Inadequate Litigant’s Cases Dismissed Plaintiff, by her Litigation Appears to Establish the Report for a Mental Health Evaluation Was Appropriate Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gECRyZ-f, see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gs_4Bby9 and at https://lnkd.in/g67dDK8q, and https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4950 posts. Post 4950 In Samreen Riaz v. State Of California, et al., F087504, California Court of Appeals, Fifth District (December 2, 2024) the California Court of Appeals found itself asked to resolve suits against an individual and the state of California from an inadequate but excessively litigious plaintiff. FACTS Samreen Riaz was a licensed dentist – she lost her license to practice because of the facts underlying this case. According to her, there is an elaborate conspiracy to harass, stalk, threaten, and ultimately prevent her from testifying in a separate “whistleblower” case involving “OSHA and HIPPA Violations” at a medical facility. Riaz sued raising numerous claims against numerous individuals and government entities. The opposing parties challenged the complaint’s viability through demurrer and anti-SLAPP proceedings. The trial court sustained the demurrers and granted the anti-SLAPP motion, leaving Riaz with no viable claim. Riaz appealed. BACKGROUND The facts underlying this case involve four discrete events. First: Riaz sued a medical facility and suffered an alleged eye injury while attempting to testify in that case. Second: She sought treatment for that eye injury but was refused service and then sued that doctor in small claims court. Third: That doctor reported Riaz to the Dental Board of California which, in turn, initiated mental health competence proceedings against Riaz. Fourth: Riaz’s license to practice dentistry was revoked, and she filed the complaint at issue in this case. Initial Lawsuit Against Medical Facility Acting as a “whistleblower,” Riaz “disclosed … OSHA, Hippa, recruited patient, potential insurance fraud and anti-competent activities in the market” at a medical facility. After filing a lawsuit on that basis, Riaz claimed she suffered “organized harassment,” culminating in “permanent eye damage” after a sheriff-department employee pointed a finger in her face while attempting to enter the courthouse in her “whistleblower” case. Visiting Doctor for Eye Injury Riaz visited Dr. Cantrell to treat an eye injury. She claimed Cantrell became combative, refused to answer Riaz’s questions, and declined to treat Riaz. The next day, Riaz filed a complaint with the Medical Board of California. Several days later, she filed a small claims case against Cantrell, essentially alleging discrimination, negligence, and retaliation. A small claims judgment was eventually entered in Cantrell’s favor. Report to Dental Board Cantrell reported Riaz to the Dental Board. The Dental Board issued an order to Riaz to comply with a mental health examination “to evaluate her fitness to practice safely ….” (See Bus. &Prof. Code, § 820.) Riaz failed to comply with the order. Since Riaz continued to disobey the order, her license to practice dentistry was ultimately revoked. Instant Complaint and Judgment Riaz sued Cantrell, various government entities, and several individuals working for those entities (collectively, the State). The complaint alleged an elaborate conspiracy among all the defendants to injure Riaz, to intimidate her to prevent her from testifying, and to retaliate against her for the “whistleblower” case. The trial court sustained the demurrers and granted the anti-SLAPP motion resulting in total dismissal. DISCUSSION Did the trial court err in granting the anti-SLAPP motion? Did it err in sustaining the demurrers? The California Court of Appeals concluded the trial court did not err. Anti-SLAPP Motion In the anti-SLAPP motion, Cantrell argued his furnishing information to the Dental Board was protected activity and defeated claims “for discrimination, fraud, defamation, retaliation[,] and intentional infliction of emotional distress[.]” In opposition to the anti-SLAPP motion, Riaz claimed again Cantrell “made inaccurate, knowingly misleading statements to the [D]ental [B]oard to defame and harm [Riaz] based on disclosing patient information.” The trial court concluded furnishing those documents to the board constituted protected activity. ANALYSIS Litigation of an anti-SLAPP motion involves a two-step process. First, the moving defendant bears the burden of establishing that the challenged allegations or claims that arise from protected activity in which the defendant has engaged. Second, for each claim that does arise from protected activity, the plaintiff must show the claim has at least minimal merit. If the plaintiff cannot make this showing, the court will, and did, strike the claim. If there is no merit, the claim is stricken. The Court of Appeals noted that Riaz failed to adduce any evidence-including exhibits, declarations, judicial notice, and testimony-to substantiate her allegation Cantrell reported her to the Dental Board for retribution. She failed to adduce admissible evidence on the point. DEMURRERS Both Cantrell and the State filed demurrers to Riaz’s complaint.. Additional Background A small claims plaintiff is collaterally estopped from relitigating the same issue in superior court where the record is sufficiently clear to determine that the issue was litigated and decided against plaintiff in the small claims action. Governmental immunity is an affirmative defense properly raised by demurrer. Government Code section 821.6 immunizes public employees from liability for ‘instituting or prosecuting any judicial or administrative proceeding’ within the scope of their employment, even if the employees act ‘maliciously and without probable cause. Riaz alleged her claims arose in July 2022. Her written government claim was submitted in April 2023, more than six months later. Accordingly, the claims were barred, at least insofar as they stemmed from the section 820 order. CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY Riaz failed to allege colorable claims against either Cantrell or the State. The potential claims against Cantrell were either tried and resolved against her in small claims court or dismissed pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute. The potential claims against the State were either barred for failure to timely present them under the Government Claims Act, or the State was immune under Government Code sections 821.6, 818.4, and 821.2. ZALMA OPINION It is axiomatic that a person who represents himself has a fool for a client. The litigation history, the multiple actions, and the lack of consistency and evidence, establish that Dr. Cantrell was correct when he advised the Dental Board that a mental health examination to evaluate her fitness to practice safely…” was correct. She refused to fulfill her obligation to the Dental Board to be evaluated because she was concerned she would not pass. This case is an abuse of Doctor Cantrell and the state and should have resulted in serious sanctions. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk

The Ranger: The Guy With A Gun In A Knife Fight A lot of people are calling the Ranger the strongest class in the sport, and whilst this is a chunk of an exaggeration, there may be some reality to these claims. The Ranger has absurd ranged harm with bows in combination with their Perks, super vicinity-denial options with bear traps and Quick-Shot, and even innate restoration with Rations. An archer elegance with get entry to to infinite arrows in a sport in which both the protective and evasive alternatives are sparse is certainly terrifying. Everyone having guns in Escape from Tarkov was one thing, but this is completely distinctive. This is exactly why the Ranger works nicely in solo play. Even the most veteran Dark and Darker players still get hit by AI enemies from time to time, but the Ranger's combat loop basically gets rid of that threat. Plus, towards actual gamers, a nicely-placed Ranger can easily fight and win against a three-character squad unmarried-handedly. And, even though their combatants do manage to close the space, Rangers can use their innate movement speed and endure traps to outrun and frustrate their pursuers before finishing them off with a bolt as quickly as they permit their guards down. The Fighter: A True Swiss Army Knife Class Where Rangers are a brilliant solo elegance because of their overall utility in areas, ranged fight and pace, Fighters are properly solo instructions because of their widespread software in all areas. Fighters have proper health, true defense, desirable offense, appropriate survivability, top Perks, proper Skills, and are simply all-round pretty excellent. However, be aware how none of their aspects are described as 'notable' or 'outstanding'. Yes, Fighters are accurate at maximum things, however they may be not clearly the 'high-quality' at some thing in exchange. Their average melee damage is not as right as a Barbarian's, they may be no longer nearly as speedy as a Rogue or Ranger, and that they don't have access to Spells like a Cleric or Wizard does. But, for a solo player, a properly-geared Fighter (each in terms of armor and weapons) will provide them the overall maximum chance of survival against the odds. Now, Fighters can not without problems 1v3 an enemy group, but they will typically stay lengthy sufficient to try to and have the best risk of dwelling to try to escape if they can't. The Cleric: Tons Of Healing In A Game Where Healing Is Sparse And sooner or later, there are Clerics. In wellknown Clerics are excellent solo training for a lot of the identical motives Fighters are. Their offense isn't horrible, their defense is respectable, and that they also can use a protect. But, in which the Cleric excels solely is of their basic survivability and PvE software. Clerics have a mess of spells that deal damage to undead which include Holy Light and their Holy Purification Skill. Not simplest that, but they may be also able to maintain themselves alive plenty longer on common than every other elegance might by the usage of each Lesser Heal and Holy Light. That said, while Clerics are accurate for solo gamers, they still shine the brightest when in a crew due to the fact they are able to heal their harm sellers mid-combat and even revive teammates with a spell. But for anyone simply trying to play on their very own and survive towards enemy squads, a Cleric is a pretty good elegance desire. Why Not Barbarian Or Rogue? And ultimately, it need to be stated that each Barbarian and Rogue can work in solo play, they can even dominate in the proper hands. In fact, with how regularly players see Rogues jogging round by themselves, it'd appear peculiar not to have them on here. But, in phrases of their standard playstyle and available Skills/Perks, Barbarians and Rogues simply war more in solo vs squad play than the other instructions do. A Barbarian's slow interaction velocity, sluggish motion speed, and overall awkward weapon hitboxes make it hard to chase or break out enemy gamers. Meanwhile, the Rogue can sneak up on a player without difficulty or even melt them before they have a hazard to react relying on what number of stabs they get in, but in the event that they get hit even as soon as, they're essentially completed for. They're just lessons that shine so much extra in a group scenario that it would be a chunk silly to simplest use them in solo play. The Fighter in Dark in Darker is largely the Mario-type person in Super Smash Bros Ultimate of this recreation if that makes sense. It's the elegance alternative gamers select to analyze the game earlier than moving directly to the extra robotically unique training. Or, rather, they grow to be sticking with it and coming across the man or woman or class' internal complexities. It's the Ryu from Street Fighter or the Sol Badguy of Guilty Gear, just to provide a few different examples. But, as absolutely everyone who has 'principal'ed' any of those characters in fighting video games will say, just because it's the 'starter' man or woman does not mean that it's horrific, simple, or clean to grasp. So, allow's smash down the Fighter in Dark and Darker and pass over its standard construct. All servers of Dark and Darker Gold Coins on MMOexp.com.

What NJ Mystery Drones Demonstrate – GOVT LIES! https://tinyurl.com/4zvku829 SUMMARY: Let’s talk about the so-called Mystery Drones flying over New Jersey. … AND YET officially the lying government is saying the equivalent of, “Nothing to see here, all is well.” Frankly that is probably HOGWASH! … My guess: The concern is the construction of a dirty bomb. And gee whiz, you’ve heard or read all those reports of Illegal Aliens from Drug Cartels, Islamic Terrorists, CCP military-spy operators and so on… MORE TO READ & WATCH! #NJMysteryDrones #GovtLies

Our governments should be forbidden from justifying any secrecy or lying on the pretext of preventing “panic”. That rationalization becomes universal camouflage for betrayal and coverup. We have a natural right to know what threatens us. We pay for institutions to enable us to see, not to willfully blind us. Join @DrBretWeinstein

Falsely Claiming to Be an Insurer Can be Criminal To Sue for Business Disparagement Evidence is Required Post 4951, Posted on December 17, 2024 by Barry Zalma Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/falsely-claiming-insurer-can-criminal-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-3bwrc, see the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4950 posts. See the full video at and at Plaintiff Route App, Inc.’s (“Route”) moved the USDC to Dismiss two counterclaims asserted by OrderProtection.com, Inc. (“OrderProtection”). In Route App, Inc. v. Orderprotection.Com, Inc.; Julian Wilson, et al, No. 2:23cv606 DAK, United States District Court, D. Utah (December 9, 2024) found no evidence supporting a claim of business disparagement or business defamation. BACKGROUND This case involves a dispute between Route, a post-purchase shipping insurance provider, and a competitor, OrderProtection. In its Complaint, Route alleges that OrderProtection and several of Route’s former employees misappropriated trade secrets to create a competing business. In response to Route’s Complaint, OrderProtection filed an Answer and Counterclaims, asserting four causes of action: (1) Unfair Competition in Violation of the Lanham Act; (2) Defamation Per Se/Defamation/Business Disparagement; (3) Tortious Interference with Existing and Prospective Economic Relations; and (4) Negligent Misrepresentation. The facts pertaining to OrderProtection’s claim for “Defamation/Defamation Per Se/Business Disparagement” are essentially that Route employees have allegedly told OrderProtection customers and potential customers that they should work with Route instead of OrderProtection because Route is a “legal insurance provider” and OrderProtection is not. OrderProtection argued that Route is not a licensed insurance company and that, at best, Route affiliates with an insurance producer to procure its own insurance coverage (which does not benefit customers or merchants). More importantly both Route and OrderProtection in essence both self-fund the warranty protection they provide, and thus a customer is no better off with Route’s protection package than with OrderProtection’s competitive offering. DISCUSSION Specifically, while OrderProtection’s Opposition Memorandum does not explicitly state that it conceded its defamation and defamation per se claims, OrderProtection never addresses Route’s argument that it could not properly maintain these causes of action in the context of this case. Even if OrderProtection had not conceded these claims, it failed to establish that these claims are viable in the context of this case. Further, OrderProtection made no argument that Utah law recognizes a “hybrid” cause of action for “Defamation Per Se/Defamation/Business Disparagement,” wherein a business disparagement claim may be analyzed using defamation or defamation per se case law rather than case law pertaining to a business disparagement claim. Business Disparagement The parties agree that to state a claim for business disparagement (sometimes called injurious falsehood), OrderProtection must allege (1) falsity of the statement made; (2) malice by the party making the statement; and (3) special damages. According to Route, while OrderProtection has made allegations of lost customers, it has not named specific individuals, nor has it alleged with particularity any financial losses, which is required under Rule 9(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court declined to recognize a “business disparagement per se” cause of action in which special damages need not be alleged, and it declined to recognize a business disparagement claim that relies on a statement that is “false by implication,” which is a concept that has been recognized in defamation cases. Route’s Motion to Dismiss was granted and OrderProtection’s claims for defamation and defamation per se were dismissed with prejudice. Its claim for business disparagement was dismissed without prejudice, and OrderProtection may file a Motion for Leave to Amend by January 10, 2025, if it is able to allege a proper business disparagement claim, as discussed above. ZALMA OPINION Two businesses claiming to be issuers of insurance who were not licensed insurers claimed to be victims of disparagement by the other. Customers, because of the various claims shifted from one party to the other who, contrary to their claims, were self funding what they alleged was insurance of shipments of goods. The court in a Solomon-like decision ignored the fact that both claimed to be insurers when they were not and used the false claims to take over clients. Both lost and the court gave OrderProtection the attempt to state a business disparagement claim implying that the court did not believe OrderProtection would be able to plead a viable cause of action. The State of Utah Department of Insurance should consider this case. (c) 2024 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc. Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos. Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe Go to X @bzalma; Go to Newsbreak.com https://www.newsbreak.com/@c/1653419?s=01; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk

https://medforth.biz/pope-prays-to-palestinian-jesus-lying-on-swaddling-keffiyeh-there-are-no-words-to-describe-how-much-of-an-unholy-desecration-this-is/

He must be lying because John Kirby and our government says they don't exist. Reporter Goes to see Drones in New Jersey, "My Entire World View Has Changed... https://rumble.com/v5zb43h--breaking-reporter-goes-to-see-drones-in-new-jersey-my-entire-world-view-ha.html

legitimate point! There is nobody on earth who actually cares about their body, AND eats at #McDonald's PURE FICTION folks! As if you needed another reason to call BS on this #CIA tale of BS And these pricks sitting up there lying their asses off is pathetic! We spend BILLIONS every year supposedly on "National Defense" yet we are not capable of identifying or just clipping a drone control signal??? Sorry.... but I gotta call BS on that folks! Go ahead and TRY to fly a drone into restricted airspace! You WILL lose control and your drone WILL crash! Because there are signal scrambling devices that cover ALL of these areas! But we are to believe that A WHOLE FLEET OF DRONES is just cruising around the country and we don't even know who they belong to? Again, sorry, but I don't buy that 3rd grade level lie! And neither should YOU! What you NEED to believe is that EVERYONE WITHIN YOUR ILLEGITIMATE "GOVERNMENT" IS A #CRIMINAL , and needs to be prosecuted and put behind bars!

US PROMOTES FREE SPEECH ABROAD WHILE USING NGOS TO CENSOR INFORMATION AT HOME. #Trump and every other political #Parasite are lying sacks of feces! They WANT Censorship in violation of the Constitution! Not Trump SAYS he wants Free Speech... Right up until you speak #Truth about a #Jew! THEN he wants you sent to PRISON! Because HE is a Jew! And on top of that, he wants our #Criminal filled #Police Departments to be MORE "ABOVE THE LAW" than they already are! Bullshit! Police have no more rights than ANY other American! And it is time to toss "Qualified Immunity" AND time to ENFORCE FEDERAL LAW... Namely TITLE 18 U.S.C. § 241 & 18 U.S.C. § 242! These are laws on the books to hold government accountable! PROSECUTORS are criminal and complicit, so THE PEOPLE need to convene a grand jury THEMSELVES and see that criminal Police are held accountable (Along with Prosecutors who fail to uphold these statutes) It's up to YOU to hold the criminals in government accountable! They are not going to do it themselves! https://old.bitchute.com/video/8KO9xuqOkxDu/

RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS...Podcast ... If you missed last nights LIVE show where Craig & Diane discussed the latest on PA Sen. John Fetterman and Rep. Nancy Pelosi; DOJ Inspector General reveals info re: FBI informants and January 6th; the WH's excuse for drones flying over NJ; FBI's DEI hire fired six shots from five feet away and missed Trump's would be assassin; & Biden's largest single-day act of clemency in modern U.S. history...listen to it & past shows at https://rspradio1.com ... go to Podcasts.