UAMS Benjamin Davis M.D. takes legal advice from “council.”
UAMS doctors, nurses, and other staff are accused of a two-week-long false imprisonment and battery of a man named Sean Lynn, who entered the hospital after a head injury.
Here is what Dr. Benjamin Davis wrote in the medical record on the day Sean Lynn was finally allowed to leave. “I also discussed the case with CMO of the day (and via CMO, hospital council). All of the above concurred that Arkansas has no statute and UAMS has no policy dictating the terms under which a patient may be placed on medical hold. It was made clear to me the police
would be no help without a 72 hour psych hold, which, as stated above, was impossible.”
I am not an attorney. “Council” that Dr. Davis referred to is probably legal counsel. It is odd, therefore, that I noticed a statute in Arkansas that dictates the terms under which a patient may be placed on a medical hold that UAMS “council” does not advise doctors at the university hospital to follow.
Under Arkansas law, where a patient refuses care and no valid surrogate exists, treatment may proceed only upon a court granting a petition supported by medical certification of necessity. Ark. Code Ann. § 20-9-604.
That law is specifically for when no valid surrogate exists, and I was a valid surrogate that existed at all relevant times; but Dr. Davis and the other medical staff refused to share medical information with me and would not honor the decisions that I told them were their prisoner-patient’s wishes. Because they did not acknowledge a valid surrogate, it is my lay opinion that they should have followed § 20-9-604.
The UAMS staff held Sean Lynn for two weeks by using chemical and physical restraints, and never once applied to a court for certification of medical necessity.
It has been two years and the alleged criminals have not been arrested, they have given no restitution and continue to deny that the ordeal ever happened.
During the imprisonment, and to this day, UAMS insists that Sean Lynn fell 30 to 35 feet. The video here was taken two days after the release. Soon after, Sean described jumping off the ten-foot-high rung of a ladder that was falling. His non-hospital-acquired injuries were far more consistent with a jump from 10 feet than a fall from 35 feet.
UAMS counsel Sherri Robinson wrote in documents to the Arkansas Claims Commission that I agreed Sean fell 35 feet on the day of this recording but also claims that we did not warn UAMS of pending litigation and did not mention that we asked UAMS to correct the record to reflect the true cause of the initial injuries.
Mr. Lynn invites offers of legal representation to be sent to bohemian_books@yahoo.com.
Undue Influence and Litigation Tactics of the Arkansas Elite
A bunch of doctors who work at UAMS and get paid half a million bucks a year goofed.
Instead of admitting to their mistake, they and their cohorts hid the most damning pages of the medical report from the patient, my son, for about 16 months. They also destroyed all the video evidence of their illegal conduct that was taken by the surveillance cameras in the emergency department and hallways where they battered my son.
The UAMS PD refused to arrest any of the people we allege falsely imprisoned and battered my son. So we filed a suit against the medical personnel, security and police involved and a claim against UAMS. We should win, but the legal system rarely works the way it is supposed to work.
Someone sent me a message yesterday, on the two-year anniversary of my son’s release from our two-week ordeal. The message was, drop the lawsuits or never be granted a license to practice law in Arkansas. It was implied, not explicit. Maybe the message was that in retaliation for filing the suit, I will not be granted a license in Arkansas.
I’m 63 years old. I’ve gotten this far without a license. Those of my readers who watched my story unfold over the last two decades know that threats from misfeasors to harm me further don’t usually have the intended effect.
More importantly, the defendants met my son. After he hit his head, the UAMS gang pumped him with fentanyl, lorazepam, diazepam, and a list of other chemical restraints. They withheld all food and water. And still my son did a Houdini out of the four-point restraints the brain surgeons used to bind him, naked, to the $4,700 per night bed.
He knows how corrupt they are, and still he says, “let’s take it to trial.”
Is UAMS Dr. Joseph Margolick on the lam?
What are the chances that there are two or more people named Joseph Margolick in Arkansas, one of whom was cited for speeding more than 15 miles per hour over the limit in Pulaski County and failed to appear for the 2022 arraignment?
A search of Arkansas Court Connect reveals three cases involving the name Joseph Margolick. Two are medical malpractice cases. One is a criminal traffic case.
Standing alone, that proves nothing. Names repeat. Databases are imperfect. Coincidences happen.
But the question becomes more interesting when the lens is narrowed.
What are the chances that there are multiple individuals with the same name in Arkansas, each alleged—separately—to have acted in ways that endangered others, while the systems responsible for accountability appear strikingly disengaged?
In one medical malpractice case, allegations include conduct described as false imprisonment and battery. According to records and correspondence, evidence related to those allegations was submitted to the UAMS Police Department. No meaningful investigation followed. Instead, the department requested that this writer stop sending information.
That response raises a different question altogether.
What are the chances that if the accused individual in a case was poor, unknown, or lacking institutional affiliation, the same level of indifference would apply?
Available information suggests no urgency in executing the warrant issued for Joseph Margolick in 2022 related to a failure to appear.
Again, this is not an identification. It is an observation about systems.
Because when warrants sit unserved, when allegations involving violence are quietly shelved, and when law enforcement discourages the submission of evidence, the issue is no longer about who someone is. It is about what institutions choose to do—or not do.
If accountability pauses whenever professional courtesy enters the room, then the issue is not identity or coincidence—it is selective restraint by the very institutions charged with enforcement.
And that should concern everyone—especially those who believe the law is supposed to work the same way for all.
Opportunity for UAMS Students To Settle Lawsuit
This is a draft, unfinished complaint. It will probably be complete and filed by Monday, December 29, 2025.
Defendants who are interested in early settlement should contact Laura Hammett at bohemian_books@yahoo.com.
The plaintiffs asked UAMS attorney Sherri Robinson and Risk Manager Steve Hillis to meet for a settlement discussion several months ago. UAMS defense counsel and The Doctor’s Company Insurance representative showed little interest.
Soon to be Filed Public Corruption Complaint
This is only a rough draft of the caption and introduction. One defendant Joseph Margolick, M.D. has another open malpractice case for allegedly leaving a sponge in a patient. There is also a Joseph Margolick with an outstanding 2022 Failure to Appear warrant in Pulaski County. Coincidence?
What do you think?
The main problem I see is that Arkansas polices itself and is its own judge and jury. If the ordinary person did anything close to what we allege here, that ordinary person would have been locked up.
Introduction
Sean Lynn was hurt and wanted to go home to his bed, his food, and his daughter. Instead, clinicians at UAMS hurt him worse. For two weeks, they imprisoned, starved, dehydrated, assaulted and battered Lynn in UAMS Medical Center. Lynn was denied visitation with his beloved daughter. The Arkansas State employees insisted that the communication disabilities they caused were “incapacity.” Rather than appoint Hammett as a surrogate, the clinicians substituted their judgment for Lynn’s.
Laura Hammett made a reasonable and eventually successful attempt to rescue Lynn. The Defendants caused her physical and economic damage through ordinary negligence arising under the rescuer doctrine and breach of contractual obligations.
On January 27, 2024, the Defendants allowed Lynn to leave UAMS. He was in far worse condition than when he entered. The Defendants had caused physical and emotional trauma, exacerbated aphasia, and hearing loss.
On February 13, 2024, UAMS Medical Center, a unit of the University of Arkansas, generated a statement claiming total charges of $115,132.45, and thanked Lynn “for choosing” them as his healthcare provider.
Plaintiffs seek damages from the individual defendants who caused Plaintiffs’ harm.
Plaintiffs also seek prospective equitable relief against the Board of Trustees of the University of Arkansas to enjoin enforcement of any policy or practice at UAMS Medical Center that prohibits or chills the documentation of non-consensual hospitalization in violation of Article 2, Section 6 of the Arkansas Constitution. Further, Plaintiffs seek declaratory relief requiring referral of evidence from this action and the related Arkansas Claims Commission proceeding to the Public Integrity Unit of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Lynn is pro se and is happy to speak with attorneys willing to help him. You can contact Lynn though me at bohemian_books@yahoo.com
Populism and Corrupt Courts
Thank you to my wonderful friend Carolyn Conrad for saving many of the posts I wrote for the now-defunct Examiner.com.
Carolyn’s son Christopher died recently. He never fully recovered from the devastation thrust upon his life by corrupt court collaterals and judicial officers. Ah, that tears could wash away the memories. But not.
UAMS Doctors Tried to Hide the Evidence
Summary of the Case
This complaint arises from negligence in a medical setting that can be understood by a person of ordinary intelligence using common knowledge. The defendants failed to ask the patient what the mechanism of his injury was, instead relying on an unattributed and erroneous note made by someone who was not a witness to the accident. Based solely on that erroneous statement, the Medical Defendants substituted their judgment for the patient’s and refused to allow the patient to contact his family or get a ride home from a professional driver.
The claims that arose during the two weeks immediately after are brought under two alternate theories. The Plaintiffs’ preferred theory is that refusal of consent ended the doctor-patient relationship, and the further claims arise out of ordinary tort, contract, and civil rights law. The alternative is that Lynn’s claims are subsumed into the medical injury claim, and Hammett’s claims fall under tort, contract, and civil rights law, particularly the ADA.
In response to the Plaintiffs’ threats of a lawsuit, the Defendants allowed Lynn to leave the hospital on January 27, 2024. Instead of attempting to make the Plaintiffs whole, the Defendants manifested their intent to commit fraud on the court and obstruct justice. They refused to amend the medical record to correct the mechanism of the initial injury and destroyed the videos taken in the emergency room and during Lynn’s escape attempts through the hospital halls and stairways.
ABC Guide to Lawyering
This book was actually my son Sean’s idea, and it’s published through his Amazon account. Amazon takes the bulk of the sale price—Sean says he earns only a few cents per copy—but his goal was never the money. He wants to share what he went through: the medical battery and false imprisonment he endured at UAMS, and the obstacles he’s faced while pursuing a settlement with the state-run hospital.~~~
There is a lengthy sample that you can read on your phone. It is a good long-weekend-cozy-in-bed book.
A Higher Law 