McKee V. Laurion: Defendant Laurion’s Reply To Plaintiff McKee’s Threat Letter
[ This text is copied from Exhibits AA-395, AA-396, AA-397, AA-398, and AA-399 of the Minnesota Defamation Lawsuit of David McKee, MD, V. Dennis K. Laurion, Minnesota Sixth Judicial District Case 69DU-CV-10-1706, Filed June 9, 2010. ]
MAY 7, 2010
To: Marshall H. Tanick
1700 U. S. Bank Plaza South
220 South 6th Street
Minneapolis MN 55402-4511
Dear Mr. Tanick,
I am in receipt of your intimidating letter of May 7, 2010, regarding David McKee, MD.
Although I intend to seek counsel, I wish to detail my previous actions relative to Dr. McKee, my past and present intentions about Doctor McKee, and my possible future action relative to Dr. McKee.
After the encounter that I describe in enclosure 1 and enclosure 2, I felt the need for Doctor McKee to know that he treated my father rudely. I felt then and feel now that Dr. McKee owes my father an apology. I knew then and know now that Dr. McKee doesn’t want my opinion or agree with it. I felt that St. Luke’s Hospital and agencies that set standards for Dr. McKee should review my opinion and see if they agree.
My past actions:
I visited the following websites that seek patient ratings of doctors:
Insider Pages, Health Grades, Vitals.
I posted the contents of enclosure 1. I confined my comments to a recitation of my personal experiences. I did not state any generalities or any opinions about Dr. McKee’s medical skills.
I next sent enclosure 2 to: American Academy of Neurology; American Neurological Association; Attending Physician Craig L. Gilbertson, MD; Lake Superior Medical Society; Minnesota Board of Medical Practice; Minnesota Department of Health Office of Health Facility Complaints; Minnesota Medical Association; Minnesota Quality Improvement Organization, Office of Quality Monitoring, The Joint Commission (JCAHO); Patients Action Network, American Medical Association; St. Louis County Public Health and Human Services Advisory Committee Senior Ombudsman; St. Luke’s Hospital Patient Advocate.
Since I don’t know who influences Dr. McKee’s behavior, I sent enclosure 2 to any agency that might be able to counsel him about his bedside manner.
My present intentions:
Today, I received an email from the Ruth Martinez, Supervisor, Complaint Review Unit, MN Board of Medical Practice. It says “If you would like to file a complaint against one or more professionals regulated by the Board of Medical Practice, you may download the complaint forms from the Home Page of the Board’s website . Please sign and return the completed forms to our office by US Postal Service. You may wish to attach a copy of your e-mail summary to the complaint form, rather than rewriting your complaint. If you have any difficulty downloading the forms from the website, let me know and I will be happy to mail you the necessary forms.”
Before I received your letter, my inclination has been to let this drop. I got it off my chest. I think Dr. McKee’s behavior was rude. I felt somebody whose opinion matters to him should tell him “We got this complaint; we thought you should see it.” That was all I sought. I don’t think Dr. McKee’s curtness to my father merits loss or suspension of his license or privileges, and I know I don’t have the horsepower to accomplish that anyway. Until today, my actions were finished – no more letters, no more forum postings, no legal action.
My future intentions:
I shall, of necessity, visit the lawyer who has previously counseled me about estate planning and business contracts. I’ll ask him if my expressed complaints about Dr. McKee’s behavior do, in fact, constitute defamation. I anticipate he may have to refer me to another attorney.
I returned to the websites on which I posted enclosure 1. None provides a mechanism for my deleting my comments. If Dr. McKee has you contact me again, I’ll take that as his desire that I balance my remarks by amending them to include his response to me, so the public can see his rebuttal. I’ll also send a copy of your letter to each of my previous addressees, so they can see your assertion that Dr. McKee denies making the statement that I attribute to him. Otherwise, I have no intention of posting anything more about Dr. McKee or corresponding with anybody about Dr. McKee.
Only if I feel the necessity, I’ll write to Ms. Martinez. I’ll affirm to her that my original statements are true. I’ll ask for the complaint form – not only because of Dr. McKee’s behavior toward my father, but because he threatened legal action against me for using valid communications channels to seek a valid and measured response.
I affirm to you in this letter and in any other necessary venue that Doctor McKee said and did the things I’ve asserted. My mother, father, and wife will attest to that. Having had a stroke, my father has forgotten Dr. McKee’s name, but he does remember that his unpleasant conversation was with the neurologist who visited him. I’ve never met Dr. McKee before and wasn’t predisposed to picking a fight with one of my father’s treating sources. I felt Dr. McKee owed my father an apology. I’m pragmatic enough to know that won’t happen. Left to my own devices, I’m no longer inclined to discuss Dr. McKee’s behavior with anybody.
I’ll consider this matter finished. Will Dr. McKee?
DENNIS K. LAURION