My Dr Alan Bittner Story.com
|Lawsuits and Staff Member Information:
It seems that 3 women were harmed enough that counsel felt they had cause for litigation. Attorney is not interviewing aqny more witnesses at this time. Please file a complaint with the Medical Board to be added to the list of victims and potential witnesses if needed in the future.
Case No. SC097157 [Choi v. Bittner]
Attornney for plantiffs:
* I would like to take a moment here to commend Mr. Besser. His superb moral character is one that I have seen rarely in most people, even less in an attorney. His dedication and effort in this matter has extended far beyond his own cases. He has worked tirelessly; weekends, early mornings and late into the evenings. I have been astounded by the personal attention and extended hours that he has given to help his clients and all of those who were victims. I do not doubt that any defendant facing Mr. Besser has little chance of escaping justice beyond leaving the U.S. I am proud to have known him.
Physician's assistant Rodney Davis is currently( at the time this was originally written) working with a probationary license. According to the California Medical Board, Mr Davis was not honest on his license application. Application question 19a asked: "Have you ever been convicted or pled nolo contendere to any violation (including misdemeanor or felony) of any local, state, or federal law in any state, territory, country, or U.S. jurisdiction?....you are required to include a conviction that has been set aside and dismissed or expunged." Mr Davis responded "no" although it was found that he "was convicted in 1992 in Randolph Township Municipal Court of N.J.S. 2C:20-3(a) Theft by unlawful taking." Mr. Davis is supposed to be working under a doctor that is approved by the court during his probation. *11/8/2010: I have been threatened by Mr Davis' attorney about revealing this information. He claims that I cannot knowingly reveal info in an expunged case. If this case was expunged, I had no knowledge of it. I was able to look up the documents myself, as you can too. The fact will remain that Mr. Davis' license in CA was probationary, that he was dishonest in his application about a prior arrest, and that later he lied to me in an email..in writing!...about the nature of his crime that I personally verified as a completely different offense....and, in my opinion...a far more serious crime. These aer not my opinions but a documented, public, lagal decision by the California Me3dical Board. Furthermore, Mr Davis takes offense that I noted that the public record showed that he was to be working under an approved supervisor. It is a fact. His attorney claims that it "implies" that he was not. I have made no such statement regarding whether he was or not...just that he was supposed to be. So let me make that clear: The Medical Board ordered that Mr. Davis be specially supervised, I have no knowledge of whether he complied with that order. Let me say....and note that this is my personal opinion...read that, counselor...MY OPINION...That he needed a "babysitter" implies..to me...that he could not be completely trusted! Additonally, I feel that patients shave teh right to know if someone working on them was on probation. While Mr. Davis did not OPERATE on me..at least before they drugged me....he DID assist with the preliminaries. Also, I have had many letters from victims who claim...claim, Mr RIvera..that he worked on them and that they were damaged.
*11/8/2010: Expunged records--Please note that the CA Medical Board supplies to citizens the records of their licensee's actions. Note that all the information that I used in the above paragraphs appears and is DIRECTLY quoted from the Board's PUBLIC filing regarding their decision in Mr. Davis' status. Mr. RIvera: If Mr. Davis' past record was indeed expunged, then you should have a beef with the CA Medical Board... not me...here is it..in black and white. I have no knowledge of expungment now or when the post was made. Use the link and do the search yourself...just like anyone else can! IN MY OPINION.....Mr. Davis had a professional duty to protect me and other patients from the sloppy, questionable at best, butcher jobs that were preformed in that office! Again..IN MY OPINION....Mr Davis has failed the very core of the professional code of ethics that he is required to uphold. You wanna threaten and sue me for expressing my opinion? Bring it on...and I will bring you others who feel exactly the same. This is serious, it is not about whether someone went to strip bar or not. It is about professional duty and the willingness to tolerate or assist someone in commiting harm to others.
Nice try. Why would an attorney make a threat regarding information that is duly noted on public records and available to anyone? Personally, in my opinion, this is not a fact, just how I feel, please mr attorney don't threaten me......An attorney who will take the case of someone who has been openly dishonest, who helped others harm patients and then make threats to the victims of the crimes by editing their words and making accusations that can be proven untrue by a simple public record check is one of those attorneys that all the jokes are about. Did you not check you facts? Or did you just think that you could bully me? In case you are not computer saavy....mr cyberlawyer...here is a copy of the public document. Please read sections 2 and 3...it is still on file and still searchable to anyone at the link above: Take it up with the MBC!
Update 1/3/08: In September of 2008, Mr. Davis filed incorporation papers for Pacific Lipo of Beverly Hills (corporation #C3129286), it was later dissolved. I doubt that a PA with a probationary license could open a clinic, I think it was probably another shell company for Bittner.
The above statement originally included the words "felony" and "perjury." The statement came from a responsible party. I verified that the documents existed and contained the information, but I did not verify that an actual conviction using those terms was conferred. Upon contact from Mr. Davis, I have removed the the original quote unless I can ascertain if the terms are valid in a legal sense. Regarding those two terms, I apolgize to Mr. Davis and his family for not checking that portion of the statement I quoted. I do not believe that any justice is served by dishonesty, whether it is intentional or not. In this case it was not intentional. To say or post something that you KNOW to be false dilutes and destroys the very core of justice. Call me an idealist. *11/8/2010: Mr Davis and his attorney also take offense to this statement although they conveniently left out important qualifiers and endited in other paragraphs to change the scope of the statement. So let me be clear: Two strong terms were originally used. Although, each of those terms may very well be accurate, I was not able to find that the terms themselves were used in any documents or that he was CONVICTED of those crimes. I removed them. I noted that he LIED..and he did....on a licensing application...."perjury" IS lying in a legal sense. Perjury is a felony under many conditions and in many states. I have proof that he lied...but no proof that he was ever formally charged with "perjury."
Perjury is essentially "lying in a legal context," such as on a professional license application. Although, by definition, lying is perjury, the courts may choose not to convict a party on the count of "perjury" or use that specific term in the documents. In many states perjury is classified as a felony. Whether it is in California, or whether Mr. Davis was actually convicted as such is not known to me. What is known is contained in the opening paragraph and the links to the documents.
***In communications to me, Mr. Davis defended his actions by claiming that the "question specifically asked about any prior misdemeanors or felony convictions. Rather than wait for up to year to clear up the accusation I agreed to a probationary license." According to the legal documents, that is NOT how the question was worded (see above). He then wrote "This all stems from a "disorderly persons" offense that occurred when I was 18 years old." According to court records, the charge was "theft by taking." It is understandable to mispeak or choose your words poorly. However, IN MY OPINION, this issue is one where an individual should be AWARE of the specific details of such a personal situation. I believe that Mr. Davis intentionally tried to hide these facts, especially because he made claims in letters to me that were easily proved to be false. I, personally, feel that this sort of dishonesty is unnacceptable in a "professional" that is trusted with cutting into my body.
EVERYONE has told lies, there are no perfect people. That the lie may be intentional, hurt someone or something wrongly and the degree of the damage are critical parameters. When we speak of medical care, elective or neccessary, the state of licensing and character of licencees should be available and subject to the individual scrutiny of each potential patient. The ramifications of such an issue is more important to me when someone is going to operate on me than if someone is going to wash my car. Perspective is important, and those who provide expensive, critical and physically dangerous services should be held to a higher ethical accountability.
Jonathan G Martin:
At this time it seems that it is possible that staff member Jonathan may not have a license to administer anesthesia or perform surgery. If he performed any of your surgery please file a complaint with the Medical Board. See staff photo on the "Website Claims" page.
Trevor A Schmidt:
Trevor and Jonathan worked on me, Trevor on my right, Jonathan on my left. Trevor did the abdomen. Both sides and the abdomen had odd lumps afterward.
Kyle may not have had license. She was present during my surgery, but I am unsure if she is the person who administered my "nitrous." There have been claims that she administered various types of anesthesia.