In a stunning development, Lehigh Valley Pennsylvania Judge J. Brian Johnson on Thursday, October 13, 2005, tossed out a defamation lawsuit by nationally known self-proclaimed “consumer medical advocate” (Quackbuster) lawsuit just minutes before it was going to be considered by a local jury.

The Quackbuster battle was targeting chiropractic core values with subluxation being challenged as "quackery."

            The lawsuit, filed in August 2002, against also nationally known Pennsylvania chiropractor, lecturer, researcher and publisher, Dr. Tedd Koren sought unspecified damages against Koren and his company, Koren Publications, Inc. for statements that he wrote in his newsletter in 2001.   A long-time nemesis of chiropractic, filed the lawsuit because of Koren’s publication of an attacker of traditional core values of chiropractic practitioners.  In his defense, Koren contended that the statements were true and not defamatory and that he had a First Amendment right to write them in his newsletter.

            The ruling by Judge Johnson represented a major reversal of the finding of an arbitration panel in August 2004 wherein the panel consisting of three local private attorneys reviewing the case had found against Dr. Koren and imposed an money judgment gainst him and ordered that Dr. Koren should publish a retraction.  Koren hired Carlos Negrete and appealed that award. 

            Dr. Koren was represented by well-known health freedom San Juan Capistrano, CA, attorney Carlos F. Negrete for trial. and Washington, D.C. attorney James Turner of  Swankin & Turner.  Turner and Negrete have been well-known for their representation of clients in the health food, supplement and vitamin industries, as well as representing naturopaths, nurses, dentists, physicians, chiropractors and complimentary therapists across the country.  Turner’s experience dates back to the 1960s when he joined consumer advocate Ralph Nader and was one of the groundbreaking Nader’s Raiders that made consumer advocacy popular, and which brought significant changes in manufacturing and consumer protection.  The Nader’s Raders’ campaigns received worldwide attention.

            In making the ruling to throw out the case, Judge Johnson granted a rare directed verdict to the jury finding there was insufficient evidence to support Plaintiff’s claims.  Judge Johnson indicated that this case was one of those “rare times” where such a motion was appropriate.

            The lawsuit was well publisized by www.quackwatch.org , www.chirobase.org and 20 other web sites and have been a long time critic of chiropractic calling much of it “quackery.”  The victory to chiropractor Dr. Koren comes almost 18 years to the date that chiropractors received national attention with their victory against the American Medical Association (AMA) by obtaining an injunction against the AMA from an Illinois federal judge for engaging in illegal boycotting of doctors of chiropractic in Wilk et al vs. AMA.   Dr. Koren had been a vocal advocate that the AMA has, in recent years, violated the spirit of the federal judge’s order.

            After the ruling, Koren proclaimed: “I am overjoyed and enthusiastic that this nightmare is over and that the science, art and philosophy of chiropractic and the work of all of my colleagues have been vindicated.  This case took a toll on my life and family, but I knew that I was right in publishing the truth.  They had no right to misinform the public about chiropractic and other natural healing arts or to try to silence anyone who criticizes him or tell consumers that he is not what he purports to be.  I believe that it is not right to be silent when there is a duty to inform the public and let the truth be told.”  

           Dr. Tedd Koren is known for his writings and lectures on chiropractic science, research, philosophy and chiropractic patient adjusting.  He is known for his Koren Publications chiropractic patient education brochures, posters, booklets, books and other products that are used in chiropractors’ offices throughout the United States and around the world.   Dr. Koren also co-founded a chiropractic college, is on the extension faculty of two chiropractic colleges, is published in chiropractic and bio-medical journals, and has received numerous awards in his field.  His web sites include www.korenpublications.com and www.teddkorenseminars.com. 

            Koren’s trial attorney, Carlos F. Negrete of San Juan Capistrano, CA, is known for his defense of physicians, chiropractors, dentists, clinics and natural heath providers who practice what is known as integrated, complimentary & alternative medicine and holistic healthcare.   Negrete has also handled groundbreaking cases against HMOs in California and has represented many celebrities, corporations and politicians.

           This was not the first time that Negrete was a trial attorney in a Quackbuster case.  He also represented anti-fluoridation advocate Darlene Sherrell in a federal lawsuit filed in Eugene, Oregon.  Darlene won the case and the anti-flouridation movement was validated.   In addition, Negrete represented Dr. Frank J. King, Jr. ND, DC of King Bio Natural Medicine of North Carolina and MediaPower (manufacturers of CalMax and Nu-Zymes) of Maine in cases filed by Quackbusters, which were also lost by Quackbuster organization. 

            After the Koren trial, Negrete stated: “The de-bunker has been de-bunked.  I am pleased and satisfied with this outcome for Dr. Koren and am proud that Dr. Koren did not succumb to the pressures of the intimidation of the legal wrangling of Quackbusters.  Not everyone can stand up to well funded Quackbusters.”  

            Negrete continued, “It is another great day for health freedom and alternative healthcare around the world.  I am especially pleased that this most important victory for health freedom.  It just goes to show you that there is justice anywhere, even when you are a visitor challenging the home team.  These people act like a shills for the medical and pharmaceutical cartels and his bully tactics and unjustified discrediting of leading innovators, scientists and health practitioners should not be tolerated.”  

            Negrete proclaimed “You can be assured that our legal team will be wherever health freedom advocates and practitioners are being persecuted.  The tide is now turning and people are no longer accepting that synthetic drugs are the only way to address health concerns.  Every day, consumers are becoming more educated about the benefits of holistic and alternative methods.  This is something that the medical establishment obviously fears and wants to crush with false propaganda.”

            Koren said that he would now go back to his home in Pennsylvania to spend more time with his family and continue to write, research and lecture on topics concerning chiropractic and healthcare and the experiences he has gained from this precedent setting legal battle.  He plans to give new lectures to chiropractors across the country that are under attack or have been subjected to governmental actions.   He also announced that he is forming a new organization aimed at informing and assisting chiropractors across the country.

            The trial started on Monday, October 10, 2005 and ended on October 13, 2005.

CALIFORNIA COURT OF APPEAL HANDS DOWN

LANDMARK RULING

IN FAVOR OF HOMEOPATHY

        On April 22, 2003, the California Court of Appeals handed down a far reaching landmark decision in favor of homeopathy and against the National Council Against Health Fraud.

        NCAHF [which professes itself to be a "consumer watchdog" against what it calls as health "quackery"] filed a lawsuit on February 16, 2001, as a representative of California Consumers, against King Bio Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its president Dr. Frank J. King, Jr., N.D., D.C., a leading manufacturer and distributor of homeopathic products.

        The lawsuit accused Dr. King and King Bio of false and misleading advertisement and unfair competition under the California Business & Professions Code. It was the first case of this type to go all the way to trial with respect to homeopathy. In the lawsuit, NCAHF challenged homeopathy by proceeding on the theory that there is no scientific basis for the advertised efficacy of King Bio’s products and the King Bio’s products were "drugs."    

        Dr. King has been an active contributor to the national chiropractic community since 1979. He is the Founder and President of King Bio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a registered homeopathic manufacturing company dedicated to the research, development, promotion and education of the many benefits of homeopathy. Dr. King is also a member of the prestigious Homeopathic Pharmacopoeia Convention of the United States (HPCUS). The HPCUS works directly with the FDA as a governing authority of homeopathy in the United States.

        For more information on King Bio and Dr. Frank King, you can refer to www.kingbio.com .

        NCAHF is outspoken in its criticism of homeopathic medicine calling it "worthless" and unproven. There is even a recently launched a web site to publicly discredit homeopathy. See www.homeowatch.org .

        King Bio, like many other homeopathic and supplement companies targeted by NCAHF in similar lawsuits, refused to capitulate to any sort of settlement with NCAHF. Instead, Dr. King decided to take the lead and defend his own integrity and that of his company by deciding to "have his day in court" and taking the case to trail.

        The trial took place on October, 2001 in Los Angeles, California. The Law Offices of Carlos F. Negrete and Carlos F. Negrete provided support and assistance for the trial.

        Under cross-examination of NCAHF’s witnesses at the trial, it was revealed that NCAHF had never tested any of the Dr. King products or even conducted any sort of scientific study. Something which NCAHF have steadfastly argued should be performed by all supplement manufacturers and alternative therapists if they are to be recognized by the likes of NCAHF. 

        After NCAHF presented its case with little or no real evidence, Dr. King’s attorneys requested that the court end the case and rule in its favor. The trial court sided with Dr. King and awarded a judgment in favor of King Bio and Dr. King. NCAHF’s case was so weak and lacking of evidence that Dr. King and King Bio did not even have to present it full case in defense before the judge ruled.

        Despite the overwhelming defeat at trial, NCAHF decided to challenge the judge’s decision and filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal in California.

        During the appeal process, NCAHF’s attorney, Morse Mehrban, was joined by another purported "consumer watchdog" attorney who fights against alternative therapies and supplements, Mark Boling, on behalf of a little known organization called Consumer Justice Center ("CJC"). CJC filed a "friend of the court brief" in support of NCAHF’s appeal.

        NCAHF and CJC argued that the trial court was wrong and that existing law should be changed to allow plaintiffs, such as NCAHF, to bring lawsuits with little or no evidence against a targeted company and, thereafter, force the targeted company to defend itself on the basis of an accusation alone. The Court of appeal was not persuaded that such a change in law was appropriate or logical.

        The Law Offices of Carlos F. Negrete represented Dr. King and King Bio in the appeal and argued that the trial court correctly found in favor of Dr. King and King Bio and that it was not proper under California law or the United States Constitution that a plaintiff, such as NCAHF, could irresponsibly file a lawsuit without any evidence against a product and its manufacturer. Negrete argued that it would be irresponsible and against free enterprise to allow an individual to file a lawsuit without any evidence of wrongdoing with just a couple of hundred dollars in a filing fee, thereby subjecting a victim defendant to spend as much as hundreds of thousands of dollars in defense costs. All because someone could point their finger at what they did not understand or believe in.

        In its Opinion, the Court of Appeals agreed with King and Negrete. Specifically, the Court of Appeals found that NCAHF "presented no evidence that King Bio’s products were not safe and effective, relying instead on a general attack on homeopathy, made by witnesses who had no knowledge of, or experience with, King Bio’s products, and who were found to be biased and unworthy of credibility"

        And, in an more remarkable validation, the Court of Appeals ordered that their Opinion be "published" as a precedent setting case in the official reports of the State of California. This is the first opinion of its kind as to homeopathy and the issues raised during the appeal. It will undoubtedly be discussed by many legal scholars and cited in cases to follow in the future.

        The Law Offices of Carlos F. Negrete congratulates Dr. Frank King, Jr. for his efforts, dedication and perseverance in defending the advancement homeopathy and alternative therapies and it is proud to have participated in yet another case defending health freedom.

        For a full text of the Opinion in Word Format or Adobe format, click below.

        WORD FORMAT                ADOBE PDF FORMAT

OREGON FEDERAL JUDGE

HANDS DARLENE SHERRELL A MAJOR VICTORY

ANTI-FLUORIDATION MILESTONE

NEGRETE TALLIES

ANOTHER ANTI-QUACKBUSTER WIN!!!

    In yet another MAJOR VICTORY for the Anti-Fluoride Movement, a Federal Court Judge in Eugene, Oregon, has ruled that the Plaintiff could not prove his case against well known anti-fluoridation advocate, Darlene Sherrell.

    The Plaintiff filed his lawsuit against Darlene Sherrell in 1999  demanding $100,000 in "damages" for alleged defamation and sought an injunction against Sherrell for posting information on her web site.

    Darlene Sherrell is a well known independent researcher and expert on the dangers of excessive daily intake of fluoride in human beings leading to chronic fluoride poisoning. 

    The Law Offices of Carlos F. Negrete agreed to accept Darlene Sherrell's case in order to give a voice to the anti-fluoridation movement and defend Sherrell. 

Background:

    In the summer of 1998, Darlene Sherrell, challenged pro-flouridation advocates to come forward to name a study demonstrating the safety of current fluoride levels in drinking water and the effect excessive daily intake of fluoride as a possible cause to chronic fluoride poisoning.  Sherrell had been rebuked and faced continuous challenges and even called "delusional."

    On November 5, 2002, after a trial in October, 2002, Federal Judge Michael R. Hogan ruled in favor of Sherrell.  He ordered the case dismissed. 

    Before the trial, the defamation case against Sherrell had been languishing in the court for years awaiting trial.  Trial was finally set for June, 2002. 

    Two weeks before trial, Sherrell engaged the Law Offices of Carlos F. Negrete based upon its experience with defending cases that had been filed by Quackbusters previously and their commitment to health freedom and environmental issues.

    Darlene Sherrell was convinced of the correctness of her findings and public statements.  She refused to settle and pay any money or even remove the information about the dangers of Fluoride poisoning on her website.  Instead, she was committed to having her "day in court" on the fluoridation issues and vigorously defend what she believes to have been bullying tactics.

    We congratulate Darlene Sherrell for her courage, conviction and commitment to advocating information about the dangers of chronic food poisoning.

    Law Offices of Carlos F. Negrete is dedicated to representing individuals and organizations that share similar beliefs in health freedom and prevention of toxic contamination.

    Darlene was born on January 4, 1941 and passed away on September 29, 2008.   She was a beautiful, articulate and fearless crusader against flouridation.  It was my honor to provide her legal representation and vindication.

More information on Darlene Sherrell and her courageous efforts at www.all-natural.com/think.html

FIGUEROA LAWSUIT AGAINST DR. HULDA CLARK

DISMISSED BY SAN FRANCISCO SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE

        In yet  ANOTHER MAJOR VICTORY for Dr. Hulda Clark and the health freedom movement, San Francisco Superior Court Judge David A. Garcia DISMISSED a lawsuit filed on September 10, 1999 against Dr. Clark by Esther Figueroa and Jose Figueroa of New York. 

        The dismissal, which has been touted by Quackbusters and the Quackwatch web site, comes as a MAJOR SETBACK and STUNNING DEFEAT to anti-health freedom forces and marks the culmination of months of Dr. Clark's defense of false charges.

        The case, which languished for months, was vigorously defended by Dr. Clark, who denied all of the charges.  Earlier this year, the same Judge sided with Dr. Clark in finding that the Figueroa case against her had no "no reasonable possibility of prevailing" and ordered the Figueroas to post a $20,000 bond if they wanted to continue the case.  The Figueroas failed to posted the court ordered bond.

        Shortly after the Figueroas were ordered to post a bond, their attorney, Christopher Grell, withdrew from the case leaving the Figueroas representing themselves in the case.  Christopher Grell thereafter filed a personal lawsuit against Dr. Clark in Oakland.  The Court in Oakland has already commented that his (Christopher Grell's) case has little merit.   Attorney Grell has recently been sued, among other things, for Racketeering by New Century Press (publisher of Dr. Clark's books).

        Once again, Dr. Clark has been vindicated.

        Dr. Clark was represented by the LAW OFFICES OF CARLOS F. NEGRETE (HEALTH FREEDOM LAW).

        Dr. Clark thanks all of the people that supported her during these past years and assures all that her vital work will continue.

JUDGE THROWS OUT LAWSUIT AGAINST ILENA ROSENTHAL

ORDERS PLAINTIFFS TO PAY HER ATTORNEY'S FEES

      In another MAJOR victory for health freedom and Free Speech, the Court in Oakland tossed out the lawsuit that Terry Polevoy and attorney Christopher Grell filed against ILENA ROSENTHAL.

    This is a stunning, but not surprising, new development and defeat for the Quackbusters.   Judge Richman also ordered that Polevoy and attorney Christopher Grell pay for ILENA ROSENTHAL's attorney's fees and costs in bringing her motion.

    In his ruling Judge Richman found that Grell had no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Rosenthal and that Polevoy lacked prerequisite evidence.  The motion brought by Ms. Rosenthal was based on recently enacted California SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute, which seeks to prevent lawsuits that are "brought primarily to chill the valid exercise of the constitutional rights of free speech and petition for redress of grievances."   Judge Richman found that the Polevoy/Grell lawsuit was that type of lawsuit.

    Health Freedom Law applauds Ilena Rosenthal for her courage and determination and congratulates Attorney Mark Goldowitz of the CALIFORNIA ANTI-SLAPP PROJECT for his work in this case. We thank the both of you.

Mexican Federal Judge Orders Century Nutrition Clinic Reopened

    In another important development, a Mexican Federal Court in Tijuana, Mexico, has ordered the reopening of the the Century Nutrition Clinic pending a full trial on the charges imposed by  the Health Department in Mexicali, Mexico (almost 100 miles away from Tijuana).

    The Court sided with Century Nutrition's lawsuit asking that it be able to open pending a full trial on disputed charges of violations.  Since the unannounced closure of the clinic last February 16, 2001, Century Nutrition has vigorously denied any charges of impropriety and has filed two lawsuits, in Mexico, against the Health Department and its officials.

    Century Nutrition refused to pay fines to the Health Department that it maintained were unwarranted, excessive and unconstitutional.

    The Court action has been heralded as a milestone in alternative medicine law in Mexico and is the first of its kind in this court.   As with her cutting edge discoveries, Dr. Clark's legal team is providing breakthroughs in health freedom law in this country.

    The clinic will soon be fully functional providing much needed services to Dr. Clark enthusiasts and supporters. 

    Dr. Clark and her legal team deliver another victory for health freedom.

Libel Lawsuit against Dr. Joseph Mercola, D.O.

Editorial Comment and Opinion by Carlos F. Negrete

         The libel lawsuit that he filed against Dr. Joseph Mercola, D.O.

        The lawsuit stemmed from allegations that Dr. Mercola was defamatory by his internet postings concerning Tim Bolen on his website.  

        Soon after the lawsuit was filed, Dr. Mercola engaged the LAW OFFICES OF CARLOS F. NEGRETE along with THE HEALTH FREEDOM LEGAL DEFENSE COUNCIL to act as his lead attorneys in the defense of the case. 

        The hearing on the objections was set for June 26, 2001.   The dismissal was announced only one day prior to the Court hearing. 

Alternative Medicine & Health Freedom Related Legal Cases

Editorial Comment and Opinion by Carlos F. Negrete

   This web site contains several cases that are being litigated in different parts of the country relating to health freedom issues and alternative medicine.  Several of the cases reported on this site involve Dr. Hulda Clark and Century Nutrition.  However, there are other cases reported that concern lawsuits filed by so called Quackbusters and other opponents of alternative medicine. 

    Dr. Clark has taken a leading role in the crusade against those who want to challenge an individual's right to make well-reasoned intelligent choices as to whether he/she elects alternative medicine versus traditional medicine as a therapy for their wellness or ailments.  It is our opinion that each individual has the fundamental right to elect the nutrients and therapies that they have determined best meets their own personal research, investigation, beliefs, philosophies, metabolism, religious concerns and well-being.

    The cases reported in this web site involve several disputes between advocates of differing viewpoints on the traditions of alternative medicine and health choice.  You are invited to review the information and documents contained in this site and make you own determinations and conclusions.

    It is the phenomenal growth of alternative therapies that has energized a spirited discussion of the efficacy of alternative medicine.  Unfortunately, there are those traditional medicine advocates that believe that they "know better" and would like to block the growing popularity of natural healing methods.  They seem to want to ridicule alternative medicine and stop the free flow of information spreading through the internet.  These heresyphobics engage in constant tactics to discredit what they do not understand with the same reckless abandonment of a drive-by shooter.  One can only speculate as to their true motives and ask: What are they afraid of?  Is it that perhaps alternative medicine works and people ARE really being cured?

    Quite frankly, if they don't like the natural products that we decide to incorporate in our health regimen, then just leave us alone.  They can keep popping Prozac to alleviate their patronizing anguish over us and turn to radiation when their bodies succumb to cancer.  Cancers that were caused by the toxins that they deny even exist.

    These self-appointed "medical experts" fail to recognize that natural healing, and the methods used by alternative treatment advocates, has a longer and more established history than does mainstream allopathic medicine.

    I am reminded of an HMO case that went to trial several years ago.  In that case, one of the directors of the HMO testified that he followed the "golden rule" when it came to which treatments the HMO would accept and pay for.  When asked what the "golden rule" meant, he testified that "he who owns the gold RULES."   Yes, the opponents of alternative medicine are better funded and equipped to challenge the health freedom movement.  Fortunately, they may have the bucks, but our numbers are growing.  At some point, the big lie will get out and then people will start realizing who is killing whom.

    We, on the other hand, are committed to allowing the public to receive all of the information available in order to allow them to decide for themselves what is best for their bodies. 

    If the battle for health freedom must be fought in a court of law, then so be it.  The alternative therapy community is ready to stand by its knowledge and established modalities against narrow-minded medical militants. 

Information Contained in this Site

    Unless otherwise stated, the information and documents contained in this site are actual court proceedings, events and/or the actual court filings or documents that are substantially similar to the originals that have been filed with the respective courts or governmental entities.

        BACK to Home Page

Disclaimer

Please read the Legal Notice & Disclaimer concerning this web page and all other pages on this web site.

Last Update: Monday, May 30, 2011 04:13 AM (Eastern Standard Time)

Comments

www.negretelaw.com

    All feedback or comments are welcome.

Info@healthfreedomlaw.com

© 2010 - Law Offices of Carlos F. Negrete - All Rights Reserved