GENERAL THEORY OF HOW A CORRUPT ATTORNEY CAN DESTROY THEIR OWN CLIENT’S INSURANCE CLAIM IN A 2 DEFENDANT VICARIOUS LIABILITY LAWSUIT.


A case can be destroyed in 5 distinct stages.



STAGE 1: The corrupt attorney demands and receives all original documents from the client and leaves the client with no copies.

If the attorney has all the original documentation the client possessed the attorney can start to analyze if the attorney has a case he can manipulate. 


Stage 2: Analyze and determine the key minor weak points within the original documentation.

The corrupt attorney analyzes and identifies the best documented evidence supporting his client’s case. 

The corrupt attorney analyzed and determined key data points within the original documentation and now knows where to alter the documentation in minor ways to fit a new paradigm and begins the game of preparing key safeguards and tests.



STAGE 3: Lowball the claim by using the 222b affidavit when filing the complaint with the court.

The client’s case can be locked under $50,000 in this way.

If the corrupt attorney wants to hide what they are doing, the corrupt attorney puts pressure on and informs the client through  through email or phone that now is the time to file the complaint, saying it can't wait. Once the client says okay, the corrupt attorney files the complaint and the 222b affidavit with the court on behalf of the client without ever showing it to the client or obtaining the client's signature but rather only informs the client after the fact that the attorney went ahead and filed suit on behalf of the client. 

The attorney can claim they are seeking over $50,000 in the complaint, just in case the client ever gets a copy to read, then claim the case is not to exceed $50,000 in the 222b affidavit and sign it on behalf of the client.

The attorney never actually provides the client with a copy of either the complaint nor the 222b affidavit. 

If caught, the attorney can later claim the not to exceed $50,000 phrase was a typo in the 222b affidavit, an honest mistake.



STAGE 4: Send out interrogatories and receive the answers without notifying the client.

The corrupt attorney formulates interrogatories and receives the answers and doesn't show the client.

The corrupt attorney analyzes the other parties answers and determines what minor data points need to be altered in the clients documents to create a false paradigm.



STAGE 5: Test and confirm the client's ability to disprove the false paradigm.

Almost a year after the corrupt attorney was hired and collected all the original documents the corrupt attorney then tests the client by telling the client what the other parties are claiming and asks the client to prove as fact the key piece of evidence needed.

The client refers to the original documentation provided to the attorney almost a year earlier.

The corrupt attorney brings out the clients altered documents while hiding the originals.

The client fails to show the attorney the key points of evidence because the attorney is in possession of and hiding the original documents and only brings out the altered documents to show the client, the client now realizes they cannot prove key facts the client thought existed within the original documentation.

The client starts to question his own memory and since the client gave the originals to the attorney the client can't prove otherwise and starts to concede on minor points which strengthens the false paradigm.



STAGE 6: Make the altered documents part of the record.

Assured the client cannot prove otherwise, the corrupt attorney then sends the now altered evidence to the opposing party as part of the discovery document disclosure so the altered evidence is now part of the record and in the defendants hands. 

The corrupt attorney’s purpose is to reduce the case to only one person’s word against another person word with no clear documented evidence to tell which party is telling the truth.

This way the case becomes the word of his client against the word of the defense witnesses with no clear documented evidence to pin the defense down.



STAGE 7: Help lead defense witnesses through their depositions.

Rehash of the last 6 points:
The corrupt attorney carefully chose and sent the earlier interrogatories to the defense without letting the client review them. 
The corrupt attorney receives the answers to the interrogatories and withheld them from the client and analyzed what minor data points could be altered in the clients documentation to make sure certain parts of the defendants answers cannot be disproven.
The corrupt attorney altered key minor data points in the clients documentation.
The corrupt attorney tested the clients ability to disprove the other parties position using the altered documents on the client.
The corrupt attorney sent the altered documents to the other party. 
The other party knows the documents cannot disprove their story.

The depositions:
The corrupt attorney does not let the client know the client has the right to attend the deposition.
The corrupt attorney then uses leading questions with the defense witnesses through the depositions in a way that his own client could never be able to pin down because the clear documented evidence the client needed to impeach the defense witnesses and win the case was concealed or altered earlier.
The corrupt attorney then withholds the deposition transcript from the client for as long as possible.

In this way the case remains nothing more than the word of his client against witnesses for the defense.



STAGE 7: Trigger one defendants insurance ‘med pay’ offer and pressure and coerce the client to accept it.

The corrupt attorney triggers one of the defendants defense counsel and the insurance adjuster to make a minimum no fault $5,000 ‘med pay’ offer. 
The corrupt attorney does this by secretly sending the defense a $7,500 offer on behalf of their client to settle the case.

Once the corrupt attorney receives the $5,000 ‘med pay’ counter-offer, the corrupt attorney presents the counter offer as an original offer to the client and emphasizes that the client really doesn’t have a case against the one defendant because there is no hard evidence to impeach the one defendant and the case is just one person’s word against another person's word.

The corrupt attorney scares their client into accepting the $5,000 offer by telling the client the one defendant is sure to win on a motion of summary judgment. If the client doesn’t accept the $5,000 offer right now the client will receive nothing.

The corrupt attorney reassures the client that the other defendant is still in the case and has plenty of insurance to cover any eventual recovery anyway.

The client reluctantly agrees to give up the claim for the $5,000 ‘med pay’ from one of the defendants and continues the case against the remaining defendant.



Stage 8: Lead the client into bankruptcy and withdraw

Now that the corrupt attorney successfully tanked the case against one of the defendants the corrupt attorney tells the client he is not interested in the pursuing the case against the remaining defendant to trial because there is not enough in the remaining defendants insurance policy to cover all the medical bills and the costs associated with a trial.

The corrupt attorney tells the client that most people in this position need to file for bankruptcy or they will get nothing so start talking with bankruptcy attorneys soon.

The client no longer trusts the corrupt attorney and is angry but does talk with bankruptcy attorneys and eventually files for bankruptcy.

When the bankruptcy trustee comes inquiring about the case the corrupt attorney tries to force the client to settle for less than the medical bills saying since its in bankruptcy the clients recovery is capped at $15,000 no matter what so it doesn't matter.

The client no longer trusts the corrupt attorney and refuses the settlement.

The corrupt attorney withdraws before having to explain anything to the bankruptcy trustee leaving the client in bankruptcy and only a $5,000 'med pay' settlement for a grievous injury.



STAGE 9: Shield themselves from suspicious and hostile clients.

For potentially hostile clients this 9th stage is necessary.

The corrupt lawyer will use the 2 year statute of limitations to shield themselves from their angry client. To do this they need 2 things:

1) To pin down the date of the first malpractice ‘injury’.
2) To pin down the earliest date that the client knew or should have known the of the ‘injury’.

The corrupt attorney will claim that both dates are more than 2 years before any possible malpractice lawsuit could be filed by the client so it is already too late to file a malpractice claim.




DULBERG’S SPECIFIC CASE

Dulberg is in possession of 5 key pieces of evidence. I call them the ‘5 pillars’. They are:

1) Under $50,000 declaration

2) Hiding timestamps

3) Mast leading Gagnon about driving directly to McGuire's house from hospital and never receiving interrogatory answers from Gagnon

4) October 22nd 2013 memo of $7,500 offer to settle the case 5) Forged Saul Ferris letter
How does this general theory apply to the Dulberg case?
The 5 stages match the 5 pillars perfectly as seen in the following table:


		General theory								Dulberg case

Stage 1		Lowball claim by using Affidavit 222b					Affidavit 222b "not to exceed $50,000" Signed by Attorney Mast, "on behalf" of Dulberg

Stage 2		Collect and Conceal Client's evidence					Removal of RX Timestamps

Stage 3		Lead defense witness through depositions and interrogatories		

Stage 4		Trigger Insurance no fault 'Med Pay' and pressure client to accept

Stage 5		Shield oneself from suspicious and hostile clients




An explanation of the logic behind forged Ferris letter:

By changing the date of the injury Popovich is trying to change the meaning of the word 'injury'. "Injury' is changed from the chainsaw injury to malpractice injury. The letter now refers to a malpractice injury which Dulberg claims he received on January 24, 2013.

The date January 24, 2013 was chosen by Popovich because he was forging the letter in February 2015. He wanted to choose the malpractice injury date at least 2 years before the date he forged the letter. He did that because he thought the statute of limitations would already be over this way. This is why he chose a date 2 years and a few weeks before the date of the forgery.

He changed the date of the Saul Ferris meeting because he wanted to show that Dulberg met with Ferris just before he believed the statute of limitations would run out on January 24, 2015. If he didn't change the date of the Ferris meeting, it would appear as if Dulberg let the statute of limitations run out before meeting Ferris or wasn't aware of the January 24, 2015 cut-off date at all.

If sued in the future, Popovich will then claim Dulberg first became aware of a malpractice 'injury' on January 24, 2013. Popovich will claim that Dulberg met with an attorney about malpractice on December 31, 2014 (just before the 2 year limit) and he is barred from suing any time after January 24, 2015 (a date just before he doctored the letter).




This is how Dulberg first received the Saul Ferris Declination letter:

The Declination letter was sent via the US Post Office from attorney Saul Ferris to The Law Office of Thomas J. Popovich P.C. by mistake on or about March 4th, 2015. This package contained the Attorney Saul Ferris Declination letter, 4 depositions and all correspondence Mast/Popovich mailed to Dulberg via the US Post Office dated before February 26, 2015.
(See Saul Ferris Deposition)

The Declination letter stayed in possession of The Law Office of Thomas J. Popovich P.C. until on or about March 23, 2015 at which time Attorney Brad Balke received a partial, mixed up case file from Mast/Popovich containing the now altered (forged) attorney Saul Ferris Declination letter. This partial, mixed up case file Dulberg later names the "Mixed Brown Box File".
(See Dulberg 002821 - Dulberg 002822)

On May 7, 2015 Saul Ferris' office contacts Dulberg and informs Dulberg they now have back the mail mistakenly sent to The Law Office of Thomas J. Popovich P.C.
(See Dulberg 002651 and Dulberg 002848 - Dulberg 002849)

On May 8, 2015 Dulberg goes to Attorney Saul Ferris' office, picks up the mistakenly mailed package and emails Attorney Brad Balke and gives a description of it's contents. The Attorney Saul Ferris Declination letter is not in the package.
(See Dulberg 002651 and Dulberg 002848 - Dulberg 002849)

On Jul 16, 2015 Dulberg picked up the "Mixed Brown Box File" from Attorney Bulke after firing attorney Bulke. This is the first time the forged Attorney Saul Ferris’ letter arrived at Dulberg's house. (See Dulberg 002883 - Dulberg 002884)
Sometime between July 16, 2015 and August 17, 2015 Dulberg sorts out the 'Mixed Brown Box File" and separated the attorney Saul Ferris forged Declination letter from other case documents found in the "Mixed Brown Box File" and put it in a separate pile.
(See Dulberg 002885, Dulberg 002888, Dulberg 002889, several other emails can be cited here but will require more time to find)

On August 17, 2015 Scott Dulberg signs for the 2nd Dulberg case file at The Law Office of Thomas J. Popovich. This becomes known as the "Brown Jacket File", which is neat and orderly, and is turned over to Attorneys Randy and Kelly Bowden to be used from this point forward in the case against Gagnon.
(POP 000804)

In December of 2016 Dulberg gave both the "Mixed Brown Box File" and the separate pile which contains Attorney Saul Ferris’ (forged) Declination letter to Attorney Gooch who scanned it in as part of Dulberg's documents in the instant case against Mass and Popovich.