PRE-TRIAL DOCUMENTS TO CASE 92-C-1222, NOW GEN # 4-93-0847

OSTERBUR, JIM Vs. COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER Plus remainder of trial transcript 92-c-1222 not included in brief

A mixup in numbers occurred to originally designate this case as 4-93-0839 (my mistake)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGES taken from handwritten

1-7 initial description (argument)

8-11 obligation to pay revisited

12-15 complaint

16-17 determination (cause)

18-20 acknowledgment of prejudice by plaintiff (to plaintiff)

21 legal proof of monopoly exists

22-24 initial description of treatment

25 last attempt to remain, out of court

26-31 exhibit (some)

32 small claims

33-34 amended small claims

35 "portion" of applicable law

36-38 mediation necessary

39-43 support given for law

44-45 defendant speaks

46 trial notice

47 92-c-1222 begins

51-54 brief (initial)

54-56 offer

57-59 enlargement to include mental health reform

60-63 correspondence with honorable J. G. Townsend

64-68 correspondence with Mr. Krchak

69-76 subsequent brief to Honorable J .G. Townsend and defendant

77-87 motion & reply

95-97 rights

98-103 reply of defendant & answer

104-112 clear demand (issued as warning)

113-120 issues enlarged

121 their image

122 case as filed initially

123 trial transcript not contained in brief

trial pages 1-6 prepared statement used in trial

124-141 issues relating to medical terminology

141-143 not for profit challenged

144-145 issues involving slander

146-147 constitutional defense

148-154 religious nature identified

155-165 testimony regarding self

166-167 contract for public use

pg 1-7

exhibit J JUSTICE THE RECEIPT OF FAIR (EQUAL) TREATMENT TO EVERY PERSON, irregardless of prejudice, pre-conceived idea's, or realities unimportant to a specific event or occurrence.

This paper is about justice sought for each party involved in a specific incident between myself and the corporate entity of covenant medical center. This paper is also about justice sought for each member of society; by communication of matters unjust, that these things may be corrected, defined, and thereby controlled by & for societies benefit.

In a dispute concerning care received [some words failed to copy] versus money charged, there must be proof of honest service, workmanship, & honorable treatment. I am the recipient of a bill which I do hereby declare as UNJUST (particularly due to the reality I never saw "was rejected by" the doctor, neither was I referred), NO ONE within the emergency room questioned me at any time regarding any symptom or pain. (I was never spoken to by any of the emergency room staff except the doctor who refused me saying, find someone else). The only other communication to this staff was a moment when four people came quickly, intent upon giving medicine AGAINST my wishes (I had begun to feel a little better). They said they had to and after much medicine decided it was a loose clip on their machine.

The medicine caused me to feel worse (bad) but because of that medicine which I specifically rejected I was admitted into the general hospital. Within a half hour or little more my own body became nervous and it felt like a ring of needles was over my heart, not drastically hurting at that time but there. These particular nurses listened to my complaint and decided to treat the matter seriously, I received more drugs, this time I accepted.

To this day I do not know whether the pains in the hospital were caused in part by the emergency room medicines or were the recurrence of physical pain. Either way I was literally in physical pain when I entered, I was rejected by their doctor, I was totally ignored by the emergency room staff (except for a machine which malfunctioned) and DO feel abused. In my defense; I know I felt physically bad, I know my heart was somehow involved, I know I had one night 3 or 4 weeks after leaving that hospital which was critical to me, & I know I am physically not the same as before this occurrence.

I was within the walls of that hospital for 21 hours, was charged $2100.00 for my stay. Experienced less than five minutes each, of nursing care from four people I asked not to treat me, WAS rejected by a doctor, and was hooked to a machine on two occasions for roughly a minute. My total emergency room services including everything was NOT over 22 minutes and probably less. The machine malfunctioned at a clip point terminal. The service I did receive, I asked not to.

I have paid twelve hundred dollars at the agreed upon rate which I feel certain is far beyond justice for services rendered. While in the hospital I received less than 2 physical hours of nursing care, plus a bed and their (nurses) realistic care & professional service during that time.

For the purpose of billing

emergency rm staff services labor for 20 minutes (it is not known if necessary) doctor charged $120.00 approx (was NOT paid) hours in emergency room don't know (less than 1 hour, I think).

Hospital; room 20 hours approx, nursing services (individual care) 2 hours approx medicine (I don't know if caused by emergency room procedures)

SUMMARY If I was seriously Ill, I should have received the attention of the physician on duty, or at least been referred. If I was not seriously Ill why Was I given serious medicine? This answer has been decided by both parties differently and must be decided in court. Having went to small claims court to file, I am told small claims is NOT really about people who are billed improperly, but for people in business or for whatever reason, cannot collect money which they have billed to someone else. I filed anyway.

THE INJUSTICE Entry within the emergency room of any hospital requires a signature to pay and a statement which says, they can do anything they want, without liability for what they do (If you conscious).

Pg 8-11

exhibit K

to covenant medical center regarding James Frank Osterbur

In 1990 July or August, I entered your emergency room and have since sent you a letter regarding the treatment I received, a copy is included. A portion of that letter stated I would pay $1000 dollars, I have paid $1000 plus 12 percent interest or the sum total of $1200. According to my records. I WILL PAY NO MORE, regarding this matter! In summary you (the hospital, and its doctors) used and abused me, as a patient both financially, personally, and emotionally. Insofar as any resemblance to medical care is concerned apart from the nursing staff, there was NONE. I have experienced serious physical pains after experience with you, and have survived it, you as a hospital are LESS than acceptable apart from extreme. I received NO CARE from anyone but the nurses on 8^th floor and will NOT pay for rejection, inappropriate use of drugs, no doctor, no attempt at all to in any manner or way treat me as a patient. NOR will I accept the extortion now offered me. (To sign a contract under duress is extortion). I have paid what I consider to be more than enough! In retracing the events you will be required to prove 5 minutes of time by 2 people, then later 5 minutes of time by 4 people. 5 minutes of time by someone with a machine (twice) in your emergency room. Plus altogether not more than 45 minutes of nurse assistance throughout my hospital stay of 21 hours was in some manner worth $2000. Total man hours in emergency 40 minutes. Total hospital man hours 45 minutes plus billing & 10 minutes of blood work. Incidentals not more than 30 minutes (sheets, etc).

I am willing to pay a fair price for services asked for and received, which I have and more! I am not willing to be threatened or extorted. If you fail, I will work personally against you. I do demand a signed, PAID IN FULL! Which is in all reality more than I received. Signed.

Pg12-15

of care and medicine Life; a word describing a chemical factory called the body and the spirit which gives the body reason. The will to survive is the reality of choice; I want to survive, because of the happiness I have known. In the reality of living the body needs care, and may need the care of hands not your own. Care is not money, care cannot truly be bought. Each person who does care about someone else has chosen: this person, this life, has value! NO ONE can buy that decision, it must be accepted. Society itself must choose when, in relation to money, on an equal personal (not financial) basis how much we want for our self or are willing to pay for another. Feeling bad, I asked to be taken to a hospital, I was experiencing chest pain. Upon arrival a short statement was given me, to be signed. I then waited 20 minutes or more for a nurse to come. The doctor in charge chose not to treat, or examine, or refer me. While in the emergency room, the staff abruptly came and injected me with drugs, later after the drugs, it was decided a machine malfunction had occurred. I spent 21 hours total in that hospital during which time I was given medicines for heart problems which I complained of to/ by the nursing staff. In summary, I had no doctor, I was never examined by more than a machine, I received medicine which I may or may not have needed and which most certainly affected me, in the minutes or hours directly following and may have caused pain and consequently the other drugs administered. If this is not so, then my heart was experiencing pain and deserved some resemblance of professional care. Whether, from (hospital given) drug or from the inside, I felt badly for many days afterward, and still am not completely healthy.

In summary I was charged $150 dollars by a doctor who never came within 5 feet of me, nor spent more than 5 minutes, in my presence while telling me I won't treat you, find someone else!

For being in a hospital 21 hours I am charged $1,962.31 upon complaining of the bill; a person assigned to the task discovered I was overcharged $70 for supplies, I didn't receive. It is then necessary to pay for the treatment. I am told I will pay at a rate the hospital shall decide, at the interest the hospital will choose. If I do not do as they command, regardless of my situation, or protest, or willingness to pay a realistic amount. They will slander my name, putting my name on a list entitled people who don't pay.

Pg16-17

to covenant medical center & associates regarding James F. Osterbur acct#0-26945-6

YOUR STAFF HAS FAILED. The nursing staff was fine.

Upon receiving treatment I am appalled at: I have attempted to reach a realistic conclusion with your billing staff. This packet is sent to you, as well as TV talk show hosts.

(In my mind) the doctor representing you; had no right to refuse/ at the least could have referred. I did not come to your facility, JUST TO GIVE YOU MONEY!!!! I did not come as a figment of my imagination. I physically felt BAD.. You may have made things worse. I came fully understanding and expecting to receive reasonable treatment and pay for it. Your bill is too high. Your doctor too poor. And more. I have said $1000 I will pay (today) to call the account PAID IN FULL! Beyond that amount you may take me to court. If you wish to attempt to collect the rest: BE CAREFUL!! I will return, the treatment I receive.

Pg 18-20

exhibit m The description of a life: to many , life is defined by what you possess on the outside, the house, car, job, etc. These things are fought for, but do not say anything about how it was achieved. Those things which are on the inside speak directly about who and why and how. Some people spend their own lives in search of these questions. Those who think only of possessions, understand very little about people, even less about life.

When everyone may be whatever they choose without hurting anyone, then we shall live in freedom. The word freedom implies "I" may proceed with my life in whatever manner I chose without ridicule. A man who spent less than five minutes in my presence, asked only what I ate on the previous day, which I answered correctly, without hesitation added to me his own description, during the following 3 weeks I spoke with seven psychiatrists each for no more than fifteen minutes only one listened at all. I submit I was a curiosity rather than a patient. Since I was rejected (because of the label) this much I will say in my own defense: I chose to enter into two main events which are a part of my memory, the first to learn, about what is inside of me. The second to learn of a specific religious parable. Irregardless of how these are perceived I chose to enter, and I chose at every question, even if errors were made. I will suggest to you, it is NOT irrational to seek understanding of oneself, this life, or the life to come. James F. Osterbur

pg21

exhibit n For the purpose of a legal affidavit suitable for court use. I am looking for a medical doctor who agrees with the following:

Any patient who enters an emergency room clear of mind and in physical distress, deserves to be examined by a qualified doctor if one is present. Deserves to be questioned, or allowed to state the nature of said physical distress. Deserves to be heard when refusing treatment.

There will be no requirement to testify. The entire burden of proof is upon me. The only question or statement or legal consequence is to be, the above encircled statement.

Pg22-24

The difference between a machine and a qualified doctor. I felt the need to seek medical attention at an emergency room for a physical problem. Being unable to diagnosis my condition, except for my heart was involved, I said, I was experiencing a heart attack. The emergency room staff hooked me to a machine, the machine said I was ok, so the heart doctor on duty refused to examine or refer me to anyone else. As I began to feel a little worse again I was hooked to a machine again, later four people suddenly came in and injected me with medicine even though I said to them, don't I'm starting to feel better, they said they had to, then decided a clip on the monitor was the problem. I then felt worse and was admitted to the hospital, where I again received drugs.

My two BIGGEST complaints: no one in the emergency room asked me anything or was even close enough at anytime for me to talk to, all I knew for sure was I felt badly and , that affected my heart to some degree, I feel it is inexcusable that not one doctor or nurse had the decency to ask what hurt or at least allow me, to say what I felt like. A machine was my only doctor and a second machine gave me medicine, I didn't want. For this I am charged full price. The medicine first received may have caused the need for a second dose. I don't know! I do know there are many processes inside a human body and one affects another. I was used, abused, rejected, and refused and then charged an amount only an EXTORTIONIST would think fair.

I went knowing medicine is a long, long, way from perfect. I went knowing I would be charged an outrageous sum of money. I did not know I would never be examined. I did not know a machine would dispense medicine to me. I did fail to realize the full extent of power society has allowed hospitals and the COMPLETE lack of justice available to the patient. The court is NOT an answer; fair and equitable treatment is James F. Osterbur

pg25

I physically felt bad!!! you may have made things worse. I came fully understanding and expecting to receive reasonable treatment and pay for it. Your bill is too high. Your doctor too poor, and more. I have said $1000. I will pay (today) to call the account paid in full. Beyond that amount you may take me to court. If you wish to attempt to collect the rest: BE CAREFUL...I will return, the treatment I receive.

Pg 26 a signature pg 27 a complete lie because this doctor never came within 5 feet of me and told me to get out, find someone else

Pg 28 psychiatric ; evaluation; patient was alert, oriented, cooperative, flat affect but demonstrated no evidence of thought mood disorder.

Pg 31 balance 969.26 pg 32 failure to be seen by (refused examination of) by doctor. Inappropriate medical treatment. endangerment of life.

Pg 33 amended complaint "Failure....under sec 1156 (a), 1,2,3, and sec 1154 (a) (11) of the social security act SSA 408-3 (to provide access or information regarding the plaintiffs right for a determination may be made apart from the hospital).

Pg 35 sec 1156 [42 USC 1320c-5] (a) It shall be the obligation of any health care practitioner and any other person (including a hospital or other..... (1) will be provided economically and only when, and to the extent medically necessary (2) will be of a quality which meets professionally recognized standards of health care (3) will be supported by evidence of medical necessity and quality in such form and fashion and at such time as may reasonably be required by a reviewing peer review organization in the exercise of its duties and responsibilities.

Pg36-38

amended claims 92-s-1561 The desire for a fair appraisal of services rendered. The issues; WHY must I pay, when the payment and credit agreement, when properly viewed as signed by a person experiencing serious physical distress, can not be considered a free enterprise decision. There is no determination to say no bill is due, rather after a period of time and self healing it is now time to come to a reasonable decision regarding: honest money owed for services rendered.

As I am now able to defend my right. There is a philosophy common to many which says "pay the doctor, hospital, etc ANYTHING, what good is money is your dead".

I personally believe in FAIR & EQUITABLE dealings in every matter. Meaning honest work will be done at a fair wage. The description of serious physical pain is not a "license to steal", yet who will refuse to sign their papers when life, health, mobility, work, and so much more depends on reasonable health. I have tried to discuss with the hospital on several occasions, with several different people the reality that I think this bill is unjust. Each one clearly said "I have NO rights, pay the bill on our terms, period". Taken from active orders regarding my case as provided by covenant medical center admitted 1:33 pm approx 10 min of time (1) person was helped to main emergency room at 3:12 approx 10 min (1) person. Given injection 3:32 approx 5 min (4) people. Says given oxygen/ fails to say I refused. Moved to hospital nursing assistance 2:25- 2:51 given pill nursing assistance 10:33pm approx 15 min . Blood work 12:28 5:59 12:48 3:13 portable chest x-ray 1:00 5min (1) person

pg 39-43

to the defendant: covenant medical center The deliberate and willful disregard for justice, within the confines of a fair and legal billing dispute: ARE the entire cause and legal action contained within case 92-s-1651, which is and always has been strictly a billing dispute. Your suggestion that I have not met the requirements of section 2-622 is unsupported, case 92-s-1561 is a billing dispute case NOT a malpractice case.

I am personally surprised at your lack of knowledge regarding said amended complaint perhaps you have spent too much time fighting over the "letter of the law" rather than the "intent of the law". Read the material again, WITHIN the words written at the bottom: democracy is a government by all the people, FOR ALL THE PEOPLE. We live in a democracy , do we not, which does mean laws that apply to one, apply to all. Sec 1154 a 11 as was sent to you is a subsection of social security act, under title XVIII: health insurance for the aged and disabled. Perhaps I should have included the portion of pleading in case 92-c-1222 regarding the disability I have incurred; page 5 subtitle 1 clarifies this disability (by your written words it is apparent; to you case 92-s-1561 & 92-c-1222 are involved in these matters). Irregardless of how you view this claim; you have clearly stated my entitlement regarding this social security act XVIII within your medical file "physical examination" signed by P. Thopial MD read it again.

While it is true I do not collect any such benefits and further: I DISAGREE entirely with the claims! You have made it possible for me to collect, at any time, with just my signature.. Therefore I do claim the rights, you say I have and demand a review by an appropriate, peer review organization. I do claim this right within the words page 530 sec 1155 [42 V.S.C. 1320 c-4] as sent. It is the defendant actions which has made legal action a reality NOT the plaintiffs actions. It is the defendants actions which have increased the cost of these legal actions. It is the defendants actions which have make it necessary to increase the time I have spent in court and out of court only intent upon justice. It is the defendants actions which have made case 92-c-1222 BECAUSE I do not want to endure these things, nor do I wish anyone else to endure them.

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff prays that the case 92-s-1561 and case 92-c-1222 and the peer review (as demanded herein) be speedily commenced as justice will allow James F. Osterbur

pg 44 motion to dismiss ; 1. ..complaint fails to state cause of action .....does not provide any facts establishing that this act somehow relates.....2. complaint ......why it is claimed it is indebted to Mr. Osterbur in the sum of $956. 3. original complaint was dismissed.... Wherefore the defendant...prays ...dismissed with prejudice....and for costs. As an additional motion to dismiss.....1. the complaint ...allege a healing art malpractice.... 2. the plaintiff has not followed the requirements of section 2-622 of the Ill code of civil procedure ...not filed an affidavit establishing cause of action. 3. .....defendant is entitled to a dismissal under section 2-619 of the code of civil procedure.......wherefore .....dismissed with prejudice and for costs.

Pg 46 hearing 92-s-1561 courtroom H oct 8, 92

Pg 47 transcript of 1561 "Dismissed with prejudice at this time"

pg 48-50

within this case 92-c-1222 there exists claim for constitutional rights, as defined primarily by the bill of rights. The following points of law shall be discussed pursuant to these issues

1. The constitution is the law of the land.

2. The constitution defines what legislatures and courts of law and presidential authority can/ will be'

3. The constitution (bill of rights) determines the boundaries of those in powerful positions and establishes the rights of every citizen.

4. No court, nor president, nor legislature has power over the constitution, rather the constitution has power over these, and every citizen as well.

5. The constitution is the law of the land and NO OTHER LAW (as defined by courts, presidents, or legislatures) has power over its fundamental rights.

6. The citizenry as a vast majority, does have power over the constitution, within the realities of one man/ woman one vote: after sufficient notice and proper procedure!

7. The elected official works for the citizenry or he/ she works against the common good.

Further: be it hereby known and attested to as sufficient warning

The use of language or other intended for the sole purpose of discrediting me, degrading me, or which is slanderous of me, will not be tolerated. IT IS A REALITY, only if proven: the illegal monopoly over/ of human suffering by the entire medical profession :has clearly been established. The honest and complete purpose of this case 92-c-1222 has therefore become: to end the monopoly of the medical profession; and to establish a fair and justifiable description of equality & honest work.

Thomas Mamer & Haughey June 21, 93 RE: 92-c-1222 Judge Townsend: enclosed.....motion to dismiss and a memorandum in support.....

Pg 51-54

to Thomas, Mamer, & Haughey for covenant med center RE: 92-c-1222

within your letter dated 6/21/93 you claim to have enclosed copies of your motion & memorandum: it is not enclosed? Send me a copy.

Regarding this case I have enclosed the preliminary brief for your benefit, I have been informed (as stated) that I have one year to complete and present this case before a reasonable motion of dismissal shall be heard, if not please advise!

Within this brief there is reference to constitutional issues which may not be immediately clear to you so be advised as follows. This case has deferred to the cause of your (medical profession) monopoly over me a citizen. The definition of monopoly being: exclusive control of a commodity or service that makes possible the manipulation of prices, and/or something that is subject of such control etc.

Your control over me as patient and citizen, are clearly demonstrated. The bill of rights & constitution define what you may control, read them! The conviction of monopoly places you within a number of laws governing monopolies which you, the medical profession currently dismiss, that is going to change!

The trial issues are to be: malpractice: if (exhibit b) heparin is common procedure for a patient as described in the physical examination , or a coverup?

Determination (mental): apart from all other criteria an accusation has been made against me (slanderous in nature) for which I received NO trial by jury, that I might defend myself. Deliberately in violation of the bill or rights sections 1,8,16. Thereby describing in its entirety a complete monopoly over me.

Extortion; that there is no definable area apart from serious public trial whereby I may arbitrate FAIRLY over billing differences. Clearly defining a monopoly over me!

That exclusive power to control is found within the medical profession WITHOUT public approval beyond what may be considered as necessary.

THESE things and more shall comprise trial 92-c-1222

my offer to you; I have considered this matter carefully, what it shall cost me, and what it shall cost you. The term war used herein refers to the battles which shall ensue after the trial during its appeal, and thereafter. I will tell you plainly I intend to challenge your not for profit status, etc. however in matters of fair and /or unfair I have decided it is unfair to subject you as a specific entity rather than the medical profession as a whole, including you. UNLESS you refuse this offer. LEAVE ME ALONE, mark your account paid in full, and send a letter of apology to the collection agency & me stating an error in billing was made. In return I will let this case 92-c-1222 remain untouched (not dismissed) that the court system shall take care of the matter through the issues of time past (your dismissal is to be dropped) your reply is due by July 10,93. Be aware I do not intend to let these issues drop rather this offer is made so that neither you or I must defend them directly, rather they are public issues and should remain public issues. If you choose to defend, I have weighed the cost to me and I will pay whatever it costs to pursue (socially, financially, or physically) James F. Osterbur 6/23/93

pg 57-59

in response to June 29,93 letter I have received NO materials of any kind from you regarding this matter since before march of 93 NO motion to dismiss nothing! Except for your one page June 21,93 and its certification page. I have underlined your words. I remind you, I have received no motion to dismiss from you. Send the words. In response to June 29,93 a discussion is unnecessary, those are/ will remain the terms. There is only one other option apart from court available to you: the words and descriptions used within the medical records of me are inaccurate and inappropriate and unconstitutional as you altered my life without trial, without allowance for any legal option, which is: WRONGFUL, demeaning, and slanderous. When such terms ascribe meanings and actions detrimental to life itself. That the use of such language has been hurtful to me is easily proven. That no right exists to; steal from me my rights or reputation is easily proven. That medical records are personal, yet mine were used against me, can be proven. Time constraints for bringing a lawsuit against you do not apply as the medical terms applied to me were again used by you in the emergency room. Whereupon this case began and again were of a hurtful detriment to me, within the case 92-s-1561 causing the judge to be less than impartial (a review of the audible tape will prove this). As such and within the reality of work insurance etc, you do afflict and affect me every day: therefore the case is current. I do offer only one other option: erase all medical records of me (which would include those held by lutheran general hospital and return every penny paid in this matter, & the emergency room fiasco and the matters involved between you & me will be called legally resolved for good. James F. Osterbur

pg 60-63

starts court letter J.G. Townsend July 5, 1993 (get from court or scanned copies) replied: to the honorable J. G. Townsend champaign county courthouse RE; 92-c-1222 I am just informed by letter from Thomas,Mamer. & Haughey; a motion to dismiss & a memorandum in support have been filed against this case. I do hereby declare, "I have received NO such papers" I was refused a copy of the letters as sent. I will assume they were lost in the mail otherwise_____, I have again requested these papers and if denied again shall file contempt motions accordingly. With regard to case 92-c-1222 this case began as 92-s-1561 a simple money issue, in increased to case 92-c-1222 as a precaution if no resolution could be found in 92-s-1561, none was. I do respectfully request you to read both cases before making any decision. Although wordy the realities involved are simple beginning slowly with an honest attempt over less than $1000 it has increased to the threshold of a multimillion dollar lawsuit covering many of the ills involved in the medical industry. The result of an absolute avoidance of dealing with the issues and their legal responsibility to hear my complaint and produce just cause. A settlement may or may not be made, that is entirely their decision. I have proceeded with reasonable haste regarding this case 92-c-1222 as nothing could be done until 92-s-1561 was decided. The delay since that time has been involved with work, life, and so on. I do expect to be fully prepared and ready if necessary within the month of August 93, they are notified of this. As I represent myself this is the best I can do and it is within a one year time frame, which I consider my right James F. Osterbur

pg 64

starts with attorney letter July 12, 93 "dear mr. Osterbur; this is in response to materials received from you. Enclosed are copies....Your letter to judge Townsend ....was not appreciated.......was in poor taste...I do not understand.....I do not see any point in continuing discussions....I will be prepared to argue this motion to dismiss..

Pg 65

To David E Krchak RE: Osterbur vs covenant 92-c-1222 Your letter July 12,93 is not quite correct. The letter beginning " in response to June 29, 93...." clearly asks for a courtesy from you which was unanswered, prompting the words July 5 93. If they had been sent or if the date of the motion had been mentioned, that letter would not have been sent. However I was not correct either, due to my lack of formal training, it was assumed the motion dated oct 2, 92 was over as it had been replied to and no further actions were taken until this time. It was my understanding a motion to dismiss does fall within time constraints and that matter was therefore over. I do hereby apologize for that mistake, with the exception that, courtesy extended to me would have meant courtesy extended to you! Your further statement of "I do not understand...." seems unlikely to me however I will try again: the following conditions are to be met: 1^st offer: 1. Leave me alone. 2. Mark the account statement which instigated this matter PAID IN FULL. 3. Send a letter of apology to the collection agency and me stating an error in billing was made by covenant medical center I WILL in return Let this case be dismissed by the court system due to time constraints. I will not let it be dismissed by you. I do not offer to drop the issues of a public domain rather the personal issues involved shall be discontinued. My second offer: instead of the first offer erase all medical records of me including those held by lutheran general hospital and christie clinic where I was sent for tooth extraction and carle hospital where I once applied for work (they are inaccurate, inappropriate, and unconstitutional) 2. Return every penny paid in this matter & the emergency room fiasco to me. I WILL accept that the matter is/ has been legally resolved for good. 7/14/93 James F. Osterbur you have until July 25, 93 to reply.

Pg 69-76

The honorable J. G. Townsend champaign county courthouse The realities involved within case 92-c-1222 initiated as a result of my own personal experience within their emergency room ( identified; my own case, is as follows) and (review of pleading). The treatment received was ; unacceptable. The original intention, when billing issues arose was simple: to state what happened to me and demand suitable adjustment, as is my right. I approached this matter through the billing department, and various other departments to no avail. Each said that's the bill PAY IT, no hearing to determine if anything I might say had value: only the bill not the patient had value. Having exhausted all reasonable possibilities through the hospital, I began at small claims court case 92-s-1561 expecting to be heard. I received only motions to dismiss. 92-s-1561 became amended case 92-s-1561, again requesting to be heard, and again receiving dismissal with judge einhorn words (page 9, lines 1-5 transcript by Doncy L. Tracy jan 29, 93. Mr request was for a peer review: which is a formal hearing by the medical establishment and did bring substantial evidence to court. Case 92-c-1222 then became my formal request for change within the medical establishment as a whole, for the RIGHT TO BE EQUAL, and have stated cause: exhibits J,K,L,& O. For this I received another motion for dismissal and replied; titled (the issues, and exhibit N). Now comes the decision; requiring a partial disclosure of my personal life as well as, requiring covenant medical center to defend the medical establishment as a whole (the result of which could affect many people). I admit to delaying for some time regarding this decision but within a reasonable time frame. The realities involved will require me to defend and alter my life as well. Let it be clearly noted I have looked for justice throughout and found very little. This case has then become a citizens demand to be treated according to the words described by constitutional statements (samples are given). My right to ask is honestly defined on pg 18 (a case intent upon life in human terms, not medical terms, not greed or charity, rather truth equality and fair play. Pg 19 further explains the plight and fears of the common citizen pg 21 (workers compensation) define previous supporting judicial intervention. Pg 21, 22 describes legal moral grounds for trial, with the specific intention of controlling : "what is fair and legitimate". Pg 23 clearly defines a precedent set by the federal government. Closing arguments pg 23 & 24 seek to provide a beginning to the respective problems with tangible solutions. Let it be hereby known and understood every reasonable opportunity was given to covenant medical center, & their controller, servantcor. They have chosen of their own free will to enter this lawsuit and must now endure whatever consequences it legitimately requires: they are fully forewarned, regarding the use of media to represent my case. The expectation of using their name to represent the medical profession, the reality of subsequent cases which may or may not have originated from their establishment, to `prove a monopoly exists by the medical profession over the common citizen within the context of this case. In closing the arguments are clear and specific, the right to trial is absolute. Jurisdiction as the words (case) is primarily confined to money & contracts cannot be denied, the time constraints are insufficient for denial. As to the public aspects , I prefer the words written at the bottom pg 24 "for us all, it is written: there is no honor in being sick, no value over physical health. I/ we are not seeking monetary reimbursement, rather we are seeking to live with courage, respect, and to honor those we love". The definition of this statement is simple: to be EQUAL to those who otherwise attempt to rule our lives. That subsequent monetary reimbursement is now being considered in an amended case 92-c-1222 is strictly and specifically the result of arrogance & greed (it is the only method whereby attention could be directed with any certainty to this case, from management). They have viewed and thereby accepted the consequences! James F. Osterbur

pg 77

starts with motion to dismiss 92-c-1222 ....moves to dismiss ....under sections 2-615 and 2-619 of the Il code of civil procedure....!. the written materials.....fails to state any legally cognizable cause of action....it utterly fails to advise the defendant of the basis for this charge. Wherefore the defendant prays....dismiss...section 2-615... 2. the plaintiff has already filed case 92-s-1561 purporting to allege damages arising out of treatment.... Wherefore, the defendant prays...dismissed under section 2-619 (a) (3) .... 3. The written materials filed...liberally construed to state a cause of action....section 2-622 ...none of the written materials....comply....with the provisions.... Wherefore the complaint must be dismissed under section 2-619....in that it does not follow the provisions of section 2-622 of the Il code of civil procedure.

Pg 78

To the attorneys: Thomas, Mamer, & Haughey re: 92-c-1222 I have received your letter dated oct 2, 92. And do reply; paragraph 1"...it utterly fails to advise the defendant of the basis for this charge". This statement is completely false, as the 25 pages do literally describe exactly, a portion of my own complaint and the cause of action for which this trial has begun: to change your current billing practices, in the ways listed within those 25 pages or in human terms: to methods which provide equality and fair play, to every individual. This case does depend on the following 1. The hospital environment does constitute a monopoly upon the individual. 2. A person involved within the struggle for life & limb in real terms can not be considered legally involved in a free enterprise situation. Rather the definition of extortion is: to force money from a person by intimidation or abuse of authority. Therefore the law has been lax ( careless or negligent) regarding the overseeing of these matters and I am demanding change. And do reply: "paragraph 2 (memorandum) ....the written materials constitute a general & vague harangue...." This statement is completely false as the case itself defines the human condition, the problems associated with the average citizen entering a hospital are clearly outlined, the realities of treatment and billing are serious (as defined by my own case), the expected remedy is specific. And do reply : "paragraph 2 (motion) has already filed case # 92-s-1561" I have made every reasonable attempt to avoid a lawsuit, If ANY respect had been shown to me by the defendant prior to this time: this lawsuit would have been avoided, the defendant has chosen. I do hereby request these two lawsuits be joined; 92-s-1561 to this very lawsuit 92-c-1222, to avoid unnecessary court time. And do reply "Paragraph 3 (motion) .....state a cause of action for healing art malpractice as governed by section 2-622 of the Ill code of civil procedures..." even the defense acknowledges my right to trial. However my right is better stated within Ill code of civil procedure chapter 110 section 2-612 page 527 "...the supreme court reviewed amendments....the aforementioned provisions were designed to insure fairness to the litigants rather than unduly enhance the technical considerations of common law pleadings...." the provisions of section 2-622 being referred to have been answered on pages 14 & 15 of the lawsuit 92-c-1222 and evidence listed as exhibit N show an attempt to comply. Further page 13, V clearly shows lawsuit 92-s-1561 was never formally commenced. And do reply "paragraph 4 (memorandum) ....frivolous claims of malpractice." I do not consider the matters defined within lawsuit 92-c-1222 in less than very serious terms. And do reply paragraph 5....threat to reappear...& will regret it. " these words are an attempt to insure the defense has adequate warning, with regard to my personal life. Further pg 25,26 of this lawsuit declare the trial as public in every sense. Meaning to the defense and its lawyers, the medical terms and matters not specifically necessary to this case, in an attempt to slander, or defame or discredit my life may result in a lawsuit involving very large numbers, as monetary compensation. My right of privacy is clear. On pg 26 I have stated, "I have the skills necessary for this work" these words are not to be construed as a legal education rather I have learned the meaning of the words Justice & justifiable, and will argue my case within these meanings. I do further state: the use of latin ( a foreign language) or the use of numbers (as might identify isolated phrases) does not fall within my constitutional rights either nationally or of this state: as evidence the Miranda rights; allow a murderer to go free if a policeman fails to read him/her their rights in a manner which they understand. That I have a right to trial and its remedy: as a citizen of Illinois section 1, section 2, section 12, section 13, and section 23 of the Ill constitution all speak to this right and cause. James F. Osterbur

pg 88-97

starts memorandum in support of motion to dismiss oct 24, 92 (Scanned copy or court) To the attorneys re: Osterbur vs covenant 92-c-1222 the issues involved will be resolved. The words sent by me may appear as "general & vague harangue" to you at this time, but I assure you they are not. Case 92-c-1222 is written with the public in mind, is intent upon empowering the public with concepts for altering specific aspects of medical "business", and written for media "30 second, video segments "as well as talk show formats. The matter is settled then and we shall enter court and media review. Irregardless of the outcome of case 92-c-1222 we shall meet in court. If case 92-c-1222 is dismissed, this and case 92-s-1561 shall be combined into the final case (cause) which will be described as "a case to remove the monopoly of the medical profession from me and from us all. 92-C-1222 & 92-S-1561 shall be my evidence and therefore every word shall be scrutinized closely. From time to time I will send to you the question you will need to answer, that you may be prepared and choose your witness. I do intend to bring forth issues in a timely manner and shall expect early fall as the appropriate time for hearing. You are requested to take the matter seriously. I do intend to allow other cases which clearly show "monopoly" to be included in this action and have included the contract which I will be using. These are cases, not people, which shall be included.

Insofar as my "RIGHT TO TRIAL" I do redirect your attention to the pages titled (the right, as a citizen to confront injustice) a reprint is included. That I received POOR TREATMENT beneath, an acceptable standard, is clearly written: (my own case is as follows, and the review of pleading). That covenant med cent has never made any acknowledgment of my case or cause or person until the letter June 29, 93 and then only when confronted seriously. That case 92-s-1561 is the initial cause for case 92-c-1222 is completely clear. That case was heard 12/3/92. That I am not a lawyer is NOT cause to discredit my case or sufficient reason to confine me to a timetable that is unfair. Those who are private citizens require far more time than those who are paid. The writing "now comes the attempt for adequate judicial intervention, and an examination of judicial process, " clearly show I am working within the law, and : beyond and because of, a simple billing dispute (as initially entered 92-s-1561) this case 92-c-1222 has become very extensive and as such, particularly within the public nature of this case, sufficient time to prepare is not only my right, but my demand. The cause is clear, the evidence is ready 7/21/93 James F. Osterbur

the right, as a citizen to confront injustice

It is the SOLDIER who bought every right, every part, every day that FREEDOM to choose, to be able; describe life as reality, rather than as living someone else's reality. It is only the vietnam war, when the individual, the man or woman was remembered on a simple wall, as this one gave their life, for your freedom. There are NO politics in the death of a soldier, these men and women did NOT have anything to do with why they were there, apart from citizenship! It is written in the bill of rights of this country section 3. That government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation or community;,,,,. It is in these words that men and women went to war, believing what the politicians did say to us all. That soldiers died for the sake of this nation and for the HONORABLE CAUSE to help others. The realities of war are: those with honor, are only a number in the words of a commander, BUT these individuals PAID FOR FREEDOM with BLOOD, SWEAT, AND TEARS! (Those of every war). I have come to court within the blessings of freedom, (to choose peaceful arbitration of what is clearly a public controversy). As an individual citizen I DO CLAIM my right according to the bill of rights section 11: that in controversies respecting property, and in suits between man and man, the ancient trial by jury is preferable to any other, and ought to be held sacred. The cost of a nation is paid by the individual, the reason: to choose "which rights do pertain to them and their posterity, as the basis and foundation of government" (taken from the introduction to the bill or rights).

Pg98

starts with reply of defendant aug 02, 93 REPLY OF DEFENDANT ....in reply to pleadings filed by plaintiff....1. the pleadings ....shows no basis for any relief requested. 2. plaintiff states unacceptable, yet provides no support for this claim either factually or as required by section 2-622 ...3. Given every possible favorable construction, ....fail to state any cognizable cause of action.

Pg 99-103

A reply to 8/2/93 1. The foundation is simple: I/ we have a moral and legal right to contest inappropriate billing. BY ANYONE, including the medical profession. I have clearly shown (the lawyer mailings are proof) covenant med center has NOT dealt with me legally, as they have denied me my right to be heard, regarding said inappropriate billing. The court is then obligated, and my time required for what should have been a very simple matter. The bill in question cannot be construed as voluntary, do to medical realities and as such, NO cause or case exists to state these matters were previously addressed 2. Whatever the plaintiff is able to prove is for a courtroom (trial) to decide. At this moment, section 2-622 does not apply as the fundamental case is: billing rights. It is real however, to expect the amended case as has been previously suggested, shall expand this case accordingly. 3. My rights have been violated and I have repeatedly stated: this must change, that whosoever need to arbitrate their bill, will find it possible to do so, without the need of a courtroom. The cognizable cause of action is: (initially) in part, HARASSMENT. I have been charged money, a bill which I do NOT owe. They have refused to arbitrate, to listen, to accept responsibility, to justify, to clarify, or to accept their responsibility under law. To respectfully allow this matter to be resolved under the jurisdiction of the court. HARASSMENT is warranted by their absolute failure to recognize that "I do have the right to demand justification of the charges (billing) brought against me. They covenant med center, have refused all attempts/ all requests, to formally examine, all attempts to informally examine, and are attempting to derail all attempts to legally examine these actions and this billing in question.

Subsequent to formal legal actions, attempts have been made by collection agency's to collect even though the matter is clearly, legally, pending through the court. HARASSMENT is evident by the simple words: I cannot legally be charged for work, which cannot/ is not/ was not justified, particularly die to a signature made under duress. This entire case has been about equal right, if I can be charged, I have the RIGHT to ask, "what for". And DEMAND AN ANSWER James F. Osterbur 8/16/93

pg 104-112

the change required, by the lack of justice, prompted by inappropriate treatment, the failure of equitable solutions, and the uneducated denial of law; have become the only reasons for my decision to end the search for a fair, gently, and peaceful solution to these problem. It has become NECESSARY to end peaceful arbitration and engage in serious war, through law and justice and justifiable! Although case 92-s-1561 began and ended as a billing dispute, it cannot be said justice was served. Meant as peaceful arbitration over an inappropriate bill, this case began when after many efforts, by the plaintiff, to be heard by the hospital staff failed without the slightest indication, I the plaintiff had any rights, regarding any matter involved. According to the hospital my rights ( cause for complaint) ended upon signature to the admittance form. I did, clearly ask the hospital staff for arbitration (a chance to be heard, indicating I had been treated badly) on several occasions, with different people, each occurrence brought the same result: "I" a patient have no rights, pay the bill at our interest rate, on our schedule, as we see fit! (No hearing, No objection, No complaints PERIOD) . When the letter from covenant med center came indicating: if I did not pay the remaining amount, I felt to be unjust, they would give my name to a collection agency. Herein began the search for true justice: for I paid for services I received at their price: it is for abuse, mistreatment, denial, rejection, slander, and failure I have refused to pay! Clearly, I am the defendant rather than the plaintiff, in this matter, even though I was forced to begin the proceedings. Case 92-ss-1561 began as a billing dispute was enlarged because the billing dispute failed, to become case 92-c-1222. Unfortunately case 92-s-1561 remained but had a purpose. It became my intent to change the billing procedures of the medical profession at large, within case 92-c-1222, as defined within those (these) words. As it became necessary to pronounce at the hearing for case 92-s-1561: the most probable cause for the poverty of my treatment within the emergency room (that began this trial) is the word, attached to MY LIFE and left there, by mercy hospital of urbana, IL now covenant med center; some years ago. WITHOUT MY CONSENT, without any hearing or trial, without the slightest possibility of being heard or the opportunity to give any explanation in my defense, at any time! At the hearing, case 92-s-1561 although clear testimony was given within the court papers; including photocopies of the law, a description of how this law or mandate of the social securities act applies to me and to this case; during my attempt to lay a foundation for cause, I was interrupted by judge einhorn who was clearly about to give judgement, NECESSITATING an end to the reasoning and primary reasons which brought about the amended complaint 92-s-1561. Instead it was required to rely of law! Judge einhorn, declared I don't understand how this law applies, did not allow me to expand, did not declare any contrary law or reason (law) which excluded my claim and made judgement against me. Amended case 92-s-1561 was introduced to provide a quiet arena (the peer review), required by law, and to provide money to cover the debt left by case 92-c-1222 in its previous form. I did not feel it to be prudent to contest the judgment against me considering case 92-c-1222 was /is yet to come. The previous purpose to case 92-c-1222 was merely to engage in matters of public importance, in a public forum, to begin a public debate over the issues as depicted by case 92-c-1222, and to obtain some form of justice regarding my own case. Because the law was rejected, and a peer review is no longer possible, the possibility of a trial without the description attached to me, within my own personal medical files, is/ has become impossible. It is for this reason that case 92-c-1222 is hereby enlarged, to include damages: for failure to provide a forum suitable to the relief of matters such as these $10,000. For injection of drugs against my wishes, lack of attention which resulted in drugs being given, by the emergency room staff $10,000. For the slander and rejection without an examination by the staff heart doctor $1,000,000. For extortion: defined by ; a contract signed under duress, for which no alternative existed beyond this lawsuit, regarding money that was NEVER owed. $1,000,000. For the unlawful victimization of my life through the use of a medical term for which; I was allowed no say, no trial or hearing, no rights of any kind, and which is wrongful defamation of character, slander, demeaning of my life and a clear usurpation of my constitutional right of due process under the law, and violates nearly every section of the bill of rights $7,000,000. For requiring of me to define a large portion of my private life to you and to the public at large or PAY EXTORTION $7,000,000

Be it hereby known: I am the accused, the burden of proof regarding the medical term, I am accused of belongs to covenant med center. These damages are the direct result of judgments by the hospital staff, made without the slightest conception of justice. These damages are sought not a personal gain, rather all but $30,000 (a year's salary0 WILL Be given to christian charities for medical relief. Those who feel the numbers are inappropriate need only look at charges by the medical profession. I will reduce the numbers by whatever percentage the hospital will reduce and maintain their rates.

Pg 113-120

THE ISSUES The foundation of this nation as declared in general congress assembled, July 4, 1776 ......but, when a long train of abuses and usurpation, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such "government" and to provide new guards for their future security...!

The "government" written above is for/ within this instance, exchanged with the words "medical establishment", which has become in this day not unlike the tyrant for which these words were written. This "medical establishment" has invaded this land, not with soldiers, but with a long train of abuses and arrogance with only one goal in mind: to amass the largest fortune possible. In achieving this goal, the people have lost their right to REASONABLE arbitration. To a legitimate trial as provided by the constitution, a trial where one may peacefully seek justice! To a fair and fitting cost regarding services that were never asked for or desired. Rather these services are the result of personal war against outside forces (a sick body) required for survival. To the protection of ourselves from those unfit for this service; by denying our right to a full and impartial patient survey, available for public inspection at all times. To define what is life among the living and what is not (these things are for everyone, they are not for legislatures or doctors). To be equal: there is a limit to what anyone can honestly charge for wages, above and beyond the rest. To retain as a citizen life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness! Men, women, and children have needlessly lost life, limb, and health as well as, their homes, their work, and everything they worked for BECAUSE OF GREED. To an honest wage for honest work, not flat rates where 30 seconds is a charge for $50. Dollars or more. To uncontrollable interest rates and payment schedules in area's where there was no intent to ask (need) these services (accidents & illness are not chosen). To the FAIR appraisal of what is little more than a poor hotel room. To services rendered, not a charge for services never received (if a nurse attends to a patient, that to, should be an hourly rate, or____). To control of people who say "in effect" we want gold trim everywhere, when a simple building would do just as well. To a business that should NEVER have been a business, honest care, people and true needs require situations where money is not on everyone's mind. Rather quality care at a cost everyone can afford (a percentage of income and/ or community service if the community must pay). To law that protects both sides from improper retribution. To realities that deal with, "mistakes will be made". To control the teaching institutions so that doctors may never again control their own competition. To control as well, the experimentation which ______called genetic engineering. To the right of citizenship: to be EQUAL. I have no right according to the hospital, regarding billing. To competition from competing suppliers of services or products. To determine as a NATION the proper conduct for a hospital and the penalty for improper conduct. To admission, without the papers which reek of extortion.

Those who would say, "these things interfere with free enterprise" FAIL the simple test: sickness or accident IS NOT A CHOICE! Free enterprise is a situation where BOTH parties have the undeniable option to enter and accept the business deal or walk away UNHARMED! Let it be further remembered: doctors control their competition, which makes free enterprise IMPOSSIBLE. (Control is based within college admissions, medical exams, and hospital acceptance). And the deliberate fatiguing and control over new interns, for the sole purpose of pressing them into compliance. There are people from every walk of life who contribute to the healing of other people; those who make drugs & surgical instruments, those who make machines, those who transport products, grow food, supply fuel, provide clean area's, housing etc. A doctor is simply the last worker on a very long line of people involved in health care. To show the arrogance of the medical profession" at large, you need only look at the symbol of "the american medical association (ama)/ an association of many doctors. Take an honest look. We live and work together, for the benefit of all, or we will die together, for we are too many for any other way!

Pg121 the medical symbol

Pg 122 the description a case intent upon life in human terms not medical terms not greed or charity, rather truth, equality, and fair play.

The definitions of cause; typed therefore located elsewhere

Pg 123

the prepared statement for trial, typed:

9/2/93 RE: covenant med center vs James F. Osterbur case 92-c-1222 A "table of contents" regarding the attempts for justice, to date. In brief: An emergency: initial cause, can not be negotiated, a medical event. Covenant med: completely unwilling to listen to my complaint, of poor treatment. Refused all attempts, never allowed, even the opportunity, to constructively state the problems encountered, at covenant. Simply pay whatever they say! Price fixing: the opportunity to discuss billing is/ can only be considered: fair trade practice. Failure of covenant: to arbitrate over inappropriate billing is conclusive. Not perfect: covenant med center makes mistakes, this is only one. This situation demanded mediation. Small claims: was considered the most reasonable method to secure a speedy determination of differences. Small claims: proved unsuitable. Amended small claims: sought mediation through a peer review board; trained doctors from different locations to determine fault. This was denied without cause! Even though law was supporting and shown. A minor conflict; over less than $1000 has become an instrument which will alter my life as it proceeds through court. Because arbitration and mediation have been denied to me, to date. This is unfair. Equality: that reality which states, what is fair for you, is fair for me: is the simple framework of this pleading. Monopoly; the legislature has allowed the medical community to police itself: if, I must have a doctor tell/ allow me/ to take another doctor, hospital to court. They themselves have become their own judge & jury. This is an Unconstitutional proceeding. The court: to date refuses to mediate this dispute and as such greater pleadings have been issued, as a warning. Covenant med: only, at the risk of a multi-million dollar lawsuit, made one short, very limited attempt to avoid court. Covenant med, through their lawyer, has requested court proceeding to be enlarged: covenant being directly handed the legal possibilities and being fully forewarned of the content and nature these proceedings would take, have chosen. Summary: this case is defined by its initial title page. The desire for truth & fair play, is evident, as well as, clear, that the plaintiff has worked in good faith toward a fair & reasonable solution. For the record: no attempt has been made to cause covenant med any undue trouble or expense. They have not dealt in good faith with the plaintiff throughout. Any person complaining of heart problems is in no position to sign a binding contract. If conflict arises, it must be dealt with at a later time, dependent upon health. To the court: the issues herein have purposely been established in such a manner, as to cause: the moral rights of a public citizen are greater than insignificant, definitions or interpretations of minor infractions, in either, procedure or law. Justice establishes law as a part of society. Minor infractions divide and destroy when used against the public good. Beyond the smallest doubt each public citizen is worth more than any infraction or procedural difference, and is surly equal to law. The law in NOT greater than the citizen. The law IS PROVIDED by the citizen, capable and intended, to provide justice for all.

LAW is for the common good, not a mechanism, but a human reality, dependent on mutual respect for each person. James F. Osterbur

trial transcript pg 2-8

pg 124-141

my own history in part RE: 92-c-1222 I am required to defend, or to pay extortion, otherwise my own dignity will be trampled. I James F. Osterbur, walk according to my own designs and desires. My purpose is to learn and to live according to my belief in JESUS OUR SAVIOR. I will remind whosoever reads these words: it is not up to you to decide, or describe any aspect of my life, I AM FREE to choose, to define, and to describe; just as you and your life.

To begin, there are those who say I am less capable than they, to define life, its experience, or my own. These argue I do not differentiate accurately between what is real and what is not. I have been described as incapable of reason without their help, and should be dependent upon their drugs. They could NOT be more WRONG! A quick and simple definition of this portion of lawsuit 92-c-1222 is: does anyone have the right to make these types of decisions or does the accused have a right to defend him/herself before a jury? Prior to being subjected to such defamation of character, slander, and so on? This is the only question to be decided within this lawsuit 92-c-1222 concerning me. And IS a question of law (constitutional, and moral, and social)! The question: who determines your right to choose, for your own life: the law ? Social determines, if one person has harmed another. The law moral determines, whether actions by one party were meant to cause harm to another. The law constitutional determines what is right or wrong based upon the words fought for, with BLOOD! Clearly I have not acted in any manner which applies to these laws. Clearly I am the accused. The law states: the accused is INNOCENT until proven guilty. Therefore the question to be decided is: did I harm any other person? Did I willfully intend to cause anyone else harm? Did I or did I not, have the right to pursue my own interests in my own way? These questions are the true and full extent of the law, as it applies to the reality and consequence of, the medical practice of : belittling life through terminology or descriptions from doctors, hospitals, medical personnel, which right or wrong, follow and to an extent control; without so much as a legal complaint or objection by the person most directly involved. Medical files ARE NOT private and personal, before I ever saw people whom I wanted to understand, they had already been given descriptions of me which did not apply, making it impossible to be heard. Medical records are required, but can never be the descriptions of anyones' life. These words apply: to the formal description of monopoly (which is, an exclusive control over people and price). The question begins: where was/is my RIGHT to contest this judgment over me? If such a right exists, why are patients untold? Why; is the question, which goes beyond the description of circumstance, and enters the complexity of human life. It is not a right to know, what any other person defines as their life. It is gossip to guess. The question: does the medical profession have the right to define or is life too complex? Can you be accurately defined; by someone else, and labeled for life thereafter, or is that an exclusive control over people? The reality is simple: does the patient have the right to disagree, legally? Or is whatever the medical profession decree's the last say, irregardless of the patient. REMEMBER THE LAW: the accused is innocent until proven guilty, therefore it may be possible for the medical profession to legally describe someone but NOT without a legal hearing or trial, or RIGHT to appeal. The question here is : yes or no?

Addressing the more complex issues of behavioral traits, thought patterns, and freewill choice comes the decision: who has the right, to live any individual's life? I personally do not agree with the choice of greed, which is the desire for money without cost or right, it is clearly a desire for control (power) over others. The corporate entity of covenant med center adheres to this description throughout this case, to date. Should a corporate entity be allowed control over an individual? Should we (the public), demand control over the corporate entity? Corporation DO NOT provide jobs for people, people provide jobs for people. A corporation is: a few words written and registered legally to describe the activities to be undertaken. The corporate entity of covenant med center describes itself as, "not for profit", does their behavior depict this type of activity, or do they use their status for monetary gain? An examination of their records and billing practices show their ways: does, "not for profit" mean--"profiting on prescriptions, charges beyond costs for rooms, dumping existing structures outside of previous agreements, spending excess money for wages, perks, for a very few at the top management for bonuses? Is that what, "not for profit" means? The question here remains: does an exemption from income taxes entitle the holder: excessive income levels, structures that are "gold-plated" or methods that abuse the public trust? A better description is: an exemption shall produce equitable solutions, in all area's for the giver, and those receiving and be fair, to the public at large. Equitable means: "a fair and level and justifiable method for dealing with each person."Returning to the question of legal practice. Does terminology defined by the medical profession produce legally binding actions upon the individual? If, any term (description ) follows an individual throughout their life, can influence work, social desires, cause preconceptions by family, friend, associate, or people hired. Then it has been inescapably bound to that individual, by those responsible for that description. The question here: legally, who has the RIGHT to describe someone: even the criminal gets a trial! The fundamental issue is not a specific description RATHER it is the legal and specific right, to disagree and be heard, BEFORE being subjected to slander, defamation of character, etc! The medical profession is NOT by itself sufficient to determine what will remain, for the patient, a lifetime. In all area's of human behaviors or illness, what does not affect the public by a test of law, IS NONE of the public's concern, not do these area's allow discretionary terminology by anyone. FREEDOM; is the right to choose! Being subjected to criticism, legal or medical terminology, etc, in area's not the public's concern: clearly define an exclusive control (monopoly) over the individual. The ISSUE; when is it correct, and under what circumstances allowed, for the medical profession or others, to intervene in someone's life ( or the publics)? The more correct answer; is defined by law (social, moral, & constitutional) but may include activities specifically intended to degrade life, for the public.

My fundamental defense to the medical establishment: is most clearly written in constitutional law; that being the bill of rights, section 16; that religion, or the duty which we owe our CREATOR, and the manner of discharging it, can be directed only by reason & conviction, NOT by force or violence; and therefore all men/ women are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience; and that it is the mutual duty of all to practice christian forbearance, love, and charity towards each other. Other sections apply as well.

I do hereby state: the actions and reactions, are "religious" in origin and do define a personal trait being, I desire knowledge regarding life & death issues, and DO pursue this knowledge with an open desire. I view life and death to be sufficient evidence that these matters are IMPORTANT.

What occurs in this quest is not dependant upon what is known, rather departure from the designs and ways of men/ women allow for investigation into the inner realities. These things define SELF, and bring understanding. Wisdom follows. To those who read; beware of how you interpret these words (above). The rules are different. The intensity extreme! You may choose to enter, but you shall NOT choose beyond (how, when, where, what or why)? JESUS does watch over these realities. Those who believe are SAVED before, during, and after, only the literal ACCEPTANCE of your belief is necessary! The rules: there are NO sacrifices to be made!!!! you cannot interpret; the answers will be given in time! You cannot depend upon ANY visual, hearing, or preconceived expectation! ONLY FAITH is to be your guide/ NEVER give up !!!!!!! Prepare in prayer and praise To JESUS DO NOT FEAR/ BELIEVE IN JESUS!

As to my own experience, I have made many mistakes, REPENTED, and went forward. Even the little things are EXTREMELY important. If you fail, GET UP, REPENT (i will do my best, not to let this happen again, and make repairs) and GO FORWARD! Simply put: learn, do, & live! DO NOT try, you will fail; DO your best, you will do well! Of the many things I have learned: JESUS HAS SAVED EVERYONE, That work is done! They need only to accept their salvation, as real! As important! As truly desirable! And live accordingly! Never sacrifice, not for love either, love needs no sacrifice. NEVER act or react in ways that do not CLEARLY identify JESUS OUR SAVIOR IS ALIVE! BE AT PEACE with your own humanity! Remember what you do have, not what you don't. Do not be concerned about any portion or part of an existence, banished from your LIFE BY THE FATHER THROUGH JESUS!

NEVER interpret, you either understand or you don't! Believe as if your life depended upon JESUS OUR SAVIOR!

Regarding my own medical history, I DO DEFEND as follows: as it regards two false teeth, which I purposely knocked out; having entered into an unfamiliar experience (by choice), and under NO duress to do so, I went examining. The cost, to disregard how others saw me. Through the first minutes or hours the images/ words proved false and I was at ease. It was at this point an image challenged me to knock out those front teeth and I turned and forcefully declared: JESUS gave his life for me and I WILL NOT sacrifice anything! The image replied; those are false teeth and defile because they are false. It was at this point that trouble began. The first mistake was defending anything. I/ we DO have the right to choose what we believe (right or wrong) & that which is of the FATHER Does not Need to be defended by you or I!

The instant I had turned to answer, I had also entered within the journey to come. The first battle was over, who owned this body (my body) and what right did I have to use or alter anything regarding this body. My answer (at the time) was, I DON'T KNOW. The body or this "house" wherein I live is, without doubt, a gift to me by our CREATOR! The question: whose body is it truly, and is there a boundary? An open statement; IF there had not been false teeth, I assure you with NO doubt, real teeth would NOT have been removed. My answer at that time was, "I better not take any chances and removed the false teeth". A BAD MISTAKE! This body IS OURS it use with complete freedom! False teeth are OK. You / I will never be asked to sacrifice ANYTHING by OUR FATHER!!

For me, the journey continued through the realities of my own choices. Most important that I must ACCEPT the faith I have in JESUS AS OUR SAVIOR, Beyond any doubt, and live accordingly.

Included in the first medical report is an experience from earlier life. Confronted by three who made threatening gestures I moved to the middle of a small crowd of people, one came forward and again moved/ acted in threatening ways. I was able to gain time to search for an answer and remembered, "the bible writes "love thy enemy" and at they moment chose to do so. SUDDENLY "in the vision of my mind" a light like no other appeared above me, coming down to me, and I needed only to raise my arms to receive it. As I began a voice from nowhere said, "what if your wrong"? And I thought, and the light stopped, I then assumed my opportunity was over, "too late", but the light remained until I became hesitant and then it returned. I was angry, sad, happy, etc for a very short time thereafter. Angry that I let the influence of others affect me, sad that so great an opportunity was lost, happy that I was noticed, and more. I am sorry to say poor/ wrong choices ensued. Not every situation can be dealt with through love, but everyone should have their dignity left intact.

The final journey written of me in medical records concerns the 23^rd psalm. The question being: "is this correct"? Because my answer is different, from the church, as a step by step walk through the descriptions given by the psalm. Compared to the rest of the bible, it will be withheld. My purpose is NOT to disrupt, but I will write; the 23^rd psalm is a part of the old testament, when JESUS came, the old testament changed and JESUS BECAME OUR SAVIOR! NOT the 23^rd psalm.

Regarding the experience to me, I entered willingly, the journey required more than expected but, did not harm me, at its end I was given the choice: my pride or a serious mistake. I CHOSE to throw away pride!

To these I will add one other event, some years later while traveling many, many, little things began to go wrong. After/ by the third day I became certain something was wrong with me, looking closely, I found I was turning cold (not being as compassionate as I want to be, rather reacting to the ways I had been treated). Upon realizing my life as I have chosen it to be, and has been given to me to be, needed fixing, I quickly returned to people are important, and I do desire to be accepted. If, you do not live within/ you live outside.

These answers are NOT question. These answers are the FREEDOM of my soul, to inquire within my choice, my life, and my experience. These answers are my own, and do NOT need approval! These answers do demonstrate REASONING AND LOGIC, whether there is agreement over their validity or not. IF you can not fully define life, & death, & eternity and produce demonstrative results that clearly, undeniably (in terms the average person can identify with) provide evidence for your position ( whatever that may be); then the beliefs', my own ways, and the issues they represent, can not be denied or ridiculed, or used in any way against me. As that is/ would be slander, defamation or character, harassment and so forth! This is a clear warning The question: who decides, who determines, the soul? James F. Osterbur