ANS Circus: Driving in Tent Poles Once Again

Not surprisingly, the triumvirate of HKS, Eroshevich and Kapoor entered not guilty pleas today to 23 drug-related felony counts of drug conspiracy.  Eroshevich and Kapoor won a small victory when Superior Judge David Wesley denied an attempt to revoke their medical licenses since Deputy Attorney General E.A. Jones III and a California state medical board delayed seeking action for over a year.  Even though AG Jones felt it was imminently dangerous to the public for the doctors to  continue practicing, he and the board refused to act sooner to determine whether testimony from the preliminary hearing warrants the case going to trial.  Before the closing gavel sounded, Judge Wesley set a December 18th pretrial motion hearing and a tentative trial date of February 5, 2010.
Eroshevich’s attorney stated there was “simply no basis to prevent her from practicing medicine at this point. [This case] is related to a single patient, and on its face, it’s laughable [Eroshevich] would [be deemed] an imminent threat to the public.” Lady Justice fails to find the humor in any of this.
Kapoor’s attorney, Ellyn Garafalo, felt publicity may be a factor in the medical board’s “troubling” decision.  Nonetheless, she was pleased with Judge Wesley’s decision to deny the license suspension motion.  We will keep you abreast of all the action!

14 thoughts on “ANS Circus: Driving in Tent Poles Once Again

  1. What a shame – at least a temporary suspension until the case against them is resolved would make us feel that the medical board and these judges have the publics’ best interest in mind.

  2. California is way too protective of its questionable doctors. Many other states post complaints against doctors on the internet. The Calif. medical board hides all questioning of doctors.
    It is incredibly arrogant to say doctors should keep their licenses when they act as Eroshevich.
    And it is no excuse to say that only one patient is involved. Each life is precious, even Ana Nicole’s. I guess Dr. Murray may follow this logic and say Michael Jackson was only one person so any wrongdoing is o.k.
    I just read Rita Crosby’s book “Blonde Ambition” and it was excellent.

    1. Doris Jean, have you ever heard of presumption of innocence? Are you saying you know law better than Judge Wesley? You bragged you read “excellent” book called Blonde Ambition” i guess you never heard of “Anna Karennina” by L.N. Tolstoy.
      Federal Judge Denny Chin said about Blonde Ambition: “There is evidence in the record that Cosby acted with hatred, ill will and spite towards Stern…Moreover, there is a qualitative difference between comments made on a tabloid TV shows and written statements in a book purporting to be the product of legitimate investigative journalism written by “Emmy award journalist.” In simple English, “Blonde Ambition” is a worhless tabloid book full of lies and smut.

      1. You are improperly quoting the Judge in the NY Cosby case. He only determined that a jury could determine if that were true or not. Also the Judge ruled for Summary Judgement for Hachette Books entirely and for 8 of the 19 complaints for Cosby, leaving the other 11 for a jury to decide. That was with him having been required by law to look at the evidence in the light most favorable to Stern. The Jury would not have had that requirment.

        The case in NY was dismissed with prejudice without cost to either party. Cosby book is still for sale and is set to be released in paperback in January 2011. Doesn’t appear that the defamation case was successful at all. Many will find the fact that the book survived the defamation case will bolster its credibility. That is one of the pitfalls of bring that sort of case.

        Cosby also has a new book coming out in June 2010.


        1. Rita Crosby is an excellent writer in my opinion. I recommend “Blonde Ambition” for its literary excellence. It just happens to also enlightening on a current disturbing social issue which needs to be dealt with, i.e. the abuse and killing of patients by doctors.
          I look forward to Ms. Crosby’s next book, does anyone know the subject?

  3. Thank you for the coverage. I hope if its in their power, the medical board will follow through on their own. Or at least do the monitoring that one article suggested that the judge is open to.

  4. It seems to me that if these doctors keep their licenses, it will be open season for drug-seeking celebrities and their sycophants (a la ANS, HKS etc etc). It’s time that these charlatans were brought to justice!

  5. In what way is prescribing drugs to aliases and to people other than the person for whom they are intended NOT a threat to the public?! If you are free-wheeling in your issuance of prescriptions then you are essentially a drug dealer and last I checked those folks are generally considered a threat to the public. Not surprising that Anna would surround herself with these sorts of enablers given her less than sterling reputation.

  6. In a way I can understand the judges ruling. If they were a threat, the DA should have moved to have their privileges restricted at the time they were arrested. I wondered why he didn’t move to have Howard disbarred, then I remember, he’s a one client lawyer, whose only client suddenly got dead from drugs prescribed in his name.
    I mean, don’t all attorneys conduct themselves like Stern?

  7. I’m confused- why does the judge have a say in whether or not an independent agency gets to suspend (not revoke) a professional license? to me, it seems that the medical bar should have complete discretion in this activity- after all, they are the ones responsible for maintaining professional qualty in the industry. What would this judge say to the family of anyone who (god forbid) is harmed during this period?
    To me, this decision should be left to those charged with this sort of a decision on a daily basis- not a criminal trial judge.

    1. MJP you are absolutely correct! Thank you for your comments. It’s funny because I am actually writing a piece to post next week that addresses the issues you raised, namely that the Judge is not an extension of the California Medical Board.

    2. MJP, you have a good point, the judge has no jurisdiction over licenses. But I have seen judges discover wrongdoing by doctors and lawyers in open court in the middle of a trial, and I have heard them say that they will report the wrongdoing (like any private citizen might do). A judge has no more authority than any citizen.
      Any of us (including judges) who see wrongdoing may report it to the professional board who then has jurisdiction to investigate and may choose to take some action.
      From what I see, the professional boards are extremely reluctant to pull licenses.
      In my opinion, all the doctors and HKS have done more than enough to justify hearings to revoke their licenses.
      And yes, they are not yet guilty of anything, but when I look at the fact of the dead bodies of Daniel and ANS, I know.

  8. me thinks that the medical association is enabling doctors that are prone to be criminal in their actions with patients…who are full of dollars ….someone needs to clean that organization also….

Comments are closed.