Appeal Thread - Murray Filed for Appeal / Update: Appeal DENIED

Murray still hopes to practice medicine again and filed a civil lawsuit to regain his medical license in Texas.

He also has a mandatory settlement conference related to his California medical license scheduled for June 9.

If no settlement is reached, a hearing on the proposed revocation of his California license is set to begin July 1.


Can members of the public send letters of concern to these types of hearings? I don't feel comfortable with the idea that someone as ethically and mentally lacking as this man could even be considered to practice medicine.
 
passy001;3961026 said:
So game is OFFICIALLY over for Murray.

He should also forget about trying to regain his license. he's done for good.

Aren't dumb and dumber trying this case in supreme court, so it is not over yet or is it?
"His lawyer asked for the corrections to prepare for filing a further appeal with the California Supreme Court."


pug;3961046 said:
Murray still hopes to practice medicine again and filed a civil lawsuit to regain his medical license in Texas.

He also has a mandatory settlement conference related to his California medical license scheduled for June 9.

If no settlement is reached, a hearing on the proposed revocation of his California license is set to begin July 1.


Can members of the public send letters of concern to these types of hearings? I don't feel comfortable with the idea that someone as ethically and mentally lacking as this man could even be considered to practice medicine.

I did a search about this settlement thingy and seemingly it is a case where CM will be called on front of board members and speak up. First of all, I doubt he wants to speak on front of that panel as they are medical professionals and there is no chance in hell they are going to believe CM explaining that MJ forced him to give propofol at home + other deadly actions he did, and he didn't speak up during the trial either.
I think he is too coward to speak when he can be questioned by authorities, but he posses no such a problems when he speaks to tabloids when they do not question him.

See the following link, it is for Texas and they have it named as Informal settlement Conference, but I assume that all med boards have the same procedures.
http://impertinentremarks.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/TMB_publication.pdf

CM violated all of below so I don't believe he can persuade Cali med board to allow him practice again.
Other common violations
In addition to standard of care violations — which account for about 60% of TMB disciplinary actions — there are many other ways a physician’s actions can initiate a Board investigation. Some of the most common non-standard of care violations are listed below. Board rules that are cited can be found at www.tmb.state. tx.us/rules/rules/bdrules.php.

Non-therapeutic prescribing — the Board has taken an increasing number of actions against physicians who prescribe without a valid reason; who prescribe the same “pain cocktail” to every patient, frequently on a cash basis; and who prescribe to known abusers.

Prescribing to self, family, friends, or employees without keeping medical records. This violation can trip up well-meaning physicians. According to TMB rules, such prescribing is a violation if it is done “without taking an adequate history, performing a proper physical examination, and creating and maintaining adequate records.” Most TMB actions related to this violation involve prescribing controlled substances. It is always wise to create a patient record for anyone to whom a physician prescribes.

Boundary violations — typically involve “inappropriate conduct involving physician-patient relationship.” Sometimes sexual or romantic, sometimes financial, such personal relationships can harm patients and ruin a physician’s reputation. Avoid becoming emotionally or financially involved with patients outside the office.

Inadequate medical records — the bane of many physicians because it can make it difficult to determine whether a physician is practicing within the standard of care. When a patient files a complaint and the records are inadequate to confirm why the physician did what he or she did, the Board may take action on the inadequacy of the records. (Please see page 34 for additional information on TMB documentation requirements.)
 
Last edited:
Supreme Court

Court data last updated: 02/14/2014 03:05 AM

Case Summary Docket Briefs
Disposition Parties and Attorneys Lower Court
Case Summary

Supreme Court Case: S205570
Court of Appeal Case(s): Second Appellate District, Div. 7
B237677
Case Caption: PEOPLE v. MURRAY
Case Category: Review - Criminal Appeal
Start Date: 09/24/2012
Case Status: case closed

Ivy or somebody, does that mean that Supreme court refuses to hear or review CM's case and this is end of the road.
 
Murray still hopes to practice medicine again and filed a civil lawsuit to regain his medical license in Texas.

He also has a mandatory settlement conference related to his California medical license scheduled for June 9.

If no settlement is reached, a hearing on the proposed revocation of his California license is set to begin July 1.


Can members of the public send letters of concern to these types of hearings? I don't feel comfortable with the idea that someone as ethically and mentally lacking as this man could even be considered to practice medicine.

Where in Siberia ? :ctfu:
 
Bubs;3961089 said:
Supreme Court

Court data last updated: 02/14/2014 03:05 AM

Case Summary  Docket Briefs
Disposition Parties and Attorneys Lower Court
Case Summary

Supreme Court Case: S205570
Court of Appeal Case(s): Second Appellate District, Div. 7
B237677
Case Caption: PEOPLE v. MURRAY
Case Category: Review - Criminal Appeal
Start Date: 09/24/2012
Case Status: case closed

Ivy or somebody, does that mean that Supreme court refuses to hear or review CM's case and this is end of the road.

Since it gives the Supreme Court case number, I am confused about this as well. Supreme Court has denied to hear or review the case?
 
Supreme Court

Court data last updated: 02/14/2014 03:05 AM

Case Summary Docket Briefs
Disposition Parties and Attorneys Lower Court
Case Summary

Supreme Court Case: S205570
Court of Appeal Case(s): Second Appellate District, Div. 7
B237677
Case Caption: PEOPLE v. MURRAY
Case Category: Review - Criminal Appeal
Start Date: 09/24/2012
Case Status: case closed

Ivy or somebody, does that mean that Supreme court refuses to hear or review CM's case and this is end of the road.

Bubs, do you have a link to the Supreme Court docket please? I've done a search and can't find anything. I didn't think Murray had taken his case this far yet. I was thinking this would be his next move, so I'm kind of surprised if it's already done and dusted.
 
Bubs, do you have a link to the Supreme Court docket please? I've done a search and can't find anything. I didn't think Murray had taken his case this far yet. I was thinking this would be his next move, so I'm kind of surprised if it's already done and dusted.

I got it here: http://www.courts.ca.gov/2dca.htm
Scroll down the page to Search Case Information (in blue box)
Do search by Party and Type in CM name in the box and you get all the cases on his name.
If you click the first case number B237677, it will bring you to case summary.
There is this:Supreme Court Case: S205570 and when you click that it will show you the info I posted earlier.


Note, I don't know whether I read it right that Supreme court kicked out CM or does it mean something else. Ivy might knows if she pops in later.
 
ivy;3961012 said:
Court: No rehearing in Michael Jackson doc's case
Updated 6:39 pm, Thursday, February 13, 2014

0
0

inShare
Larger | Smaller
Printable Version
Email This
Font
LOS ANGELES (AP) — An appellate court is refusing to grant a rehearing to Michael Jackson's doctor on the appeal of his involuntary manslaughter conviction.

And for the 3rd time the court told Muarry:

<object width="144" height="100"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.dvbernard.com/Multimedia/BeatIt.swf"> <embed src="http://www.dvbernard.com/Multimedia/BeatIt.swf" width="144" height="100"> </embed> </object>

When will he get the message. I wish I could send him some crazy laughing, because I really feel like laughing at him right now.

Bubs if he is going in front of that panel well before he sits down, they would have already read all the documents and have a decision in their heads. They just let you talk as a procedure. There is no way he can explain his action & lack of appropriate action when a crisis arose.
 
Last edited:
The minute he opens his mouth before the medical board.. Its over. They will not be impressed by his sad face, whiney voice or the Bull *** he Spews from his whiney pie hole.
 
The minute he opens his mouth before the medical board.. Its over. They will not be impressed by his sad face, whiney voice or the Bull *** he Spews from his whiney pie hole.

^^Love this especially the underlined. I don't think I every saw that expression before!! It is a no win situation for him. I doubt he would be able to resist the urge to say his usual statements about him not doing anything wrong. I see his mouthpiece has remained quiet after this last response from the court. Maybe both she and Muarry are still perusing the new response trying to find invisible holes in it.
 
^^Love this especially the underlined. I don't think I every saw that expression before!! It is a no win situation for him. I doubt he would be able to resist the urge to say his usual statements about him not doing anything wrong. I see his mouthpiece has remained quiet after this last response from the court. Maybe both she and Muarry are still perusing the new response trying to find invisible holes in it.

About the bolded part, I agree with you.
I would like to be fly on the wall when he opens his mouth and says "I did nothing wrong" and what reaction he gets from panel.
 
Back
Top