UAMS Attorney and Insurer Playing Stupid Tricks
The two envelopes above supposedly delivered the same documents to two claimants. Ooops! Look at the metered postage.
The reason UAMS attorneys and insurance agents wanted to withhold the actual documents from me, one of the joint claimants on a case stemming from false imprisonment and battery, is that they caused partial deafness, aphasia, and PTSD in the other claimant. Now they don’t want him to have ADA accommodations during the proceedings.
I am incredibly busy, between my 1L year in law school and trying to make the state-run hospital pay restitution. So, I am going to just post our latest documents below. Enjoy the read.
Does UAMS Attorney Hallucinate; Or Does She Use ChatGPT? [Redacted for error on 11/1/2025]
My sincere apology. It is I who made the error, quoting the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, instead of the Arkansas rules, which do use the word “amend.”
Still, UAMS chose to lie to the Commission by submitting the original answers. UAMS’s counsel has access to the authors of the medical record and is paid to read the record; yet, counsel failed to admit that there was no written consent by Lynn to be found when she wrote the original responses.
You can download the full documents that were filed in this volley of motion practice, here:
UAMS Lawyer Admits Some Lies; Creates Others
Mrs. Sherri Robinson, the $160,000 per year public attorney representing UAMS, filed what she called Amended and Substituted Answers to the Requests for Admissions.
I can’t make this up. So, with no more ado:
REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS
REQUEST NUMBER 1: Admit that Sean Lynn gave no informed consent to be treated at UAMS.
[OLD] ANSWER: Denied. Consent is not required in Emergency Situations. Moreover, the person who was with Lynn in the emergency room gave consent for his admission and treatment at UAMS.
AMENDED AND SUBSTITUTED ANSWER: UAMS admits that Lynn’s written consent was not received upon his admission to UAMS; however, UAMS denies that it was required. Arkansas Code Annotated § 20-9-603 provides that “when an emergency exists and there is no one immediately available who is authorized, empowered to, or capable of consent,” then “consent is excused or implied at law” for a licensed physician to provide medical treatment. Lynn arrived at UAMS by ambulance, and EMS personnel notified medical providers that he had fallen from a ladder at a height of 30-35 feet. EMS advised UAMS that Lynn had experienced a loss of consciousness, and UAMS providers observed that Lynn was continuing to have confusion. As a result of the initial assessment, Lynn was admitted to the Emergency Department Trauma Service. No one was with Lynn in the emergency room, and he was not capable of giving consent at that time. Based on the information that UAMS had at that moment and the nature of Lynn injuries, an emergency under Ark. Code Ann. § 20-9-603 existed which excused the requirement for UAMS to obtain consent to treat him.
REQUEST NUMBER 15: Admit that UAMS staff administered sedatives to Sean Lynn against his will.
[OLD] ANSWER: Denied.
AMENDED AND SUBSTITUTED ANSWER: UAMS denies that it administered sedatives to Lynn against his will. UAMS admits that Lynn was given medications for the purpose of treating the symptoms he was experiencing as the result of his injuries, significantly, a traumatic brain injury. While some of those medications may have had a sedating effect, the treatment goal was to ease the symptoms Lynn was experiencing and to improve his overall condition.
REQUEST NUMBER 16: Admit that UAMS staff administered antipsychotic medications to Sean Lynn against his will.
[OLD] ANSWER: Denied.
AMENDED AND SUBSTITUTED ANSWER: UAMS denies that it administered antipsychotic medications to Lynn against his will. UAMS admits that Lynn was given medications for the purpose of treating the symptoms he was experiencing as the result of his injuries, significantly, a traumatic brain injury. While some of those medications may have been classified pharmacologically as antipsychotics, the treatment goal was to ease the symptoms Lynn was experiencing and to improve his overall condition.
REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.20: Admit that UAMS used Chemical Restraints on Sean Lynn.
[OLD] ANSWER: Denied.
AMDENDED AND SUBSTITUTED ANSWER: UAMS denies that it used a chemical restraint on Lynn. UAMS admits that Lynn was given medications for the purpose of treating the symptoms he was experiencing as the result of his injuries, significantly, a traumatic brain injury. While some of those medications, in other settings and at certain doses, may be used as a chemical restraint, the treatment goal in using the medications administered to Lynn was to ease the symptoms he was experiencing and to improve his overall condition.
Here, I’ll throw out a couple of snippets from cases from my 1L studies:
With respect to the failure to obtain consent, a patient has the burden of proving each of three essential propositions: First, that the Plaintiff sustained damages; second, that the medical care was provided without consent; third, that such failure was a proximate cause of damages to the Plaintiff. Millsap v. Williams, 2014 Ark. 469, 12, 449 S.W.3d 291, 298 (2014). “No” means “No”.
Flores v. Santiago, 986 N.E.2d 1216 (Ill. App. Ct. 2013) (patient of defendant eye doctor sufficiently alleged an inability to consent due to defendant repeatedly plying her with illegal drugs in order to facilitate sexual contact).
Here are the docs for download:
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.
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.
A Higher Law 