Quietly yesterday and last night family and friends gathered at the home on the northeast side of Houston Texas of Johnny Cutliff to pay their condolences to his wife of twenty-five years, Rosemary Anderson. Johnny Lee Cutliff was described as a modest man by family members who said Cutliff loved John O’Quinn and loved working for O’Quinn.

Relatives describe Johnny Cutliff not just John O’Quinn’s personal driver and attendant but also O’Quinn’s “right hand man” and had been devoted to O’Quinn since 1983 from the first day he worked for O’Quinn. That was before the big wins and the tragic personal and controversial life of O’Quinn unfolded before giant corporations, fellow lawyers with O’Quinn or those on the other side in opposing O’Quinn. It was 1986 when O’Quinn began his own quest of wins to become the most reverend and also the most reviled lawyer from Houston Texas. Mr. Cutliff was one of the few who was in John O’Quinn’s trusted inner circle.

Quite different from the accolades pouring in from around the country for the man described “bigger than Texas”, Mr. Cutliff’s widow sat at her kitchen table and watched the scenes over and over again on her television play out while wondering why. “I really don’t understand how it happened,” she said, staring at the pictures of the wrecked vehicle on TV. Rosemary went on to say, that he, Cutliff, hardly took a day off in the 26 years he had worked for John O’Quinn saying; “He didn’t want to take no vacation or nothing, he really loved his job.”

Rosemary said of her husband that since she first laid eyes on Johnny Cutliff at a Sunday gathering at a friend’s house a quarter-century ago, she loved “just being around him.” Cutliff attended Lakewood Church every Sunday, relatives said. He was “a terrific dad” to his only son, who died in 1993, and a role model for his grandson, his daughter-in-law, Rayna Polk, said yesterday “It’s just shocking for things to happen the way they did today.” Mr. Cutliff was 56 years old.

Our heartfelt condolences go out to all who loved Mr. Cutliff, from his family to friends to those who attended church with him weekly, the pain will remain long after the funeral for Mr. Cutliff as this modest man’s family lay him to rest.

Very different from the around the clock coverage of the wreck that claimed Mr. Cutliff and John O’Quinn’s life yesterday morning on Allen Parkway during rush hour traffic. The police have recovered the black box from O’Quinn’s SUV and confirmed that O’Quinn and not Cutliff was driving when O’Quinn lost control of the vehicle and it became airborne landing impaled on a tree that had to be cut down to remove the wreckage. There are whispers from the Houston police department that O’Quinn was driving way too fast for Allen Parkway, which has claimed more then it share of Houstonians’ lives and left many to recover from other wrecks on this winding treacherous road. Perhaps one of the lasting tributes to O’Quinn will be that one of Houston’s most famous died on that road, and therefore it will finally be fixed as those who lived near the road said they had been begging to have something done to fix the road before something like yesterday happened. One of the witnesses to the wreck described the road as a “waiting time bomb”, perhaps now that it has gone off, the road will be fixed and no one else will be injured or killed traveling Allen Parkway.

John O’Quinn was having Accolades pour in from those who loved him, those who feared him and those still in litigation on adversarial roles. For yesterday, October 29, 2009 those in litigation pending with the O’Quinn Law Firm were quiet and respectful. L. Lin Wood one of the lawyers who had been in an adversarial and contentious battle with John O’Quinn since the spring of 2007 yesterday sent a note to Patti Lampton, a paralegal at the O’Quinn law firm. In answer to Ms. Lampton’s request for prayers for both men, Mr. Wood was one of the few who responded with, “Patti, I am in Washington, DC. I heard the news this morning and sent Neil an email. My deepest sympathy to you and the other members of John’s firm, and yes, to his family and the family of Mr. Cutliff.” it was signed simply “Lin” Even though we also are in an adversarial role with one of O’Quinn’s last big clients, Virgie Arthur, Anna Nicole Smith’s mother, we also stopped yesterday and sent one of what was probably thousands of emails to Ms. Lampton, Mr. McCabe, Don Clark and Wilma Vicedomine offering our deepest sympathy at their loss and offering any help we might be able to give as blog owners.

In interviews John O’Quinn described him and his law firm as a “Benevolent Tyranny” saying no one doubted who was in charge. O’Quinn had said in interviews he took his percentage of the lawsuits off of the top and paid the lawyers who worked for him an hourly rate with a bonus for incentive to win lawsuits. He described it as letting them taste blood like shark infested water by handling the firm in this manner. Some lawyers who knew him like Richard “Race Horse” Haynes said he, O’Quinn, never seemed to find real happiness in his life. Others in O’Quinn’s tight inner circle disputed that saying that might have been true at one time but not recently with Ms. Darla Lexington who was seen as a stabilizing influence on O’Quinn during the last years of his life. He had two failed marriages and had made it clear even as a young lawyer he did not want to have children of his own. He knew in his quest to be the greatest plaintiff litigator of all times he did not have time to be a father.

Now the questions start. Why was John O’Quinn at the Hobby airport in Houston to catch a Southwest airline flight to San Antonia for a mediation meeting at 7 AM to leave and die before 8:15 AM? It was eerie said one lawyer as the Southwest Airline counter began to page John O’Quinn at 9:30 AM to please report to the gate for boarding his flight. The airline did not know that O’Quinn had been killed in a horrendous accident over an hour earlier.

One person close to O’Quinn told us on condition of anonymity that many had been worried about his health lately and problems he was having with his diabetes, time will tell if that played a part of the crash that took his life early Thursday morning. This person said many of the almost 25 lawyers and over 100 support people employed by the O’Quinn Law Firm had worried about what would happen to them and their jobs if something happened to O’Quinn. Not only was he the heart and soul of his firm but also the driving force of brilliance of the firm. O’Quinn was known by his public persona of “Big Bad John”.

Neil McCabe appeared at the scene of the accident to see where his boss had been killed for himself. Mr. McCabe could not hold back the tears choking his throat as he said simply to the press, “That those who worked for O’Quinn were devastated”. McCabe added; “John was not only the head of our firm, he took care of all of us”. McCabe then looked over his shoulder at the wreck scene as if he could not take it all in and with tears no longer hidden said simply, “he will be missed, he will be missed”.

What will happen to this man’s firm that he built with hard work and a zealous need to win and be the best? Ken and I talked quietly about that last night and Ken said, “Rose, whether you loved or hated the man, he was a perfectionist and when the Estate is opened after his funeral next week we will find he left specific instructions for his O’Quinn Law Firm family”. John Maurice O’Quinn never left anything to chance.

Now back to today, yesterday as the death of John O’Quinn was blazing across wire services like the AP, Ms. Lampton on behalf of Mr. McCabe filed papers with the First Court of Appeals that had been prepared the day before.

October 29, 2009 Virgie Arthur Postsubmission Letter Brief with Exhibits to the First Court of Appeals, answering some of the points and questions brought up during the Oral Arguments on Oct. 27, 2009.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2616.

The O’Quinn Law Firm has place in effect today the succession plan which also assures both the financial and legal continuity of the firm. That plan will be administered by Christian A. Steed and two other attorneys that had been life long friends of John O’Quinn. The O’Quinn firm has announced on the firm’s website that the funeral for John Maurice O’Quinn will be on November 4, 2009 at 11 AM at the Second Baptist Church in Houston, Texas.

©Rose Turner
October 30, 2009
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Art Harris, Bonnie Stern, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Dannielynn, Don Clark, Don Clark ex-FBI, First Court of Appeals Texas, Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Hobby Airport - Houston, Howard K Stern, John M. O'Quinn - dead, John Maurice O’Quinn, John O'Quinn, John O'Quinn killed, Johnny Cutliff, Johnny Lee Cutliff, L. Lin Wood, Lakewood Church - Houston Texas, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Ms. Darla Lexington, Ms. Lampton - O'Quinn paralegal, Neil McCabe, Patti Lampton, Rayna Polk, Rayna Polk - Cutliff daughter-in-law, Ricahard "Racehorse" Haynes, Rose Turner, Rosemary Anderson, Southwest Airlines, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Virgie Arthur

HOUSTON (April 2, 2009) – Almost a year since Angela Robinson, a former paralegal at the law firm of Laminack, Pirtle & Martines, L.L.P was fired, the frivolous allegations brought against her former employer, local trial lawyer Richard N. Laminack, have been dismissed by Judge Tracy E Christopher of the 295th District Court in Houston.

In a ruling issued by Judge Christopher, the court acknowledged that the case has been on file since 2008 and all defendants moved for traditional and no evidence summary judgment on all causes except the claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Court noted that plaintiff failed to raise or offer any evidence to defeat summary judgment and granted the motions to dismiss.

“I have always had faith in the system and knew that the facts would speak for themselves,” stated Richard N. Laminack of Laminack, Pirtle& Martines, L.L.P. “While it is wonderful that our society allows anyone to readily file a lawsuit, our legal structure does have mechanisms built in to deal with frivolous lawsuits such as this. This has certainly been a long and painful process for all of us to go through.”

Robinson and her lawyer demanded that Defendants pay money prior to filling the lawsuit and the Defendants said “no.”

The Court has determined that the case has no merit and should not have been filed. The Court’s ruling means that not a single one of the allegations against Laminack had even a shred of evidence to support it. Laminack has been exonerated.

The remaining claim against the law firm regarding overtime/fair labor acts will be addressed in a separate ruling later this year. The sole remaining claim is not expected to fare any better given plaintiff’s own testimony that she was paid for working all of the hours that her timesheet reflects she was working. Based in Houston, Texas, Laminack, Pirtle & Martines, L.L.P. isa trial law firm proud of its Texas roots and its success in protecting clients’ interests in complex trials. Driven by a deep commitment to justice, the lawyers of Laminack, Pirtle & Martines have worked diligently to protect their clients and achieve successful results for more than 20 years.

Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Angela Robinson, Fair Labor Standards Act, Judge Tracy E Christopher of the 295th District Court in Houston, Laminack Pirtle Martines, Richard Laminack, Richard Laminack - Angela Robinson, Richard N. Laminack

G. Ben Thompson missed the filing date the Court set of November 3 for his mandatory filing of the Rule 26 f of initial disclosures, also Howard K. Stern’s attorney pointed out that due to Thompson’s attorney being ill they had not been able to hold the required conference via phone.

The Court approved Susan Brown to represent Ben Thompson. Howard K. Stern has attorneys approved for Pro Hac Vice status, including Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Nicole Jennings Wade of Powell Goldstein as well as his South Carolina attorneys.

The best reading in my opinion is the Rule 26f filings required by the Court of which to date Ben Thompson has not answered. Ford Shelley lists only 3 witnesses, himself, his wife Gina Shelley and Howard K. Stern. However, in Shelley’s rule 26-3-a local rule filings, he lists only himself and his wife Gina Shelly as witnesses or persons that have information relevant to these allegations.

What caught my eye was the list of people who have possessions of some of the items alleged to have been taken out of Horizons the day after Anna Nicole Smith’s death.

1. Defendant Shelley has possession of a copy of a clown video.
2. All documents and tangible items related to litigation in the Bahamas which are in possession of the Bahamian authorities.
3. All documents and tangible items in possession of the California Department of Justice as to any investigation relating to Ms. Smith.
4. All documents and tangible items in possession of co-defendant Ben Thompson and/or his agents.
5. All documents and tangible items in possession of Larry Birkhead and/or his agents.

Which leaves the question of who has the ORIGINAL copy of the infamous Clown Video?

Howard K. Stern’s filing is a tad more revealing about where Stern’s team is going. In his required Rule 26-f list of the following witnesses.

(1) Howard K. Stern
(2) Larry Birkhead
(3) Pol’ Atteau
(4) Rita Cosby
(5) Don Clark
(6) Wilma Vicedomine
(7) Stancil “Ford” Shelley
(8) G. Ben Thompson
(9) Tom Pirtle, on of Virgie Arthur’s Texas lawyer at the burial hearing
(10) Tracy Ferguson an attorney that is part of Callendar’s in the Bahamas that G. Ben Thompson is suing.
(11) Gaither Thompson
(12) Melanie Thompson
(13) Gina Shelley
(14) Representatives of Fox News
(15) Representatives of Biscayne Professional Associates (possibly the company that imaged Anna Nicole Smith’s computers and hard drives when the Estate recovered them)

Howard K. Stern lists several Counts that make the basis of the Estate’s case against Ford Shelly and Ben Thompson and a couple caught my attention.

Count Three: Statutory and common law commercial appropriation of right of publicity:

Under California law, the right of publicity survives the death of a celebrity. Thus, any person who uses a deceased person’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner . . . without prior consent from the executor of the deceased person’s estate commercially misappropriates the deceased person’s right of publicity. Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.1.

There can be no dispute that Ms. Smith held a fully descendible right of publicity
in her Estate property. See Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.1. Further, Shelley has admitted to removing documents and materials from Horizons after Ms. Smith’s death. There is no question that these documents and materials are owned by the Estate. Further, there is no dispute that these items removed by Shelley contained Ms. Smith’s name, voice, signature, and photograph. Shelley used the property by, among other things, distributing it to third parties, including media entities. Shelley had no prior consent from the Executor to use the property he stole from Horizons.

Count Six: Violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act:

Whoever knowingly causes transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer; intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct causes damage and Forensic analyses confirm that Shelley copied and deleted files contained on the password protected computers and external hard drives owned by the Estate, which Shelley unlawfully removed from Horizons. Shelley lacked authorization to access the computers and external hard drives. Shelley’s conduct caused damage and losses in excess of $5,000 in a one-year period. causes losses of at least $5,000 in a one-year period, violates federal statute. 18 U.S.C. §1030(a)(5).

Forensic analyses confirm that Shelley copied and deleted files contained on the
password protected computers and external hard drives owned by the Estate, which Shelley unlawfully removed from Horizons. Shelley lacked authorization to access the computers and external hard drives. Shelley’s conduct caused damage and losses in excess of $5,000 in a one-year period.

Stern’s Local Rule 26-3-a, lists most of the same witnesses with the exception of Wilma Vicedomine which leads to ask when and why did she become involved with Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley?

Howard K. Stern’s lists the following evidence and documents in the same disclosure that he and/or the Estate (Dannielynn Birkhead as the sole heir) might use to prove the claims.

The following categories of documents in the Executor’s possession, custody, or control may be used to support his claims:

(1) All documents referred to in the Complaint.
(2) Documents relating to the investigation into Defendants’ unlawful conduct in the Bahamas.
(3) Media interviews of Defendants.
(4) Communications between Defendants and third parties regarding the factual circumstances that form the basis for the allegations in the Complaint.
(5) Deposition transcripts of third parties in other litigation regarding the factual circumstances that form the basis for the allegations in the Complaint.
(6) Forensic analyses of Ms. Smith’s computers.
(7) Communications from counsel for Defendants which support the factual basis for the allegations in the Complaint.

So folks why did Ben Thompson miss the date of November 3 and has not notified the court or ask for an extension due to one of his lawyers being ill? Who edited the Clown Video and who has the original now? Why is Tom Pirtle listed, but the rest of Virgie Arthur’s legal team in Florida are not? Then we have Don Clark on both disclosures but Wilma Vicedomine as the lone separate person missing in one of the filings.

Could the Clark/Vicedomine investigation lead us from California, to Florida, to New York to South Carolina in the alleged attempts to have Howard K. Stern arrested and tried for something, anything it appears if the filings are to be believed.

Remember you can pick up all of the documents related to the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith suing Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley, opened to ALL, not just members of Rose Speaks.com.

In other news on November 4, 2008 Court Order from Florida that Postpones the Requirement of John O’Quinn and the O’Quinn Law Firm financials until November 10, 2008 the deadline for the two sides to file a Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice.

©Rose Turner
November 5, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Ben Thompson, Biscayne Professional Associates, California Department of Justice, Clark/Vice investigation, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Don Clark, Don Clark ex-FBI, Ford Shelley, FOX News, G Ben Thompson, Gaither Thompson, Gina Shelley, Horizons, Horizons in the Bahamas, Horizons lawsuit, Howard K Stern, John "Jay" Patton, John Patton, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Melanie Thompson, Nicole Jennings Wade, O'Quinn's Don Clark Ex-FBI, Pol' Atteu, Rita Cosby, Stancil "Ford" Shelley, Tom Pirtle, Tracy Ferguson of Callendar's in the Bahamas

In the lawsuit of Angela Robinson vs. Richard Laminack and his Law Firm as well as the O’Quinn Law Firm, on September 16, the 295th Court of Harris County in Houston Texas granted Angela Robinson a brief extended period of time to prepare and appear for a deposition. The Court however Ordered Ms. Robinson to appear on or before October 24 for her deposition.

There are numerous Motions on the Court’s Calendar for Monday, October 13, these includes Motion to Compel Production of Documents as well as two Motions to Compel Interrogatories. In a letter filed with the Court on Friday, October 10, one of the lawyers for the defendants has outlined what he would like to have addressed at the hearing, which would include, the Special Exception D, Special Exception F from the O’Quinn law firm. Original Answer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Petition and counter-claim for Temporary Restraining Order and Temporary Injunction Relief filed August 29, 2008. The Response in Opposition by Robinson to the O’Quinn defendants’ Special exceptions. Tomorrow seems like it will be a busy day in hearings.

From looking at the Court’s Documents, it appears that all of the defendants have filed Responses to Ms. Robinson Original Complaint and then later her Amended Complaint.

It appears that Richard Laminack has filed a cross claim against Ms. Robinson.

We have not been able to get the documents due the outlandish cost through Harris County District Clerk online. If any of you know any of the lawyers involved in this suit of, Spencer Markle of McKinney & Cooper, Dale Jefferson of Martin, Disiere, Jefferson & Wisdom, Stewart Hoffer; or if you are a court watcher in the Houston Texas area and can pick up and send us the papers we want to be sure we give fair and unbiased coverage on these lawsuits. If you want to send them to us anonymously use my email address at Rose Speaks.com of rose @ rosespeaks.com In the interim will follow the case via the Court Docket Sheet.

When any Orders are issued from tomorrow’s hearing, we will have that information here on Rose Speaks.com as well.

©Rose Turner
October 12, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Angela Robinson, Dale Jefferson, Laminack Pirtle & Marttines LLP, Richard Laminack, Richard N. Laminack, Spencer Markle, Stewart Hoffer, The O'Quinn Law Firm

In the Texas Lawyer this morning, all of the lawyers including Richard Laminack have given statements to the reporter on the record in an article.

Mr. Laminack says of Angela Robertson claims and lawsuit words including “silly” and “ridiculous and not true”. Of the over billing of clients, in “scheme to defraud thousands of Fen-Phen litigation clients” Mr. Laminack said, “”That allegation makes absolutely no sense, because under O’Quinn’s contract, [the O'Quinn firm] pays almost half of the expenses out of his fee. So it doesn’t really make sense for us to engage in some kind of a scheme to increase the expenses.” Our effort the entire time we handled these expenses was to keep them as low as possible.” In regards to not being paid for the overtime Ms. Roberson worked Laminack said, “”interesting, to say the least, because that’s one of the primary reasons she was fired.” Laminack went on to allege that Ms. Robinson was “cheating on her OT and was warned about this,” but he declines to identify other reasons why Laminack Pirtle [his new firm also including in the suit filed on July 25] fired Ms. Robinson. Laminack went on in the interview to say about the sexual allegations, “She was very aggressive at seeking employment with us. This is after all these alleged incidents of sexual harassment had occurred.”

In response to Mr. Laminack’s on the record comment Ms. Robinson attorney, Spencer Markle, stated, “That’s absolutely untrue. … I’m saddened that after victimizing her, he wants to destroy her reputation. … I’m confident the evidence will show who is the victim and who is the wrongdoer,” Robinson’s attorney, Markle, says it’s not surprising Laminack denies all the allegations in Robinson’s petition. Markle, of counsel at Houston’s McKinney & Cooper, says the allegations speak for themselves. In response to statements from Laminack asking why Ms. Robinson would have continued to work for him in a sexual hostile environment Mr. Markle responded, “”She will address that when she gives her deposition.”. Mr. Markle went on to say that just because Ms. Robertson suit stated that she had not filed any complaints with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or with the Texas Commission on Human Rights did not mean she would not now file with those agencies. Mr. Markle added, “Ms. Robinson did not file those because she had hoped to settle with Laminack without filing suit. However, she is now considering filing a complaint with one or both of the agencies.”

Houston lawyer Dale Jefferson, a partner in Martin, Disiere, Jefferson & Wisdom who represents the O’Quinn Law Firm, says the mail fraud allegation against his client is “completely false.” “When all the facts come to light, I sure hope the actual facts are reported with the same intensity as the alleged facts contained in the petition,” Jefferson stated in the interview.

You can read Ms Brenda Jeffreys article in the Texas Lawyer a subscription service at this URL: http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202423476249&pos=ataglance.

You can also download the Original Complaint filed Ms. Angela Robertson in our download section of Rose Speaks.com, which is open to ALL not just members of our site.

Rose Speaks.com will be following this litigation as it develops and to its conclusion in the Harris County 295th Court with additional filings by all of the parties.

©Rose Turner
August 4, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

In an in depth article of the continued plaguing woes of the O’Quinn Law Firm, The Houston Chronicle reporter MIKE TOLSON, refers to the O’Quinn Law Firm as the “oft-controversial Houston law firm” and describes Richard Laminack as John O’Quinn’s “First Lieutenant in the breast silicone implant suits”.

It was this combination of lawyers, which forced Dow Corning into bankruptcy while fighting class action suits over silicone implants. It was only later that thousands of women learned that the breast implant scare was more for class action suits then of any real health danger. Many women have return to having their breasts enhanced, once the myth of silicone breast implants and autoimmune problems were debunked by studies around the globe.

The Department of Pathology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX: “Pathologic findings in nerve and muscle biopsies from 47 women with silicone breast implants” CONCLUSION: These findings do not support a consistent association between Silicone Breast Implants and any neuro-pathologic entity.”

The most comprehensive study of its kind: researchers from the University of North Carolina reviewed 20 studies involving 10,000 women with gel implants from the United States, Sweden, the Netherlands, Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia. The researchers could find no link between gel implants and autoimmune diseases…

An article by Dr. David Kim, Beverly Hills, CA states that, “After years of waiting, silicone implants are back. Since 1992 there has been a ban imposed by the FDA on the sale of silicone gel implants. Women wanting silicone implants, since then, have had to “qualify “for the implants by meeting specific criteria to be included in a study. The ban was imposed due to claims of a connection between silicone gel breast implants and autoimmune diseases, connective tissue diseases and even cancer. Scientific evidence since that time conducted by the Institute of Medicine and experts from all over the world has shown no such connection to exist. In July of 05’ a letter was sent by the FDA to a silicone implant manufacturer stating that silicone implants could be used if certain criteria were met. And as of last week, November 2006, silicone implants are available to all breast reconstruction and revision patients, as well as women 22 years of age and older seeking cosmetic breast enhancement. A number of conditions come attached to the approval, including studies and follow-up.”

Besides Dow Corning going bankrupt, the other sad fact is that thousands of women in Texas alone are still waiting for money due them because of being over billed by the O’Quinn Law Firm an arbitration panel found in September 2007. It has ordered O’Quinn to pay $41 million dollars for overcharging breast implant clients for expenses. The last update on this was that O’Quinn was going to appeal the decision of “binding arbitration” through the courts.

It appears in Angela Robinson lawsuit against Richard Laminack and O’Quinn’s Law Firm goes beyond the sexual harassment claims. Ms. Robinson is alleging that the same thing has happened to the “Fen-phen” clients of over billing as the silicone clients faced. Ms. Robinson complaint goes on to say that she refused to be part of what she alleges was mail fraud in over billing these clients, while Richard Laminnack’s new firm and the O’Quinn law firm received “kick backs” from medical record retrieval companies.

To date however, there appears to be no criminal investigation of Laminack or The O’Quinn Law Firm, unlike the lawyers in Kentucky whose retrial for the same charges to clients is expected to began as early as September.

You add to that the scathing opinion by Judge Janis Jack the bridge playing, whiskey drinking Clinton Appointment to the federal bench and things seem to not be setting well these days.

In an article, tilted “Legally Insane” the NAM.org stated that; “When Federal District Court Judge Janis Jack blew the lid on potential fraud in litigation over silicosis (a lung disease caused by overexposure to silica – the primary component of sand and other minerals) in a June 30 2005 ruling, prominent plaintiffs’ law firms and “medical” screening companies were not laughing. In fact, they likely were reminded of another “Laugh-In” standard – “Sock it to me.”

Perhaps because she used to be a nurse, Judge Jack did not simply rubber stamp the claims as other judges before her have done. Instead, her medical training caused her to have concerns about the extent of the problems alleged.

…. At one point, Judge Jack mused aloud that if she had the power she would sentence all of the lawyers involved to using only the doctors hired in this litigation for their medical needs. She was also gutsy enough to use the word “fraud” during proceedings and a federal grand jury is investigating these charges.

The O’Quinn law firm was fined and criticized by Judge Janis Jack for attempting to manipulate the diagnostic process in order to increase the number of claimants.”

Of course, none of us knows if that grand jury is still convened in the Southern District of Texas. However, her scathing decision and sanctions against the lawyers involved as well as telling “expert doctors” they might want to get a lawyer and plead the fifth, before going on with testimony in her court and her decision has had a pebble rippling effect in the legal communities and other class action suits across the nation.

O’Quinn has an Answer due to a lawsuit in Mississippi by the end of today if an out of court settlement has not been reached brought by a lawyer who alleges that neither his clients or him has been paid by O’Quinn’s law firm in related class action suits.

Could a spunky 29-year-old ex-paralegal manage to stand up to the O’Quinn machine and survive? Only time will tell us if Ms. Robinson’s suit has legs and if any additional investigations are began or are ongoing due to her “whistle blowing”.

Rose Speaks.com will be following Ms. Robinson’s suit closely, and we recommend you read the Houston Chronicle article since it has quotes on the record from all of the attorneys in this new round of accusations.

You can pick up a copy of the Judge Jack decision in our download section opened to ALL, not just members of Rose Speaks.com.

The password protected blog for regular posters can be found here. http://www.rosespeaks.com/rose-blog/?p=408.

©Rose Turner
August 1, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.