Wednesday, December 12, 2007

Warming Up??....12/18


Well, Essent's boardroom is probably seeing a bit more reds in their color schemes, considering the ruling handed down on the appeal. For one of the more confusing documents (not that I disagree, of course), follow the link. The ruling isn't confusing (pretty much what I indicated, a Cahill based decision), the formatting is. Don't know what the problem with my browser is.

While there's not singing yet, she's warming up in the wings.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Heard that Derald Bulls resigned last Thursday from PRMC to take a job at PJC Alumni PR person.

Anonymous said...

Snooze on--scooped again!!

Anonymous said...

I'm glad Derald got out, he's a nice guy and deserved better than E$$ent. Can you imagine trying to be an effective PR man for this dung heap?

Anonymous said...

I've known Derald for a long time, and he's OK in my book. Gift of gab, open personality, touch o' the blarney (I mean that in a good way)- if indeed he left, it took him long enough. At least now he'll be able to sleep nights.

God bless those folks from both MRMC and ST. Joe's who have bailed from the Essent nightmare.

Anonymous said...

Hope remains for our freedom of speech.

Anonymous said...

Can you hear the gnashing of teeth in NashVegas and on the Loop?

Blogger remains anonymous

By Bill Hankins
The Paris News

Published December 13, 2007

The Court of Appeals of the Sixth Appellate District of Texas Wednesday granted a writ of mandamus in the Paris Regional Medical Center lawsuit against an unknown blogger and ordered the trial court to vacate its order seeking the identity of the blogger.

The appeals court ordered the trial court to proceed in accordance with its opinion that the hospital must prove first that statements made by the blogger are not true and second that they have been harmful to the hospital.

The writ of mandamus order had been sought by the blogger’s attorney James Rodgers of Moore Law Firm in Paris after 62nd District Court Judge Scott McDowell ordered Internet search provider SuddenLink to reveal the name of its client — the blogger.

PRMC filed its lawsuit June 19, accusing the unknown blogger of wrongful conduct in publishing “false and misleading” information detrimental to the hospital and “violations of confidentiality of patient information.”

The hospital argued the blogger “published statements with malice, with a reckless disregard for truth or falsity and with negligence in failing to ascertain the truth of the statements.”

McDowell then ordered the release of the blogger’s identity.

The appeals court ruling, however, said the trial court showed a clear abuse of discretion in ordering the name released because it did not follow the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.

It held there is no precedent in Texas to give the trial court the authority to issue such an order, and that several courts have noted that Internet anonymity serves a particularly vital role in the exchange of ideas and robust debate on matters of public concern.

The appeals court said the trial court should view the matter as if Doe 1 (the blogger) had filed a traditional motion for summary judgment establishing its defense by alleging that his identity was protected from disclosure by virtue of the First Amendment right of free speech.

It said to obtain the requested discovery, the hospital would then be required to produce evidence which would be sufficient to preclude the granting of a summary judgment.

The appeals court said the hospital must first prove the statements are not true and then prove they are harmful to the hospital.

“This is the first case in Texas on this point,” Rodgers said. “We are quite pleased. The appeals court’s ruling is a victory for everybody. There has to be some proof before a person’s First Amendment Rights are pushed aside.”

“They answered all the questions we had,” Rodgers said. “We are very pleased with the appeals court ruling.”

Essent attorneys issued an official statement that said: “We appreciate how carefully the court is proceeding with this important issue. We understand the rules surrounding the Internet are new and evolving and that the court wants to proceed deliberately. That said, we are very confident in our ability to meet the standards articulated by the court.

“In the same way the court is being careful, we are being vigilant with our patients’ private health information and are working hard to ensure that information is kept confidential.

“We understand and respect the blogger and general public’s right to voice their opinions about PRMC, and welcome open dialogue that may help us to better serve our community. However, the method used by the defendants is wholly unacceptable and is an infringement on the confidentiality rights of PRMC patients and a breach of federal law.

“It is equally incomprehensible that this same individual can publish false and misleading information damaging to the reputation of the hospital while hiding under cover of anonymity.

“We intend to pursue all available legal options.”


Essent still doesn't get it- they're the Isiah Thomas of hospital organizations, pointing fingers at everyone while ignoring the fingers pointed back at themselves as they seek to fix blame for their lack of performance.

I don't know what' if any, legal avenues they have, unless they harass the ISP or tighten the screws on the employess even further (both borderline actions).

Seems to me that with all the red ink on the ledgers and the mare's nest left behind by Hud, the very last thing they need to worry about is a blogsite. The only money being made by anybody in this saga is done so by the lawyers.

Clean up your own backyard first, Essent- then either concentrate on actually running hospitals better, or admit you can't do the job & bail out.

Anonymous said...

I have this picture in my head of Frank walking around in his house singing,

I've got big balls
I've got big balls
And they're such big balls
Dirty big balls
And he's got big balls
And she's got big balls
But we've got the biggest balls of them all

fac_p said...

Funny, but it ain't me, babe!

Actually, Essent has a chance to step back and think. They could save face and make the majority of the people involved happy by turning over a new leaf.

With Hud gone and things in a bit of disarray, it would be the time to declare a 'New Essent', all for meeting the needs of their core--the people...and do it.

The worth of the company is essentially zip. If they want to salvage, they need a turn around point. This is their chance, or the chance for a white knight.

The investors need to suck it up and determine a new direction. For, if we don't hang together, we shall all hang separately.

Anonymous said...

Those wishing to impact the lower courts may now do so.

www.USAjudges.com debuted last year and not surprisingly, Texas attorneys caught on first. (I thought it would be NY or CA attorneys). We helped one Texas judge who had been on the bench eight years and running for re-election, return to private practice.

Although our government is broken the good news is the public sector wants to and is now empowered to fix it.

USAjudges.com restores transparency to government not particularly interested in transparency.
http://www.ajs.org/ethics/pdfs/When%20confidentiality%20ceases.pdf

Because of USAjudges.com, I was invited to speak to the American College of Trial Attorneys, 10th Regional District meeting.

First, showed the short, but great video below on the history of the Internet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gmP4nk0EOE
and then nicely said;

"Time's up with these judicial commissions."

The attorneys were charming, as were two of the three judges in attendance. My thirty minute talk was well paced, extremely informative, (with many, many examples, including case numbers, of long time allowed judicial misconduct, and an entire issue of a legal magazine devoted to "impaired" judges on the bench.)

Having once done stand-up, I was also occasionally funny.

Can't really say they liked the message much. But I can tell you this: They believed it.

Anonymous said...

How about the victory hug I saw you give your wife at Sears Thursday? Feels good, don't it?

fac_p said...

Come on, Todd, that was in WalMart. You and unk wouldn't be caught dead there....frank

Anonymous said...

What has happened is the little man, represented so faithfully by Frank and of course James Rogers (this will have people clamouring to retain him), has stood and with a booming voice told "The Man" to kiss his ass, and meant it.

Bravo Frank and James. Take a bow.

Anonymous said...

Frank's boxers. Home of the enormous granite fixtures.

Woot said...

Well I'd hug ya Frank if I had clue who you were!! So I'll just give ya cyber hugs:

[[[[[[[[[Frank]]]]]]]]]]