Arkansas Makes False Imprisonment by Hospital “Medical Malpractice”
For those who have been following along on my son’s and my case against UAMS, we made a third amendment to the claim.
It seems that the legislature made false imprisonment by a medical provider a “medical injury” under the Medical Malpractice Act. Our elected officials decided also that medical providers, in the context of providing medical services, consensual or not, cannot be sued civilly for any other tort.
It is not a big deal to our case. Really just semantics. The clause in the Med Mal Act that requires an expert witness does not apply, because the claim is easily comprehended based on common sense without specialized medical knowledge.
Here is a summary of the Third Amended Complaint generated by AI using Westlaw Co-Counsel.
- The claimants, Sean Lynn and Laura Hammett, allege that the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS) unlawfully confined Sean Lynn for two weeks, during which he was subjected to repeated battery and denied autonomy over his body.
- They claim that UAMS failed to treat Laura Hammett as a surrogate, causing her physical, economic, and severe emotional harm.
- Sean Lynn alleges that he suffered various harms, including emotional trauma, iatrogenic harm, and physical injuries such as hearing loss and pain from non-consensual invasive procedures.
- Laura Hammett claims emotional trauma and loss of ability to manage her health conditions, as well as a loss of future income due to the situation.
- The claimants assert that UAMS acted under the color of law and that its workforce’s actions can be attributed to UAMS, which is liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.
- They allege that UAMS engaged in spoliation of evidence and obstruction of justice.
- The claimants argue that UAMS did not obtain consent for medical treatments and that Lynn was held against his will without due process.
- They claim that UAMS misled Hammett about Lynn’s condition and legal rights, causing her to encourage Lynn to remain in the hospital.
- The claimants allege that UAMS violated Lynn’s rights under the UAMS Patient Rights and Responsibilities and Arkansas law, and that its actions were outrageous and malicious.
- They assert that UAMS committed fraud against Hammett by deceiving her about Lynn’s condition and the treatments administered.
- The claimants allege a breach of fiduciary duty by UAMS for not allowing Hammett to act as Lynn’s surrogate and for failing to inform her of his rights.
- They seek monetary compensation for damages, including attorney fees and costs of litigation, and specific compensatory damages for Hammett.
Second Amended Claim Against UAMS for False Imprisonment and Battery & Medical Record
FACTS
10. Lynn was taken to UAMS and admitted to the emergency room on January 13, 2024 at or about 5:13 PM. He had full capacity. He submitted to testing to determine if immediate surgery was necessary. The doctors decided there was not an emergent need for surgery. Lynn asked to leave. Instead of allowing Lynn to use his phone to call Hammett or the woman he lived with, UAMS doctors and nurses poisoned Lynn with Fentanyl. They continued to drug him for two weeks, claiming that the effects of the drugs were “incapacity”, and telling Hammett he might be this “out of it” the rest of his life because of the brain injury from the fall.
11. No one witnessed the fall that caused Lynn’s need for emergency care. Despite evidence to the contrary, the UAMS Workforce adopted the narrative that Sean Lynn fell from 30 to 35 feet.
12. Lynn remembered the accident in detail on or about February 8, 2024. He was on a ladder with his head at about 16 feet and his feet about 10 feet above ground. The ladder began to fall away from the house it leaned against. There was a steep slope in the direction of the fall, so Lynn decided to jump. He did not calculate for inertia and flipped backwards, landing on his head. He remembers his thoughts as he fell, primarily, concern for his daughter if he died.
13. This was unquestionably a severe injury, though survival rates from 10 feet are significantly better than from 30 feet. Miraculously, Sean Lynn was relatively unscathed. There was no damage except to his head.
14. According to a scanned copy of the handwritten triage notes first produced to Claimants on May 9, 2025, 15 months after they requested a copy of the entire medical record:
15. Upon entry to the ED, Lynn had blood pressure 120/70, heart rate 60, Glasgow Coma Scale 14 (13 – 15 is a “mild” TBI). GCS evaluates three key responses:
- Eye Opening (E): Spontaneous, to voice, to pain, or none
- Verbal Response (V): Oriented, confused, inappropriate words, incomprehensible sounds, or none
- Motor Response (M): Obeys commands, localizes pain, withdraws, abnormal flexion, extension, or none
16. The only one of 37 Primary Scene Trauma Level 1, 2 and 3 Activation criteria Lynn met was fall greater than 20 feet, which was an error based on an unattributed statement written by an EMT who was not a witness to the fall. There are no known witnesses to the fall except Lynn himself;
17. Neither “Emergency Physician Discretion” nor “MD/Charge RN discretion” were checked off;
18. Lynn was noted on the Behavior & Suicide Screen as saying that over the past 2 weeks he had not felt down, depressed, hopeless, nor had thoughts of killing himself, and never had thoughts of killing himself;
19. There was no indication that patient Lynn “refused” to answer, was “unable to complete” or “was not assessed due to severity of illness”;
20. It was noted that Lynn’s sensory, motor, and circulatory systems were intact.
21. iSTAT blood test results at 17:22 showed
sodium: 141 mmol/L [Ref Range: 135 – 145];
potassium: 3.8 mmol/L [Ref Range: 3.5 – 5.0];
chloride: 106 mmol/L [Ref Range: 98 – 109];
CO2: 23 mmol/L [Ref Range: 22 – 31];
BUN: 13 mg/dL [Ref Range: 6 – 20];
Glucose: 155 mg/dL [Ref Range: 70-105];
Hct: 47 % [Ref Range: 40 – 52];
Hb: 16.0 g/dL [Ref Range: 14.0 – 18.0];
pH: 7.34 [Ref Range: 7.31 – 7.41];
PCO2: 41.2 mmHg [Ref Range: 41.0 – 51.0];
HCO3: 22.2 mmol/L [Ref Range: 23.0 – 28.0];
BE: -4 mmol/L [Ref Range: -2 – 3]
22. These results are unremarkable, except for mild metabolic acidosis, which might indicate trauma or dehydration, and slightly elevated glucose, also a normal sign of trauma. There are over 363,000 people in Arkansas with chronic elevated glucose plus those who have trauma induced elevated glucose. There are only about 1,197 ICU beds in Arkansas. It is a matter that can be concluded by any person of reasonable intelligence that a glucose level of 155 mg/dL does not demand intensive care.
23. At 17:24-17:25, CT scans were performed on Lynn’s cervical spine, maxillofacial area, head & neck, abdomen and pelvis.
24. No need for surgical intervention was documented.
25. Olivia Speed, MD (Resident) commented, “No need to keep admitted from facial fracture standpoint.” Some of the fractures were plausibly pre-existing.
26. Lynn had a left frontoparietal temporal subdural hematoma, left frontal hemorrhagic contusion, left tentorial subdural hematoma, and scattered subarachnoid hemorrhages. Despite the radiographic presence of intracranial bleeding across multiple compartments, his condition remained neurologically stable, and no surgical or interventional procedures were deemed necessary or administered. The absence of emergent curative treatment further underscores the lack of medical justification for prolonged involuntary restraint and chemical sedation.
27. Yet, at 7:33, Sarah E. Martin, MD (Resident) placed an order for levETIRAcetam (Keppra) 500 mg/5 mL (injection). No consent to treat was obtained from Lynn.
28. Levetiracetam is a prophylactic.
29. UAMS documented no Electroencephalogram (EEG) in the ED or at any time during the two-week forced hospitalization.
30. At 17:48 Nolan R. Bruce, MD was assigned as admitting physician. UAMS is a teaching hospital where the residents and trainees are required to be supervised, and the standard consent form requires the signatory to acknowledge and agree to be treated by trainees. Lynn did not consent and was bothered that the people who were performing intrusive procedures on him looked inexperienced.
31. At 17:48, Natalie J. Applebaum, MD (Resident) placed an order for fentaNYL (Sublimaze) (injection) 50 mcg. No consent to treat was obtained from Lynn. No consent to allow students, trainees or residents to treat Lynn was obtained.
32. At 17:51, the fentanyl was started by Nathan Ernst, RN (possibly a Trainee).
33. At 17:52, the fentanyl was “stopped”.
34. In answer to Interrogatory No. 11 propounded by claimants, UAMS wrote, after objections: “on page 84 of the UAMS medical record, it indicates that Dr. Applebaum, an Emergency Department physician, ordered a 50 mcg dose of fentanyl via injection into the IV line for Lynn while he was in the Emergency Department, and Emergency Department nurse Nathan Ernst administered the fentanyl per the order.”
35. UAMS did not explain why an entry on page 69 of the medical record generated 4/29/25 showed “0 mcg Intravenous Stopped 1/13/24 1752.” There was twice the .1 mg = 100 mcg ordered, but no coding on the record to indicate discarding the remaining 50 mcg (JW). This along with contradictory records on other medication administration make it more probable than not that there was diversion of some expensive medications and controlled substances diverted for the personal use or sale by the staff. UAMS has shown no meaningful investigation into our claim.
36. A subdural hematoma might put pressure on the language center of Lynn’s brain, which might cause three types of aphasia. The effect of Fentanyl can mimic aphasia or exacerbate it. It can also delay or blunt recovery. Regardless, aphasia is an ADA disability that does not affect reasoning.
37. There was no objective evidence that Lynn’s ability to reason was affected. Lynn was always an iconoclast. He was and is brilliant. He just had trouble finding the right words after the administration of Fentanyl.
38. At admission there was specifically “no evidence of ossicular disruption or otic capsule involvement” in Lynn’s right ear. There was no mention of injury to the left ear. By the time Hammett learned that her son was in the hospital, he had been tackled and restrained and struggled with his superhuman strength to escape, and his hearing, which was already a little impaired before the fall, seemed to approach deafness. Post escape medical exams showed ossicular disruption and virtual deafness in the left ear. It is plausible that the disruption occurred while struggling to escape.
39. At no time during the two-week imprisonment did UAMS file a petition for an order of detention pursuant to AR Code § 20-47-211 (2023). UAMS failed to serve Lynn or his Accommodator with a copy of his statement of rights, including that he has the right to effective assistance of counsel, including the right to a court-appointed attorney, despite Hammett demanding a copy of “the paperwork” several times.
40. Following his admission to UAMS, claimants were not informed of Lynn’s rights as required, including not being advised of his right to be released upon the expiration of a legal 72-hour-hold and UAMS Patient Rights and Responsibilities (Exhibit A).
41. An order for detention could not be justified. At no time did Lynn express an intent to hurt himself or anybody else. There are a small number of boiler plate notes that Lynn made a comment to hurt himself or others well into his imprisonment. There was no quotation. There was no report made to security nor to UAMS police department. Neither Hammett nor Lynn remember any such threat. In fact, Lynn specifically remembered not hurting a healthcare worker because of signs he read, and Hammett specifically remembers and documented Lynn being oddly polite to his captors, saying “sir” and holding out his hand to shake theirs.
42. Lynn did not want to use benzodiazepines, sedatives, opioids, be catheterized, restrained physically, be fed through a tube or defecate in a bed pan. He used none of these substances or techniques after leaving AMA and survived a year and eight months so far. If God decided it was time for Lynn to go to Heaven, he wanted to die at home, with a chance to “num num” his daughter, giving her big funny kisses like Cookie Monster. But he would do nothing to hasten his death, and he would do everything that in his informed opinion would lengthen his life without destroying the quality of that life.
43. Positive treatments not allowed by UAMS included eating enough and only healthful food, getting any fresh air, sunshine, adequate water, enough gentle exercise, uninterrupted sleep, and the constant company of his loved ones.
44. Lynn was able to escape four-point restraints by somehow breaking his right foot free, then bringing his right foot to his left hand and using his toes to loosen the restraints. This took flexibility rarely found in 34-year-old men, dexterity and, most importantly, ingenuity.
45. Soon after leaving UAMS, Hammett asked Lynn why he did not use force against the staff to escape. He said he read a sign that says it is a felony to assault a healthcare worker. During a whirlwind tour of the 4th floor on July 1, 2025, there were none of the signs posted on the floor. Either UAMS took them down subsequently, or Lynn was cognizant enough to remember reading the sign in his past.
46. His speech improved dramatically the moment he got home. He said that he knew he was in a hospital, but thought it was “in the middle of nowhere” and initially thought that the doctors were like those “Nazis that did experiments in World War Two.” (Lynn is Catholic, but half his ancestors are Jews who escaped persecution in Eastern Europe. UAMS kept Lynn isolated from family for the first 14 hours, and were “locking” him to the cot, which was extra confusing with aphasia and hearing loss.)
47. After leaving the hospital AMA and getting a mile or so away, Lynn knew exactly where he was and pointed out landmarks in relation to his house. (i.e. There is the place we like (for Chinese), and my house is just a few blocks away.)
48. Lynn was held against his will from January 13-January 27, 2024 despite repeated requests to go home, and numerous attempts to escape, several of which are noted in his medical record using the base word “elope” instead of “escape”.
49. Lynn was starved. Typical meals served by UAMS included the following:
- 4 ounces of vanilla ice cream (~100 calories)
- 3.5-ounce Kraft chocolate pudding (~110 calories)
- 4-ounce serving of Ardmore Farms cranberry juice cocktail (~60 calories)
- One cup of tomato soup (~90 calories)
- 8-ounce carton of whole milk (~150 calories)
- 8-ounce glass of sweetened tea (~30 calories if sweetened)
50. This meal, totaling approximately 540 calories, was representative of the hospital’s nutritional offerings—high in sugar and processed ingredients, and lacking in protein, fiber, fresh vegetables, or healthy fats. These foods are inconsistent with dietary standards for any adult, let alone a neurologically compromised patient with increased metabolic needs. Standard clinical guidelines recommend between 2,000 and 2,800 calories per day for adult males, depending on medical condition and activity level. Mr. Lynn was consistently underfed.
51. UAMS, in response to interrogatory No. 6, claimed it does not routinely document when food or drinks were presented, how Lynn was supposed to eat or drink (whether his hands were restrained), and an ingredient list for the food and drinks he was given. The full response to our inquiry about his diet during the hospitalization was that “Lynn was given only a liquid diet and/or a feeding tube until just a few hours before he left the hospital against medical advice.”
52. On January 14, 2024, UAMS told Hammett that Lynn could only eat ice chips until the SLP practitioner evaluated his ability to swallow.
53. On January 15, 2024, Hammett observed Emily Gray, CCC-SLP allow Lynn to brush his teeth. When given a small cup, approximately 2 oz. of water, Lynn swished it around to rinse, then he looked around like a criminal who was going to snatch something from a shop, and he swallowed the water. He was dehydrated and begging for water before Ms. Gray came into the room. Ms. Gray wrote that “Pt was unable to swish and spit water to remove toothpaste from oral cavity; pt swallowed water instead.”
54. On January 14, 2024, UAMS also told Hammett that Lynn should not eat solid food for approximately six weeks due to a fracture in his jaw. This limitation was not noted by the doctor who diagnosed Lynn’s facial fractures, Dr. Olivia Speed (Resident) or her supervising physician. Regardless, UAMS fed Lynn pudding and ice cream. Hammett was willing to feed Lynn a soft food diet at home, but she would have ground proteins, fresh whole fruits and vegetables, and used soft cheeses. Lynn did not need to eliminate solids, introduced them immediately at home and had no problem with his jaw.
55. UAMS refused to keep foods for Lynn and Hammett in the refrigerator. UAMS left the healthful foods Hammett brought for Lynn unused.
56. Hammett was on a strict elimination diet in a successful attempt to manage Hashimoto’s Disease and gastrointestinal problems. Hammett was also living on about a $650 per month pension. She could not afford the few foods offered by the UAMS cafeteria that had none of her eliminated foods, such as black pepper, tomatoes and onions.
57. UAMS forbid Lynn to have the company of CL, his beloved daughter, based on her age, 8 years old. UAMS told Hammett while Lynn was in ICU that CL could not visit. They did not tell her the restriction does not apply when he moved to F4. Jaliyah Rucker, PCT noted how well Lynn responded when he got to talk to CL on the phone.
58. UAMS failed to bring in a priest, despite their feigned concern that Lynn was on the verge of death.
59. UAMS ceased administration of Keppra after six days. If the hospital was truly concerned about the seizure risk, they should have continued Keppra. Their failure to do so indicates that the seizure risk was exaggerated to justify keeping Lynn in the hospital. (Lynn did not consent to the use of Keppra. The claim is not that it should have been continued, but that it was not necessary or emergent.)
60. Incurring billable charges is a more plausible motivation for the false imprisonment.
61. Hammett was physically free to leave but was kept at the hospital by the coercive measure of keeping her son there and threatening to have the police come, with the implication that she would be arrested if she helped Lynn leave. Hammett explained to UAMS Workforce that both she and Lynn had a history of traumatic experiences with police who refused to protect them from Lynn’s abusive father. Since there were people in uniform and surveillance cameras all around, claimants’ concern for inaction and worse, improper action against claimants by the police was reasonable. In fact, when Lynn finally agreed to get the police involved, they flat out refused to investigate.
62. UAMS condoned the denial of Lynn’s rights, denying each and every “material” allegation in the answer to the claim.
63. Lynn, on and after January 13, 2024, repeatedly told the UAMS Workforce that he did not consent to be there and wanted to go home but he was not allowed to do so. UAMS Workforce further participated in a scheme to cover up their violations of Claimants’ rights. Respondent in the furtherance of the conspiracy by coercion, trickery and deceit convinced Hammett that Lynn’s behavior that was similar to when he abused substances in his teens, was caused by the traumatic brain injury instead of by the drugs UAMS administered. On several occasions UAMS Workforce said, verbatim, “we never give opioids to TBIs” and “we never give Benzos to TBIs.” UAMS convinced Hammett it was illegal for her to help Lynn leave. UAMS insisted Lynn consented to treatment and Hammett could not make decisions as next of kin. In defeat and wanting to mitigate the damages done in escape attempts and pulling out the invasive apparatus, Hammett begged Lynn to stay and “cooperate” with his captors. This was a huge breach of trust between mother and son. On January 29th, when Lynn woke at home, he said to Hammett that he had a bad dream that she was being mean to him. We will prove at trial that UAMS Workforce’s conduct was especially cruel in light of the history Hammett shared with UAMS about Lynn and Hammett’s traumatic past and the trust issues it caused.
64. UAMS further showed malice by making an inaccurate record and refusing to amend it completely upon claimants’ request.
65. UAMS supposedly destroyed the surveillance videos that would show that the imprisonment was not consensual and that it was UAMS that was belligerent and at risk of harming others, not Hammett and Lynn as noted by UAMS in the inaccurate record.
66. UAMS was aware of the illegal action taken by UAMS Workforce against Lynn but failed to take any action to secure his discharge and return him to his home.
67. UAMS sent a bill to Lynn, upon his release, demanding $42,095.78 plus a separate bill demanding an additional $4,188.40 for a total of $46,284.18.
68. Hammett asked to speak with a “social worker” or “case manager” about getting Medicaid for Lynn on January 14, 2024 and January 16, 2024 and was told both times that someone would speak to her. But no one ever did. Hammett obtained and paid for other insurance for Lynn that would begin on February 1, 2024, told UAMS that, and UAMS Workforce noted it in the record.
69. Because UAMS tricked Hammett into thinking the effects of the drugs they forced on him were due to the TBI, Hammett intended to have Lynn live with her for an unspecified length of time, maybe forever. Hammett was able to help Lynn obtain Medicaid to cover the legal charges incurred before February 1, 2024. This was the ambulance and emergency room charges. UAMS convinced Medicaid to pay charges for the non-consensual imprisonment.
70. UAMS knew of the illegality of detaining Lynn on what they called a “72-hour hold” (even though it was a two-week hold) and a “psych hold” without first
filing a petition with the court for an order for inpatient detention and
treatment pursuant. Nevertheless, UAMS Workforce willfully, intentionally,
and in utter disregard of Claimants’ legal and human rights refused to allow Lynn to leave UAMS.
71. The actions UAMS took violated Lynn’s rights under the “UAMS Patient Rights and Responsibilities” and under AR Code § 20-47-207 et seq., (2023)., and his rights to be discharged upon request, to informed consent and to refuse medication and invasive procedures without force or coercion.
72. The actions and inactions of Respondent, their agents and employees were in
direct violation of Claimants’ rights to liberty and freedom from restraint, to be
released from detention, and to live or die in his own home. The actions of Respondent in incarcerating Lynn against his will at UAMS were knowingly taken, without legal authority and in direct violation of well settled standards of medical ethics. The action of Respondent, their agents and employees were intentionally taken and not taken in good faith.
73. Respondent further denied Lynn his right to counsel to challenge his detention. UAMS failed to provide an experienced aphasia accommodator. UAMS failed to provide someone with experience communicating with newly deaf patients. UAMS, who claimants were supposed to be able to trust, lied to Hammett about Lynn’s condition and legal rights, who then conveyed those lies to Lynn. (Lynn never believed the lies and asked Hammett why she was being “weird”.)
74. UAMS did not have a psychiatrist or therapist speak with Lynn until January 24, 2024.
75. UAMS did not discuss their treatment plans with Lynn. None of them were
presented to Lynn, discussed with him, or signed by him.
76. UAMS discussed some treatment plans with Hammett but refused to allow Hammett to make decisions for Lynn. UAMS Workforce repeated that Lynn consented. When Hammett pointed out that he did not consent, UAMS Workforce said he does not have capacity. When Hammett said she had capacity, UAMS Workforce said Lynn was a consenting adult.
77. Hammett tried to play a YouTube video by a doctor about TBIs to Lynn. A nurse demanded Hammett cease informing Lynn, as she claimed it would upset him.
78. Respondent’s actions and those of UAMS Workforce in illegally holding Lynn against his will not only denied him due process of law, but exposed him to a significant, foreseeable, and unreasonable risk of harm and actual harm and exposed Lynn and Hammett to traumatic emotional distress.
79. The ordeal was so traumatizing that when Hammett begged her younger son to voluntarily seek hospitalization in the best hospital in Nevada for mental health issues, he refused. Hammett, in writing, had to acknowledge that the experience at UAMS was horrifying, but not all hospitals are that bad and evil. Her efforts were of no avail. Her younger son died of drug toxicity while using methadone prescribed to a housemate, exactly one year after Sean Lynn was allowed to leave UAMS. It is not possible to apply a certain percentage of fault for Hammet’s son, Lynn’s brother on UAMS. But his refusal to seek help at a hospital shows how the public that UAMS is supposed to serve would view the conduct of the medical providers if informed.
80. In November 2024, Hammett’s husband was diagnosed with stage IV prostate cancer metastasized to his bones, lungs and lymph nodes. His PSA was 1,299 (one-thousand, two hundred and ninety-nine. That was not a typo.) Healthy range is under .5 (point five). His PCP referred him to UAMS for treatment. He refused to go to UAMS. His PCP changed the referral to Carti. Again, the citizens UAMS is supposed to serve would not enter UAMS knowing what they did to Lynn and Hammett.
81. Hammett was in an early consultation with her husband at Carti. She heard the doctor ask what his pain level was on a scale of one to ten and his reply. “15”. Hammett asked the doctor how long her husband might live without treatment. Without hesitation the doctor said he would be dead in six months. Even as foreboding as his situation was, Carti did not strap him to the chair and inject him with Fentanyl. He gave informed consent and proudly displays his Carti Certificate of Completion on the fireplace mantle.
82. Respondent’s actions and those of UAMS Workforce made it impossible for Hammett to care for and advocate for her son unless she was also confined in ICU. This caused Hammett to lose sleep. She is treated for insomnia and had to break her sleep protocol. UAMS caused Hammett difficulty in following the diet that helps her manage Hashimoto’s Disease. UAMS caused Hammett severe emotional distress from watching her son be tortured, having to wipe blood and feces off her 34-year-old son’s genitalia and anus, being forbidden to stay with her son at times, such as on January 21, 2024, when UAMS Workforce demanded Hammett wait in the waiting room. Hammett could not be in two places at once. She, her son and CL would all have benefitted greatly by having Sean stay in Hammett’s house while he needed 24/7 care.
83. Respondent UAMS has obtained payment from the United States by illegally
billing Medicaid for treatment during Lynn’s detention in ICU. UAMS has shown an intent to use the charges that were not covered by Medicaid to make fraudulent statements on grant applications and public relations literature, overstating the charity and good UAMS does for the community.
84. The actions of Respondent violate the criminal laws of the State of Arkansas
and the United States.
General Counsel for UAMS Exposed
Public servants are supposed to serve the public.
Instead, the attorneys for University of Arkansas’s teaching hospital condone the cover-up of the false imprisonment and battery of a man who fell off the ten-foot-high rung of a ladder. (The victim is my son.)
At best, the doctors and nurses at UAMS made a bone head mistake. My favorite saying these days, “they aren’t brain surgeons.”
Someone at MEMS, the EMTs who brought the injured man into the Emergency Department, wrote that the chief complaint was “fall from approximately 35 ft from ladder”. The EMT gave no attribution. There were no known witnesses. It would have been correct to write “fall from approximately 35 ft ladder”. He added an extra “from”.
The only criteria that suggested this injury deserved trauma activation was “fall > 20 ft.”
Ignoring the physical evidence they were staring at, UAMS decided to adopt the narrative of a 35-foot fall with the injured man having vitals better than most men his age on a good day. They started shooting him up with Fentanyl, Lorazepam, Diazepam, Haldol…. binding him to the $4,700 per day hospital bed.
Which brings us to the worst-case scenario. The doctors who are paid as much as $560,000 per year salary wanted to drum up business. They said my son would probably not qualify for Medicaid. Another illogical statement, since Medicaid is income based, and they were claiming the TBI patient would need months of intensive care followed by inpatient rehab. It was likely, according to them, that he wouldn’t be working any time soon.
Self-pays are charged about 2.5 times what UAMS has negotiated to pay Medicaid.
He looked like a lucrative mark.
Well, our claim to the Arkansas Claims Commission is heating up. Here are a couple documents I filed today. If you are an attorney licensed in Arkansas who would like to represent Mr. Lynn in a case against the insured individuals involved, shoot me an email. bohemian_books@yahoo.com.
If you want to dig deeper, here is a copy of the full medical report. It has a lot of inaccuracies. But you can check the pages I reference, to make the unbelievable believable.
Sunday Funday. What I wish I could tell the court.
ChatGPT and that woman wearing a white business suit and a halo who sits on my right shoulder will try to talk me into taming my sarcasm. I’m rooting for the lady in the red, tight-fitting gown who sits on my left shoulder. The questionable tone is in my motion for spoliation sanctions against UAMS for “writing over” videos of the doctors and nurses who allegedly falsely imprisoned, drugged, battered and raped my son, repeatedly over a two-week span. Then charged him $46,000 after letting him leave in far worse condition than when he was brought in.
Imagine a video of a man who allegedly needed intensive care running down the hallway carrying a full grocery bag of his belongings in each arm, breaking loose of grasping hands of the gang following him, both men and women, all dressed in scrubs, and he outran them to the elevator. A bunch of them, including the man they claim to want to save from having a deadly seizure, get into the closest elevator to H4. A skirmish ensues. The patient’s 60-year-old mother, who was sitting in the waiting area as ordered, sees the chase and moves toward the elevators. The patient yells, “I just want to give these things to my mom.” He is allowed to hand the bags off to his mother. Then he jumps across the aisle to the second elevator, kitty corner to the one closest to ICU. He moves to press a button with his left hand and someone shoves him, causing the left side of his head to hit the wall. This subdues him and the group of healthcare workers is able to bring him back to confinement. This imagery should bring to mind a man who does not consent to treatment and who is amazingly fit, despite this being the second week of his imprisonment, starvation and poisoning after falling on his head from the 10-foot rung of a ladder and being denied uninterrupted sleep or proper hydration. But UAMS destroyed the video. They claim now that they had no indication that there might be criminal or civil misconduct alleged. Nope, they say, this is a routine event. Shred away.
SPOILER ALERT: The patient did not die after we left UAMS against unsolicited advice. 18 months later and he is enroute home from an African Photo Safari. He hopes to find an attorney who will represent him against UAMS and a list of doctors and nurses including Dr. Mary Kimbrough, Dr. Jordan Greer, Dr. Joseph Deloach, Dr. Elizabeth Brown, Nurse Shannon Cobb and a host of others.
Send emails of interest to bohemian_books@yahoo.com. You can watch videos that we took against the intimidations of the alleged criminals on Youtube.
FREE Doc of the Day: Third Set of Interrogatories in False Imprisonment case against UAMS
All the questions are good, but as a teaser, here are two that together will make weaseling work.
INTERROGATORY NO. 59:
Did Joseph P. Deloach sincerely worry that Sean Lynn would “have continued agitation” after leaving UAMS on January 27, 2024? (See Med. Rec. 4/29/25 at page 105.)
and
INTERROGATORY NO. 84
UAMS wrote in its Response to Claimants’ First Set of Requests for Admission:
REQUEST NUMBER 10: Admit that Sean Lynn had the right to be informed of continuing health care requirements following discharge from the hospital.
ANSWER: Admitted. The discharging physician also advised Lynn, both in person and in writing, during the discharge against medical advice to go to another hospital for continued treatment as the physician did not believe that Lynn was medically stable for discharge.
UAMS admitted:
REQUEST NUMBER 9: Admit that Mr. Lynn was discharged with a prescription for only propranolol and sodium tablets sent to a pharmacy.
And
REQUEST NUMBER 8: Admit that the “Discharge of Patient from Hospital Against Medical Advice” form (shown on Med. Rec. 4/29/25 at page 1301 and repeated on page 1303) has a handwritten note that
says, “I have requested prescriptions for the 3 medications that stabilized Sean. I agree to follow the protocol Sean Lynn is on until receiving medical advice.”
Is it true that the only medications UAMS opined were necessary to stabilize Sean Lynn at the time of discharge “Against Medical Advice” were propranolol and sodium tablets?
**************************
Dr. Joseph Deloach claimed to “worry” that the patient would have continued agitation at home, but failed to prescribe any of the long list of antipsychotics and benzodiazepines UAMS used to restrain him from leaving the hospital.
Escape vs. Elope: UAMS General Counsel Associate Sherri Robinson weighs in.
REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NUMBER 12: Admit that [Patient] Lynn tried to escape from UAMS.
UAMS’ ANSWER: Denied. Patient Lynn attempted to elope which is the act of a patient leaving a healthcare facility without authorization or notification when there are safety concerns for the patient based on the patient’s medical condition, which in this case, included cognitive impairment resulting from a traumatic brain injury.
In their answer, UAMS did not simply deny the request. Instead, they reframed it by substituting the word escape with the term elope, and then inserted a definition—uncited and not drawn from any legal authority. This language appears designed to justify their actions rather than respond in good faith to the request.
Medical staff at UAMS referenced at least 20 separate instances of Lynn’s attempts to leave the facility using variations of the term elope. It is worth noting that “elopement” in this context is a term adopted by the medical industry. It is not a legal classification of behavior, nor does it override a person’s constitutional rights.
UAMS’s response implies that Mr. Lynn required authorization to leave the hospital. This implication is both misleading and dangerous. There is no law requiring a mentally competent adult to obtain permission to leave a hospital. The term Against Medical Advice (AMA) was coined by the healthcare industry to describe patients who decline care—not to denote unlawful behavior. Leaving a hospital AMA is not unauthorized. UAMS knows this. Its own published Patient Rights and Responsibilities—which must comply with the Fourteenth Amendment—acknowledge the patient’s right to refuse treatment and leave the facility.
UAMS justified the use of physical and chemical restraints by citing cognitive impairment. What Mr. Lynn actually experienced was mild aphasia—resulting from swelling in the language center of his brain. Aphasia is a recognized disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It affects communication, not judgment, and does not make a person a danger to themselves or others. There was no injury to Mr. Lynn’s frontal cortex, the part of the brain that governs decision-making.
Despite this, UAMS forcibly detained him using both physical restraints and sedating medications. They did so without proper notification to his family or household members. His mother—listed in his phone as “Mom and Grandma”—was not contacted, even though she and others arrived at the hospital shortly after learning of his injury. UAMS refused to recognize her as a surrogate decision-maker. It was not until day 14 that UAMS admitted, in writing, that they had no reason to consider her incapacitated.
For two weeks, UAMS misrepresented the cause of Mr. Lynn’s condition. Now, rather than acknowledge their errors, they appear to be doubling down. The agitation they blame on a brain injury was more plausibly caused by a combination of factors: overmedication, being physically tackled, restrained naked to a hospital bed, trauma to his genitals, and—based on descriptions in the medical record and first hand observation by this writer—what could be legally characterized as sexual assault.
After Mr. Lynn was discharged Against Medical Advice, the hospital was asked to prescribe the medications they had used to stabilize him. Of the many powerful drugs administered to him without his consent, only two—propranolol and sodium tablets—were prescribed for use at home.
The following medications were administered involuntarily while Mr. Lynn was held at UAMS, and the doctors knew he would not need these if Lynn was allowed to return home:
- Ciprofloxacin-Dexamethasone
- Dexmedetomidine
- Diazepam
- Divalproex
- Enoxaparin
- Fentanyl
- Guanfacine
- Haloperidol Lactate
- Levetiracetam
- Magnesium Sulfate
- Olanzapine
- Ondansetron
- Phenobarbital
- Polyethylene Glycol
- Propranolol
- Quetiapine
- Senna
- Trazodone
These drugs span multiple classes: sedatives, antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and opioids. Administering them to a restrained patient who is attempting to assert their right to leave—without informed consent and with no legal authorization for involuntary hold—raises serious questions about abuse, medical ethics, and civil liberties.
Rant about UAMS’ Sr. Ass. General Counsel Sherri Robinson
Doctors and nurses at UAMS tortured my grown son for two weeks, then sent him a bill for over $46,000.
We filed a civil claim against the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences last August.
It is not a malpractice case. It is a case for false imprisonment and for the bodily injuries and emotional distress caused by the University’s employees, with the approval of the highest levels of management. Many of the culpable employees are paid over $525,000 per year, and they intended to take all their victim’s assets for UAMS to divvy up amongst them. Those salaries clearly can’t be satisfied by taxpayers alone. And the insurance companies? Too stingy, too lawyered up. So when an uninsured man with assets stumbles through their doors, the opportunistic vultures like Dr. Mary K. Kimbrough and Dr. Joseph Margolick make damn sure he doesn’t walk back out on his own.
What they did is allegedly criminal. But UAMS has its own police department, and UAMS PD refused to even look at the video evidence the victims offered to provide.
UAMS also took surveillance video of the non-consenting patient attempting to escape, sometimes butt naked. (UAMS often refused to give him a gown or shorts — seemingly a perverse control tactic.)
HIPAA starts to look like a polite suggestion when you’re already violating someone’s most basic human rights. And with cameras only in the halls, who knows what private videos might exist — for personal thrills or for corners of the internet no one wants to imagine.
The videos Mom took were subdued compared to the majority of the horror show that went on non-stop for two weeks. (Ya, the brain surgeons at UAMS deprived a TBI patient of uninterrupted sleep for two weeks.)
UAMS allowed the man to leave without further battery after 14 days, upon the oft-reiterated and clearly stated threat of legal action. Dr. Joseph Deloach told the victims that General Counsel had been consulted, along with other department heads and the ethics committee, and they admitted there was no legal authority for the doctors and nurses to hold my son.
The captive’s blood work looked much better when he was first taken to the hospital by ambulance. By UAMS’ own records, he was not delirious and could communicate clearly. UAMS caused his sodium level to fall to a dangerous level, which they then used as the purported excuse for keeping him in the $4,700-per-day room. A few days after his release, his sodium was in normal range again. He had a fully intact left ossicular chain when he entered the hospital. UAMS disrupted the tiny bones by slamming his head into walls while trying to prevent him from escaping. His right ear is also half what it should be, which has left him 75% deaf.
Maybe Lead Attorney for UAMS Sherri Robinson thought we had no recordings of the ordeal. Nurses had ordered me to stop making a record of the imprisonment several times. They failed to cite a statute or policy number, so I hesitatingly took a few videos and recorded our telephone conversations when I was by the equipment I needed. You can watch the videos on YouTube, here.
Mrs. Robinson denied all our allegations. Quote:
Respondent denies each and every material allegation contained in the complaint.
Respondent denies that it was negligent in treating Claimant Lynn.
Respondent denies that it treated either Claimant in any unlawful manner.
Respondent specifically denies that it or any of its employees, agents, officials or representatives took any action or inaction that caused either Claimant any harm.
Respondent specifically denies that it or any of its employees, agents, officials or representatives are liable for any damages as alleged in the complaint.
Mrs. Robinson propounded interrogatories and requests for production of documents, to which we responded, objecting to overbroad and burdensome requests but tailoring a reasonable response to each. You can download our response here.
Now, without answering our first set of interrogatories yet, and while denying there are any surveillance videos taken by UAMS that were not overridden, the UAMS attorney wants to limit the number of interrogatories and requests for documents that we make. She also wants to set time limits for motions and other discovery before she even gives us one answer or document.
She waited until the Thursday before the July 4th weekend to raise this. I wrote an email to her saying I have doctors’ appointments to address adhesive capsulitis in my right arm, and that minutes earlier, I learned that my mother-in-law passed away. I said I did not know when I could get my supplemental responses and next set of requests to her.
Fifty minutes later, she sent this email:
Dear Mrs. Hammett and Mr. Lynn,
I believe that this case would benefit from some added structure through the imposition of discovery limitations and a scheduling order. I intend to file a motion with the Commission making this request. I proposed a limit on discovery as follows: each party may propound 100 total interrogatories, 50 requests for production, and 50 requests for admission, and take 10 depositions. I am also asking the Court to set a scheduling order that contains a discovery deadline, a motion deadline, a motion hearing date, and a final hearing date should one be needed that includes a deadline to disclose the names of witnesses and list of exhibits prior to the hearing date.
Please advise by the end of the day whether you object to this request, so that I may include the information in my motion.
Thank you for your time.
About three hours later she sent this:
“I am sorry to hear about your health issues and your mother-in-law. Prayers for your family.”
Nothing about taking an extra day to get back to her on her request for a stipulation.
But what did I expect. She compared her mother having a broken wrist to my son being poisoned with a potentially deadly two-week-long infusion of Fentanyl, Barbiturates, Lorazepam, Diazepam, and any other pam the staff thought would be fun; catheterized against his will, re-catheterized after he pulled the first tube out, re-catheterized after he pulled the second tube out, starved, dehydrated, tackled, and raped.
Hey, if anyone knows an attorney who is willing to take on doctors at UAMS, my son wants legal representation for his claim at the Claims Commission and for a suit that has not yet been filed against the individuals involved. Many of them have malpractice insurance — which may or may not cover the personal injury claims.
He does not want to be pro se, because damn, revisiting something this vile is like crawling back through shattered glass.
Shoot me an email at bohemian_books@yahoo.com with an offer to meet and I’ll pass it on.
Memories of Evil Past – Commissioner Alan Friedenthal (deceased)
One of the adult children of corrupt family law rulings passed away at the age of 30 on January 27, 2025.
My son Buddy Lynn had his life ruined by a grotesque soul, Alan H. Friedenthal.
Cleaning up old files, I came across this recording. Friedenthal had custody of Deborah’s children. He left this nasty voicemail for her. And felt untouchable enough to include a slur against me.
Here is a petition for writ of certiorari I filed in the United States Supreme Court. It was denied. Which does not mean my case was without merit. SCOTUS hears about 1% of the cases that petition for permission to be heard, and about 1/1,000th of 1% of petitions filed by pro se litigants.
This is the California Supreme Court’s order imposing a “severe” public admonishment against Friedenthal, for his unethical conduct on my case and three others.
Does Anyone Believe This UAMS BS?
“No such video evidence has ever existed in UAMS’ possession”? Then why does UAMS try to have patients sign this consent form?
“[C]ertain patient care areas in the Emergency Department are continuously monitored by videorecording for the purpose of [] patient safety.” It would have helped keep Sean safe had there been video of him before he was administered Fentanyl and bound to a cot. Then doctors, such as Dr. Joseph Margolick and Dr. Mary Kimbrough would not be able to get away with chemically restraining and battering Sean as easily.
Will the Arkansas Claims Commission let the government’s attorneys get away with tacit approval of the spoliation of evidence?
My guess as a less naive entering 1L student is yes, the Claims Commission will allow them to get away with it. But the answer should be “no”.
What do you think? Please comment.
A Higher Law 