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.