Monday, May 16, 2011




                                                In The United States District Court
                                          For The Middle District Of Tennessee


Barry Schmittou,                                                               No. 3:05-0013                           
                                                                                           
Plaintiff,                                                                                 Honorable Judge Trauger
                                                                                           
V.                                                                                               Magistrate Judge Bryant
                                                                                                   
Metropolitan Life Insurance                           
Company and TMG Solutions Inc.                
d/b/a Mosaic Sales Solutions           

Motion and Memorandum Requesting Court to Appoint A Special Prosecutor To Investigate The U.S. Department of Labor and U.S. Department of Justice’s Failure To Stop Insurance Companies and Doctor’s Paid By Insurance Companies Who Are Ignoring Life Threatening Medical Conditions of Numerous Patients, and Similar Crimes That Are Being Committed By Insurance Companies In Five Different Types of Insurance
Please consider this to be the motion and memorandum combined.


Metlife and its henchmen” is an exact quote from U.S. District Judge Richard Enslen that is seen in Exhibit A.

Also seen in Exhibit A :

Quotes from U.S. District Judge Timothy Savage who wrote that Metlife and their paid consultant Dr. Gary Greenhood ignored MRI reports that evidenced Multiple Sclerosis and lesions on the brain of patient Jacquelyn Addis.

Judge Savage also wrote that MetLife and Dr. Greenhood ignored medical records that indicated weakness and shaking in lower and upper extremities, poor coordination, bladder and bowel problems, blurred vision, and other physical problems”

In the case of Joanne Vick, who developed diabetic kytoacedosis following childbirth, U.S. District Judge Robert Cleland wrote that Metlife and Dr. Gary Greenhood said Ms. Vick had never fallen. Then Judge Cleland wrote that Metlife and Dr. Greenhood were ignoring the medical records that prove Ms. Vick actually fell and broke her foot in 5 places.

There are many more shocking quotes about MetLife written by numerous U.S. Judges’ seen in Exhibit A

As you read these case quotes it is very important to remember that these cases are governed by the U.S. Title 29 Employee Retirement Income Security Act which regulates health benefits for 150 million Americans who work for privately owned businesses and corporations

** There is extreme danger for anyone who files a claim for health benefits or disability because they may die due to lack of money for medical treatment, food, and housing while they have to wait years for the insurance companies to deny their claim and for the Courts to make a determination.

In my personal case MetLife completely ignored my long term claim for eye cancer for five years while seeing many desperate requests for help including this sentence that was filed in U.S. District Court in Nashville:

"the Plaintiff who has had cancer removed from his eye and leg and over 200 biopsies plus stitches in 100 places has no money for follow up treatment."

While MetLife ignores evidence in the disability cases seen in Exhibit A,  Exhibit B shows how three U.S. Court of Appeals Judges wrote that MetLife “reverse engineered” a diagnosis and claimed that a patient had a pre existing condition.

The Judges also wrote that the medical records did not indicate that to be true.

In Exhibit C you’ll see how U.S. District Judge Robert Sweet wrote that Metlife trained appeals specialists to ignore evidence from the Social Security Administration.  You’ll also see how four U.S. Judges Wrote that  Metlife Ignores SSA Judges’ Profound Determinations‏

Exhibit D has six cases that prove MetLife’s complex fraud regarding vocational determinations‏

On page 7 of U.S. Magistrate Judge Bryant’s Order seen in Document 80 in this civil case Judge Bryant has written,

“In particular, plaintiff has already more than sufficiently alleged defendants’ “fraudulent” abuse of prescribed claims procedures, and his citation to criminal provisions of Title 29, United States Code are futile inasmuch as the enforcement of such provisions “is the exclusive prerogative of the Attorney General.” West v. Butler 621 F.2d, 244 ( 6th Cir. 1980)

After Judge Bryant wrote that quote I made two personal trips to the F.B.I. ofiice in Nashville, and I also contacted the Department of Labor because the DOL’s EBSA webpage has the following guidelines regarding opening investigations based upon complaints submitted by participants like me :

4. Complaint-Generated Cases. Consistent with RO priorities, the RO will open investigations as soon as practical after allegations of fiduciary violations deemed worthy of investigation are received from plan participants, plan officials, employees, employee benefit plan practitioners, the general public, or other federal, state, or local governmental agencies.

I can give the Court or Special Prosecutor evidence that proves I have contacted top members of the Bush and Obama administrations and made hundreds of requests asking someone to stop the destruction of the lives of very sick patients including me.

It took four years to get any response !!!!

As seen in Exhibit E, I recently received letters from DOL Directors’ telling me “Please be assured that EBSA’s top priority is to protect the benefits of participants and to make sure that providers of those benefits obey the law.”

After four years of trying no noticeable action has been taken.

Because of this inaction very dangerous doctors such as Gary Greenhood can continue ignoring Multiple Sclerosis and brain lesions and feet that are broken in five places !! Many patients can die as they wait years to get through the insurance company claims process and get a decision from the Courts

As I mentioned there is extreme danger for any of the 150 million Americans who has an insurance policy and files a claim for health benefits or disability because they may die due to lack of money for medical treatment, food, and housing while they have to wait years for the insurance companies to deny their claim and for the Courts to make a determination.

I pray the Court will appoint a Special prosecutor to investigate an extreme number of obvious violations committed by numerous insurance companies. I pray the Special Prosecutor will also investigate the Obama and Bush administrations failure to uphold their fiduciary duties and seek prosecution of the deadly organized crimes that are evidenced in the Judges quotes and the extensive evidence I have given them that proves identical deadly crimes are being committed by multiple insurance companies and destroying the lives of many Americans who are :

(1) Severely Disabled
(2) Needing Long Term Care
(3) Severely Injured Workers
(4) Severely Injured War Zone Contractors
(5) Families Filing Life Insurance claims

The Court has the authority to appoint a Special prosecutor as seen in Exhibit F, that indicates U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan appointed a special prosecutor to
investigate Justice Department lawyers who repeatedly withheld evidence from defense attorneys and the Judge during the month long trial.

If the Court does not take action, that will mean that in the United States of  America, medical doctors paid by extremely wealthy insurance companies can continue destroying the lives of many very sick patients and their families while no one in the U.S. Government will stop them.

You cannot imagine how it feels to have obvious life threatening crimes committed against you for years, and then learning this is a pattern of intricate crimes within crimes that are so obvious a fourteen year old could easily see them.

Finally, every time insurance company fiduciaries violate one law they actually violate seven because of the strict requirements for fiduciaries that are seen in Exhibit G.

In exchange for these duties the insurance companies have every law in their favor, but when they are allowed to violate every law repeatedly many very sick Americans have their lives destroyed.

My vision is really bothering me now so in a few days I will try to send the report from my Psychologist who wrote that MetLife seemed reckless, dangerous and inhumane as they violated laws while they knew how much it damaged me.

I also pray the Court will order the special prosecutor to immediately stop the doctor’s who are ignoring life threatening conditions as evidenced in the Judges’ quotes.

I also pray the Court will order the Special prosecutor to immediately investigate any insurance company that is failing to follow Court orders or Department of Labor orders to pay insurance claims. I can provide evidence that proves this is occurring in Workers Comp cases and Injured War Zone Contractors cases. When insurance companies defy Court orders to pay medical benefits many can die unbelievable deaths while knowing that the insurance companies do not care.

Typing increases my risk of falls and accidents, but so many people including myself are in danger, and I have about twenty more Exhibits I will file when I am able. These exhibits prove an extreme pattern of dangerous and intricate crimes within crimes that are committed so openly it seems the insurance companies must feel certain they will never be prosecuted.

It will take me months to unravel MetLife’s latest frauds in 2010 and 2011, that include three ophthalmologists paid by MetLife completely ignoring my bloody falls and accidents, and the fact that my left eye image pulses in sync with every heart beat.

This is a very dangerous thing to ignore since I am legally blind in my other eye.

Every day is a desperate struggle for me, but I must continue to seek justice because the lives of many thousands of very sick patients including myself will continue to be destroyed if nothing is done by the U.S. government.

 I also pray the court will immediately order that MetLife has only three business days to respond to this motion, and I request this based on the fact that many more very sick and injured Americans may die during every additional day of delay !!

Respectfully Submitted,
_____________________
Barry Schmittou

Exhibits are below - Address Removed From This Public Copy


Exhibit A

Numerous Judges' and Doctors' Quotes Prove Metlife Destroys Lives


As you read the quotes it’s very important to remember that very sick patients can die because they may have no money for medical treatment, food, or housing while they wait years to get through the insurance companies claims procedures and violations and then get a ruling from the U.S. Courts.

U.S. District Judge Nancy Gertner won the Thurgood Marshall Award of the American Bar Association in 2008. 

Here’s two important quotes Judge Gertner wrote about Metlife: 

“It misquoted Whitehouse’s doctors and cherry-picked or took out of context statements made. The denials continued to press factual inaccuracies even after being informed of the errors.”

“Perhaps most egregious of all, it misquotes Dr. Bhan as stating that Whitehouse “[was] able to function” AR 116 when, in fact, he said “she was not able to function.” AR 121 (emphasis added). 

The following quotes are from the Opinion written by Honorable U.S. District Judge Richard Alan Enslen in ZANNY v. KELLOGG COMPANY and METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE CO.)“Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has arrived at a formula for operating a profitable insurance business. It simply does not allow piddling things like facts to intrude upon its employee benefit claims decisions. Witness Zanny v. Kellogg Company and Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.”

“What is most shocking about the Report is the underlying context. In this instance, Mr. Kooi made the object of videotaped surveillance and spying at her home, on the road, and at her therapist’s offices a woman suffering extreme depression, paranoid symptoms, anxiety toward strangers and a history of repeated suicide attempts.”

“MetLife and its henchmen should appreciate that such conduct may itself precipitate the suicide death of a person who has placed implicit trust in their organization to foster mental health. MetLife should investigate the conduct of Mr. Kooi to insure that its agents are not either wittingly or unwittingly subjecting mentally-ill claimants to untoward risks of suicide death or other preventible injury.”

“This record is an open indictment of MetLife’s practices and treatment of the mentally-ill and long-term disability benefits. In this case, MetLife regularly reviewed the client’s file with an open intention to deny benefits despite the profound and compelling evidence of serious and prolonged mental illness.”

“On May1, 2002, MetLife requested Ann Tacl (a rehabilitation counselor) to provide a written report concerning Plaintiff’s employability. The Tacl report, for the most part, completely ignored medical information supporting disability, psychiatric hospitalization records, or the reports of examining psychologists and previous rehabilitation counselors who concluded that Plaintiff was not employable at any occupation nor able to operate a for-profit business. (Id.)”

“Tacl’s report is dated May 14, 2002. In it, she concludes that there is “no objective evidence that she [Plaintiff] has cognitive deficits . . . .” This conclusion is wildly inaccurate and wholly ignored the opinions of every psychiatrist or psychologist who has physically examined Plaintiff, including the most recent such examinations.”

“And What About those “Independent” Medical Exams and Reviews? Overall, the Tacl report is explainable only as the product of a professional who has been directed to reach a conclusion, has focused on data only in support of such conclusion, and who has scrupulously ignored all contrary data.”

(Quotes from Case 4:05-cv-00074-RAE Document 55 Filed 06/30/2006
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION, Case No. 4:05-CV-74 BRENDA ZANNY v. KELLOGG COMPANY and METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE CO.)


Judge William Acker asked Metlife this question about cardiac patient Frank Blankenship :

"Can a heart patient with angina, working under severe stress, be expected to earn up to 60 percent of what he earned before his heart condition, that is, until he drops dead?"

In the case of Wright verses Metlife U.S. Magistrate Judge Jennifer Guerm wrote these quotes :

"MetLife relied on clearly erroneous findings of fact in making its benefit determination. MetLife’s review of Plaintiff’s appeal consistently omitted or misrepresented relevant information in several ways. On October 18, 2004, Dr. Barnett wrote a letter to MetLife stating:

"I am gravely disturbed by your misrepresentation of the facts with regard to my discussion with your independent physician consultant and your lack of due diligence in collecting further medical information regarding Mr. Wright’s health condition. Indeed, Mr. Wright has ongoing cardiac disease including ischemia and loss of function due to previous myocardial infarctions."

In the case of Joanne Vick verses MetLife, Honorable U.S. District Judge Robert Cleland wrote that Metlife and their paid consultant Dr. Greenhood ignored a foot that Ms. Vick broke in 5 Places after she developed diabetic kytoacedosis following childbirth.

Here are two exact quotes Judge Cleland wrote in this case :

“Noticeably missing from Dr. Greenhood's report is any mention of Dr. Al-Kassab's November, 2001 office notes, Dr. Churchill's November 13, 2001 office notes, and Dr. Churchill's March 14, 2002 office notes. This is particularly significant in that Dr. Greenhood's August 2, 2004 report specifically noted that "[t]here is no indication of seizures or falls." Dr. Churchill's March 14, 2002 report, however, indicates that as a result of her right sided weakness, Plaintiff broke her left foot in January 2002--in five places, no less.”

“Moreover, both Dr. Greenhood’s and Dr. Gosline's reports contained numerous errors and inherent inconsistencies, which should have been noted by the plan administrator and resulted in less weight being given to them. (E.D. Michigan, Southern Division. No. 03-CV-73124-DT

Here’s Dr. Greenhood again !

The following quotes were written by Honorable U.S. District Judge Honorable Timothy J. Savage in the case of JACQUELINE ADDIS v. THE LIMITED LONG-TERM DISABILITY PROGRAM :

“MetLife relied almost exclusively upon the report of Dr. Gary Greenhood, an internist specializing in infectious diseases hired by MetLife, who did not examine Addis and did only a records review. Dr. Greenhood selectively viewed Addis’s medical records, and MetLife then selectively adopted parts of Dr. Greenhood’s report to support denial of the claim.”

“Although the denial letter listed reports of several physicians, it relied exclusively on Dr. Greenhood, the internist it had retained, and gave little consideration to Addis’s treating neurologist, Dr. Tatarian. There is no discussion of the reports or findings of any of the other physicians who are listed.”

“Dr. Greenhood selectively extracted portions of Dr. Tatarian’s treatment notes to support his conclusions, which are contrary to those of Dr. Tatarian. At the same time, he ignores parts that bolster Addis’s complaints and support her doctor’s diagnosis and prognosis.”

“In his report, Dr. Greenhood states that Addis’s physical examinations were “either unremarkable or demonstrated increased tone in the lower extremities.” Implying that these were normal findings, he ignored Dr. Tatarian’s observation that the increased tone in the lower extremities was a spinal cord abnormality.”

“Dr. Greenhood states that there were no objectively abnormal findings in the materials he reviewed, creating the impression that the absence of such findings rules out a disabling condition. He also ignores the MRI reports evidencing MS, November 2, 2000, and December 9, 2003. To the contrary, Dr. Tatarian documents a variety of spinal problems; and, MRIs consistently showed the presence of lesions and plaque on the brain. Dr. Greenhood ignores Dr. Tatarian’s report of a positive Babinski sign, which is indicative of nerve damage consistent with Addis’s complaints of stumbling and falling.”

“Both MetLife and Dr. Greenhood ignored the Multiple Sclerosis Medical Source Statement of Functional Abilities and Limitations completed by Dr. Ana Lavdas, one of Addis’s treating doctors. Dr. Lavdas reported that her patient’s prognosis was poor and she had significant functional limitations. Among the symptoms were pain in the lower extremities, fatigue, weakness and shaking in lower and upper extremities, poor coordination, bladder and bowel problems, blurred vision, and other physical problems. She noted that Addis had “significant and persistent disorganization of motor function in two extremities resulting in sustained disturbance of gross and dexterous movement or gait and station.” Dr. Lavdas concluded that her patient was “unable to work,” and could not sustain a job.”

“Significantly, there is no discussion of the records of Doctors Lavdas, McDonald, Gray, Files and McCarel, which he lists as having been submitted to him. Dr. Greenhood simply ignores them.”

“MetLife assigned reconsideration of Addis’s claim to Tammi Phillips, who was not a physician and whose qualifications are unknown.” “Her assessment ignores Dr. Tatarian’s unequivocal diagnosis that Addis was suffering from “relapsing, remitting MS with possible repeat exacerbation.”

“Disturbing, in light of the clear evidence to the contrary, is Phillips’s conclusion that Dr. Tatarian did not provide “any specific restrictions and limitations” that would prevent Addis from performing her own job. On the contrary, Dr. Tatarian specifically recommended that due to her unpredictable weakness, fatigue, sphincter incontinence, visual difficulties, and cognitive problems, Addis could no longer work.”

Civil Action No. 05-357 in The United States District Court For The Eastern District Of Pennsylvania on March 30, 2006


The next quotes concern Dr. Tracey Schmidt who is paid by Metlife. Dr. Schmidt is certified by the American Board of Internal Medicine that certified Dr. Greenhood who is mentioned in multiple cases in this Brief.

Here are quotes written by the Honorable Judges in the UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT :
“Dr. Schmidt's analysis was unsatisfactory in other aspects as well. Contrary to her assertion that the file lacked mention of "any restricted ROM of joints other than the right foot abnormality," a February 2002 exam revealed that Audino's "wrists [were] swollen bilaterally with pain on range of motion of the left wrist" and her "left ankle was swollen with pain [on] range of motion." Although she noted in summarizing the evidence that Audino's physician had observed severe arthritis around the trapezius in August 2002, Dr. Schmidt failed to evaluate that finding in her analysis of whether Audino's impairments constituted disability under the plan.”

“Regarding Audino's rheumatoid arthritis and optic neuritis, Schmidt concluded that Audino's file lacked "objective evidence of a physical functional capacity impairment to a full time sedentary job."

GLORIA AUDINO versus RAYTHEON COMPANY SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM DISABILITY PLAN; METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; No. 04-10729

John Marshall Law School Professor Mark Debofsky wrote :

“empirical evidence is now available that shows insurers operating under ERISA have systematically engaged in the wrongful denial of claims. Cases of abusive benefit denials involving other disability insurers abound. Unum turns out to have been a clumsy villain, but in the hands of subtler operators such misbehavior is much harder to detect.''

(ERISA is the U.S. Title 29 Employee Retirement Income Security Act that regulates health benefits for 150 million Americans who work for privately owned businesses and corporations)

Please note that Professor Debofsky wrote “insurers” in the plural.

You’re about to see quotes written by Honorable Judge Malachy Mannion in the case of JAMES KNOBLAUCH v. METROPOLITAN LIFE.Judge Mannion wrote the first quotes regarding the questionable relationship Metlife has with the company Metlife pays to perform FCE’s that evaluate the claimant’s ability to work. Judge Mannion also details how there are far more limitations on the patients than Metlife is reporting :

“The court has noted, however, that there are several documents in the file which appear to contradict the defendants’ assertion that there was no questionable relationship between Isernhagen and Metlife or Synchrony. For example, there is a document titled “Isernhagen Work Systems Functional Capacity Report” which is on Metlife letterhead.”

“There is another document titled “Isernhagen Quality Providers/MetDisAbility (sic) Referral Form” which gives specific directions to the FCE provider as to how Metlife FCEs are to be handled procedurally. This form requires the reviewer to“[C]ontact MetDisability with a verbal report 1 day after the FCE is completed.”

“There is a Metlife/Synchrony log entry dated April 5, 2002, which states:


...telephone call on voice mail from Cindy from Isernhagen
at 2:52 pm. FCE done 4/3 and 4/4...ee (sic) did pretty well. He
was compliant, cooperative, no self limiting. Unstable BP first
day, said she had to call MD his pressure was so high. On the
second day his heart rate was unstable and he was having
abdominal pain, so limitations were more medical [than] strength
factors...” (Doc. No. 20, p. 42)(emphasis added).”

“This more contemporaneous statement of the FCE results is telling in that it suggests far more limitations on the part of the plaintiff than later statements made by Metlife/Syncrony to the plaintiff in support of its decision to terminate benefits.”

“Also disturbing is the fact that Ms. Oxendine testified that she had not been provided with a copy of the plaintiff’s job description prior to performing the FCE. Ms. Oxendine stated, “...I did not have available to me at the time of his FCE a job description...[It] was not available at the time I performed the FCE.”

“Ms. Oxendine’s testimony also undermines the post-termination, post- appeal records review performed on July 9, 2002, by Joseph M. Nesta, M.D. For example, Dr. Nesta assumed that the plaintiff’s job description was before Ms. Oxendine at the time the FCE was performed.”

“After the plaintiff appealed the determination, the
defendants had a physician consultant, Joseph M. Nesta, M.D., review the record. No independent medical examination was performed.”

“When Dr. Nesta did his records review, he stated, “...[B]y July 20, 2001
this individual was cleared by his surgeon to return to work.” He either did not know, or failed to include, the fact that the plaintiff’s surgeon, Dr. Scagliotti, released the patient “to return to light physical activity...as tolerated,” and that the plaintiff was “instructed to progress as tolerated.”. No interpretation of Dr. Scagliotti’s records could suggest that he was released to return to unrestricted full time work.”

“Dr. Nesta further stated in his report, “This individual also has had a chronic pancreatic insufficiency. This is treated with pancreatic replacement therapy.” As can be seen from Dr. Brislin’s above referenced report, the plaintiff’s ongoing pancreatic insufficiency was stated to be very difficult to control despite high doses of pancreatic supplements, and enzyme supplements.”

“There was never any discussion concerning the plaintiff’s other medical complications including the inability to control the pancreatic insufficiency with medications, or fatigue. Fatigue is documented profusely in the FCE, but never mentioned by the defendants. There is no acknowledgment that neither of the plaintiff’s treating physicians ever released him to full time work. In fact, the only treating, or examining physician who released him without restrictions was the orthopedic physician, whose actual name was never mentioned, and who clearly was referring only to the plaintiff’s shoulder capsulitis problem.”
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02-1801

The following quotes were written by the Honorable Judges from the 6th Circuit in the case of Wanda Glenn verses Metlife, (Case Number 05-3918)

“This inappropriately selective consideration of Glenn’s medical record was compounded by the fact that the occupational skills analyst and the independent medical consultant were apparently not provided with full information from Dr. Patel on which to base their conclusions.”

Here are quotes written by the Honorable Judges in the 6th Circuit in the case of Janice Spangler, v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc.; Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., No. 01-5770, File Name: 02a0424p.06.

“Why Met Life did not also send Dr. Rice's report or the rest of Spangler's file to Crawford for review by the vocational consultant is inexplicable. Indeed, we can only conclude that Met Life, as Spangler contends, "cherry-picked" her file in hopes of obtaining a favorable report from the vocational consultant as to Spangler's ability to work.”

“Met Life's action in sending only Dr. MacKay's September 14, 1999, report to Crawford was arbitrary and capricious. Met Life should have provided Crawford with all of the medical records relevant to Spangler's capacity to work. As a result, the report by Crawford's vocational consultant was an incomplete and inaccurate representation of Spangler's ability to work.”

Here’s an example of how patients may die due to lack of money for medical treatment and other necessities while they wait years for the Judges’ rulings.

In January 2007 Metlife had completely ignored my Long term disability claims for five years !! They continued to violate numerous laws repeatedly even after reading this quote I filed in a Court document :

 "the Plaintiff who has had cancer removed from his eye and leg and over 200 biopsies plus stitches in 100 places has no money for follow up treatment."

(More quotes seen below)

 A short time after this was filed I began having extreme pain in my stomach, leg and back but I waited to seek treatment and surgery because I had already borrowed $20,000 from my parents when my savings ran out. I told my family and close friends if they found me passed out in the floor to take me to an emergency room and tell them where my pains were. I was trying a part time job and one night my pains were so bad I was about to call an ambulance.

In My Case Judge Bryant’s Quotes Prove Many MetLife Violations, But They Still Continue

Here are some of Judge Bryant’s quotes :

On page 11 of his Order U.S. Magistrate Judge Bryant wrote,

“Metlife’s administration of plaintiff’s claim and appeal is troubling, particularly when compared to the regulations which govern such administration.”

“the record is utterly devoid of any glimmer of recognition by Metlife of plaintiff’s attempt to assert an LTD claim, despite plaintiff’s repeated attempts to ascertain the status of the claim(e.g. AR 10, 11 ,25, 28, 33, 81 )”

On page 7 of his report Judge Bryant wrote,
“the record reflects that Plaintiff did not receive timely notice of the initial denial of his STD claim ( AR 8-10); nor of the denial of his administrative appeal, nor of certain documentation upon which the denial was based, in particular the report of independent physician consultant Dr. Greenhood. In addition Metlife failed to make a timely response to several attempts by plaintiff to ascertain the status of his claims.”

On page 9 Judge Bryant wrote,

“The record does not reflect that Metlife, at any point, during the Administrative process, disclosed to plaintiff Dr. Greenhood’s identity as a consulting medical expert or the content of his narrative report, despite Metlife’s apparent reliance on that report (AR 15), verses the restrictions imposed by plaintiff’s treating sources, and despite plaintiff’s repeated requests for same. Metlife apparently even failed to produce this information after issuing its decision on his appeal, when it purported to mail plaintiff “copies of the information which was used to make a decision on your claim.”

On page 10 of his Report Judge Bryant wrote,

“In addition, the “Diary Review – Report” contained in the record reveals that Dr. Greenhood was consulted in connection with the initial determination of plaintiff’s disability claim ( AR 6) as well as the determination on  appeal. Contrary to defendant’s argument, the undersigned finds that these violations by Metlife of the claims procedures prescribed by ERISA and its interpretive regulations must in fact be corrected in further administrative proceedings, as further justified below.”


On page 12 Judge Bryant writes,

“Moreover Defendants’ claim that “both the short-term and long-term disability Plans require that a claimant be unable to work” is patently erroneous.”

On Page 16 Judge Bryant writes this about the one claim that Metlife acknowledged and denied :

“However, but for the application of the “Actively at Work” provision, the undersigned would recommend finding the two-page denial decision arbitrary and capricious, inasmuch as it is nearly devoid of any meaningful analysis of the medical evidence and thus fails to reflect any “deliberate, principled reasoning process . . . Glenn, 461 F.3d at 666.”

Honorable Judge Bryant wrote this on page 18 of his Report and Recommendation :
“In sum, the undersigned finds that Metlife’s total disregard for Plaintiff’s LTD claim, despite his repeated efforts to call their attention to said claim, was arbitrary and capricious.”

It is obvious the fiduciary/administrators at Metlife have openly violated their fiduciary duties by willfully presenting false statements in writing to the U.S. District Court where they wrote,

“Defendant’s deny that they ignored relevant medical evidence, refused to respond to properly submitted communications, improperly delayed consideration of the Plaintiff’s claim, made false statements, or violated the terms of the TMG plans or of ERISA”

When Judge Bryant found Metlife was arbitrary and capricious he ordered them to do a full and fair review of my Long term claims, but MetLife has continued to endanger my life by repeatedly violating many laws !!

In 2010 and 2011 MetLife has paid three consultant ophthalmologists who completely ignored my extensive documentation of falls and accidents. They also ignored the fact that I am unable to fixate on objects.

In 2008 Metlife’s Lawrence Rocco denied my Long Term claim for eye cancer, and he completely ignored my claim for Psychological disability and the medical records from my Psychologist and family doctor including the anti depressants and medications I was prescribed.

This was the third separate unit of MetLife that completely ignored my Psychological records and claim.

I assert that Mr. Rocco’s decision to completely ignore my claim for Psychological disability is evidence of additional fraud that was committed even after Judge Bryant ordered a full and fair review and wrote :

 “In particular, plaintiff has already more than sufficiently alleged defendants’ “fraudulent” abuse of prescribed claims procedures”

With Rocco’s decision to completely ignore the Psychological claim, there are now three units of Metlife, that are required by law to be completely separate with no influence from the other units, and they are all doing the exact same thing in completely ignoring the Psychological claim for disability. This is no coincidence, there is someone who has directed these three separate units to completely ignore the Psychological claim !

After Judge Bryant ordered a full and fair review, in 2008 Metlife paid an Ophthalmologist from Network Medical Review named Dr. Yanik to review my file, but he never saw me or spoke to me. He made evaluations of my medical condition from 2001 to 2008 but he had never seen the medical records from 2004 to 2008. Metlife did not receive any records during the time of the lawsuit and they did not request any from me when the Court ordered a full and fair review of the record.

Then Metlife’s agent Lawrence Rocco denied the claim for eye cancer and vision while also completely ignoring my medical records from 2004 to 2008. Rocco and Dr. Yanik also clearly ignored the affects of the tremendous majority of symptoms documented in my medical records.

My father had a 4 month illness and I tried to help him through a desperate struggle during his last hours; and he passed away during the exact time I learned of Metlife’s newest frauds and violations.
I think I will hate Metlife forever because the stress they caused me during this time lessened my ability to be the very best I could be for my father at the time of his death!

As seen in other documents there were many more fraudulent actions from 2008 until now !!

After reading that I had surgery and “no money for follow up treatment”, MetLife has continued to violate numerous laws including :

After the Court ordered MetLife to conduct a full and fair review in 2008, Metlife and their paid consultant Dr. Yanik (who works for Network Medical Review) ignored my medical records from 2004 until 2008 regarding my right eye cancer and left eye orbital surgery problems !!

In 2010, MetLife and their paid consultant Dr. Weber (who also works for Network Medical Review) requested information from my surgeon Dr. Wallace who is the Chief of Ophthalmology at Baptist Hospital.

Metlife’s Consultant Dr. Weber wrote : 

“The conversation with Dr. Wallace was very thorough and we agreed that this was a case of subjective complaints without objective findings.”

My surgeon Dr. Wallace wrote a one page letter to correct Dr. Weber. After MetLife and Dr. Weber read the letter their reports completely removed the following statements Dr. Wallace wrote:
 
“I did notice the eye movements and Nystagmus in 2008”

 Dr. Wallace also wrote this correction of Dr. Weber’s report :

 “I hope I have not been misunderstood.  I did not mean to say that you did not have any problems with your right eye from the treatment of the tumor.  You have a large blind spot in the right eye with a large area of loss of central vision. I am sure that this loss of central vision causes a considerable loss of depth perception and difficulties in many areas of your life every day”.

Dr. Wallace also wrote this :

“loss of vision in one eye and Nystagmus in the other eye can greatly affect someone’s lifestyle and someone’s ability to work in many occupations” 

 After seeing that MetLife’s Procedure Analysts and Dr. Weber completely ignored all the quotes seen above.

In her denial of my claim MetLife’s Analyst then repeated Dr. Weber’s quote that said : 

“The conversation with Dr. Wallace was very thorough and we agreed that this was a case of subjective complaints without objective findings.”

Ms. Dewey dissected and fraudulently reconstructed Dr. Wallace’s sentences


Dr. Wallace wrote :

“In the left eye, the macular region was healthy and the retina was completely attached. I did notice the eye movements and Nystagmus in 2008.”

Here is what Ms. Dewey wrote in her May 2010 denial letter :

In the left eye, the macular region was healthy and the retina was completely attached , and your vision was 20/25.

As you can see Ms. Dewey removed Dr. Wallace’s sentence “I did notice the eye movements and Nystagmus in 2008.”

She took “your vision was 20/25” from another paragraph and precisely placed it in her sentence while removing Wallace’s sentence “I did notice the eye movements and Nystagmus in 2008.”

This is very important because my right eye has no central vision due to eye cancer surgery ! Dr. Wallace is writing about the left eye movement and nystagmus in the sentences above, but Ms. Dewey has extracted that in her reconstruction of the sentence.

Adding to the fraud of omissions, in Ms. Dewey’s denial letter and Dr. Weber’s reports they briefly mention left eye problems and Dr. Lavin’s documentation of seeing Nystagmus, but in their specific analysis of disability they completely ignore any mention or consideration of the left eye problems that are very well documented throughout my medical records, observed by two of my treating Physicians, and documented in the DVD.

In her denial letter Ms. Dewey wrote that she sent Dr. Wallace’s one and ¼ page letter to Dr. Weber. In his addendum report Dr. Weber completely omitted any mention of the quotes from Dr. Wallace you have just seen.

In other documents I’ve sent to MetLife recently I have provided evidence that proves MetLife omitted the discussion of very important evidence including every sentence that the social security administrative law judge wrote about my vision.

I am adding this today, April 26th, 2011 – now there are two more doctors’ paid by Metlife who have completely ignored the quotes from Dr. Wallace.




Exhibit B

Three Court of Appeals Judges’ write “MetLife reverse engineered diagnosis” !!

While MetLife ignored life threatening medical conditions so they could deny disability claims as seen in bullet point one above, in the Long Term Care policy of Russell Conger they made up conditions that Mr. Conger had never been diagnosed with !!

Here are quotes from the U.S. Court of Appeals Judges’ in the case of METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
v. Russell D. CONGER, Defendant-Appellant.

"Such a decision-making process is not deliberate or principled, and the explanation provided was far from reasoned, as it failed to address any of the contrary evidence. Instead, MetLife supported its decision to rescind only by its cherry-picking symptoms from Conger's medical records, and then reverse-engineering a diagnosis. This is not the hallmark of a reasoned explanation."

 “MetLife reached its conclusion only by ignoring substantial contrary evidence in Conger's medical records. For instance, MetLife did not address the doctor's December 20, 1998 conclusion that Conger's "[b]rain demonstrate[d] no significant abnormality, [and was] essentially normal for patient's age," or the doctor's statement that he saw "no cerebellar abnormality." J.A. at 138. Similarly, Metlife ignored Conger's multiple brain MRIs that revealed no problems. MetLife's communications to Conger (through LTCP) do not acknowledge these MRIs or even attempt to explain why they do not negate its conclusion regarding Conger's condition. The same is true of the internal communications between LTCP and MetLife's claim-review physician. MetLife also ignored multiple neurologists' failure to diagnose Conger with a progressive neurological disorder or even to note an impression in their charts that he had such a disorder. Further, MetLife ignored Dr. Tillett's impression that Conger's ataxia was not "cerebellar," which indicates that Conger's symptoms were not caused by a neurological disorder.”

(End of quotes)

Exhibit C

U.S. Judge Writes MetLife Trained To Ignore- Four U.S. Judges Write Metlife Ignores SSA Judge's Profound Determinations‏

In the case of Solomon v. Metlife, Judge Robert Sweet wrote that Metlife trained appeals specialists to ignore evidence from the Social Security Administration (SSA). Here’s one quote from Judge Sweet :

 "In addition, as in Glenn, MetLife urged plaintiff to apply for government benefits, but then disregarded the SSA’s grant of benefits.  Indeed the appeals specialist assigned to decide Solomon’s appeal stated that she had been trained by MetLife to disregard SSA decisions and that the decision was only relevant if MetLife was paying benefits and could use it for an offset.”

(end of quote)

In the case of RUDZINSKI v. METLIFE, U.S. Magistrate Judge Arlander Keys wrote the following quotes on Sept. 14, 2007 :

“MetLife hired Dr. Jeffrey Lieberman, a rheumatologist, to review Plaintiff's medical file.”

“Dr. Lieberman is affiliated with Network Medical Review, an organization that receives over one million dollars in business annually from MetLife.”

“In rejecting Plaintiff's claim that she was disabled, Dr. Lieberman mentioned, but did not discuss, dispute, or distinguish, the reports by the numerous physicians that supported Plaintiff's claim that, she was unable to work.”

“Like Dr. Lieberman in his review, MetLife made no attempt, to explain why it was rejecting these physicians' findings, and made no mention whatsoever of the SSA's determination, when informing Plaintiff that her final appeal was being denied.”

“Instead, it curtly informed Plaintiff that Dr. Lieberman, a physician who had never examined Plaintiff and apparently reviewed only a portion of the file, determined that she was capable of performing her former position and, therefore, her application was being denied.”

“MetLife's decision to credit Dr. Lieberman's Physician's Review, to the exclusion of all evidence supporting Plaintiff's claim, is particularly troubling, because the Court finds that Dr. Lieberman's Review was wholly unreliable.”

“Dr. Lieberman based his opinion on a selective review of the evidence, neglecting to distinguish the parade of medical opinions and test results that support Plaintiff's claim of disability.”
(End of quotes)

On August 4, 2010, U.S. Court of Appeals Judges Kanne, Wood, and Hamilton wrote the following quotes in the case of Holmstrom v. Metlife:
“Metlife’s selective consideration of the evidence not only indicates that its decision was arbitrary, but also demonstrates the effects of a conflict of interest.”

“A second indication is Metlife’s conduct regarding the Social Security award”

“A third indication of the effect of MetLife’s conflict of interest is the repeated moving of the target”

(end of quotes)

Here’s a note from Professor Mark Debofsky regarding the Courts ruling and quotes in the case of Blankenship v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., December 30th 2009

“In addition, the court was struck by the conflict between the reviewing doctors' findings and the findings made both by the treating doctors and by the Social Security Administration, suggesting that "MetLife's decision was the culmination of a structurally conflicted process."  


Exhibit D

Six Cases Prove MetLife’s Complex Fraud Regarding Vocational Determinations‏

The following quotes were written by the Honorable Judges from the 6th Circuit in the case of Wanda Glenn verses Metlife, (Case Number 05-3918)

“This inappropriately selective consideration of Glenn’s medical record was compounded by the fact that the occupational skills analyst and the independent medical consultant were apparently not provided with full information from Dr. Patel on which to base their conclusions.”


(2)            Here are quotes written by the Honorable Judges in the 6th Circuit in the case of Janice Spangler, v. Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc.; Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., No. 01-5770, File Name: 02a0424p.06.

“Why Met Life did not also send Dr. Rice's report or the rest of Spangler's file to Crawford for review by the vocational consultant is inexplicable. Indeed, we can only conclude that Met Life, as Spangler contends, "cherry-picked" her file in hopes of obtaining a favorable report from the vocational consultant as to Spangler's ability to work.”

“Met Life's action in sending only Dr. MacKay's September 14, 1999, report to Crawford was arbitrary and capricious. Met Life should have provided Crawford with all of the medical records relevant to Spangler's capacity to work. As a result, the report by Crawford's vocational consultant was an incomplete and inaccurate representation of Spangler's ability to work.”

(3)            Judge William Acker asked Metlife this question about cardiac patient Frank Blankenship :

"Can a heart patient with angina, working under severe stress, be expected to earn up to 60 percent of what he earned before his heart condition, that is, until he drops dead?"

(4)            Here are quotes from the Report and Recommendation written by U.S. Magistrate Judge Jennifer Guerm in the case of Wright verses Metlife :

"MetLife relied on clearly erroneous findings of fact in making its benefit determination. MetLife’s review of Plaintiff’s appeal consistently omitted or misrepresented relevant information in several ways."

"On October 18, 2004, Dr. Barnett wrote a letter to MetLife stating:

"I am gravely disturbed by your misrepresentation of the facts with regard to my discussion with your independent physician consultant and your lack of due diligence in collecting further medical information regarding Mr. Wright’s health condition."
"You indicate in your letter that “it was concluded that you are out of work primarily due to work related stress.” I spent over 30 minutes on the phone with your independent physician consultant explaining that this was definitely not the case. Indeed, this consultant seemed to have had a preconceived notion that stress was why the patient was out of work and that there was no cardiovascular disease contributing. I very clearly explained that this was not the case. Indeed, Mr. Wright has ongoing cardiac disease including ischemia and loss of function due to previous myocardial infarctions."

"Each time I expressed the belief to your consultant, she would return to the fact that she felt that stress must be the major issue that was keeping him out of work.... Furthermore, I carefully explained to your physician that Mr. Wright has nonunion of the sternum resulting in severe pain and contributing to his disability, and yet you fail to mention that at all in your note."
(End of Dr. Barnett’s quotes that Judge Guerm included in her report)
(5)            The following quotes are from the Opinion written by Honorable U.S. District Judge Richard Alan Enslen in the case of Zanny v. MetLife :

“Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has arrived at a formula for operating a profitable insurance business. It simply does not allow piddling things like facts to intrude upon its employee benefit claims decisions.

“On May1, 2002, MetLife requested Ann Tacl (a rehabilitation counselor) to provide a written report concerning Plaintiff’s employability. The Tacl report, for the most part, completely ignored medical information supporting disability, psychiatric hospitalization records, or the reports of examining psychologists and previous rehabilitation counselors who concluded that Plaintiff was not employable at any occupation nor able to operate a for-profit business. (Id.)”

“Tacl’s report is dated May 14, 2002. In it, she concludes that there is “no objective evidence that she [Plaintiff] has cognitive deficits . . . .”
“This conclusion is wildly inaccurate and wholly ignored the opinions of every psychiatrist or psychologist who has physically examined Plaintiff, including the most recent such examinations.”


“This record is an open indictment of MetLife’s practices and treatment of the mentally-ill and long-term disability benefits.
(6)            Here are quotes written by Honorable Judge Malachy Mannion in the case of JAMES KNOBLAUCH v. METROPOLITAN LIFE.

** Judge Mannion wrote the first quotes regarding the questionable relationship Metlife has with the company Metlife pays to perform FCE’s that evaluate the claimant’s ability to work.
** Judge Mannion also details how there are far more limitations on the patients than Metlife is reporting :
“The court has noted, however, that there are several documents in the file which appear to contradict the defendants’ assertion that there was no questionable relationship between Isernhagen and Metlife or Synchrony. For example, there is a document titled “Isernhagen Work Systems Functional Capacity Report” which is on Metlife letterhead.”

“There is another document titled “Isernhagen Quality Providers/MetDisAbility (sic) Referral Form” which gives specific directions to the FCE provider as to how Metlife FCEs are to be handled procedurally. This form requires the reviewer to“[C]ontact MetDisability with a verbal report 1 day after the FCE is completed.”

“There is a Metlife/Synchrony log entry dated April 5, 2002, which states:

...telephone call on voice mail from Cindy from Isernhagen
at 2:52 pm. FCE done 4/3 and 4/4...ee (sic) did pretty well. He
was compliant, cooperative, no self limiting. Unstable BP first
day, said she had to call MD his pressure was so high. On the
second day his heart rate was unstable and he was having
abdominal pain, so limitations were more medical [than] strength
factors...” (Doc. No. 20, p. 42)(emphasis added).”

“This more contemporaneous statement of the FCE results is telling in that it suggests far more limitations on the part of the plaintiff than later statements made by Metlife/Syncrony to the plaintiff in support of its decision to terminate benefits.”

“Also disturbing is the fact that Ms. Oxendine testified that she had not been provided with a copy of the plaintiff’s job description prior to performing the FCE. Ms. Oxendine stated, “...I did not have available to me at the time of his FCE a job description...[It] was not available at the time I performed the FCE.”

“Ms. Oxendine’s testimony also undermines the post-termination, post- appeal records review performed on July 9, 2002, by Joseph M. Nesta, M.D. For example, Dr. Nesta assumed that the plaintiff’s job description was before Ms. Oxendine at the time the FCE was performed.”

“After the plaintiff appealed the determination, the
defendants had a physician consultant, Joseph M. Nesta, M.D., review the record. No independent medical examination was performed.”

“When Dr. Nesta did his records review, he stated, “...[B]y July 20, 2001 this individual was cleared by his surgeon to return to work.” He either did not know, or failed to include, the fact that the plaintiff’s surgeon, Dr. Scagliotti, released the patient “to return to light physical activity...as tolerated,” and that the plaintiff was “instructed to progress as tolerated.”. No interpretation of Dr. Scagliotti’s records could suggest that he was released to return to unrestricted full time work.”

“Dr. Nesta further stated in his report, “This individual also has had a chronic pancreatic insufficiency. This is treated with pancreatic replacement therapy.” As can be seen from Dr. Brislin’s above referenced report, the plaintiff’s ongoing pancreatic insufficiency was stated to be very difficult to control despite high doses of pancreatic supplements, and enzyme supplements.”

“There was never any discussion concerning the plaintiff’s other medical complications including the inability to control the pancreatic insufficiency with medications, or fatigue. Fatigue is documented profusely in the FCE, but never mentioned by the defendants. There is no acknowledgment that neither of the plaintiff’s treating physicians ever released him to full time work. In fact, the only treating, or examining physician who released him without restrictions was the orthopedic physician, whose actual name was never mentioned, and who clearly was referring only to the plaintiff’s shoulder capsulitis problem.”
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:02-1801


Exhibit E
DOL/DOJ won't even ask insurance company doctors' to stop ignoring life threatening conditions !!!!


Evidence Summary

The Atlanta Regional Director of the DOL EBSA wrote the following quote in a letter she mailed to me after reviewing quotes from numerous U.S. Judges’ that prove MetLife and doctors’ paid by MetLife ignore life threatening medical conditions including Multiple Sclerosis, brain lesions, and cardiac conditions :

“Please be assured that EBSA’s top priority is to protect the benefits of participants and to make sure that providers of those benefits obey the law.”

(Written on 12/10/2010 by DOL Regional Director RC Marshall)

On January 26, 2011 Department of Labor Director of Participant Response Ms. Sharon Watson sent a letter from Washington saying :

“As we previously indicated, we take the allegations you have made that MetLife has engaged in a pattern of fraudulent activities regarding your claim and other participants’ claims very seriously and have taken the information under advisement.”

Ms. Watson closed by saying :
“At this time, there is nothing more EBSA can do for you regarding your claim.”

It took me four years to get the DOL to even acknowledge and respond to the evidence I submitted.

They responded when I placed a video on YouTube where the DOL agent repeatedly said “We can’t go against MetLife”.

(Video link seen below)

It’s been six months since DOL reviewed the quotes from numerous U.S. Judges’ who wrote that MetLife and doctors’ they pay ignore life threatening medical conditions.

It took four years for me to even get anyone to acknowledge the evidence.

No noticeable action has been taken and because of that doctors such as Gary Greenhood can continue ignoring Multiple Sclerosis and brain lesions and feet that are broken in five places !!

Many patients can die as they wait years to get through the insurance company claims process and get a decision from the Courts.


 
 Exhibit F

Court Appoints Special Prosecutor

Associated Press 4/7/2009 7:54:12 PM ET

WASHINGTON— Pumping his fist in triumph,
former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens swapped
places with his prosecutors Tuesday, his
corruption conviction dismissed and his
accusers suddenly facing criminal
investigation themselves.

It was a stunning turnaround for one of the
legendary fighters in Senate history, a man
known for a temper that matched his
Incredible Hulk neckties. Run out of office
following the conviction last October, Stevens
gave his long-awaited victory speech in court
as a judge wiped away the verdict.

The prosecutors, who around this time would
normally be arguing for Stevens' prison
sentence, were not in court. Kicked off the
case following repeated accusations of
withholding evidence, they're now the subject
of a criminal contempt probe.

"In nearly 25 years on the bench, I've never
seen anything approaching the mishandling
and misconduct that I've seen in this case," U.
S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said.

Case cost Stevens his Senate seat
Sullivan appointed a special prosecutor to
investigate Justice Department lawyers who
repeatedly withheld evidence from defense
attorneys and the judge during the monthlong
trial. Stevens was convicted in October of lying
on Senate forms about home renovations and
gifts he received from wealthy friends.

The case cost Stevens, 85, a Senate seat he
had held for 40 years. Once the Senate's
longest-serving Republican, he narrowly lost
to Democrat Mark Begich soon after the
verdict.

Now, the case could prove career-ending for
prosecutors in the Justice Department's public
corruption unit.

After Sullivan dismissed the case, Stevens
turned to his friends and held up a fist in
victory as his wife and daughters broke into
loud sobs.

"Until recently, my faith in the criminal system,
particularly the judicial system, was
unwavering," Stevens told the court Tuesday,
his first public comments since Attorney
General Eric Holder announced he would drop
the case. "But what some members of the
prosecution team did nearly destroyed my
faith. Their conduct had consequences for me
that they will never realize and can never be reversed."

The unraveling of the case overshadowed the
facts of a trial in which Stevens was shown to
have accepted thousands of dollars in
undisclosed gifts.

Sullivan appointed Washington attorney Henry
Schuelke to investigate contempt and
obstruction by the Justice Department team.
Schuelke is a former prosecutor and veteran
defense attorney who oversaw a Senate Ethics
Committee investigation into influence-
peddling allegations against former New York
Sen. Alfonse D'Amato in 1989.

Sullivan said the misconduct was too serious
to be left to an internal investigation by the
Justice Department, which he said dragged its
feet before investigating. He criticized former
Attorney General Michael Mukasey for not
responding to complaints: "Shocking, but not
surprising," Sullivan said.

He worried aloud about how often
prosecutors withhold evidence, from
Guantanamo Bay terrorism cases to public
corruption trials. He called on Holder to
retrain all prosecutors in the department.

The decision to open a criminal case raises the
question of whether the prosecutors, who
include top officials in the department's public
corruption unit, can remain on the job while
under investigation. The investigation carries
the threat of prison time, fines and
disbarment.

Investigation into other public officials
It also threatens to derail the investigation into
other public officials, including Rep. Don
Young, R-Alaska, who has been under
scrutiny by the same prosecutors now being
investigated. Young's lawyer attended
Tuesday's hearing but said nothing after it
ended.

Subjects of the criminal probe are lead
prosecutor Brenda Morris, the department's
No. 2 corruption official and an instructor
within the department; Public Integrity
prosecutors Nicholas Marsh and Edward
Sullivan; Alaska federal prosecutors Joseph
Bottini and James Goeke; and William Welch,
who did not participate in the trial but who
supervises the Public Integrity section and has
overseen every major public corruption case
in recent years.


Exhibit G

Seven Laws Destroyed At Once

 Law # 1 Destroyed

U.S. Title 29 1104 mandates :

“ a fiduciary shall discharge his duties with respect to a plan solely in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries”

“with care, skill, prudence, and diligence”

In exchange for agreeing to the laws seen on this website, the insurance companies make trillions of dollars providing health benefits to 150 million Americans get every other law in their favor.

They cannot be sued for punitive damages !

If they delay your claim for ten years when they know you have no money for surgical follow up and medical treatment, and almost kill you because of this like they have done to me, they only have to pay you what they originally owed you years ago !!

  Law # 2 Destroyed

U.S. Title 29 also requires MetLife and other insurance companies to have :

“The claims procedures contain administrative processes and safeguards designed to ensure and to verify that benefit claim determinations are made in accordance with governing plan documents and that, where appropriate, the plan provisions have been applied consistently with respect to similarly situated claimants.” (Title 29 CFR 2560.503-1 – section  (b)(5)”

Law # 3 Destroyed

 U.S. Title 29 also requires MetLife and other insurance companies to have :

“The claims procedures do not contain any provision, and are not administered in a way, that unduly inhibits or hampers the initiation or processing of claims for benefits.” (Title 29 CFR 2560.503-1 – section (b)(3)

Law # 4 Destroyed

 U.S. Title 29 also requires MetLife and other insurance companies to have :

“Provide for a review that takes into account all comments, documents, records, and other information submitted” (Title 29 CFR 2560.503-1 Section (h)(2)(iv)

 Law # 5 Destroyed

Title 29 U.S.C. 1141  mandates :

 "It shall be unlawful for any person through the use of fraud to restrain or attempt to restrain any participant or beneficiary for the purpose of interfering with or preventing the exercise of any right to which he is or may become entitled under the plan, this title. Any person who willfully violates this section shall be fined $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. The amount of fine is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3571.

Law # 6 Destroyed
Reckless endangerment :

My Psychologist wrote :

“In light of the violations Metlife has committed against Mr. Schmittou and Metlife's awareness of the additional harm caused him, Metlife's actions seem irresponsible, inhumane, dangerous, and reckless.”
(End of quotes)

This is happening to thousands of medical patients a year !! MetLife knew I had no money for surgery and medical treatment and MetLife continued to violate laws. Metlife is much worse than potentially fatal cancer !!

Every state has laws that prohibit reckless endangerment !!

Law # 7 Destroyed

Involuntary Manslaughter

Definition – “The act of unlawfully killing another human being unintentionally”

I am certain if there a real investigation occurs there will be thousands of examples of deaths that have been caused by these flagrant repeated violations !!


Respectfully Submitted,
Barry Schmittou

Address Removed From This Public Copy







No comments:

Post a Comment