Steve Glickman Fraud and Perjury

Although my entire case against Dr. Fischel is complex, understanding how my attorney, Steve Glickman committed fraud and perjury is quite simple. Glickman conspired with the defense to dismiss my punitive damages claim against Dr. Fischel (see "Motion to Strike Punitive Damages"). This was the real "teeth" of my suit. Glickman agreed to dismiss my punitive damages claim, without opposition (see "Non Opposition to Motion to Strike".

The supposed reason for dismissing my punitive damages was missing a statute of limitations. At the time, in January 2006, Steve Glickman told me that there was a limit of 2 years to file punitive damages against a doctor, that is 2 years after the injury occurred. Based on that, it would have been correct to dismiss my claim for punitive damages.

However, Glickman was lying. The statute used by the defense was California Code of Civil Procedures (CCP) § 425.13 (see code). This code says that a claim for punitive damages against a doctor must be brought no more than 2 years after the original complaint is filed. My original complaint was filed October 10, 2003 (see original Malpractice Complaint, Baker vs. Fischel), my punitive damages claim was filed October 7, 2005 (see Fraud Complaint, Baker vs. Fischel).

No wonder Steve Glickman never showed me the Motion to Strike, and forbid me from being at the hearing. Only recently, in March 2009, have I learned that the defense used §425.13.

Now I've sued Steve Glickman for this fraud, and he has committed perjury. Under Oath, in a court of law, Steve Glickman said that he was substituted in as my attorney on October 12, 2005 (see Glickman Trial Brief). Since my original complaint was filed October 10, 2003 (see original Malpractice Complaint, Baker vs. Fischel), he says we missed the statute of limitations in §425.13. This is a lie.

Steve Glickman substituted in as my attorney in September of 2005. Steve Glickman wrote and filed my complaint, seeking punitive damages, on October 7, 2005. (see Fraud Complaint, Baker vs. Fischel).

October 7, 2005 is less than 2 years after October 10, 2003.

It is thus beyond all doubt that Steve Glickman conspired with attorneys for Richard Fischel, namely Suzanne De Rosa, of Schmid and Voiles, to deprive me of my civil rights, and to obstruct justice. I'm seriously contemplating suing Fischel, Glickman, de Rosa, and judge Randall Wilkinson in Federal Court for fraud, conspiracy, and racketeering.

Motion to Strike Punitive Damages, Baker vs. Fischel

Non Opposition to Motion to Strike, Baker vs. Fischel

Fraud Complaint, Baker vs. Fischel

Steve Glickman, Link to Ripoff Report

Here's the Ripoff Report I filed. It's very interesting that at first, the report was very high in the Google Ranking. Then mysteriously, it disappeared out of the Google search results altogether. Very odd.

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/0/448/RipOff0448233.htm

Response to Glickman's Trial Brief

Beverly Hills Small Claims Court



Alexander Baker
15911 Valley Wood Road
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Steve Glickman
Glickman & Glickman, A Law Corporation
9460 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 830
Beverly Hills, CA 91212
Defendant )
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) Case No.: BH 09S00432

Response to DEFENDEANT’S TRIAL BRIEF

Glickman Invokes a Non-Applicable Statue of Limitations

Defendant Glickman has asserted a 1 year statute of limitations in this matter, claiming that it is governed by CCP §340.6. §340.6 sets forth the time limitations on Legal Malpractice, i.e. negligence. The cause of action in this matter is fraud, not Legal Malpractice, and is properly governed by §CCP 338 (d). which clearly provides a 3 year limitation on actions arising from fraud. No claim of Legal Malpractice, nor any sort of negligence is alleged in this case.

Glickman Knowingly Flasifies a Date to Justify His Dismissing a Punitive Dagamges Claim in the Underlying Case

One glaring example of Glickman’s fraud was the hearing that took place on January 25, 2006 in the underlying fraud case against Surgeon Richard Fischel. Mr. Glickman agreed with, and did not oppose, a motion to strike the punitive damages claim from my fraud action. The basis for the motion to strike was §425.13, which indeed sets forth a two year limitation on seeking punitive damages against a health care practitioner. The limitation is 2 years after the originl complaint was filed, not after the damage occurred. From §425.13:

“The court shall not grant a motion allowing the filing of an amended pleading that includes a claim for punitive damages if the motion for such an order is not filed within two years after the complaint or intitial pleading is filed . . .”

The original Medical Malpractice case of Baker vs. Fischel was filed October 10, 2003. The Fraud case of Baker vs. Fischel, seeking punitive damages, was written by attorney Steve Glickman, and filed in Orange County Municipal Court October 7, 2005. This is less than two years after the original complaint.

Thus, to deceive the court in the underlying case, defendant Glickman simply did not oppose the motion to strike. To deceive me, Glickman falsely tole me that there was a 2 year statute of limitations for punitive damages in a fraud action, counting from the date of injury. This assertion was fabricated out of whole cloth. To help ensure that I did not discover the deception, Glickman never showed me the defense motion, never cited the CCP statute to me, and forbind me from being present in the courtroom for the January 25, 2006 hearing.

To deceive the court now, in the present matter, defendant Glickman has employed the crudest of all tactics, falsifying a date. In his “DEFENDANT’S TRIAL BRIEF” Glickman states:

“Glickman did not substitute in as counsel for Baker until October 12, 2005”. (see exhibit 66 – Defendan’ts Trial Brief in Baker vs. Glickman)”.

Clearly defendant Steve Glickman filed the fraud complaint, Baker vs. Fischel, on October 7, 2005. The copy is stamped in the upper right hand corner as follows:

FILED

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF ORANGE

CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

OCT 07 2005

ALAN SLATER, Clerk of the Court

By E PERREAULT Deputy

(Please see exhibit 52 – Complaint, Baker vs. Fischel).

Thus, defendant Glickman has knowingly issued a provably false statement, under oath, about a material issue. I ask that the court find perjury, and punish defendant Glickman accordingly.






Dated this 30th day of April, 2009


Alexander Baker
15911 Valley Wood Road
Sherman Oaks, CA. 91403

Complaint in Baker vs. Glickman

Beverly Hills Small Claims Court

Alexander Baker
15911 Valley Wood Road
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403,
Plaintiff,

vs.

Steve Glickman
Glickman & Glickman, A Law Corporation
9460 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 830
Beverly Hills, CA 91212
Defendant )

 Case No.: BH 09S00432

Statement of Claim

The evidence will show that the defendant, attorney Steve Glickman, is a fraud. As my attorney, Mr. Glickman deceived me repeatedly, I relied upon those deceptions, and I was harmed as a result. Mr. Glickman was retained to prosecute my action against a surgeon named Richard Fischel, in what the evidence will show was a very winnable case. 

Mr. Glickman, of course, had a duty to prosecute my case to the fullest extent of the law. Instead, the evidence will show that he conspired with the defense attorneys to systematically dismiss the elements of my case, piece by piece, and put forth a clear effort to lose. Eventually, on the eve of trial, Steve Glickman insisted that I dismiss my case against Dr. Fischel altogether, or else I would have to act as my own attorney.

Facts (underlying case against Dr. Fischel)

• 
  
• 1. Prior to October 2002, I was successful in the business of writing music.
  
• 2. In October 2002, at the hands of Richard Fischel MD, Ph.D., I underwent a surgery called ETS. This was to treat an embarrassing cosmetic problem I had with excessive facial sweating (“hyperhidrosis”). 
  
• 3. Dr. Fischel had a legal duty to inform me about the known risks of ETS surgery. 
  
• 4. Pre-Op, Dr. Fischel warned me about exactly 2 possible side effects - “Horner’s Syndrome” which he said was “a little bit of a droopy eyelid” and “Compensatory Sweating” which he said was “mild moistness” on the lower body (see exhibit 14 - my consultation notes, exhibit 9 - CD-ROM transcript, exhibit 1 – Fischel’s consultation notes, p.7).
  
• 5. Dr. Fischel stated that there was a 0% chance of Horner’s Syndrome (see exhibit D), and a 1% chance of Compensatory Sweating (see exhibit 9 - CD-ROM transcript).
  
• 6. Dr. Fischel’s website mentioned only the same 2 side effects (see exhibit 6 - hyperhidrosis.la website).
  
• 7. Dr. Fischel’s educational CD-ROM video mentioned only the same 2 side effects (see exhibit 9 - CD-ROM transcript). 
  
• 8. Dr. Fischel himself, in a prior court case, mentioned only the same 2 side effects, and stated under oath that he always gave the same routine speech to all his prospective ETS surgery patients (see testimony in Driscoll v Fischel, p. 17, line 15; excerpted in exhibit 20). 
  
• 9. 3 other Fischel patients provided declarations indicating that they had been warned only of the same 2 side effects (see declarations by Brody, Mahan and Zacarias). 
  
• 10. I had taken handwritten notes during my consultation, and they indicated only the same 2 side effects (see exhibit 14 - my consultation notes). 
  
• 11. Dr. Fischel’s own notes taken during the consultation indicate only the same 2 side effects (see Exhibit 1 - Fischel Office Consultation, p.7)
  
• 12. After ETS surgery, beginning in November of 2002, I complained to Dr. Fischel of many physical and mental problems I was having, including severe pain, and a very weak heartbeat.
  
• 13. In November 2002, Dr. Fischel gave me an EKG treadmill test, in which my heart rate could only go up to 110 beats per minute (see exhibit 1 - medical records. Normal maximum heart rate for a 42 year old man is 180-200 beats per minute. 
  
• 14. At the EKG session, Dr. Fischel stated there was no possible way that ETS surgery could affect the heart. He suggested I was “out of shape” (see exhibit 1 - medical records). 
  
• 15. In May 2003, Dr. Fischel wrote a letter to me, post-op, in which he admitted warning of only 2 side effects. In the same letter Dr. Fischel stated “Your cardiac complaints are a mystery to me” (see exhibit 3 - Fischel letter, p. 5). 
  
• 16. Eventually, during the course of my lawsuit against him, Dr. Fischel claimed to have warned me about 6 side effects, including heart problems (Fischel deposition p.26, line 18-25), anhidrosis (Fischel deposition p. 126 line 13 – p. 127, line 13), changes to the sensation of touch (Fischel deposition p. 111, line 1), and chronic nerve pain (Fischel deposition p. 130, line 23). (Deposition excerpts are exhibit 20).
  
• 17. ETS surgery involves cutting out parts of the Sympathetic Nervous System. These parts, known as “T2”, “T3”, and “T4”, provide nerve function to the heart, the lungs, the blood vessels, the thyroid gland, sweat glands, fat tissue, sensory nerves, bone, bone marrow, and other organs glands and muscles. 
  
• 18. ETS surgery is disabling. The words “disabled” and “disabling” appear in the medical literature with regard to ETS surgery (see “Are We Paying a High Price for Surgical Sympathectomy?”, abstract). 
  
• 19. ETS surgery is proven in the published medical literature to cause dysfunction of the heart, the lungs, the blood vessels, arrector pili muscles, thyroid gland, skin, bone, bone marrow, sensory nerves, and other organs glands and muscles. 
  
• 20. ETS surgery destroys all sweating on the top 1/3 of the body, a condition called “anhidrosis”. 
  
• 21. ETS surgery causes excessive sweating on the lower 2/3 of the body, a condition known as “hyperhidrosis”. The published literature indicates that the total amount of sweating increases after sympathectomy. Thus Dr. Fischel was attempting to treat excessive sweating by causing more excessive sweating (see exhibit 56 - “The Effect of Upper Dorsal Sympathectomy on Total Body Perspiration”). 
  
• 22. ETS surgery is psycho-surgery. ETS is routinely used to treat psychiatric conditions such as panic attacks and schizophrenia, because it profoundly decreases the ability to experience fear, thrills and excitement (see exhibit 60). 
  
• 23. After ETS, I found it extremely difficult to continue my career of writing music, because the missing emotions have rendered music meaningless. 
  
• 24. ETS surgery greatly compromises temperature regulation (see thermal image). When pressed, Dr. Fischel likened ETS to “removing the thermostat” (Fischel deposition p. 106, line 1)
  
• 25. ETS surgery greatly compromises exercise capacity (see exhibit 57 - “Effects of Endoscopic Transthoracic Sympathectomy on Hemodynamic and Neurohumoral Responses to Exercise in Humans, graphs on page 3). 
  
• 26. In November 2004 I participated in a study of ETS patients at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (“NINDS”)(see exhibit 12).
  
• 27. The NINDS study on me provided empirical confirmation of disability to my heart, blood vessels, thyroid, temperature regulation, and blood chemistry, all caused by ETS surgery (see exhibit 12, also heart and thyroid PET scans). 

Facts (case against Steve Glickman)

• 
  
• 1. In September 2005 I retained attorney Steve Glickman to prosecute Dr. Fischel for fraud. 
  
• 2. Steve Glickman was aware of my injuries, and aware of my documentation showing the injuries. 
  
• 3. Steve Glickman drafted a fraud complaint against Dr. Fischel. The complaint only dealt with the issue of sweating. The complaint did not mention my heart, nor my lungs, nor my blood vessels, nor my thyroid gland. It did not mention the fact that the top 1/3 of my body was 10 degrees hotter than the lower 2/3, nor did it mention the issue of temperature regulation at all. The complaint did not mention the fact that ETS is psychosurgery, nor my resulting damages, mental and financial. (see exhibit 52, Complaint) 
  
• 4. Steve Glickman filed the complaint before giving me a chance to read it. 
  
• 5. Upon reading the complaint written by Mr. Glickman, I immediately asked him to please amend the complaint, and to please include my injuries and damages. 
  
• 6. Steve Glickman refused to amend the complaint, and informed me that I had a right to act as my own attorney. 
  
• 7. Prior to retaining Mr. Glickman, I contacted Dr. Jeff Victoroff, an expert neuro-psychiatrist who was happy to dialog with me. Dr. Victoroff was very interested in my case, and stated in an email that he thought it would be very difficult to write music after ETS surgery. 
  
• 8. In about Novemeber 2005, Steve Glickman stated that he had spoken to Dr. Victoroff, who had “changed his mind”, and no longer wanted to testify in my case. Mr. Glickman emphasized that I was not to contact Dr. Victoroff ever again. 
  
• 9. Several times during the course of the case, I suggested to Mr. Glickman that we should request a copy of the EKG treadmill test performed on me.
  
• 10. Steve Glickman never requested a copy of my EKG treadmill test from Dr. Fischel, but he did remind me that I had a right to act as my own attorney. 
  
• 11. Requesting medical records is “Standard Operating Procedure” in all medical lawsuits. 
  
• 12. In January 2006, Dr. Fischel’s defense motioned to dismiss my punitive damages claim (see exhibit 53 - Motion to Strike Punitive Damages). 
  
• 13. The statute of limitations in a fraud action is 3 years. 
  
• 14. Steve Glickman stated to me that there was a separate 2-year statute of limitations on a punitive damages claim, and that we had missed it. 
  
• 15. Steve Glickman refused to allow me to be present at the January 2006 hearing for Motion to Strike Punitive Damages. I asked Mr. Glickman if I had a right to be present, and he answered “Yes, and you also have the right to act as your own attorney”. At the hearing, Steve Glickman agreed to dismiss my punitive damages claim, without opposition.
  
• 16. Next, in about February 2006, Steve Glickman insisted that I dismiss my loss of earnings claim. Mr. Glickman never suggested my loss of earnings claim was without merit. Rather, he warned me that the defense investigation would go out of their way to cause problems with our biggest client. 
  
• 17. In about February 2006, there was a Mandatory Settlement Conference. We met Steve Glickman at the courthouse and had lunch with him in the cafeteria. Mr. Glickman specifically forbid us from entering the courtroom. 
  
• 18. From February through March 2006, Steve Glickman began insisting that I dismiss my entire case against Dr. Fischel. I refused, and I became increasingly confused and upset. 
  
• 19. Mr. Glickman scheduled depositions of defense experts for February 6, 2006, and allowed a mere 1 hour for each deposition. For reasons unknown, these depositions never took place (exhibit 54).
  
• 20. In about March 2006, Steve Glickman said that if I still wanted to go to trial, he could not represent me. For about the eighth time, Steve Glickman said I had the right to act as my own attorney. 
  
• 21. I felt I had no choice but to dismiss the case, so I did. 
  
• 22. In February 2009, when I picked up my case file from Steve Glickman’s office, conspicuously absent was Dr. Fischel’s Educational CD-ROM video. Also missing were the signed declarations from past Fischel patients Chris Brody, Kerrigan Mahan, and Mitchell Zacarias. 
  

Count 1 – Fraud

Steve Glickman intentionally omitted from the complaint all of my most serious injuries. This was a deliberate deception intended to protect the interest of Dr. Fischel. I relied upon this deception, and I was harmed by it.

Count 2 – Fraud

Steve Glickman intentionally removed an expert witness from the case. This was a deliberate deception intended to protect the interest of Dr. Fischel. I relied upon this deception, and I was harmed by it.

Count 3 – Fraud

Steve Glickman refused to request a key medical record (the post-op EKG) that was being concealed by the defense. This was a deliberate deception intended to protect the interest of Dr. Fischel. I relied upon this deception, and I was harmed by it.

Count 4 – Fraud

Steve Glickman conspired with the defense to fabricate out of whole cloth a fictitious 2-year statute of limitations for punitive damages in a fraud action. This was done to dismiss my punitive damages claim, protecting the interest of Dr. Fischel. I relied upon this deception, and I was harmed by it.

Count 5 – Fraud

Steve Glickman intentionally destroyed the CD-ROM containing audio-video recordings of Dr. Fischel giving an ETS surgery consultation, then deceptively claimed it had been “lost”. I relied upon this deception, and I was harmed by it.

Count 6 – Fraud

Steve Glickman intentionally destroyed signed declarations of 3 other Fischel patients. This was done to protect the interest of Dr. Fischel. I relied on this deception, and I was harmed by it.


Relief

My case against Dr. Fischel was winnable. Dr. Fischel claimed to have warned me of 6 side effects. But Dr. Fischel’s own website, and his CD-ROM video, and his prior sworn testimony, and his other patients, and my consultation notes, and his own consultation notes, and his own letter to me all support my position that he only warned me of 2 side effects. There is not a jury in the world that would have believed Dr. Fischel, if only they would have seen the evidence. Any attorney would know this. Any honest attorney would have been anxious to prosecute my case to the fullest.

Instead, Steve Glickman removed my neuro-psychiatrist expert, concealed my injuries from the court, dismissed my loss of earnings claim without opposition, dismissed my punitive damages claim without opposition, lied to me about an utterly fictitious statute of limitations, failed to request a key medical record, repeatedly threatened to quit as my attorney, failed to depose any defense experts, and ultimately insisted that I dismiss my case altogether.

Considering loss of earnings, my injuries, my pain and suffering, my damages are incalculable. My bizarre physical and mental disabilities continue to this day, and they are permanent. Your honor, I ask you to punish attorney Steve Glickman by finding him liable for fraud, and awarding monetary damages that you see fit.

Dated this 29th day of April, 2009

Alexander Baker
15911 Valley Wood Road
Sherman Oaks, CA. 91403