Court rules against anti-amalgam lawyer
Forum: Amalgam Replacement
- Court rules against anti-amalgam lawyer
RN by #34154
5 of 6 (83%)
Found this somewhat disturbing article. What is the world coming to? This lawyer filed a lawsuit against the ADA regarding the dangers of Amalgams and lost. Now the ADA is suing back citing that it 'suffered harm'. And it looks like the ADA is going to win. What kind of damages does a big organization like that suffer? Makes me sick to my stomach that these people can get away with it.
A district court judge has denied a motion to dismiss the American Dental Association's libel suit against Los-Angeles-based attorney Shawn Khorrami. The suit charges that Khorrami has targeted the ADA with an orchestrated "campaign of lies and distortion" to promote himself and his law firm. The suit, filed in May, states:
Khorrami falsely and maliciously accuses the ADA of defrauding and endangering the lives of the American public by promoting allegedly unsafe dental practices -- specifically the use of dental Amalgam fillings -- and exerting "undue and unfair pressure" on dentists as a result of a purported "vested economic interest" of the ADA in amalgam.
Khorrami has falsely stated that, "When scientifically analyzed, amalgam fillings represent nothing more than a con on the U.S. population, orchestrated by the American Dental Association and its web of constituent associations and component societies."
Khorrami was well aware that numerous scientific and leading consumer organizations, independent of the ADA, have concluded that dental amalgam is safe.
The ADA has no vested economic interest in amalgam.
The ADA is seeking compensatory damages for harm it suffered and punitive damages to deter further wrongful conduct against it. In January 2004, the district court judge denied Khorrami's motion to dismiss the suit and concluded that the ADA will prevail if it proves that its allegations are true.
The judge's decision noted that so far, during the discovery process, neither Khorrami nor his expert witnesses have provided any evidence that Khorrami's accusations have a factual basis.
[Order denying defendant's motion to dismiss. American Dental Association v. Shawn Khorrami. U.S. District Court, Central District of California Civil Case No. 02-3853, filed January 26, 2004]
Alert Webmaster & Moderators|
Already alerted! Already alerted!
5 of 6 (83%) readers agree with this message. Hide votes What is this?
How do you feel about this message?
Hide this question
Attributes associated with this message:
#34154 will be notified if you reply to this message!
|DISCLAIMER Information available on this page and on CureZone is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended as a substitute for the advice provided by a healthcare professional or any information contained on or in any product label or packaging. You should not use the information on CureZone for diagnosing or treating a health problem or disease, or prescribing any medication or other treatment. Answers, comments and opinions provided on CureZone are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. CureZone does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in messages, comments or articles on CureZone. Your use of this website indicates your agreement to these terms and those published here. Read more ...||