. No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

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-

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

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

"'C~H

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M 0 Thursday December 6 2007

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

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

Filed 12/01/2008

27
1 2

28
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

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

3
4 5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

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, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants. No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

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

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

-"C"'H

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEl M 0 Thursday December 6 2007

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

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 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

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, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants. No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

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

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

-'C""H

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN S JOSEPH WROBEL M D Thursday.. December 6 2007

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

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 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

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, vs. COUNTY OF KERN; et al. Defendants. No. 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

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-

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9

Document 278-2 Filed 12/01/2008 37 Q. Don't remember. Did the chair of surgery at 1 8:55 a.m.
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 it?

-"'Cl

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN ES JOSEPH WROBEL M 0 Thursday December 6 200'

Page 185 of 189 38

10
11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

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

MR. LEE: I'll give this -- you want to take 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

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

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

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-

C"'-t

~S

JADWIN VS. COUNTY OF KERN JOSEPH WROBEL M D., Thursday December 6 200·

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

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

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

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

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

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG EUGENE KERCHER, M.D.

Document 278-2
Page 50

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 188 of 189 09-04-08
Page 52

I
I
•

14:25:39
14:25:42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

A. It was Jekyll and Hyde. But then when he came to work the next day·· I meall, I just had a wonderful evening with him .- he would come to work the next day, and I would see this tightened up, controlled, and at times, suspiciolls

I I , 14:28:03

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

out on December 7, 2005 -- I'm solT)' -- 2007. I don't know why I am doing this. Now, when did you -- was there -- in the beginning, was David pretty nonnal, easy to get along with? Did he have this Jekyll and Hyde aspect to him from the vel)' beginning or was this something that you noticed --

14:28:09

14:25:44 14:25:47

14:28:10

14:28:14 14:28:18

14:25:52

Q.

14:25:52 14:25:56
14:25:57
14:26:03

You are a psychiatrist. You observed him? Yeah. Did you think he had Axis It issues? WouJdyoli

A
Q

I 14:28:22
I

I 14:28:22

A. No, it came on It wasn't there initially.

I 14:28:26
14:28:28
14:28:31 14:28:32
14:28:35 14:28:39

Q

It wasn't there. So when did it start to appear,

say he had some personality disorders, in your opinion?
A. YOll know, r·- you know, -interestingly enough,
when I deal with people, unless

this Jekyll and Hyde aspect'!

14:26:08
14:26:11

A. I can't tell you when. Somehow-Q. Was it after the October tumor board conference?
A. No, he was having problems with some of the people he had in his department, discontent with the fact that they weren'l- he was -YOll

11
12 13

r see them clinically, I

11
12

14:26:16
14:26:20 14:26:24 14:26:28 14:26:32 14:26:35 14:26:37 14:26:40 14:26:43 14:26:43 14:26:47 14:26:49 14:26:49 14:26:53

don't interact with people with the DSM stutI, and I never
really assigned any axis stulfto him or diaj,,'lIOSis. Alii know is he was basically an insecure guy, and I recognized somehow, he had troubles, he had some losses, and there was an underlying depression, but f never went any further thalilhat. Q. Well, okay, Let's talk about A..xis II then. Did you ever suspect he had personality disorders?
I

13 14
15 16

14
15 16

!

14:28:45 14:28:48 14:28:51 14:28:55

know, he was one thaI really had

high expectations of himself. I mean, his expectations of himself were just huge, but it was also his expectations of those that worked for him were huge, and he had some issues wilh one individual specilically -- actually, two, a woman and a man.

17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

17
18 19 20 21
22

i, 14:29:04
!
I

14:29:00

A

No

14:29:06 14:29:07

Q. Dr. Shel1udke and Dr. Out!?

Q. Okay. Okay. Well, what about Axis I? You know Axis I?

A. No. No. No. These are people that were on-board
when he arrived.

14:29:10
14:29:12 14:29:14 :29:18

A. Yeah.
Q Did you ever suspect he had Axis I issues?

23 24 25

Q Elsa Ang and Adam Lang?
A. Yeah. And it seems like in dealing with those
people and his frustration with them that that seemed to

A. No

Page 51
14:26:54

Page 53
14:29:23 14:29:25

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Q. Okay Well, Okay. When did you learn Dr. Jadwin
had depression?

1 2 3 4 5

have moved him in a direction that -.

14:27:01
14:27:02 14:27:05 14:27:07 14:27:07 14:27:10 14:27:14 14:27:17 14:27:20 14:27:22 14:27:25 14:27:28 14:27:31 14:27:34 14:27:38 14:27:39 14:27:43 14;27:45 14:27:48 14:27:48 14:27:50 14:27:52 14:27:55 14:28:00

Q Well, Elsa Ang and Adam Lang were in the
Department of Patholo!,.'Y from 2000 because they overlapped. A. [know

A

I just assumed it.

r didn't leam it.

[ mean,

14:29:30 14:29:32 14:29:33 14:29:34 14:29:35

that's just my assumption, Q. Based on what?

Q

nley were there when he arrived?

A

Based on the fact t1mt he had issues with anger

6
7

A. I know Q. SO he was having problems from the time he arrived
then? A. Wet!, my lUlderstanding is that he was -- that he worked very hard to make it clear to some of us that he wasn't happy with the people that he inherited in that department, and --

and he had issues with getting along with people. He was discontent. He was never happy, he was never satisfied. There was always a reason to be upset with something, and he would always be critical of something I mean, there is something wrong with that kind of an individual. And I sort oflay this -- you know, I am a psychiatrist, but' am a pretty reasonable what you see is what you get. 'don't -- when I interact With people, I don't look at them clinically. And David is exactly how J explained. Q. Okay. Well, when didMR. WASSER: At one point,
YOll

9
10

I

14:29:38 14:29:38 14:29:41 14:29:46 14:29:50

8 9 10

11
12

11
12

13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20

I I I

i 14:29:54
14:29:57 14:30:00 14;30;01 14:30:04

14:29:51

13 14
15 16

Q. Did you think there was good reason for that?

A. He didn't give a particular reason, but these were
people we had worked with for some time, having been there as long as we had. So I stayed sort of away from that because why would I want -- that was his depal1ment. So I didn't wan! to bother him with his department. That's not my job unless he asked me to, and he never asked me to.

I
asked him to

17
18 19 20 21 22 23
24

describe the meeting, wh.ich we are kind of off the subject or now. BYMR. LEE: Q. I understand. Now, getting back to Dr. Jadwin, he was hired - I am going to represent to you that he began his employment in October of2004
~~

I 14:30:08

14:30:12 14;30:15 14:30:18 14:30:18 14:30:18 14:30:18

21
22 23 24 25

Q. Okay. But then

-~

so there were some issues

already with Ang, Lang, and I guess there was Fang Luo Liu; right, Fang Luo Liu?

I'm sorry -- 2000,

A. Yeah.

October 12 of2000, and he was there until his contract rail

25

Q. There were three pathologists there. He seemed to

14

(Pages 50 to 53)

JADWIN WOOD & RANDALL

vs.

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

DATE PREPARED DEPARTMENT NAME 09/17/2008 KERN MEDICAL CENTER EMPLOYEE NAME MARTINEZ GILBERT R CLASSiFICATION 0657 MGR, CLiN LAB SV

I

APPOINTMENT CHANGES
TYPE OF APPOINTMENT TYPE OF CIIANGE Pennanent 35 Retirement RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE DATE 09/27/2008

I

RETIREMENT EFFECTIVE 09127108. COMMENTS

DATE ACKNOWI.EDGMENT BY TilE EMPLOYEE: IACKNOWI.EDGE AND CERTIFY
THAT TIlE STt\TEMENTS ON TillS fORM ARE TRUE ANDCORREcr TO TltE

SIG~ATURE

BEST OF MY KNOWI.EDGE DEPARTMENT HEAD OR OTIIER AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE
REQUESTED CHANGE IS: RECOMMENDED
APPROVED
NOT RECOMMENDED
DIRECTOR OF PI.:RSONNEL AND SECRETARY. CIVil. SERViCE COMMISSION

NOT APPROVED Approved By ARMIDA SMITH
Personnel Approval JUDY BEGGS

Keyed By ARMIDA SMITH

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: mwasser@markwasser.com 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: mnations@co.kern.ca.us 9 10
11

Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.

12
13

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

Plaintiff, vs.
COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,

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

Defendants.

REQUEST FOR WDICIAL NOTICE

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 280

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4

Defendants hereby requests, under section 201 of the Rules of Evidence, that the Court take judicial notice of the records of this proceeding identified below. This request for judicial notice is made in connection with the January 12 hearing in this matter. Defendants requests that the Court take judicial notice of the following records: 1. Defendants' Memorandum of Points and Authorities In Support of Motion for

5
6 7

Summary Judgment andlor Summary Adjudication on All Claims in the Second Amended Complaint, filed on November 13,2008.

8
9 10
II

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

12 13 14
15

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

16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23

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

Summary Adjudication, filed on November 13,2008. Dated: December 1, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER By: lsi Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al.

24

2S
26
27

28
-1REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 281

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

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: mwasser@markwasser.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: mnations@co.kern.ca.us Attorneys for Defendants County of Kern, Peter Bryan and Irwin Harris

11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 vs.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
Plaintiff, Case No.: 1:07-cv-00026-0WW-TAG

NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS
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

COUNTY OF KERN, et aI.,
Defendants.

NOTICE OF LODGING OF DEPOSITION TRANSCRIPTS

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 281

Filed 12/01/2008

Page 2 of 2

1 2
3 4

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: transcript; Exhibit 2: transcript and Exhibit 3: transcript; Dated: December 1, 2008 LAW OFFICES OF MARK A. WASSER By: /s/ Mark A. Wasser Mark A. Wasser Attorney for Defendants, County of Kern, et al. Deposition of Eugene Kercher, M.D., taken September 4,2008, condensed Deposition of Charles Wrobel, M.D., taken December 6, 2007, condensed Deposition of Edward Taylor, M.D., taken December 5, 2007, condensed

5
6 7 8 9 10
11

12 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


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: David F. Jadwin v. Kern County: 1:07-cv-26 in the United Stated District Court for the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division before Judge Oliver W. Wanger. This was a 2009 federal employment lawsuit that went to a bench and jury trial resulting in a unanimous verdict and significant judgment for the plaintiff employee. Issues involved violations of medical leave and disability discrimination laws, as well as 42 U.S.C. 1983 procedural due process violation. Plaintiff was represented by Eugene Lee, a Los Angeles, California employment lawyer.