Medical Justice provides consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. We also provide counsel specific to COVID-19. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a consultation – or use the tool shared below.
“Can Medical Justice solve my problem?” Click here to review recent consultations…
all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…
- Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
- Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
- Just received board complaint…
- Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
- Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
- DEA showed up to my office…
- Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
- My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
- My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
- How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
- How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
- I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
- Hospital wants to fire me…
- Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
- Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
- Patient’s results are not what was expected…
- Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
- Just received notice of intent to sue…
- Just received summons for meritless case…
- Safely responding to negative online reviews…
We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.
A Washington attorney general is suing a Seattle-based plastic surgeon. And considering the facts as we understand them, if accurate as alleged, it’s difficult to imagine the surgeon’s career surviving the fallout. Time will tell. The attorney general alleges the practice used a combination of bribes and threats to prevent patients from posting negative online reviews. And that’s not all – but we’ll get to those details in a bit.
The attorney general recently filed a lawsuit against the practice, Allure Esthetic, and the practice’s owner, Dr. Javad Sajan. Investigators interviewed about 40 former employees and ten patients. The lawsuit claims around 10,000 patients signed non-disclosure agreements designed to penalize them if they posted negative sentiment online.
By way of background, Allure Esthetic offers surgical and non-surgical treatments, including Botox injections and gender-affirming care.
The attorney general learned of the practice’s behavior by listening to the testimonies of former patients. Investigators also consulted prospective clients dismissed by the practice. It should be noted some prospective clients departed Allure voluntarily, often after learning of the practice’s liberal use of advance non-disclosure agreements.
To provide an example: Cynthia Tamlyn approached the practice with her loved one, whom our source refers to as “John.” When the couple requested a summary of the practice’s HIPAA policy, Allure refused to provide one. The practice then insisted that John sign a non-disclosure agreement. John signed the document, but after discussing the matter with Cynthia, decided to terminate their relationship with the practice.
As we stated previously, the non-disclosure agreement discouraged patients from posting negative reviews (meaning less than 4 stars). What would happen to patients if they posted negative reviews anyway?
The practice is accused of answering negative sentiment in one of two ways:
The practice promised the author a cash incentive (characterized by the attorney general as a bribe) to remove the review…
or
The practice threatened to sue the author…
The cash incentive wasn’t always offered. Sometimes the practice just threatened to sue.
If the patient accepted the bribe, Allure allegedly required that patient sign another non-disclosure agreement that promised a $250,000 fine would follow any more negative reviews.
The doctor-patient relationship is built on trust; threatening patients with a $250,000 hammer doesn’t build trust.
Victoria Hester, another prospective patient, scheduled an initial consultation after reading positive reviews about the practice online. Hester claims the practice made disparaging remarks about their body before dismissing them.
“I broke out in tears and quickly ran out of the office, because I was so embarrassed and so traumatized and so humiliated,” Hester said. “What about these five-star reviews that I saw posted? What about all the rave reviews that Dr. Sajan really cared about transgender people?”
When Hester posted a review describing their experience, the practice contacted them and threatened litigation.
If this was “all” Allure was allegedly doing, the attorney general’s lawsuit would still be an outcome from hell.
But there’s more.
The practice allegedly posted fake 5-star reviews and associated these fake reviews with modified “before-and-after” photographs. Was Victoria motivated to schedule a consultation after reading fake reviews? Don’t know. But it is possible. And if Victoria was encouraged by those fake reviews, other patients were likewise motivated.
Not to pile on, but consider the following: Did those pictures depict the practice’s actual patients? If so, did the practice have permission to post them online? If the models depicted were not patients, where did the images originate? Our source material doesn’t say. But in these situations, litigators tend to uncover as many rocks as possible in pursuit of potential damages – which is why it is critical to obtain a patient’s express written consent prior to using their image in your marketing.
And then there’s the alleged rebate fraud.
“[Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson] said the company used real patient names and birthdates to register for rebates on a skincare brand they use on patients. Allure is accused of then pocketing the money that should have gone to the consumers.”
The lawsuit seeks to invalidate the non-disclosure agreements. It also seeks $7,500 in damages per violation, and that patients are refunded their $100 consultation fees. With 10,000 affected patients, the math becomes daunting.
A case study demonstrating how not to behave. Perhaps the facts as alleged by the attorney general are not the full story. We’ll eventually learn as this case percolates. If accurate, it’s hard to imagine any doctor coming back from allegations like these. We understand the desire to tell “your side of the story” in the event of conflict, but binding patient behavior in 2023 via contract before being seen won’t work. Since the Consumer Review Fairness Act was passed by Congress in 2016, the law has changed, and the world has changed.
What do you think?
Medical Justice provides consultations to doctors facing medico-legal obstacles. We have solutions for doctor-patient conflicts, unwarranted demands for refunds, online defamation (patient review mischief), meritless litigation, and a gazillion other issues. We also provide counsel specific to COVID-19. If you are navigating a medico-legal obstacle, visit our booking page to schedule a consultation – or use the tool shared below.
“Can Medical Justice solve my problem?” Click here to review recent consultations…
all. Here’s a sample of typical recent consultation discussions…
- Former employee stole patient list. Now a competitor…
- Patient suing doctor in small claims court…
- Just received board complaint…
- Allegations of sexual harassment by employee…
- Patient filed police complaint doctor inappropriately touched her…
- DEA showed up to my office…
- Patient “extorting” me. “Pay me or I’ll slam you online.”
- My carrier wants me to settle. My case is fully defensible…
- My patient is demanding an unwarranted refund…
- How do I safely terminate doctor-patient relationship?
- How to avoid reporting to Data Bank…
- I want my day in court. But don’t want to risk my nest egg…
- Hospital wants to fire me…
- Sham peer review inappropriately limiting privileges…
- Can I safely use stem cells in my practice?
- Patient’s results are not what was expected…
- Just received request for medical records from an attorney…
- Just received notice of intent to sue…
- Just received summons for meritless case…
- Safely responding to negative online reviews…
We challenge you to supply us with a medico-legal obstacle we haven’t seen before. Know you are in good hands. Schedule your consultation below – or click here to visit our booking page.
Jeffrey Segal, MD, JD
Chief Executive Officer and Founder
Dr. Jeffrey Segal, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Medical Justice, is a board-certified neurosurgeon. Dr. Segal is a Fellow of the American College of Surgeons; the American College of Legal Medicine; and the American Association of Neurological Surgeons. He is also a member of the North American Spine Society. In the process of conceiving, funding, developing, and growing Medical Justice, Dr. Segal has established himself as one of the country’s leading authorities on medical malpractice issues, counterclaims, and internet-based assaults on reputation.
Dr. Segal was a practicing neurosurgeon for approximately ten years, during which time he also played an active role as a participant on various state-sanctioned medical review panels designed to decrease the incidence of meritless medical malpractice cases.
Dr. Segal holds a M.D. from Baylor College of Medicine, where he also completed a neurosurgical residency. Dr. Segal served as a Spinal Surgery Fellow at The University of South Florida Medical School. He is a member of Phi Beta Kappa as well as the AOA Medical Honor Society. Dr. Segal received his B.A. from the University of Texas and graduated with a J.D. from Concord Law School with highest honors.
In 2000, he co-founded and served as CEO of DarPharma, Inc, a biotechnology company in Chapel Hill, NC, focused on the discovery and development of first-of-class pharmaceuticals for neuropsychiatric disorders.
Dr. Segal is also a partner at Byrd Adatto, a national business and health care law firm. Byrd Adatto was selected as a Best Law Firm in the 2023 edition of the “Best Law Firms” list by U.S. News – Best Lawyers. With decades of combined experience in serving doctors, dentists, and other providers, Byrd Adatto has a national pedigree to address most legal issues that arise in the business and practice of medicine.
You might want to add that this person is not certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery, so he is not a legitimate plastic surgeon in that regard.
Yes. PLEASE do not dignify this doctor by calling him a plastic surgeon. He is a FACIAL plastic surgeon and has not completed ANY residency training in plastic surgery.
Because DPM’s don’t (yet) have a plenary license, they have “limited options” to call themselves other classifications of specialty. So, if you are a patient, when you hire a DPM to do your foot and ankle surgery, those docs actually had residency training to do that stuff. I know because I trained them myself. Also, when I was a resident at a VA hospital, I worked closely with orthopedists to do surgery that my license would not in the future cover.
For patients, this is a good solution: Yes, your surgeon was trained at an actual residency. Yes, your DPM surgeon was also trained in procedures he/she would NOT be allowed to do in their future. You can call this “over-training” if you wish. It is what it is.
However, if you have a plenary license, it opens the door for people with marginal skills to occupy your specialty. This is also true with “physician extender” licensure. It’s the “bargain” we have made and accepted. So in this case, the doctor who advertised himself as qualified to perform certain definitions of plastic surgeon, was not so qualified.
Yes, this is a matter of semantics, but the tire hits the road when he was doing things he did not know how to do. Your license allows this. Caveat emptor.
Michael M. Rosenblatt, DPM