Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Opening Brief

(1 of 26)
Case: 16-35763, 02/28/2017, ID: 10337347, DktEntry: 11-1, Page 1 of 25
No. 16-35763
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
___________________________________
Robert Finbar Brown et al.,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
PEACEHEALTH ST. JOSEPHS HOSPITAL,

STATE OF WASHINGTON, WHATCOM
COUNTY, HOLY SEE, POPE FRANCIS,
Defendants-Appellees.
___________________________________
ON APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE NO. C16-00626-JCC
HONORABLE, JOHN C. COUGHENOUR
APPELLANTS OPENING BRIEF
PEACEHEALTH ST. JOSEPHS Appellant Pro Se

HOSPITAL, D. Jeffrey Burnham. Robert Finbar Brown
STATE OF WASHINGTON, Lilia 7650 Birch Bay Dr. Oak 8
Lopez. JAY INSLEE, Governor, Lilia Blaine, Wa. 98230
Lopez. ATTORNEY GENERAL, Lilia 818 - 491-3558
Lopez. WA STATE BOARD OF bobbynorthlake@gmail.com
HEALTH, Lilia Lopez. WHATCOM
COUNTY, Atty. Jeffrey Sawyer for
SHERIFFF ELFO, PROSECUTOR
DAVID MCEACHRAN, AND, RON
ANDERSON, Chief North Whatcom
EMT, WILLIAM PERNET, Bellingham
Fire Chief, HOLY SEE Pope Francis
(2 of 26)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. i
1. STATEMENT OF ISSUE i
Whether District Court erred granting Defendants 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss
after; finding no plausible allegation of fraud or concealment, the Court holds
Plaintiff has not demonstrated Statute of Limitations should be tolled and,
heretofore, Whether Assisted Suicide Statutes in Washington State violated
the Natural Rights to Life and Religious Freedoms of Gloria Brown and her
First, Fifth, Eight and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution. ............
STATEMENT OF CASE ....2
ARGUMENT I 7
CONCLUSION....19
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
1. Whether District Court erred granting Defendants 12(b)(6) Motion to

Dismiss after; finding no plausible allegation of fraud or concealment,
the Court holds Plaintiff has not demonstrated Statute of Limitations
should be tolled and, heretofore, Whether Assisted Suicide Statutes
in Washington State violated the Natural Rights to Life and Religious
Freedoms of Gloria Brown and her First, Fifth, Eight and Fourteenth
Amendments to the U.S. Constitution
i
(3 of 26)
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Gloria Jean Brown chose life when she refused a DNR the day she was
admitted to PeaceHealth St. Josephs Hospital. Instead, Doctor Bree
Johnston, Head of Palliative Care, refused to accept her wish, saying she had
strange beliefs and wasnt thinking straight. Three days later PH risk
management forced GB to sign a medical directive when she was drugged
and incompetent that authorized two doctors to initiate a DNR without
informed consent according to an eyewitness affidavit. Their cunning
appearance to accommodate the Browns wishes for full resuscitation was
only a cruel and cunning trick by taking advantage of the couple at their
weakest moment to issue a DNR. The State refuses to prosecute its laws on
RCW 70.122.090 and Courts have failed to rule on merits of case for the
murder of Gloria Jean Brown. Doc. 1-1 pg 1 of 15 Complaint
NATURAL DEATH ACT

RCW 70.122.090
Criminal conductPenalties.
(1) Any person who willfully conceals, cancels, defaces, obliterates, or damages
the directive of another without such declarer's consent is guilty of a gross
misdemeanor.
(2) Any person who falsifies or forges the directive of another, or willfully
conceals or withholds personal knowledge of a revocation as provided in
RCW 70.122.040 with the intent to cause a withholding or withdrawal of life-
sustaining treatment contrary to the wishes of the declarer, and thereby,
because of any such act, directly causes life-sustaining treatment to be withheld
or withdrawn and death to thereby be hastened, shall be subject to prosecution
for murder in the first degree as defined in RCW 9A.32.030.
PH knew what they were doing was hastening her death, loading her
body with deadly drugs and morphine, confident the DNR was their insurance
2
(4 of 26)
to show she chose death over life, allowing them to refuse full resuscitation
after weakening the body enough to create a medical crisis that kills a patient
yet no one could challenge their decision not to resuscitate, while they avoid
liability for their crimes. PH criminally initiated comfort care without informed
consent to use deadly drugs guaranteeing she could not breath without 24
hour oxygen or move her legs. Fluoride and steroid drugs Cipro,
dexamethasone, prednisone Levaquin, have black boxes warnings not to
administer to people over 60, for causing permanent tendon damage while
Johnston intended to harm her respiratory system with morphine. They lied
saying she was in excruciating pain and was dying from leukemia. For 12
days hellish days they wouldnt allow the couple to leave or tell them what
they were administering, one woman hospital director told the husband hed
never take his wife out of PH alive.
According to GB it all started with one vindictive doctor named Jennie
Crews. Her evil cohorts Dr. Bree Johnston, Dr, Maury Sury, were angels of
death and risk management employees acted together to hasten her death
under color of law. They felt safe with Death with Dignity statutes that takes
criminality out of the equation, while Natural Death Act removes or is
ambiguous on criminal or civil liability, RCW 70.122.030, RCW 70.122.05, 80,
90., for killing a patient under color of law. Risk managements job is to
remove liability at any cost, doing whatevers necessary to avoid a potential
lawsuit even if it means accusing people of shooting hospital employees or
telling responders to kill a patient.
3
(5 of 26)
Gloria refused a DNR at PH, Doc 1-2 pg 7 of 25. She requested full
code later at UWMC. Doc 1-2 pg 8 of 25 Instead of saying GB had strange
beliefs, Johnston should have respected her decision not to have a DNR, GB
would still be alive. Here, Crews felt her authority challenged by the Browns
and made it rough for them calling APS while failing on purpose to tell GB her
blood counts rose swiftly due to the debriding at their wound center that gave
Crews the opportunity to blame the husband. GB lived thirty years despite
doctors telling her shed live only ten years until she ran into PeaceHealths
coven of three evil women doctors. Gloria called Dr. Jennie Crews vindictive,
she strove to guarantee GB would die, staying in the background yet
spreading false information that GB was in excruciating pain and dying from
leukemia and refusing to allow another oncologist to deal with the Browns.
GB stood up against her medical advice and the medical establishment who
forces deadly drugs onto patients, Double effect is a catholic solution to
torture pain management from the Dark Ages, it admits the bad result has to
be unintended. Johnston admitted in her ER notes she knew the morphine
would intentionally harm GBs ability to breath. Its diabolical that double
effect is even mentioned in Washington law, it accepts an ancient excuse for
torture as a permissible excuse for harming a patient. Later when UWMC did
their own tests they discovered immediately PH was lying, GB was never in
excruciating pain or dying from leukemia.
That is the tradeoff when you make euthanasia legal, opponents
warned of this years ago and claimed once voluntary euthanasia became legal
it would quickly evolve into involuntary euthanasia without informed consent

4
(6 of 26)
while both sides agreed informed consent was patients only safeguard from
nefarious acts.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
The compelling state interest standard will inevitably require this Court to
examine the legislative policies and pass on the wisdom of these policies in the
very process of deciding whether particular state interest put forward may or
may not be "compelling." for example, partakes more of judicial legislation than
it does of a determination of the intent of the drafters of the Fourteenth
Amendment. 174 Roe v. Wade, 410 US 113 Supreme Court 1973
Euthanasia reduces medical costs for the state at a terrible loss of life,
hospitals love it because its no fault malpractice insurance for their doctors,
innocent patients are vulnerable to evil acts under color of law. The state had
always protected the sanctity of life, now theyve pitched their tents with the
death mongers, while not serving a legitimate medical purpose. Law always
required either a competent patient or their proxy to have the choice to make
life or death decisions, however RCW 70.122.030 takes away the proxy or
family member, replaces it with strangers. PH broke state laws using their
own employees, while board of health is on permanent paid vacation, turns
its back to violations of patients rights to life and due process. PH isnt
required to conform to POLST or one legitimate style of Medical Directive
instead leaving it to risk management to use their own craftiness to eliminate
liability. If PH had not forced DNR without informed consent, administered
deadly comfort care drugs without informed consent and not told responders
GB was DNR and husband was going to shoot hospital employees and
responders, Gloria Jean Brown would still be alive.
5
(7 of 26)
RCW 70.122.30 Directive to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment.

(1) ..the directive shall be signed by the declarer in the presence of two
witnesses not related to the declarer by blood or marriage and who would not
be entitled to any portion of the estate of the declarer upon declarer's decease
under any will of the declarer or codicil thereto then existing or, at the time of
the directive, by operation of law then existing. In addition, a witness to a
directive shall not be the attending physician, an employee of the attending
physician or a health facility in which the declarer is a patient, or any person
who has a claim against any portion of the estate of the declarer upon declarer's
decease at the time of the execution of the directive
Two months later, after coming home from UWMC GB fainted,
Whatcom responders refused to render first aide or transport her immediately
to the hospital. They walked out, reported they witnessed her expire in their
home, yet her heart beat for 35 minutes in the ambulance while it sat in the
yard for 40 minutes with emergency room twenty minutes away. If a persons
heart is beating and theyre breathing, theres no reason not to take someone
directly to the hospital.
Responders never asked husband if his wife was DNR despite being
told repeatedly she was full resuscitation. Six or seven Bellingham crew
walked in, told first crew to put away a needle, then turned and walked out
and reported they witnessed her die in the home, when two young emts
werent able to lift her husband picked up his wife and placed her on the
gurney. Ambulance didnt leave so husband opened rear door to ride with his
wife, it looked as though she was thrown in, the right side of her face was up
against the wall of the ambulance, no oxygen, the one responder jumped up,
pushed the door hard against the husband, slammed it shut, ambulance
moved quickly to back of the complex till they murdered her.
6
(8 of 26)
According to Washington state emergency medical authorities,
responders have to immediately help a person, regardless of a DNR, state
law requires a POLST before a responder can legally not resuscitate, there
was no POLST.
There was a puncture wound by the responder over GBs internal
jugular vein reported in the UWMC autopsy report. GB had a PICC line placed
a week earlier in her upper arm by UWMC that eliminated completely any
need for a puncture wound over her internal jugular vein. An EMT investigator
said if wife had a PICC line and there was a puncture wound to the internal
jugular vein, it proves one thing, she was euthanized. Responders tried to
cover it up, saying they gave an IV to the external jugular vein. Expert said
even if they did the IV, that is only superficial, responders dont have a reason
to go near the internal jugular vein which is deep in the neck and can mean
instant death, PICC line was already in place for emergencies. An internal
jugular vein, central line catherization is reserved for only experienced
doctors in a sterile environment in a fully equipped hospital using Doppler
using a special maneuver to insert a central line thats deep and dangerously
close to the carotid artery whereas an external IV puncture wound is
superficial and routine.
PH risk management knew if she lived they could be in for a lawsuit
after crippling her legs and her ability to breath, then lying to UWMC that she
was in excruciating pain and dying from leukemia, it was all a lie according
to UWMC Ethics Committee, she was never in excruciating pain or dying from
leukemia who did their own tests and took her off opiates and she
7
(9 of 26)
immediately began to recover, however the damage was already done, GB
knew it. Without death statutes enabling hospitals to get rid of their mistakes
and PH deadly comfort care double effect crippling drugs and responders that
murdered her shed still be alive.
Her heart beat for 35 minutes inside the ambulance, when emergency
room was only 20 minutes away. Responders claim they tried CPR half way
to hospital, that was 50 minutes after they arrived, question is why even
bother if they didnt help her when they first walked in plus claiming falsely
she died in their home. If there was a legitimate DNR responders could have
been charged with battery for going against patients wishes not to be
resuscitated, thats another reason why death statutes need to revoked. It
seems unfair a person who wants to die can sue for battery and win, yet a
person who wanted to live is murdered, and her family cannot get justice
because defendants are immune from criminal and civil liabity under the
Natural Death Act RCW 70.122.051(2)
Any provider who participates in good faith in the withholding or withdrawal of

life-sustaining treatment from a qualified patient in accordance with the
requirements of this chapter, shall be immune from legal liability, including
civil, criminal, or professional conduct sanctions, unless otherwise negligent.
Detective Scanlon of the Bellingham Police was in the hospital that
same day reporting to hospital security and ER nurse he investigated alleged
death threats and they were erroneous. Both were surprised police were
involved. Nurse blurted out she just told responders Mrs. Brown was DNR and
that husband was going to shoot responders. Whatcom County prosecutor
wont investigate circumstances of murder or false accusations.
8
(10 of 26)
PH must have felt confident they had a legitimate DNR on her life to
tell responders to put her down, it sounds like theres a connection causing
revenge and hospital security connection with a case against Whatcom
County and its Sherriffs Department in federal court, Case # C14-1763RSL,
involving Browns seven-year-old granddaughter who was lured into
strangers apartment overnight and Whatcom Sheriffs department covered
it up. Whatcom County Prosecutors office lied to Supreme Court, telling them
their star witness never testified, turns out victim was an infamous Canadian
criminal who stole millions from Air Canada who was used to testify falsely
plaintiff hit him and was drunk at five in the afternoon. Plaintiff was able to
get crossing evidence after the trial proving he was on a bus coming from
Canada at five oclock, they all lied, even his own court appointed lawyer.
Evidence discovered November 18, 2016 on this case proves PICC line
was scheduled to be serviced on August 10, 2012, with diagram showing PICC
was in place on 8-8-2012 with no puncture wounds, proving puncture wound
could only be from responder.
ARGUMENT 1
District Court erred granting Defendants 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss after;

finding no plausible allegation of fraud or concealment, the Court holds
Plaintiff has demonstrated Statute of Limitations should be tolled and,
Heretofore, Assisted Suicide Statutes in Washington State violated the
Natural Rights to Life and Religious Freedoms of Gloria Brown and her First,
Fifth, Eight and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
9
(11 of 26)
STANDARD OF REVIEW
Findings of fact are reviewed for clear error. See Husain v. Olympic Airways,
316 F.3d 829, 835 (9th Cir. 2002). This standard also applies to the district
courts application of law to facts where it requires an essentially factual
review. See id. The court reviews adopted findings with close scrutiny, even
though review remains to be for clear error. See Phoenix Engg & Supply Inc.
v. Universal Elec. Co., 104 F.3d 1137, 1140 (9th Cir. 1997).
FRAUD AND CONCEALMENT
PeaceHealth had no justification for initiating comfort care drugs
without informed consent, they administered Cipro, Morphine,
Dexamethasone, Predisone, And Levaquin all without informed consent, when
she was NOT in excruciating pain or dying from leukemia as discovered by
UWMC Ethics Committee who did tests of their own, that is what makes this
case so egregious.
The Brown family was never told of a DNR until initials DNR were
discovered in Bellingham police records in November 2014 that were not
available until two years after the event. It finally answered plaintiffs haunting
question why responders did not help his wife. Plaintiff asked PH for
information on the DNR. Two months later on January 26, 2015, PH admitted
they initiated the DNR on June 12, 2012, Doc 1-2, 5 of 25, Doc 23-1, 2 of 5.,
claiming it was hospital policy. Defense argued from beginning DNR does not
exist. The first few lines of the medical directive, a part not shown the patient,
states two doctors can initiate a DNR. DNR was contradictory to Gs wish for
full resuscitation and illegal, according to Bellingham Police detective Scanlon.
Courts failed to rule on plaintiffs four summary judgement motions
Doc. 23 1 of 5, while Defense argues consistently medical directive only
10
(12 of 26)
supplied full resuscitation and did not initiate DNR, in direct contradiction to
PHs own admission. Doc 23-1 pg 2 of 5.
Defendants attorney also implies falsely that theres been a final
judgement on merits. Doc, 14 pg 9 of 13. Doc. 22 pg 4 of 5. Court also
granted defendants erroneous finding of material fact that DNR doesnt exist
and dismissed case, despite PH admission they issued DNR, doesnt make
sense. "A district court may abuse its discretion if it does not apply the correct
law or if it rests its decision on a clearly erroneous finding of material
fact." Bogovich v. Sandoval, 189 F.3d 999, 1001 (9th Cir.1999) (quoting United
States v. Plainbull, 957 F.2d 724, 725 (9th Cir.1992)). PH admits they issued DNR,
yet no Court has made a ruling on merits or plaintiffs four summary
judgements.
Plaintiff knew DNR was false because they did not believe in suicide,
suicide was against their religious convictions yet he had no way to prove
DNR was illegal. PH admitted they initiated the DNR but refused to answer
whether they had informed consent to issue DNR, stating only it was hospital
policy. On September 9, 2015, Doc 23-1, 1 of 5, an eyewitness gave an
affidavit revealing actual proof that G was forced to sign for a medical
directive when she was drugged and incompetent.
They forced the medical directive so they could unknowingly initiate a
DNR, they were one and the same yet no one ever told us, husband realized
it meant only one thing, they not only forced a medical directive but they also
forced the DNR which killed his wife, without informed consent.
11
(13 of 26)
The facts came together and husband realized theyd been tricked to
initiate a DNR without informed consent to relieve PH of responsibility if she
died, theyd being able to show she chose death over life therefore absolving
themselves from any chance of liability and dissuading husband from ever
discovering facts enabling him to prove essential elements of a future cause
of action for wrongful death or medical negligence necessary to go to trial. It
basically proves they were premeditating her death.
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS TOLLED INDEFINITELY
The District Court erred on tolling of time, according to legislation,
when there is intentional fraud or concealment by doctors or hospitals there
is no statute of limitations. Duke v Boyd 942 P. 2d 351 Wash Supreme
Court 1997 Gloria Brown was not in excruciating pain and dying from
leukemia according to UWMC medical reports, in the twelve days PH kept
Gloria Brown they deliberately made it so shed never walk or breath again
without 24 hour oxygen, then killed her under the color of law. The statute
of limitations are tolled until there is actual knowledge, just as in any criminal
murder case, though done in a medical setting. What PH did to her with
comfort care drugs without informed consent was criminal, fluoride and
steroids and morphine were used not for a legitimate medical purpose but to
cripple and kill using color of law death statutes to involuntarily euthanize
her. See. Senate Journal at 491. Duke v. Boyd, 942 P. 2d 351 - Wash:
Supreme Court 1997 His statement that there is no statute of limitation in
cases of fraud or intentional concealment supports literal reading of RCW
4.16.350 that proof of fraud or intentional concealment
12
(14 of 26)
permanently suspends the statute of limitation. It may seem unduly harsh
to suspend permanently the statute of limitation when doctors engage in
fraud or intentional concealment. Regardless, we cannot question the wisdom
of this policy, and we must enforce the statute as written. See Geschwind, 121
Wash.2d at 841, 854 P.2d 1061.
Dr. Jennie Crews, Dr. Maury Sury, Dr. Bree Johnston and Dr. Don Berry
by their acts of never informing the Brown family of the DNR and issuing it
without informed consent and refusing to show their signatures authorizing
the illegal DNR on the life of his wife Gloria Jean Brown or produce their
authorizations assigning deadly double effect crippling comfort care drugs
without the Browns permission "
A prescription for a controlled substance to be effective must be issued
for a legitimate medical purpose" 21 CFR 1306.04(a) (2005). We have
previously acknowledged that the Regulation gives added content to the text
of the statute: "The medical purpose requirement explicit in subsection (c)
[of 829] could be implicit in subsections (a) and (b). Regulation [1]306.04
makes it explicit." Moore, supra, at 137, n. 13.[1] Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 US
243 - Supreme Court 2006 at 280, therein causing severe crippling damage
to her tendons and making it so she could not breath with morphine, claiming
falsely she was in excruciating pain and dying from leukemia, all this tolls
statute of limitations, no less criminal than when Josef Mengele ordered
doctors to murder Jewish people.
13
(15 of 26)
STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS TOLLED TO SEPTEMBER 9, 2016
In the alternative, the statute of limitations is tolled on State of
Washington RCW 4.16.350's 1-year discovery rule. District Court claimed
Statute of Limitations ran out August 8, 2015, three years after death of
plaintiffs wife on August 8, 2012. RCW 4.16.350(3) states a person has either
three years or one year to discover injury was caused by a said act or
omission, fraud or concealment whichever period expires last on multiple acts
or omissions.
In Duke, by way of contrast, the plaintiff alleged that the physician
made misrepresentations and lied about the uniqueness of her unfavorable
results from treatment. Washington's intentional concealment proviso
requires more than just the alleged negligent act or omission forming the
basis for the cause of action. The proviso is aimed at conduct or omissions
intended to prevent the discovery of negligence or of the cause of action.
Plaintiff had no actual proof DNR was illegal even after PH admitted
they issued DNR on January 26, 2015. It wasnt until the eyewitness affidavit
on September 9, 2015 Doc. 23-1 pg 1 of 5, that gave plaintiff actual proof
medical directive supposedly for full resuscitation was also authorization for
the DNR therefore proving DNR was forced because they are one and the
same. Doc. 23-1 pg 5 of 5. It was proof there was an ulterior reason behind
them forcing a full resuscitation, it actually initiated the DNR that was found
in the police records Doc 23-1 pg 3 of 5, and that PH admitted to. Doc 23-1
pg 2 of 5, all material facts that could prove essential elements necessary to
prove to a jury several causes of action. Tolling based on
14
(16 of 26)
intentional concealment requires a showing of "conduct or omissions
intended to prevent the discovery of negligence or of the cause of
action." Gunnier v. Yakima Heart Ctr., Inc., 134 Wn.2d 854, 867, 953 P.2d 1162
(1998).
Plaintiff learned actual knowledge of the act of fraud or concealment
from the eyewitness affidavit on September 9, 2015 that included facts of
concealment and fraud and criminal acts which forced his wife to sign without
informed consent when she was incompetent. Time should not have accrued
till plaintiff discovers all material facts of his several causes of action,
whichever expires last, keeping responders in mind that only court ordered
discovery will reveal the truth, that will prove essential elements of the cause
of action for duty, breach, causation, damages, breach of duty and informed
consent. See Ohler v. Tacoma General Hospital, 598 P. 2d 1358 - Wash:
Supreme Court 1979; We hold appellant's claim against Tacoma General did
not accrue until she discovered or reasonably should have discovered all
essential elements of her possible cause of action. Court would expect actual
knowledge of additional acts of fraud and concealment will surface during
discovery necessary to prove essential elements on responders major role in
her death by the puncture wound.
RCW 4.16.350(3)
(3) shall be commenced within three years of the act or omission alleged to
have caused the injury or condition, or one year of the time the patient or his
or her representative discovered or reasonably should have discovered that the
injury or condition was caused by said act or omission, whichever period expires
later, except that in no event shall an action be commenced more than eight
years after said act or omission: PROVIDED, That the time for commencement
of an action is tolled upon proof of fraud, intentional concealment, or the
presence of a foreign body not intended to have a therapeutic or diagnostic
15
(17 of 26)
purpose or effect, until the date the patient or the patient's representative has
actual knowledge of the act of fraud or concealment, or of the presence of the
foreign body; the patient or the patient's representative has one year from the
date of the actual knowledge in which to commence a civil action for damages.
Plaintiff had one year of the time he discovered death was caused by
the act or omission of hiding DNR within illegal medical directive, Doc. 23-1
pg 5 of 5, then PeaceHealth disclosed DNR on January 26, 2015, Doc. 23-1
pg 2 of 5, which at that time for commencement of an action is tolled upon
proof of fraud, intentional concealment, until the date the husband had actual
knowledge of the act of fraud or concealment, which was September 9, 2015
Doc 23-1 pg 1 of 5., whereupon husband had one year from date of the actual
knowledge of fraud and concealment starting September 9, 2015 to
September 9, 2016 to commence a civil action in federal court for civil rights
for wrongful death. State courts filing were all timely, yet Courts refused to
consider the merits of his case and summary judgement motions with same
evidence that could have been adjudged on merits two years earlier, it would
seem unfair for a case to be dismissed for a plaintiff that only did what he
thought was right as far as letting the state handle its own problems first
before having to file in the federal courts.
Plaintiff filed in District Court on April 29, 2016, within the one year
proviso on fraud and concealment from September 9, 2015 to September 9,
2016 therefore filing in federal court was timely and within eight year limit of
repose. State action was also timely, within the three-year statute of
limitations, when theres no ruling on the merits, there is no res judicata.
See. Board of Regents of Univ. of State of NY v. Tomanio, 446 US 478 -
16
(18 of 26)
Supreme Court 1980 The District Court rejected these defenses. First, the
court found that res judicata would not bar consideration of a 1983 claim
in federal court if the constitutional claim was not actually litigated and
determined in the prior state-court proceeding.
Plaintiff requested and received information back from PH on January
26, 2015 Dckt 23-1 page 2 of 5. PH verified they issued the DNR, actually
saying directive
overrode her original directive, claiming they had no copy of a signed DNR,
only ER notes, wherein it says Dr. Bree Johnston wrote DNR on her own but
then later that Dr. Berry also signed the DNR, no where do they admit it was
illegal, only that it was hospital policy. Plaintiff knew DNR was illegal because
their religious beliefs never approved of suicide but he had no information to
prove in a court it was illegal or why doctors would ever go against families
beliefs without getting permission. Their attorney denies the medical directive
had anything to do with the DNR but its obvious now medical directive
authorized two doctors to initiate a DNR, how else did doctors get their so-
called informed consent to issue the illegal DNR. Medical directive illegally
contradicts itself by allowing both full resuscitation and DNR according to
Bellingham Police.
SUMMARY JUDGEMENT - STANDARD OF REVIEW
An order granting summary judgment is reviewed de novo. Rivas v. Overlake

Hosp. Med. Ctr., 164 Wash.2d 261, 266, 189 P.3d 753 (2008). Summary judgment
"shall be rendered forthwith if ... there is no genuine issue as to any material
fact and... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." CR
56(c). We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving
party. Miller v. Jacoby, 145 Wash.2d 65, 71, 33 P.3d 68 (2001).
17
(19 of 26)
District Court erred by not ruling on plantiffs summary judgment
motion, Doc. 23 pg 1 of 5. Court of Appeals should consider appellant filed
three Summary Judgement Motions in State Courts and one in District Court
without a ruling. Plaintiff timely filed the case in Whatcom County August 7,
2012 against PeaceHealth Hospital only without one ruling on the merits.
In. Keck v. Collins, 357 P. 3d 1080 - Wash: Supreme Court 2015 The
"`purpose of summary judgment is not to cut litigants off from their right of
trial by jury if they really have evidence which they will offer on a trial, it is
to carefully test this out, in advance of trial by inquiring and determining
whether such evidence exist.'" Preston v. Duncan, 55 Wash.2d 678, 683, 349 P.2d
605 (1960) (quoting Whitaker v. Coleman, 115 F.2d 305, 307 (5th Cir.1940)).
Defendant claimed falsely PH was granted summary judgement in
Superior Court, actually it was plaintiff yet state courts rejected his three
summary judgement motions which should have settled this case a year and
a half ago. District Court would not hear plaintiffs summary judgement
motion, Dckt 23, 1 of 5, on merits and fraudulent concealment. In.515
Grimmett v. Brown, 75 F. 3d 506 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1996 "The
doctrine [of fraudulent concealment] is properly invoked only if a plaintiff
establishes `affirmative conduct upon the part of the defendant which would,
under the circumstances of the case, lead a reasonable person to believe that
he did not have a claim for relief.'") (citation omitted); Rutledge v. Boston
Woven Hose & Rubber Co., 576 F.2d 248, 249-50 (9th Cir.1978); Conerly v.
Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 623 F.2d 117, 120 (9th Cir.1980); Pocahontas, 828 F.2d at
18
(20 of 26)
218-19 515*515 (noting that fraudulent concealment "implies conduct more
affirmatively directed at deflecting litigation") (emphasis added)
Here, Defendants cannot present rebuttal evidence to plaintiffs
material facts that prove essential elements and rebuttal evidence plaintiff
alleged necessary to go to trial, on concealment, plaintiff has prima facie
evidence; an affidavit from an eyewitness, UWMC autopsy, ethics committee
reports, affidavit from eyewitness, Bellingham Police records, etc. expert
witnesses are not required when evidence is more than sufficient and plaintiff
is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. An issue of material
fact is genuine if evidence is sufficient for a reasonable jury to return a verdict
for nonmoving party. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248,
106 S.Ct. 2505, 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986) Herron v. KING Broad.
Co., 112 Wash.2d 762, 768, 776 P.2d 98 (1989)
PH attorney refuses to acknowledge Doc 23-1, 2 of 5., is proof PH did
initiate a DNR on GB. PH knows their medical directive, Doc. 23-1 pg 5 of 5,
is illegal, that it caused GBs death but wont admit, it needs to go to a jury.
Small indescriminate print at the top of medical directive allowed two PH
doctors to initiate DNR on the plaintiffs wife who was drugged and
incompetent according to eyewitness affidavit and unable to comprehend
what risk management was forcing her to sign without informed consent. PH
continues to refuse to show plaintiff a signed DNR order, claiming they dont
utilize a separate document for that process, only the patients medical
record, per hospital policy. A consult note that GB denied a DNR, that doctor
19
(21 of 26)
said she had bizarre ideas about treatments and that husband acted
threatening to staff, is no reason to issue a DNR.
A few indescriminate words in the medical directive authorized the DNR
that defense cant seem to find anywhere. Husband was told Directive was
for full resuscitation, showed him checked boxes for full resuscitation, he
never imagined it would authorize a DNR which neither of the Browns would
ever sign for. He was never told medical directive contradicted patients
wishes or authorized two doctors to initiate an illegal DNR, it was forced on
his wife by PeaceHealth risk management who later used that false authority
to tell responders not to resuscitate his wife and kill her.
Responders hid the fact that they punctured her internal jugular vein,
instead reporting an IV to the external jugular vein, she had a PICC line that
made any puncture wound redundant, a catherization to the internal jugular
vein is only to be performed by experienced doctors in a sterile environment
in a hospital setting with use of Doppler, not something an inexperienced
responder would attempt in an ambulance.
It's all a crime, doctors never had legal informed consent, she declined
DNR three days earlier and two months later at UWMC, Doc 1-2 7 of 25, they
forced the DNR at PH when she was drugged and incompetent and tricked
husband into thinking it was for full resuscitation.
DOCTRINE OF FRADULENT CONCEALMENT
Doctrine of fraudulent concealment is invoked only if the plaintiff both
pleads and proves that the defendant actively misled them, and that they had
neither actual nor constructive knowledge of the facts constituting their cause
20
(22 of 26)
of action despite their due diligence. Volk, 816 F.2d at 1415 ("The doctrine
[of fraudulent concealment] is properly invoked only if a plaintiff establishes
`affirmative conduct upon the part of the defendant which would, under the
circumstances of the case, lead a reasonable person to believe that he did
not have a claim for relief.'") (citation omitted); Rutledge v. Boston Woven
Hose & Rubber Co., 576 F.2d 248, 249-50 (9th Cir.1978); Conerly v.
Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 623 F.2d 117, 120 (9th
Cir.1980); Pocahontas, 828 F.2d at 218-19)(noting that fraudulent
concealment "implies conduct more affirmatively directed at deflecting
litigation") (emphasis added) In. 515 Grimmett v. Brown, 75 F. 3d 506 -
Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 1996.
PH forced DNR and went around husband by telling him directive was
for full resuscitation which was half the truth, the other half they didnt tell
him was it initiated DNR, although he should have been the one witnessing
the directive if it was for making life and death decisions, since he had the
power of attorney, Doc 23-1 pg 4 of 5 not hospital employees using RCW
70.122.030 Directive to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment. PH
did this to have it appear GB agreed to sign a DNR and chose on her own not
to have full resuscitation which shows conduct upon the part of PH to lead
the husband to believe he did not have a claim for relief by never telling
husband that the DNR existed, if PH were sued, PH would be able to convince
a reasonable person to believe husband would not have a claim for relief for
fraudulent concealment because his wife signed for the DNR in front of
witnesses who would testify she was competent and agreed to not wanting
21
(23 of 26)
to be resuscitated, plaintiff claims this demonstrates active fraudulent
concealment.
This liberty interest in bodily integrity was phrased in a general way by
then-Judge Cardozo when he said, "[e]very human being of adult years and
sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body"
in relation to his medical needs. Schloendorff v. Society of New York Hospital, 211
N. Y. 125, 129, 105 N. E. 92, 93 (1914). The familiar examples of this right derive
from the common law of battery and include the right to be free from medical
invasions into the body, Cruzan v. Director, Mo. Dept. of Health, 497 U. S., at 269-
279, as well as a right generally to resist enforced medication,
see Washington v. Harper, 494 U. S. 210, 221-222, 229 (1990). Thus "[i]t is settled
now . . . that the Constitution places limits on a State's right to interfere with
a person's most basic decisions about . . . bodily integrity." Casey, 505 U. S.,
at 849 (citations omitted); see also Cruzan, 497 U. S., at 278; id., at 288
(O'Connor, J., concurring); Washington v. Harper, supra, at 221-
222; Winston v. Lee, 470 U. S. 753, 761-762
(1985); Rochin v. California, 342 778*778U. S., at 172. We talk about liberty and
freedom, the right to do with our bodys what we choose, truth is its been
taken away by making euthanasia legal in Washington State. Death with
Dignity and Natural Death Acts remove criminal and civil responsibility take
away our liberty, sovereignty, choice and our only safeguard against
nefarious acts, informed consent. We need to have referendum to look into
how this could be accomplished the fastest, it should never happen again to
another human being. The Supreme Court could overrule and ban euthanasia
22
(24 of 26)
but that will take time, the quickest way is for the State to announce theyre
revoking DWD to bring back some sanity before it evolves into a full-fledged
holocaust as it did in Germany. The State could announce the good news,
that now everyone has choice and informed consent to do anything with their
body including doctor assisted suicide, let the few who want that to do it
legally so no one gets blamed, but no more statutes removing criminal or civil
responsibility for hospital, doctors and risk management.
Gloria Jean Brown wanted to live, yet her life and her choice to live
was taken away from her brutally against her will without respect for her
informed consent or for her choice to live by doctors at PeaceHealth Hospital
and an emergency responder who feel they are exonerated by the Natural
Death Act.
Those few words below were hidden in the medical directive for full
resuscitation below, it was all PeaceHealth St. Josephs Hospital thought they
needed to issue a DNR responsible for the needless death of Gloria Jean
Brown.
FALSE MEDICAL DIRECTIVE / by Peacehealth St. Josephs Hospital
1. If all the following shall occur:
(a) Two independent physicians certify that I have an incurable

injury, disease, or illness which is certain to cause my death:
(b) Life sustaining procedures would only serve to artificially
prolong the moment of death; and;
(c) My physician determines that my death is imminent
regardless of the use of these life sustain procedures;
I direct that these life-sustaining procedures shall be withheld
or withdrawn, and that I be permitted to die naturally, with dignity
23
(25 of 26)
Court of Appeals should find plaintiff presented plausible allegations of
fraud or concealment necessary to toll the Statute of Limitations to prove
District Court filing was timely and that case can go to trial and additionally
since the issue here involves substantial questions regarding serious public
safety issues on whether legalized voluntary euthanasia in Washington state
has evolved into involuntary euthanasia under color of law that is a
substantial issue of public interest and safety wherein the Court in Glucksberg
remarked the subject of euthanasia might have to be revisited if one person
was killed involuntarily under color of law, perhaps the Court of Appeals may
consider certiorari to U.S. Supreme Court. I hereby certify I have
electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Court for the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the CM/ECF system.
I, Robert Finbar Brown, declare under penalty of perjury, under the
laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct and
plaintiff has filed this document with COA EM/ECF system and court reporter
is not in default with regard to any designated transcripts.
Signed at Blaine, Wa. 98230
Appellant Pro Se
February 28, 2017 /Robert Finbar Brown
24
(26 of 26)
16-35763
9th Circuit Case Number(s)
NOTE: To secure your input, you should print the filled-in form to PDF (File > Print > PDF Printer/Creator).
*********************************************************************************
When All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system
on (date) 02/28/2017 .
I certify that all participants in the case are registered CM/ECF users and that service will be
accomplished by the appellate CM/ECF system.
Signature (use "s/" format) s/ Robert Finbar Brown
*********************************************************************************
When Not All Case Participants are Registered for the Appellate CM/ECF System
I hereby certify that I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court for the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit by using the appellate CM/ECF system
on (date) .
Participants in the case who are registered CM/ECF users will be served by the appellate
CM/ECF system.
I further certify that some of the participants in the case are not registered CM/ECF users. I
have mailed the foregoing document by First-Class Mail, postage prepaid, or have dispatched it
to a third party commercial carrier for delivery within 3 calendar days to the following
non-CM/ECF participants:
Signature (use "s/" format) s/Robert Finbar Brown

Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Opening Brief

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals Opening Brief

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

(1 of 26)

Case: 16-35763, 02/28/2017, ID: 10337347, DktEntry: 11-1, Page 1 of 25

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

PEACEHEALTH ST. JOSEPHS HOSPITAL,

APPELLANTS OPENING BRIEF

PEACEHEALTH ST. JOSEPHS Appellant Pro Se

TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................. i

STATEMENT OF CASE ....2

1. Whether District Court erred granting Defendants 12(b)(6) Motion to

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

admitted to PeaceHealth St. Josephs Hospital. Instead, Doctor Bree

management forced GB to sign a medical directive when she was drugged

and incompetent that authorized two doctors to initiate a DNR without

informed consent according to an eyewitness affidavit. Their cunning

appearance to accommodate the Browns wishes for full resuscitation was

murder of Gloria Jean Brown. Doc. 1-1 pg 1 of 15 Complaint

NATURAL DEATH ACT

dexamethasone, prednisone Levaquin, have black boxes warnings not to

never take his wife out of PH alive.

According to GB it all started with one vindictive doctor named Jennie

criminality out of the equation, while Natural Death Act removes or is

ambiguous on criminal or civil liability, RCW 70.122.030, RCW 70.122.05, 80,

remove liability at any cost, doing whatevers necessary to avoid a potential

lawsuit even if it means accusing people of shooting hospital employees or

telling responders to kill a patient.

code later at UWMC. Doc 1-2 pg 8 of 25 Instead of saying GB had strange

she strove to guarantee GB would die, staying in the background yet

forces deadly drugs onto patients, Double effect is a catholic solution to

be unintended. Johnston admitted in her ER notes she knew the morphine

effect is even mentioned in Washington law, it accepts an ancient excuse for

excruciating pain or dying from leukemia.

That is the tradeoff when you make euthanasia legal, opponents

it would quickly evolve into involuntary euthanasia without informed consent

own employees, while board of health is on permanent paid vacation, turns

required to conform to POLST or one legitimate style of Medical Directive

instead leaving it to risk management to use their own craftiness to eliminate

liability. If PH had not forced DNR without informed consent, administered

responders, Gloria Jean Brown would still be alive.

RCW 70.122.30 Directive to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment.

Two months later, after coming home from UWMC GB fainted,

Whatcom responders refused to render first aide or transport her immediately

directly to the hospital.

moved quickly to back of the complex till they murdered her.

According to Washington state emergency medical authorities,

responders have to immediately help a person, regardless of a DNR, state

There was a puncture wound by the responder over GBs internal

jugular vein, central line catherization is reserved for only experienced

doctors in a sterile environment in a fully equipped hospital using Doppler

close to the carotid artery whereas an external IV puncture wound is

superficial and routine.

PH risk management knew if she lived they could be in for a lawsuit

immediately began to recover, however the damage was already done, GB

murdered her shed still be alive.

resuscitated, thats another reason why death statutes need to revoked. It

Natural Death Act RCW 70.122.051(2)

Any provider who participates in good faith in the withholding or withdrawal of

Detective Scanlon of the Bellingham Police was in the hospital that

same day reporting to hospital security and ER nurse he investigated alleged

that husband was going to shoot responders. Whatcom County prosecutor

wont investigate circumstances of murder or false accusations.

revenge and hospital security connection with a case against Whatcom

County and its Sherriffs Department in federal court, Case # C14-1763RSL,

involving Browns seven-year-old granddaughter who was lured into