Preston Douglas Thinks Like A Loser

Preston Douglas Thinks Like A Loser Video

Note: The part where it skips and is pixelated should be “It’s not that she put one over on the judge”. Also where I say Dr. Hollin filed his falsified CT Scan document 1.5 years later it should be 1.5 years after Phyllis’ last appointment.

Following is a transcript of the video. It differs slightly from the video in order to make it more readable.

Now I’m going to explain the difference between Kathleen M. Beck, the attorney for Dr Hollin’s estate, and Preston Douglas. Kathleen M. Beck thinks and acts like a winner and Preston Douglas thinks and acts like a loser. It is that simple. Kathleen M. Beck had no compunction whatsoever about pretending that Dr. Hollin’s falsified advise CT scan document was real, that he actually did advise the test and therefore it was Phyllis’ fault for not having it done. She took a highly incriminating piece of evidence against her client, twisted it around and threw it right back at Preston J. Douglas and then blamed it on the patient who is the actual victim in this case.

As you can see this is a real attorney at work as she is wholly dedicated to her client’s position. You can rest assured she read the medical records and knew exactly what Dr. Hollin was up to as this lady knows her job. She’s not interested in cutting corners and nickel and dimeing cases to death the way that Preston Douglas is. She is interested in one thing only, winning the case and she will do whatever it takes to win it.

This is in direct opposition to Preston Douglas who thinks like a total loser.  All Preston Douglas ever did throughout this entire case was look at dates and ignore facts. There is no way anybody can possibly know if there is a statute of limitations problem in a medical malpractice case just by looking at the date of surgery or the date of last appointment but that’s exactly what Preston thought he could do and as you can see the results of his methodology are disastrous. Not only did Preston J. Douglas just look at dates, he ignored the medical records in their entirety as if they didn’t exist.

The legal arguments that were made in this case are a complete farce and are just a contrived piece of nonsense that were concocted at the absolute last minute. Preston J. Douglas had 26 months to prepare this case: He started working on it in January 1989 and submitted his legal arguments in March 1991. He had plenty of time to properly prepare this case but he essentially did absolutely nothing during that period of time. All he did was contact an unnecessary expert witness, provide him with incomplete medical records and come to the wrong conclusion about the operation. He then waited to the absolute last minute to write his legal arguments as his legal arguments weren’t written until the motion for summary dismissal was pending in the courts. So after doing nothing for all that time he was all of a sudden in a big rush to get his legal arguments out the door.

If you don’t get your legal arguments to the court within a certain period of time the case can be dismissed based upon that alone. When you are in a rush you are going to make mistakes and that’s exactly what the legal arguments that were made in this case are. a huge mistake. His legal arguments demonstrate absolute and total lack of knowledge of the medical facts of this case. Preston J. Douglas’ entire assessment in this case is 100%. wrong as he didn’t do or get any of the facts right. He claims that Dr. Hollin repaired two aneurisms using two different methods when in fact his operations is a time bomb and even based upon the information that was known at the time it was obvious it was a timebomb.  Preston J Douglas, however, completely ignored what Dr. Haroupian had to say about the net effect of the operation.

When I first met with Preston J. Douglas I handed him all the medical records that were known at the time which was everything except the consultant’s report. I also explained to him exactly what Dr. Haroupian said about the operation creating a single giant berry aneurysm years later. When you combine that with the fact that Dr. Hollin lied to Phyllis for all those years, the question is why would Dr. Hollin even conceal the aneurysm from Phyllis and her parents in the first place unless he was up to no good. When I mentioned this to Preston J. Douglas he kind of looked at me funny and that was the last we ever heard about it. Obviously Dr. Haroupian should have been deposed as the neuropathologist is clearly a critical witness in a case like this.

Preston J. Douglas didn’t bother to give Dr. Haroupian a call to discuss the weather nor did he depose him. Preston J. Douglas didn’t even use the autopsy report as evidence which is totally unbelievable. Here is another interesting little side fact: When Fuchsberg and Fuchsberg originally had the case in March of 1984, they were going to arrange to have a neuropathologist that they knew determine the cause of death. Well, if that had happened, you can rest assured that Mr. Douglas would have spoken to their neuro- pathologist to discuss the autopsy results. So what happened between March 1984 and January 1989, a period of almost five years, where Preston J Douglas went from thinking it’s critical that we have a neuropathologist determine the cause of death to the neuropathologist is a completely useless witness where we don’t have to bother deposing him or even use his autopsy report as evidence?

Well, the only thing I can think of is that over time most people become more skillful in their profession. It appears that the exact opposite happened to Preston J. Douglas as he apparently went into retrograde mode. He went from seemingly knowing what needed to be done in March of 1984 to not having a clue as to what needed to be done in January 1989. I also suspect that his business methodology of nickel and dimeing cases to death and cutting corners became fully ingrained in him during that almost five year period.

Now, in regard to the falsified advise CT scan document, you don’t just walk into your doctor’s office and he says, Listen, I want you to run out to the nearest hospital or diagnostic facility and have a CT scan done and then report back. What is missing from this equation? A referral for the test. There is no referral because Dr. Hollin never advised any such test. The notion that because Dr. Hollin made a notation in a falsified document that says advise CT scan means that the patient is supposed to run out and have a CT scan is totally ridiculous. A competent plaintiff’s attorney would have ripped Kathleen M. Beck apart in his legal arguments regarding this. I mean, she completely relied upon a falsified document to claim that Phyllis should have had a CT scan done. Of  course Ms. Beck presented the falsified document to the Judge as if it was the real one.

So what does Preston J. Douglas have to say about the fact that there’s no referral? He doesn’t even mention it at all in his legal arguments. In addition. when an attorney blatantly misrepresents a document in a legal proceeding the way Kathleen M. Beck did, this constitutes a potential ethics violation as attorneys are not supposed to be engaging in this type of fraudulent misrepresentation of documents. A real plaintiff’s attorney would have ripped her apart in his legal arguments, pointed out to the judge exactly what she was up to and even reported her to the New York State Bar Association for doing so. But what does Preston J Douglas have to say about her engaging in this type of fraudulent activity to the court? He claims that she is merely misguided for relying on the document. In other words, it’s not that she tried to put one over on the judge which she successfully accomplished it’s that she is merely misguided for doing so.

This is just another example of how Preston J. Douglas is just a week advocate. This attorney is apparently afraid to confront anybody. Throughout this entire case he didn’t use the words fraud, malice or lied a single time even though they are written all over these medical records. God forbid he should offend somebody and who would he be offending? the estate of a deceased doctor and he still can’t get himself to use any of those terms. He can’t even get himself to use the term falsified medical record. He refers to Dr. Hollin’s falsified advise CT scan document as an Altered Photostat. That is such an off the wall description it boggles the mind that anybody would even think of calling that. An average person would look at the two documents where the original doesn’t say Advise CT Scan, the one sent to the insurance company does say Advise CT Scan and conclude that Dr. Hollin falsified his medical records. According to Preston J Douglas, however, it’s an altered photostat.

Preston J. Douglas also offers no explanation as to how the falsidifed document was even created. As I mentioned in the Dr. Hollin video, Dr. Hollin had to have Xeroxed the original, wrote in advice CT scan on the copy, Xeroxed it again and sent it off to the life insurance company. Preston J. Douglas makes no mention of this whatsoever. So now the judge has to scratch his head and try and figure out what the heck is an altered photostat. Well, you can’t expect the judge to figure anything out because in a legal argument every detail needs to be clearly explained.

As a matter of fact, it’s not even an altered photostat and Preston J. Douglas can’t even get his own distorted definition of that document right As I mentioned earlier, Dr. Hollin had to have Xeroxed his original and write advise CT scan on the copy. That’s the altered photostat but that isn’t what he sent off to the insurance company. Dr. Hollin had to have Xeroxed it again and then sent that copy because if he didn’t the insurance company would have seen that part of the document was copied and part was written in ink. So technically it’s a Photostat of an altered photostat.

It appears that Preston J. Douglas’ analytical capabilities are completely dysfunctional. Dr. Hollin lying to Phyllis about the diagnosis and treatmend was easily proven as all Preston J. Douglas had to was submit the patient consent form along with Dr. Hollin’s operative report as evidence. Of course Phyllis’ parents should have been deposed and they would have confirmed that what they signed on the patient consent form for the surgery was accurate. Instead of doing that, Preston J. Douglas, however, twisted it around into me the client finding out later on that Phyllis had two aneurysms repaired using two different methods. I don’t think you could find a defense attorney that could look at those medical records and come up with an explanation like that.

The fact that Preston J. Douglas felt he had to rewrite critical facts like that in order to make it sound like ordinary negligence is a sign of extreme weakness and total incompetence.  It is also a clear cut indication that not only is Preston J. Douglas a defendant biased plaintiff’s attorney, but he is also a non- confrontational litigator. A non-confrontational litigator is useless and serves no purpose whatsoever other than to trash cases as was done in the Dr. Hollin case. The entire purpose of being a litigator is to confront the opposition head on. Preston J. Douglas does anything but confront the opposition. All he did was twist facts around and make excuses on behalf of Dr. Hollin and associates. Then Mr. Douglas makes excuses on behalf of himself to somehow explain away his failings. Obviously this is not the way real attorneys operate, that’s for sure.


Preston J Douglas Thinks Like a Loser

When Preston J Douglas worked for the law firm of Fuchsberg and Fuchsberg he handled a medical malpractice and wrongful death lawsuit against the estate of Dr. Sidney A. Hollin, a neurosurgeon operating out of Mt. Sinai Hospital in NYC who caused the death of my wife Phyllis. Based upon the grossly negligent and incompetent manner in which he handled the case I do not recommend the legal services of Mr. Douglas under any circumstances whatsoever. This video is part of a series of videos. The entire series can be viewed in the proper order at