THE DEFINITIONS OF CAUSE

I, James F. Osterbur, do hereby declare the cause and reason and situations, which have contributed to the search for individual , as well as, Societal JUSTICE; to insure such a journey need NOT be required of Me or any other person again.

Having entered into an emergency room of Covenant Medical Center experiencing physical distress, I, am completely dissatisfied with the results. This CASE is Not, Nor has it been, concerned with POOR TREATMENT, AS HAS been received by Me (EXCEPT), as it relates to improper billing practice.

This Case is a Clear description of unlawful, unreasonable, and UNCONSTITUTIONAL billing practices, of the medical profession as a whole.

As it pertains to unconstitutional, every attempt necessary to establish an HONEST relationship between the constitutional DECREE; WE THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure Domestic tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare,------do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America! And the Reality of UNREASONABLE, UNJUST, AND UNLAWFUL practice as described within the first, third, fourth, and fifteenth amendments, of the BILL OF RIGHTS. Consequent to this action, as applies to jurisdiction are the, second amendment, and seventh amendment.

THE CHARGE IS MADE, (UNCONSTITUTIONAL), because of the Realities involved, whereby; those individuals in need of life-threatening services can Not, protect themselves as any other citizen might, that contractual demands for payment, irregardless of a persons' ability to pay, as BASED within life-threatening medical terms, are UNJUST. That NO ONE ENTERS INTO SEVERE MEDICAL EMERGENCY BY CHOICE, therefore the claim, "you accepted the debt, now you must pay" is clearly ERRONEOUS! That medical emergencies are matters of invading forces and therefore DUE the protection of, the Citizenry at large (government).

Further it is hereby suggested: The medical hospital, as an entity, DOES effectively constitute a monopoly within the contest and commerce of medical emergencies, etc, (a patient in severe medical trauma, CANNOT ARGUE, in any manner, with regard to payment for services rendered, NOR, is there any adequate forum for the average reasonable citizen to complain to, seek billing adjustments from, or describe the adequacy of treatment received, for the public good. A list of billing costs, written (displayed) within the emergency room DOES NOT constitute good faith, nor does the court system in general, provide such a forum as it requires the average citizen to contend with a legal professional (lawyer), skilled in a specialized field, or to hire an alternate lawyer at prices far exceeding the average persons ability to pay.

While there may be evidence to show neither government nor hospital must provide a, "Fair and level playing field", there is Constitutional basis for, insuring domestic tranquillity, and securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.

The stated purpose of this Judicial exercise: To provide realistic billing, where the patient has RIGHTS, EQUAL TO, the hospital, doctor, etc!

The expected Resolution with regard to: How it may be so?

First: The requirement of a Public Forum between hospital and patient whereby the patient may contend over billing or treatment within a, "FAIR and LEVEL playing field", NOT the domain of obscure legal doctrine, RATHER, a peoples' court, where the average citizen may seek and obtain Justice through his/her own actions! Anyone unwilling to make public disclosure is unwelcome, payment to either party is limited to the bill in question, or part thereof. An exception may be granted to public disclosure by committee.

Second: Is to establish a "LINE OF DEFENSE", for the citizen at war with his/her own body. Meaning reasonable treatment in every arena, including billing practices.

Third: When at war, "Individually", or as a Nation, the Constitution allows and requires a national defense, as written within the Articles of Confederation, article 3, "The said states hereby severally enter into a firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against ALL FORCE offered to , or attacks made upon them, or any of them on account of religion, sovereignty, trade or ANY PRETENSE WHATEVER!

Although it may be argued these words were intended state to state: The REALITY of the United States of America, as intended, by the founders is clearly stated within the constitutional words: WE THE PEOPLE....!

Further declared as an individuals right to be protected from all methods of tyranny is the words: A Declaration by the Representatives of the United States of America in general congress assembled July 4, 1776.

Among these words: He has refused his assent to laws the MOST WHOLESOME AND NECESSARY, for the public good.

And, according to their need and the intensity of their plight the last paragraph of these words do admit: We, therefore, the Representatives of the United States of America, in general Congress assembled, appealing to the supreme JUDGE of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, DO, in the name, and by the authority of the good people of these colonies,....and, for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of DIVINE providence, WE MUTUALLY PLEDGE TO EACH OTHER, OUR LIVES, OUR FORTUNES, AND OUR SACRED HONOR!

The words above DO speak to the mind and heart with words of HONOR, and respect for each persons situation. The words Do transcend unto the Realities of this day and time, and are needed to rectify the wrongs of this day! Within the scope of humanity and society and Justice are:

Why should an individual involved by chance, in an accident NO fault of their own, be required to lose every possession.

Why should an individual who has worked hard for every penny be bankrupt within a weeks hospital stay.

Why should the sanctity of body, mind, and the blessings of Citizenship be granted only to those with money; "I", consider it every individuals Right, as a citizen, to FAIR AND EQUITABLE treatment, especially as it regards LIFE AND LIMB AND REASONABLE HEALTH, a DUTY, of the Nation as a whole.

NOT experimental medicine

NOT replacing body parts

NOT Life support beyond which will restore a healthy person

NOT financial immunity

RATHER

The fixing of broken bones, emergency room procedures, pregnancy throughout, and so on, throughout every facility, at a PRICE that EVERY CITIZEN CAN AFFORD!

Fourth: is the establishment of a FAIR AND EQUITABLE cost of services rendered. TO BE FAIR, that cost can ONLY be determined by income (and shall become, NOT MORE THAN_______percent, of the average, of _______years income, apportioned to possessions).

Indeed every trip to the medical facility should be charged, as a relationship, to wealth. Hospitals Must be given Strict LAWS regarding, How much PROFIT will be allowed, (particularly with regard to medicine). Last doctors and hospitals may NO LONGER charge flat rates, rather WE should be charged according to service rendered, (IF the doctor stays only 5 minutes, then I expect to be charged for NO more than, the time I received, within the context of, SO MUCH PER HOUR), Just like, the VAST MAJORITY of the POPULACE.

Finally: There should be opportunity for a patient log, so to speak, displayed at the most prominent entry point which indicates the following;

DOCTOR type of care Patients response

good bad money etc

Patients are unnamed: Done as a statistical service to the community at large.

When life becomes a battle for health, society itself must view, that life, EVEN as a National symbol, for every Nation is the sum of its people. Clearly evidenced that, this is so, even at the highest levels, through three administrations, by the term and Reality of the words, "AMERICAN HOSTAGE"!

Has not the current administration spoken to the distress of a people invaded, where possessions were taken, where people were thrown out of their own houses. He and the Congress have indeed said so, spending lives and Billions to rectify this very wrong, as described by the, "IRAQI WAR'!

THE PLEADING

A preface: I do NOT look for an audience, I do not beg another to help me, I do not fear death. Rather the realities of stroke, mental and physical handicaps, the possibilities of dependancy, all gather to say, (if Not for yourself then for those who would be asked to help).

To the degree that, I must pursue an injustice that confronts me directly, and may be considered to confront us all, the Bill of Rights says it best, (with one word added), section 15: That NO free government, or the blessings of liberty, can be preserved to any people, but by a firm adherence to (the reality of) Justice, Moderation, temperance, frugality and virtue, and by frequent recurrence to fundamental principles.

A CASE

INTENT UPON

LIFE IN HUMAN TERMS

NOT

MEDICAL TERMS

NOT

GREED OR CHARITY

RATHER

TRUTH, EQUALITY, AND FAIR PLAY

MY OWN CASE, IS AS FOLLOWS

1. A possible cause for physical disturbance; In the spring of 1989, my ears became damaged due to a farming accident, this as a consequence, eliminated most of my income source, my ability to travel, and much of the possibilities of social gatherings. A year later when the physical problems erupted, my ears were still no better. Although I would not say life was totally stressful, there was concern.

2. Prior to the day I asked to be taken to the emergency room, for several weeks, I had been feeling minor chests pains on an ever increasing schedule. The day before I arrived at Covenant, I attempted to "work the pains out", by hard physical labor, It did not work. Riding a bicycle thereafter became a labored experience (not a usual occurrence).

3. The morning of that day after climbing stairs, my heart felt as though it stopped for a minute. The remaining effect was a physical weakening. I walked back down the stairs a few minutes later and said to my parents, "I think I had a heart attack". I felt strange.

4. An hour or so later I asked to be taken to the emergency room.

5. At Covenant hospital I was given a paper to sign and was left sitting in the waiting area for about twenty minutes. A person exiting asked and I replied, I feel bad. Exhibit A

6. Finally two nurses put me in a small treatment room, as soon as I was on their table, they turned away. Attempting to find help, I said to them, "I feel like there's an elephant sitting on my chest", they ignored me completely. I, will grant an elephant to be an exaggeration, it was far more like a 200 lb man, sitting on my chest, but at this point I was attempting to say to those who were suppose to help, "this is important".

7. After fifteen minutes or so, most of which I was completely alone, behind closed doors, without any monitoring equipment, of any kind, I was moved to a main treatment room.

8. Upon being helped on that table clip holders, for their monitor, were placed on my chest, everyone then left, without saying a word, during the entire procedure NOR inviting any word from me.

9. During the fifteen minutes or so in the small treatment room the pressure on my chest subsided. I still felt very poorly.

10. While in the main treatment room a man with some type of heart monitor came in attached the machine to my toes and produced a five foot graph of heart rhythms (I asked, he nodded).

11. A short time later I saw a new person holding what I assume to be that same five foot strip of paper through the window dividing the treatment room and the nurses station.

12. My dad came in at about that time, asked what it was and I said heart attack, for lack of a better explanation. While in this treatment room with me the new person came in announced he was a heart doctor; (and stated) I had NO right or reason to be there, I should get out of here, and there was NO WAY HE would treat or examine me. He never came within five feet of me, and left immediately after the above speech, without allowing me a single word. Exhibit B

13.A short time later my dad left, and within five minutes or so beyond that suddenly to my SURPRISE four people came rushing in surrounding me and began to get out needles and medicine of many kinds, in a hurry. I SAID, in an audible and clear voice, "DON'T do it, I am feeling some better (certainly no worse)". One nurse replied to me, "I wish we didn't But we have to", at which point medicine was injected in my arm, some type of patch applied to my chest, and I don't know what else. I was not in a physical condition to strongly object.

14. When the medicines were completed they all stepped back and waited as if to see a distinct response, an immediate highly noticeable response was not forth coming and one person directed his attention to the machine behind me and exclaimed, "it must have been this clip", at which time the clip was moved and each went

back to the nurses' station. I slowly began to feel worse. I did not at any time within the treatment room make any sudden moves, or drastically alter positions.

15. Approximately five minutes or so after this took place a lady came in declaring herself to be a psychiatrist who just happened to be in the hospital and was asked by the doctor to see me. We conversed for a short time and when again asked I described my pain as a heart attack. Exhibit C

16. Without a single word I was then wheeled out of the treatment room and moved to the eighth floor of the hospital.

17. Within the hospital, the first nurse to attend to me, stated I should tell her how I felt and any changes I experienced. I began to say to her, my body felt nervous, (not myself, but my body as completely apart from me). She instructed me to take a pill, I told here I don't like drugs, she considered it important and I agreed.

18. The pill had no effect and I think I had another one. A second nurse came in and at about this time it began to feel like a circle of needles were positioned above my heart in addition to a general nervousness relating to my body.

19. At this point the second nurse called, by phone, the doctor and asked him if she could give me a shot, he apparently OK'd it. I argued for a short time that "I don't like drugs", she said it was important and feeling bad, I finally accepted believing it might be the lesser of my two or three apparent choices.

20. She injected what looked like a lot of medicine and immediately asked, "feel better", I replied NO, WORSE AND DOUBLED UP.

21. Roughly twenty minutes later I sat up in bed and told the nurse I am finally feeling much better.

22. Through the night another nurse tried to help me down the hall

at my request, it was too much and I returned to the room.

23. Another nurse brought cotton for my ears as the fan in the room hurt and couldn't be shut off.

24. Early the next morning the doctor who refused me came in for a very fast check on the patient next to me. As he raced back out of the door he glanced at me once and said, "YOU can leave", I saw no more of him (I would have left anyway).

25. I got up some time after that and told the nurses to check me out and then waited for two hours or so in the waiting room of that floor, for my parents to come.

26. I did Not feel well and did experience several gas attacks particularly after eating, I never had a gas attack before.

27. Roughly two weeks after this hospital treatment during which time I experienced numerous gas attacks and heart pains. My remedy was walking, heart massage, as many as four aspirin at a time (taken at once) and various medicines supposed to reduce gas, (NONE of which helped at all). At about two weeks I had an enormous cramp in my leg shortly after going to bed. I attempted to get up to "walk it out", and fell after two steps, it quickly passed but it was a serious pain.

28. At about three weeks after my hospital visit, I was experiencing considerable trouble with tightness of chest, I associate with gas, for hours at a time. Symptoms limited to this but recurrent each day, for roughly one week, approximately 12 hours a day.

29. At one specific occasion at the end of the aforementioned week, the evening began without much discomfort, HOWEVER, roughly 11:00 that night. I felt distinctly as if a hole or valve at the top of my stomach had opened for a short time and a pressurized fluid or gas escaped into the area above the stomach, no pain was particularly evident at that time, however an hour or so later I began to feel very BAD. It felt to me as if a blockage existed on the top and toward the back of my heart. I felt specifically as if my heart was working hard and pressure was building up inside my body (heart) at this point of my body. It became serious and I was certain damage was about to occur, finally the blockage broke free, it seemed to me in pieces, and then the pressure was released. I still felt very poor but MUCH BETTER than the minutes previously.

30. My physical condition since leaving the hospital as previously described was poor, but for weeks after this night my physical condition was pathetic, everything required a very slow pace, or not at all.

31. At about 50 days from leaving the hospital, the hospital bill required attention. I argued UNFAIR, they said collectively, "Pay Up, because there is nothing YOU can do about it", at their price, at their interest rate, according to their schedule.

32. I made it clear they could have $1000.00 or $100.00 a month to $1000.00. They finally accepted one hundred dollars a month, still insisting on the full amount.

33. I was not up to fighting further. My condition improved little by little until the next spring (a year later) when I finally started feeling, like my old self. Thinking it over, I began to work in the old ways without careful attention. After about two hours of garden work, suddenly many of the old pains from this experience returned.

34. It is over a year beyond that time, and I still experience gas and chest pains on an infrequent basis. My ability to pass a stress test is seriously limited and the hospital is demanding money after several months of NO word.

REVIEW OF PLEADING

Review 1. Indicating probable cause due to stress.

Review 2. Determination something was indeed wrong and was not going away without a high probability of something worse.

Review 3. Does NOT indicate a massive stroke, ONLY a worsening of the aforementioned illness.

Review 4. A situation wherein ANY PRUDENT PERSON would seek assistance.

Review 5. The admittance, showing competency to sign, and a willingness to accept a reasonable service and cost, by the patient. Acceptance of a patient (I), by the hospital, AN AGREEMENT BY THE HOSPITAL, to provide a doctor, an examination, and a diagnosis BASED upon that examination. Exhibit A

Review 6. A DEMONSTRATED desire to talk, specifically about my physical situation. A complete lack of interest, at least to the extent that (I) as a patient, had anything to say. The description and verbal plea for assistance. The Reality of asking for, accepting payment for, and a situation wherein (I) felt it necessary to exaggerate to a limited degree, in an effort to receive some resemblance of care, as to what the average citizen would consider appropriate.

Review 7. Apart from no visible sign of care EVEN AFTER a verbal plea, I was left alone behind closed doors without the slightest examination, questioning, or listening!

Review 8. Again I was placed in the hands of professional emergency staff and again NO ONE spoke to me, or asked any question of me, NOR did they do any more for me than hook up their monitor and assist me onto their table. No examination of any kind. This time I did not try to initiate a response or ask for help as before, it seemed there was no one to listen.

Review 9. My condition was finally beginning to improve somewhat by this time, it had been roughly two hours from the time, at home when the pain had increased, till this point. I view that as COMPLETELY APART from any hospital care, as I had received NONE.

Review 10. I next was hooked to a machine by a silent man at my toes and it is assumed the machine examined me. The man did not declare himself a doctor, made no comment whatever, stood at my toes for thirty seconds and then left.

Review 11. I was again alone for several minutes, still feeling very poor looking toward the direction I was pointed to.

Review 12. I again described my complaint to the only one listening, my dad. Shortly after the hospitals doctor came in and demonstrated what I believe to be: Prejudicial of me and/or my life. I do believe this prejudice was intentional and in my mind reckless (at least to my physical well-being) and it offended me seriously and was/is a direct INSULT to my life. Of the few cases similar in part, to my own specific treatment: The case of Delicco vs. Trinidad area Health ass'n, Seems relevant in that refusal by hospital employees for reasonable action, is NOT unheard of.

I do also believe this act perpetrated upon me, in such a situation, is the beginning of a case for NEGLIGENCE. I was accepted as a patient, WHO WOULD BE BILLED, I was found within the emergency treatment room, complaining of heart problems. I was not only refused an examination, I was told to leave in NO uncertain terms. I was given no opportunity to talk or respond in ANY manner and the entire episode was such, that my dad developed a diminished view of my complaint, and me.

I do believe the treatment I received was FAR LESS than any REASONABLE PERSON would view as professional or acceptable. I do further believe, "the act speaks for itself". If this were standard practice, who would go?

I do understand that some emotional immunity is required of the medical professional, BUT I did NOT come asking for emotion, ONLY a Realistic examination, by a Doctor. What I got exceeded any possibility of not wanting to be emotionally involved, I got NO involvement, EXCEPT for, "How will the BILL be paid"!

Review 13. Speaks to my physical condition remaining fairly constant, even improving, that I was surprised, even bewildered by four people suddenly rushing in. When it became clear to me I was about to receive medicine, I DISTINCTLY remember, Bluntly saying NO I'm feeling better, DON'T do it, (My physical ability to defend myself, at that time was to poor to offer other than verbal resistance).

That I was heard and understood before the medicines, is CLEAR in the Nurses' reply. That I was mentally aware and competent to refuse: Speaks for itself. IF anyone on the Nursing staff had attended me, at any time, there would have been time to establish what I, deemed to be Reasonable care, and the resulting medication would NOT have occurred, (unless ABSOLUTELY necessary). I DO BELIEVE, "It was NOT necessary at this time". Of interest, since I faced the nurses station, there were at least four Nurses standing there apparently doing nothing except watching the monitor throughout this ordeal.

Review 14. Indicates a Complete dependance upon a single machine, a failure to communicate with me, a medical treatment as a result of a machine malfunction, without the benefit of HUMAN involvement, NONE of which I had any control over whatsoever. The doctor made no appearance before, during, or after, this occurrence. An ABANDONMENT.

Review 15. A further description of my basic plight, and a licensed professional whose clinical observations, according to my file, declare me competent, insofar as my sanity is concerned.

Throughout this case, my cause and my plea is simply FAIR AND EQUITABLE TREATMENT! Further stated: This case is about Billing, Duty, and Justice.

Review 16. Written to show the emergency staff had simply discarded any responsibility over my situation: That I was treated improperly is CLEARLY EVIDENT within the hospital file itself. The Doctor P. Thopiah, md writes in effect He's Fine; even though he never came within five feet of me.

IF according to the Doctors writing (I) was physically alright, WHY was I given Heparin, a serious drug for heart patients?

This simple inconsistency would seem to indicate: SOMETHING IS IMPROPER, within this file! Particularly as it is viewed within this file, I repeatedly said, "I don't like drugs, I don't take drugs, I have NEVER EXPERIMENTED with drugs".

Another among many points of contention (discharge Instruction record), follow up appointment, chart indicates, one week! NO mention to me of any kind regarding return visit, from any staff or doctor. Exhibit D

Review 17. I have NO complaint here Except for; the REALITY of how much did the emergency room contribute to my pain, or cause this next specific set of occurrence with regard to my body.

Review 18. Showing medical symptoms (NOT a heart attack per se), RATHER symptoms of physical problems related to a serious medical problem.

Review 19. Again indicates NO MEDICATION unless absolutely necessary.

Review 20. NO complaint here, the Nurse did what she could for me AND more importantly I did agree to this medicine with reservation, but Agreed. I do NOT complain of these Nurses treatment of me in the general hospital, at least, they heard my complaint. How necessary, I don't know BECAUSE I have no way to judge if strictly physical, OR the RESULT of improper treatment within the emergency room (the medicine previously administered, without my consent)!

Review 21. An improvement from awful.

Review 22. Indicating a seriously weakened physical condition.

Review 23. Evidence to ear damage mentioned at the beginning as to probable cause.

Review 24. Indicating abandonment to the degree His name appears on my file as my doctor (EVEN THOUGH HE never came closer than five feet to me, AND apart from this never spoke to me EXCEPT as described in #12 of these pleadings. Acknowledgment that He knew it was me; even from ten feet away He couldn't stop or slow his pace, or acknowledge me, except to say, "LEAVE".

Review 25. Determination to leave. Upon leaving my words to the nurse were, "Check me out", Acknowledging my entire stay from emergency room to that moment was 21 hours. Agitation seems obvious, that overall care was insufficient; although NO COMPLAINT is registered against the nursing staff of the general hospital, eighth floor.

Review 26. Continuing physical problems beyond hospital, at first limited to excess gas.

Review 27. Beginning of more serious problems

Review 28. Symptoms and refusal to seek medical treatment.

Review 29. Heart problems NOT massive heart failure BUT SERIOUS PROBLEMS. REFUSAL TO SEEK TREATMENT, ENDURED!

Review 30. Problems directly from my previous complaint.

Review 31. Refusal to admit ANY RESPONSIBILITY for poor treatment or worse, Collectively "WE WANT MONEY"! Exhibit F

Review 32. Acknowledgment that I had received treatment on the eighth floor, that resembled professional care. REFUSAL to pay for improper treatment.

Review 33. Ongoing problems associated with refusal, rejection, use and ABUSE within the initial visit.

Review 34. Still problems; SUDDEN demand for money.

It is my belief, the Emergency room procedures, for my life, were below a reasonable standard of care. It is my belief, the pains felt, which originally brought me to the hospital were directly connected to the pain and suffering experienced later on, the partial effects of which are still with me. It is also my belief, the medicine given to me against my will, may have aggravate my situation. It is a Reality, memories of my treatment in the emergency room kept me from seeking further medical treatment.

Now comes the attempt for adequate Judicial Intervention.

I. As had been stated: If covenant medical center insisted upon further payment, beyond the $1200.00 already paid, (without so much as an indication of any kind they or anyone at the hospital had heard my complaint) We would go to Court! Exhibit G

II. I filed in small claims court in the amount of $969.26, the remainder of their bill; Content merely to end this money disagreement. I filed in the manner instructed by the staff of the small claims court and awaited, "MY DAY IN COURT'!

III. The court date was 10:00 AM on a monday. The saturday immediately preceding the court date I received a letter through common mail from the law office of Thomas, Mamer, and Haughey, stating: the requirements of section 2-622 of the Illinois code of Civil procedure (Illinois Revised statutes, Chapter 110, paragraph 2-622) had not been met by me (Even though, I filed exactly as I was told to file, and at the time I was told) AND in accordance with section 2-622(G)l, the Defendant is entitled to dismissal under section 2-619 of the code of civil procedure, AND payment for the defendants incurred costs. Exhibit Q

IV. The letter stated I had not filed an affidavit, so I wrote one that saturday, and appeared in Court that monday, personal affidavit in hand, plus two of the letters I had previously sent to Covenant medical center. Exhibits J,K,L,M

V When it was my turn to approach the bench, their attorney stood up and immediately made a motion to dismiss, I had said nothing to this point, when asked by the Judge, I reported I received their letter on the saturday, prior to. He contemplated for a moment and then said: "I will put the case aside for ninety days, (which was to give me time to get an affidavit), it's the least you deserve." Then He told me I must have an affidavit from a medical doctor, and the matter was over. Exhibit H

VI I next went to the doctor I had received treatment from as a child with a simple one page statement which I was asking for, and a one page statement describing my complaint. He refused through his nurse. I then went seeking other doctors or teachers (as the law allows) and found NO one. Exhibits N,O

VII Upon looking more closely at the law requiring these things the following is noted: In any action,_________the plaintiff shall file an affidavit________. 1. That the affiant has consulted and reviewed the facts of the case with a health professional_________(and obtained an affidavit from him/her), clearly identifying the plaintiff and the reasons, "for the reviewing health professionals' determination", that a reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action exists,_______, BUT information which would identify the reviewing health professional may be deleted from the copy so attached. Then again in 2-622 (3)

3.(a-h). REQUIRES the health professional to be judge and jury regarding this affidavit and this plaintiff, and this case.

These words are grounded in statement 3(e),_________the right to depose and examine any and all reviewing health professionals. IF, the health professional is DUPED by the plaintiff or evidence presented, to him/her, liability could be imposed.

An Examination of Judicial process.

Review I. The decision describing a NEED for Honest Intervention between two parties. The reality, "NO DEAL can be struck without an EQUAL AND FAIR AND LEVEL playing field.

Review II. The supposed remedy, clearly indicating a lack of revenge, a complete willingness to pay a REASONABLE, (EVEN EXCESSIVE) SUM. Usage of GOVERNMENT PROVIDED STAFF, THEIR METHODS, AND THE EXPECTATION OF A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL HEARING.

Review III. Intervention of my right to DUE PROCESS, that I, a citizen of these United States, having followed all applicable rules as a citizen might, that I have sought to call for evidence and prepared my own, that a trial might show MY RIGHT and MY CASE, to be JUST: Clearly shows My Right to due process according to the Bill of Rights, section 11, has been tampered with. And Further shows, the lack of a complete legal education, CAN make me liable for costs BEYOND ANY possible description of JUSTICE.

Review IV. Will indicate the desire to be FAIR, prompt, and complete as any citizen might.

Review V. Indicates NO trial or portion thereof was commenced, no hearing or pleading held. Clearly as well, the lawyer for the defense (in effect, laughing at me), attempting to use a hidden law (inappropriate and unlawful), to complete a MOCK TRIAL even to the point of charging ME money for a trial that wasn't!

Further: Within the words held dearly by this Nation; "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain INALIENABLE RIGHTS; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The Reality of this type of "justice", is NOT Justice, Rather it is even against the very call and Nature of the Constitution and the men who fought and DIED to protect OUR BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS.

It is clearly NOT the judges' fault, in this matter, for He must uphold the law, the blame then falls to state government, as well as Federal.

Review VI. Clearly shows the difficulty and impoverishment of the average citizen, intent upon Justice, given the yoke placed upon us all.

That a health professional may not wish to be involved in a situation which could be libelous is understandable. That in relation to the words given by Me, for their view, it is apparently FAR TOO MUCH TO ASK OF ANY IN THE MEDICAL PROFESSION. Thereby denying every patient Due Process under the law.

Review VII. That my Right to due process is in serious jeopardy within such an imprisonment of the Bill of Rights, section 11.

That this law MUST be abolished as it not only invites, BUT Requires a health professional to be sought and paid: thereby eliminating my Constitutional Right to defend Myself; and to call for trial on and because and within the evidence at hand. The state has effectually taken away my right as a citizen to due process and given it to another.

The worst, may be , of Ill revised statute chapter 110, paragraph 2-622, is the clear temptation of medical men and women to Go Ahead, be involved,.....AND then making that health professional libelous and at Risk professionally If the plaintiff does not win the case.

THE REALITY OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW IS: WHO, HAS THE RIGHT TO DECIDE?

Every Nation is an assembly of people who by Nature, situation, and Environment, have come together to decide; How, WE may best live among each other.

A Nation is commenced when the VAST MAJORITY, HAVE AGREED, to the words and actions which are MOST IMPORTANT to each Individual.

This in itself is a recognition, that some smaller differences in men/women will be ignored, and in return, LAWS, (which is the literal decision to live in PEACE) will be established. PEACE and FREEDOM and EQUALITY, are the HONEST AND TRUE REWARD for JUSTICE (just laws).

The founders of this Nation made clear in their own words, what they were willing to FIGHT AND DIE for. These are most eloquently stated within state and federal Constitutions, some of which are: We, therefore, the representatives of the people,....

and also, We the people.......Do ordain and established;...and so on.

STATE CONSTITUTIONS

Colorado article II Bill of Rights section 1, vestment of political power. ALL political power is vested in and derived from the people; all government, of right, originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.

Georgia preamble: To perpetuate the principles of free government, insure justice to all, preserve peace, promote the interest and happiness of the citizen and of the family, and transmit to posterity the enjoyment of liberty,......

Idaho Declaration of Rights, section 1: All government, of right, originates with the people, is founded on their will alone, and is instituted to protect the rights of the individual and for the good of the whole. Its only legitimate ends are to secure justice for all, preserve peace, protect the rights, and promote the happiness and general welfare of the people. The rights enumerated in this article are inalienable by the state and shall be preserved inviolate by the state.

Maryland Declaration of Rights, article 1; That all Government of right originates from the people, is founded in compact only, and instituted solely for the good of the whole; and they have, at all times, the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their form of government in such manner as they may deem expedient.

Massachusetts A Constitution or form of Government, the end of the institution, maintenance and administration of government, is to secure the existence of the body-politic, to protect it, and to furnish the individuals who compose it, with the power of enjoying in safety and tranquility their natural rights, and the blessings of life; and whenever these great objects are not obtained, the people have a right to alter the government , and to take measures necessary for their safety, prosperity and happiness. The Body-Politic is formed by a voluntary association of individuals: It is a Social compact, by which the whole people covenants with each citizen, and each citizen with the whole people, that all shall be governed by certain Laws for the common good. It is the duty of the people, therefore, in framing a Constitution of government, to provide for an equitable mode of making laws, as well as for an impartial interpretation, and a faithful execution of them; that every man may, at all times, find his security in them. We, therefore, the people of Massachusetts, acknowledging, with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe, in affording us, in the course of his providence, an opportunity, deliberately and peaceably, without fraud, violence or surprise, or entering into an original, explicit, and solemn compact with each other......Massachusetts.

Wisconsin Declaration of Rights article 1 Equality; inherent rights, section 1 All people are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights; among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to serve these rights, governments are instituted deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

IT IS THE JOB, AND THE DUTY, AND THE HONOR, of Government to uphold, defend, and regulate according to the will of the people. These words written as Constitutional law DO HEREBY DECLARE, what is expected from the Government, of this Nation, by its PEOPLE; IF IT IS NOT SO, then the Constitutions, state of federal, have no use or purpose whatsoever!

Part II Provisions of Existing Constitutions Chapter IX: The written Constitution and its Bill of Rights (An constitutional conventions pp 610-611 fourth edition)

The United States has made many a contribution to the theory and practice of modern politics. Among these by no means the least is the written constitution. Developed during the throes of the Revolution, one hundred and thirty eight years ago, it, and its maker the convention, have been the chief means through which democracy has made its demands and fixed them in the law of the land. A Convention, democratically organized, voices the will of the people. This will, formulated into the fundamental law, is a Guarantee of Life and Liberty, and a surety against governmental injustice and tyranny.

From: Model for a new Constitution. A Mr. Tugwell, a politician of some prominence in the 1960s' wrote; "that the institutions we now possess were hammered out and struggled over by our predecessors, as well as ourselves; that the customs and loyalties we still honor and try to preserve, and the rights we enjoy, were won for us in battles now almost forgotten; that all of these were created for us as much as by us.....

It is an absolute belief in the honest system of one person, one vote, which allows the statement: We the citizens of this Nation, ARE CAPABLE, and therefore worthy, to choose our own destiny. It is the Governments job in every branch, to accept and enforce OUR DECISIONS!

Comes the statement: FREEDOM, DOESN'T MEAN- I can charge whatever I want! Particularly in Medical areas, BECAUSE, NO ONE chooses a medical emergency (even the mentally ill do not choose mental illness). These are matters which change lives and families in an instant, there is no time or strength to barter. When a persons very life hangs in the balance, monetary cost should not apply.

I happened to be walking the streets of a city one day when coming upon an accident scene; a fifty (or so) year old black man had been badly injured, lost a lot of blood and was obviously in pain, when the paramedics picked him up on a stretcher to take him to the hospital he sat up and clearly said to them, "NO, don't take me to the hospital, they will take everything I have, and I am to Old to start over again"! They took him, he needed to go, his life was in trouble.

There are VERY MANY PEOPLE who have been bankrupted by medicine (the need to survive), IT IS INJUSTICE, and it is abandonment by the government: It is in my mind CONTRARY to the Bill of Rights, section 4: That NO man or set of men, are entitled to exclusive or separate emoluments or privileges from the Community....

This amendment was written concerning Judges and politicians, BUT applies perfectly in its concept and intent, to the medical profession. A medical emergency literally means YOU are completely vulnerable in many area's, YOU, the patient MUST simply hope for the best, (I BELIEVE IN PRAYER), and many mistakes are/will be made, irregardless, it is currently YOUR responsibility to pay ANYTHING the Hospital or doctor (whoever) requires of you, according to them. In truth there is NO Reasonable means for arbitration. Even due process and equal protection are virtually meaningless made so by hidden laws and unaffordable lawyers. Court protection has no meaning if it cannot be afforded OR costs more than the incident in question.

This then is the question: It is a choice between the medical profession and each patient: Strictly in terms of money, WHAT IS EQUAL TREATMENT? Strictly in terms of HUMANITY, the ONLY answer possible is a percentage of income according to each patient (those who serve the Rich MUST be required to share with those who serve the poor), With a yearly cap on expenses, for the patient. NO Insurance allowed. In this way momentarily at least, EVERYONE IS EQUAL. Sharing means the hospital collects and redistributes according to surgeries done, patients seen, etc. Doctors and staff may argue among themselves, who gets the most.

DECISIONS OF THE COURT, ITS PURPOSE AND ITS IDEAL.

A Robert McCloskey wrote: "Since the Court cannot do everything, it best serves our Constitutional order by concentrating on the protection of personal rights."

An excerpt from the New York court of appeals reads: "Liberty, in its broad sense as understood in this country, means the right, not only of freedom from actual servitude, imprisonment or restraint, but the right to use his faculties in all lawful ways, to live and work where he will, to earn his livelihood in any lawful callings, and to pursue any lawful trade or avocation. All laws, therefore which impair or trammel these rights which limit one in his choice of a trade or profession, or confine him to work or live in a specified locality, or exclude him from his own house, or restrain his otherwise lawful movements (except as such laws may be passed in the exercise by the legislature of the police power...) are infringements on his fundamental rights of liberty, which are under Constitutional protection.

Further defined into these words of a Court Justice, is the clear concept that while lawful work or vocation is a fundamental right, there is NO such right declared , toward the billing practice OR acceptance of monies, which brings actual servitude, "descriptive of monetary imprisonment and restraint".

To cause or take, from a man/woman or their family, their house or transportation, or credit, or attach their wages, as is common and representative of the outrage of current medical costs is as much an enslavement of the Individual, as any other method!

The first amendment, Bill of Rights: That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights, of which, when they enter into a state of society, they cannot, by any compact, deprive or divest their posterity; namely the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursing and obtaining happiness and safety.

IF these words have meaning, then they apply specifically to this situation: Where a man/woman or child MUST endure an assault upon their very being; Bringing to their house a debt imposed upon them which was NEVER desired, NOR chosen, NOR accepted in the truer Reality of "freedom of choice"! These things which are medical emergencies are imposed upon the Individual, NOT, "a free will choice". The debts medically incurred today in America, in a MORAL truth are far more descriptive of extortion than help.

Indeed the Court Justice wrote (in effect) those things which impair or trammel these rights, which limit one in his choice....or confine him....or exclude him from his own house, or restrain his otherwise lawful movements, are infringement on his fundamental rights of liberty, which are under Constitutional protection.

PAIN bears its own costs, to inflict upon a human being further, by demands exceeding their limited securities, by controlling or extracting, (while in a weakened state), the possibilities of home and work, the descriptions of NO money, NO home, a future torn, all contribute to the reality of conspiratory extortion, NOT JUSTICE.

Debts incurred by choice are entirely different! Medical expenses are Cost Plus, NOT Cost Times (anything they want)

While liberty assumes NO restrictions, Reality dictates restrictions abound, Criminal law is such a demonstration of legal restriction. The RESTRICTION of billing practices which produce bankruptcy and serious stress on the vast majority of people and their families, while literally being unnoticed by the minority (rich), who are subjected to supposed identical treatment, is REASONABLE!

From the files of workers compensation as written within (98 advisory commission on intergovernmental relations):.....some courts preceded legislatures with an impetus for reform. Employers defenses, Wisconsin Chief Justice noted, were "archaic and unfitted to modern industrial conditions", a sentiment that reflected growing national consensus. Furthermore once employers understood

that a scheduled compensation system would not only reduce the

financial uncertainties surrounding the common law system but also

mitigate labor unrest, resistance to reform ceased.

The current system doesn't work, National consensus decrees it is so, it then becomes the courts true and literal obligation and responsibility to call for reform, to be respectful and responsive to those who elect and pay for the government, through Law.

Substantive due process: This case does conform with the true meaning of the word, "MONOPOLY"(meaning), exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, OR a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices.

Declaration of fact: Doctors as well as hospitals require strict obedience to their orders otherwise the patient may be charged legally with contributory negligence. Patients once incapacitated cannot relocate OR relocating means acceptance of more tests, duplicate bills and so on. Emergency patients are delivered to where the ambulance driver goes.

These things each contribute to isolating the patient in a

specific environment, failure to follow the rules constitutes

reason for abandonment, the decision to leave has serious

financial problems, and possible health problems. Many patients have no say as to specific facilities, nor knowledge of them.

The word monopoly specifies: exclusive control over a commodity or service, (a patient may not refuse medicines provided by the hospital, at the hospitals price), (a patient has no possible way of determining significant injury apart from his/her personal doctor or the hospital doctors').

These things coupled with absolute need makes possible the manipulation of price and service with little or NO alternative for the patient. Accidents can (Illness's as well) afflict any citizen, at any time, young or old, therefore I, a citizen as do those who join this action, declare a need for government (judicial) intervention; for the purpose of a "Fair and Level playing surface", for patients, as well as the medical profession.

Within the word, Monopoly, this case DOES therefore fall within jurisdiction of anti-trust law and proceeds as follows: found in, Hartford-Empire co V. U.S. 387 syllabus 2 (c); the acts restrained by a decree of injunction must be described specifically therein and not by reference to the bill of complaint. P 410

Further in: Private Antitrust-Attorney Fee 21 ALR FED 750 reads....it was stated that a primary purpose of #4 of the Clayton Act is to encourage private persons to undertake the enforcement of the anti-trust laws in order to more effectively carry out congressional policy against illegal monopolies and restraints of trade, and that the provision in #4 insuring a successful plaintiff a reasonable attorney's fee.......and places this cost burden on the defendant...page 756 Unsuccessful prosecution as will support an application for an award of attorney's fees......such plaintiff can recover from the anti-trust defendant under #4 of the Clayton act only for such portion of the attorneys efforts as produced a recovery (#5[a], infra). Likewise, a court may not award attorney's fees to the plaintiffs' for the time their attorney's spend on matters relating to defendants who are dismissed (#5 {a}, infra).

Although the relationship between Anti-trust attorney fees may seem vague at the outset, IT DOES establish Clear precedent as to the legality of, who and how, has the right to control, excessive charges, by professionals, working in an anti-trust arena.

Further the words, as defined within the Medical profession, DO dictate there is a limit to Reasonable charges for services rendered, ALSO there should be NO charge, where the services provided by the professional (and as such the hospital), which do NOT end in a successful medical treatment. These DO NOT deserve an award of fees (BUT perhaps a partial fee), for services which do not prove successful. HOW COULD IT NOT BE SO?

In every aspect of the natural economy, there is clear evidence of payment for services rendered in good faith (meaning the work MUST produce favorable results).

Precedent for medical cost intervention is clearly shown in the medicare payments for services rendered schedule. IF the government can and will control cost for itself, does not the citizen deserve some resemblance of cost control? IF NOT, then surely the government acts ILLEGALLY.

CLOSING ARGUMENTS

In Conclusion: People are only people, with prejudice and faults and problems. This case does NOT attempt to alter, manipulate, or collect for damages. If your own body is against you, whose fault is it?

Irregardless of all other matters this case is about,"FAIR and EQUITABLE TREATMENT FOR US ALL"!

There are those who say,"let them have the money, it may buy a cure", (as defined by medical experimentation). In REALITY cures are not bought with money,(look at all the money that has been spent around the world), CURES are found by people.

Those machines which are exceptionally expensive, but deemed necessary, by the public, can be bought with tax dollars, for FAR LESS MONEY, than by a hospital.

Expensive buildings are/is for public perception, NOT quality of care (consider army M.A.S.H. units).

Medical staff deserve Reasonable pay BUT, reasonable means more than the average, but NOT ten or twenty times more.

A change in billing procedure, a peoples Court (similar to the TV show), a public evaluation of the average patients perceived care, and so on, WILL NOT result in a deterioration of care or services. IF IT DID, greed was all that's left of your medical profession, and Greed doesn't care!

As it regards medical tragedies, such as transplants, etc, those who wish to, MAY purchase medical Insurance, for those things which on a personal basis the vast majority of citizens shall not encounter, (NO Insurance, TOO BAD).

There are those who will complain, they pay more for the same service (these are the rich), AND they shall be on the front lines, of this battle. Tell them they don't have to seek medical treatment, its optional (IF money is more important). Justified in this evaluation is the simple REALITY; the sons and daughters of the poor and middle class are on the front line of other wars, IT IS FAIR AND EQUAL TREATMENT.

These matters are brought to the Court as the single OPINION: Determining what is Constitutional, and what is not, for the Nation (APART FROM THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES), is the Courts JOB.

I/WE are NOT asking for economic reform, NOT a change in free enterprise.

I/WE are asking to be EQUAL, to have a "FAIR AND LEVEL, PLAYING FIELD" for dispute resolution, for information from other patients about doctors and hospitals, AND TO HAVE THE RIGHT AND THE EQUITY, to take care of services received, IN AN HONORABLE WAY.

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.

TO: COVENANT MEDICAL CENTER

I will make one deal with you, and no more: My parents have declared upon telling them I would take you to court, "YOU can't possibly win, all that's' going to happen is they (you) will get mad at me and then refuse to treat me (OR perhaps them)".

They do not wish to be involved, IF you treat them POLITELY, allowing a simple written statement, in their words; or a short selection of simple questions, AS WE AGREE UPON, being answered APART from the trial.

Then I will withdraw ALL CLAIM to malpractice (IN TERMS OF PERSONAL MONETARY DAMAGES, for this specific offence), except for the billing dispute. This will be settled.

IF you fail in this request: I WILL REAPPEAR AT A LATER DATE.

LET WHOSOEVER WOULD JOIN THIS ACTION UNDERSTAND: There is NO attempt to fight beyond what is necessary for EQUAL treatment. There will be NO monetary award to collect, ANY possibility that could occur as a result of joining this litigation, IS AT YOUR OWN PERSONAL RISK!

To those who join: My life is my own, it is NOT a public life, I WILL RETAIN, my privacy. All the information (I consider to be necessary), for this case, IS contained within the evidence and Court papers, (Plaintiff's version). PLEASE seek out the defense's version if you wish.

It is YOUR CHOICE to join or not to join, the case itself is PUBLIC, AND YOU ARE INVITED!

an ADMISSION OF PURPOSE,

and a WARNING OF INTENT.

The matters which have occurred resulting in PUBLIC trial, are neither by my design, NOR are they my desire. RATHER, because I AM confronted directly, specifically involved, MORALLY obligated because OF MY own decisions, and have obtained all the necessary evidence and skills required for this work. I do consider this a necessary work.

BE AWARE

I will NOT tolerate SLANDER. To the defense; My personal life, BELONGS TO ME.

It is hereby stated: If YOU Deviate from the DIRECT MATTERS, SPECIFICALLY NECESSARY, to this PUBLIC TRIAL,

YOU WILL REGRET IT!

EVIDENCE SUMMARY:

Exhibit A Authorization for Medical Treatment

Exhibit B "so called, Physical exam" I WAS NEVER TOUCHED OR APPROACHED. Doctor says normal BUT, then says full Heparin, to be used SERIOUS DIFFERENCES

Exhibit C No evidence of thought mood disorder.

Exhibit D Distinct differences of opinion

Exhibit E Heparin given

Exhibit F Demand for payment

Exhibit G Small Claims petition

Exhibit H Motion to dismiss

Exhibit J Personal affidavit written for small claims Court.

Exhibit K/L Prior correspondence to Covenant Medical Center.

Exhibit M Speaks for itself.

Exhibit N The search paper for a doctor subsequent to Civil Procedure Code 110; 2-622

Exhibit O A second sheet coupled to Exhibit N, used in the search of a doctor, subsequent to Code 110; 2-622

Exhibit P My complete hospital records of this specific incident.

Exhibit Q The Code of Civil Procedure 110; 2-622

Exhibit R Heparin, a formal description.

A PUBLIC HEARING:

notice is hereby given regarding the Public, Class Action Suit: James F. Osterbur vs. Covenant Medical Center. Urbana, Illinois.

This case is about Billing procedures of the Medical Profession, AND is intent upon restructuring said billing procedures, to a more FAIR, EQUAL, AND LEVEL, "playing field", for the Public at large.

BE IT HEREBY KNOWN

THE DECISION

Allowing the usage of medical information by, James F. Osterbur

as it relates to the pending case 92-C-1222 of the circuit court of

the 6th Judicial Circuit, Champaign County, IL, is HEREBY AND HEREIN GRANTED!

TO BE USED WITHIN THE PURPOSES OF CASE 92-C-1222! Whose stated purposes is contained within the Court files described as; A CASE intent upon life in human terms, NOT medical terms, NOT greed or charity, RATHER Truth, Equality, and Fair play.

I,_________________________________________who resides at ___________________________________________________________ ________

BEING THE DIRECT MEDICAL PATIENT, spoken of or physically involved, or having POWER OF ATTORNEY, by parenthood or other: DO, HEREBY DECLARE THIS MEDICAL INFORMATION: CASE NUMBER__________________

AT HOSPITAL___________________________________________________ ____

WHOSE LEGAL ADDRESS IS_____________________________________________ _____________________________________________

AND OTHER INFORMATION, as may be contained therein: ARE FREELY GIVEN

GIVEN, without reservations or terms.

GIVEN, without compensation, for its use!

GIVEN, with the FULL KNOWLEDGE of any other person, with LEGAL AUTHORITY over same!

GIVEN, understanding these proceedings, case 92-C-1222, MAY AFFECT my own court case, good or bad; should I,__________________________

wish to proceed with my own case: prior to, at this time, or at a later date! I, DO ACCEPT THIS RISK, without compensation or cause.

GIVEN, that there shall be NO CASE WHATSOEVER, for slander, libelous, defamation of character, emotional distress, etcetera. I,__________________________________DO ACCEPT THESE POSSIBILITIES, as my own, within the limits of case 92-C-1222, UNDERSTANDING THIS IS TO BE A PUBLIC CASE, with possible media attention, etcetera.

GIVEN, That I am aware, LEGAL COUNSEL should/could be sought out, to protect MY INTERESTS; I DO ACCEPT, the responsibility of

PAGE 1 OF 2

my own actions and/or actions which I have chosen to make for another, over which I,_______________________________have legal authority!

GIVEN, that I am aware: the medical information I,_____________________________________present, through my own decisions and reasons SHALL NOT be represented in a legal manner BUT, SHALL BE represented as: INFORMATION, relative and representative of hospital treatment, as it describes matters important to the stated objectives of case 92-C-1222.

I DO ACCEPT AND AGREE AND ACKNOWLEDGE: This Declaration (DECISION), TERMINATES, All Rights to pursue legal action against, James F. Osterbur, or others as may be directly involved, with regard to this case 92-C-1222!

I, _____________________________________being of sound mind and legal age, AND HAVING FULL LEGAL AUTHORITY, over such matters: DO HEREBY DECLARE, THE MEDICAL INFORMATION

PATIENT NAME:____________________________________________________

CASE NUMBER:_____________________DATED__________________________ _

HOSPITAL NAME_____________________________________________________

LOCATED AT________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________

IS GIVEN, AS STATED ABOVE, FOR THE LEGITIMATE PURPOSES OF/WITHIN CASE 92-C-1222.

PATIENT OR PERSON WITH LEGAL AUTHORITY

_________________________________________________________________ __

WHOSE ADDRESS IS___________________________________________________

___________________________________________________

WITNESSED BY______________________________________________________

WHOSE ADDRESS IS__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

WITNESSED BY _____________________________________________________

WHOSE ADDRESS IS__________________________________________________

__________________________________________________

THANK YOU

PAGE 2 OF 2

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

THE ISSUE: turning paper "garbage" into cellulose insulation, and GIVING IT AWAY!

THE SUGGESTION: IT IS REASONABLE TO ASSUME, IF, a city would buy a paper shredder suitable to the work, and provided this service of turning paper into insulation PEOPLE would provide the paper in return for that insulation.

A suitable price, would/could be, proper return of other recyclable materials.

THE BENEFITS:

LESS LANDFILL SPACE

MORE MONEY FOR CITIZENS TO PAY FOR ENERGY, ETC

LESS ENERGY WASTED

MORE ENERGY FOR THE FUTURE

LESS POLLUTION OF EVERY KIND

AN ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY DESPERATELY NEEDED

LESS TAX BURDEN

BECAUSE "GARBAGE" IS 60% PAPER, A DOUBLING OF LANDFILL SPACE REQUIREMENTS

EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, AT A MINIMAL SKILL LEVEL

A HUGE BENEFIT TO THE POOR WHO ARE OTHERWISE UNABLE TO INSULATE THEIR HOMES.

TRUE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT!

True Government is not about who controls what, RATHER it is about what benefits society as a whole!