THE VERDICT IS IN (Foda v RateMDs.com)

Last May, Dr. Mohamed Foda's lawyer filed a motion to supoena any and all information RateMDs had on his client. On July 26th, he was told to take a hike.

The judgment is attached.

AttachmentSize
Foda V RateMDs motion denied.pdf68.12 KB

I guess congratulations are

I guess congratulations are due but I couldn't get through that legal document. Why do they have to make it so hard to understand?? What is wrong with writing things the way we speak, so that EVERYBODY can understand them??!

Daenerys wrote: I guess

Daenerys wrote:

I guess congratulations are due but I couldn't get through that legal document. Why do they have to make it so hard to understand?? What is wrong with writing things the way we speak, so that EVERYBODY can understand them??!

I am with you on that subject... the legal profession never heard of KISS (KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID).

Thanks, Kat; I hadn't even

Thanks, Kat; I hadn't even seen the verdict yet myself!

John

Good news!

Good news!

THIS IS GREAT. GUESS IF YOU

THIS IS GREAT. GUESS IF YOU CANT TAKE THE HEAT GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN.

I tried to post a

I tried to post a line-by-line translation of the judgement (it really is good reading) but the forum is acting up and I'm unable to get the text to 'take'.

But the really short summary is that the judge all but threw the motion out the window. She said that the plaintiff had utterly failed to make a case for why he needed this information and implied that he (and his lawyers) were dangerously close to violating California's ANTI-SLAPP laws. She also said that RateMDs' postings are simply not subject to defamation lawsuits unless the suer can prove that they were made with malicious intent.

"Plaintiffs have failed to

"Plaintiffs have failed to show that an order allowing them to serve the proposed subpoena on
RateMDs, Inc. is warranted."

COOL!

Kat,
How do you add attachments? I have been wanting to attach some PowerPoint slides for quite awhile now and have been trying many different avenues to accomplish this with no success.
Gagal

Its an option available only

Its an option available only when you are creating a new thread. If you scroll down past that stuff that talks about HTML coding, you'll see a couple of options for attaching pictures and files to the thread.

Katherine wrote: Its an

Katherine wrote:

Its an option available only when you are creating a new thread. If you scroll down past that stuff that talks about HTML coding, you'll see a couple of options for attaching pictures and files to the thread.

Do you know if I attach something from my desk top will any private information become available.
For example, when I right clicked your attachment document properties and page display reference along with other options popped up. I am not sure if I should attachment something from my desktop if it would indicate the source of the attachment...so and so's desktop.

gagal wrote: Katherine

gagal wrote:
Katherine wrote:

Its an option available only when you are creating a new thread. If you scroll down past that stuff that talks about HTML coding, you'll see a couple of options for attaching pictures and files to the thread.

Do you know if I attach something from my desk top will any private information become available.
For example, when I right clicked your attachment document properties and page display reference along with other options popped up. I am not sure if I should attachment something from my desktop if it would indicate the source of the attachment...so and so's desktop.

Interesting question. I just did what you did and the computer "described" (for lack of a better word) in the PDF's document properties isn't mine. My computer doesn't have a G drive and none of the folders are called PVT...or whatever it was.

But if you were to attach something you created then its entirely possible that the document properties would include information about your computer.

Katherine wrote: gagal

Katherine wrote:
gagal wrote:
Katherine wrote:

Its an option available only when you are creating a new thread. If you scroll down past that stuff that talks about HTML coding, you'll see a couple of options for attaching pictures and files to the thread.

Do you know if I attach something from my desk top will any private information become available.
For example, when I right clicked your attachment document properties and page display reference along with other options popped up. I am not sure if I should attachment something from my desktop if it would indicate the source of the attachment...so and so's desktop.

Interesting question. I just did what you did and the computer "described" (for lack of a better word) in the PDF's document properties isn't mine. My computer doesn't have a G drive and none of the folders are called PVT...or whatever it was.

But if you were to attach something you created then its entirely possible that the document properties would include information about your computer.

That's what I thought, but I did not want to try to find out. I usually upload images onto photobucket to alleviate that problem; however, I can not upload PowerPoints. I really want to be able to display PowerPoints in the forum. If you discover a way, please let me know.

gagal wrote: Katherine

gagal wrote:
Katherine wrote:
gagal wrote:
Katherine wrote:

Its an option available only when you are creating a new thread. If you scroll down past that stuff that talks about HTML coding, you'll see a couple of options for attaching pictures and files to the thread.

Do you know if I attach something from my desk top will any private information become available.
For example, when I right clicked your attachment document properties and page display reference along with other options popped up. I am not sure if I should attachment something from my desktop if it would indicate the source of the attachment...so and so's desktop.

Interesting question. I just did what you did and the computer "described" (for lack of a better word) in the PDF's document properties isn't mine. My computer doesn't have a G drive and none of the folders are called PVT...or whatever it was.

But if you were to attach something you created then its entirely possible that the document properties would include information about your computer.

That's what I thought, but I did not want to try to find out. I usually upload images onto photobucket to alleviate that problem; however, I can not upload PowerPoints. I really want to be able to display PowerPoints in the forum. If you discover a way, please let me know.

Its not hard. Just click the create a thread button. Scroll all the way down. At the bottom you will see a couple of links. One says "attach a picture" the other says "attach a file". Click the one you want and then upload it the way you would an assignment to Blackboard or WebCT or whatever your school uses.

It appears that rateMDs was

It appears that rateMDs was compelled to reveal the identity of one of their posters:

http://www.slaw.ca/2009/10/13/doctors-fight-back-against-reputations-on-ratemd/

"Administrator of RateMDs, John Swapceinski, says that the site gets letters from lawyers once a month. Not surprisingly, they do not comply with the requests. The site does serve an important public function for consumers of healthcare. But Swapceinski also said that Dr. Foda’s suit is the first time a lawyer has actually followed through and sued the site, and he indicated he would cooperate with a subpoena to release the information if one was provided.

In light of the Cohen v. Google and York University v. Bell Canada Enterprises cases I’ve covered previously, it’s probably no great surprise that the court did reveal the identity of the poster.

What is also unique about this case is that the person identified as the RateMDs poster was involved in different lawsuit on the other side of Dr. Foda in Foda v. Capital Health Region, [2007] A.J. No. 22; 2007 ABQB 19, where he was making a claim for breach of contract, conspiracy, harassment, defamation, and direct interference with economic relations."

It would appear that the poster in question was not a patient, but rather someone involved in a legal battle with the doctor.

This must have cost a fortune in legal fees for both sides.

Thanks for posting the above

Thanks for posting the above Chris. The following was very interesting:

It’s become enough of a concern to physicians that Sam Solomon provides some advice to MDs in this month’s edition of Parkhurst Exchange:

1.Ask for the review to be taken down
2.The Medical Justice approach of providing patients a contract allowing them to only post reviews on sites that confirm poster identity
3.Sue
4.Encourage patients to post positive reviews
5.Use the criticism as an opportunity to improve practice

Chris - if patients complained about you, do you think it would be a good opportunity for some reflection, and an opportunity for you to improve your practice? Puzzled

Regarding #2 - "The Medical

Regarding #2 - "The Medical Justice approach of providing patients a contract allowing them to only post reviews on sites that confirm poster identity.'

Personally, I believe that if a patient posts anything about a doctor, they should not be afraid to give their name.

They should have the supporting evidence, and not be afraid, however, the reality is that doctors have the money to sue, and can sue patients who have been wronged by them.

Money is power, and so doctors, and their supporting organizations, have the power.

The CMPA could have the power to do good, but their role is to defend the doctor - at all costs.

I believe that when patients complain to the CPSO they should not be dismissed.

When Colleges dismiss patients' valid concerns, I believe that they should be dismissed.

But, that will never happen.

I can wish on stars all I want, but doctors hold the power, and if they don't care, nobody can make them care.

chrisaldridge wrote: It

chrisaldridge wrote:

It appears that rateMDs was compelled to reveal the identity of one of their posters:

http://www.slaw.ca/2009/10/13/doctors-fight-back-against-reputations-on-ratemd/

"Administrator of RateMDs, John Swapceinski, says that the site gets letters from lawyers once a month. Not surprisingly, they do not comply with the requests. The site does serve an important public function for consumers of healthcare. But Swapceinski also said that Dr. Foda’s suit is the first time a lawyer has actually followed through and sued the site, and he indicated he would cooperate with a subpoena to release the information if one was provided.

In light of the Cohen v. Google and York University v. Bell Canada Enterprises cases I’ve covered previously, it’s probably no great surprise that the court did reveal the identity of the poster.

What is also unique about this case is that the person identified as the RateMDs poster was involved in different lawsuit on the other side of Dr. Foda in Foda v. Capital Health Region, [2007] A.J. No. 22; 2007 ABQB 19, where he was making a claim for breach of contract, conspiracy, harassment, defamation, and direct interference with economic relations."

It would appear that the poster in question was not a patient, but rather someone involved in a legal battle with the doctor.

This must have cost a fortune in legal fees for both sides.

Did the CMPA cover Dr. Foda for this lawsuit?

I thought I read somewhere that this sort of legal action wouldn't be covered.

chrisaldridge wrote: Did

chrisaldridge wrote:

Did the CMPA cover Dr. Foda for this lawsuit?

I thought I read somewhere that this sort of legal action wouldn't be covered.

As far as I know, the CMPA was not involved. At least I didn't see their name on any of the documents, but that may not mean much.

John

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.