Home Subscribe Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

News


MEDICAL FRAUD RETRIAL: Immunity at issue in Gage case

Prosecutors' motion argues against protecting surgeon

Federal prosecutors are reluctant to grant immunity to Las Vegas surgeon Mark Kabins, arguing that their investigation of doctors and lawyers allegedly involved in a scheme to defraud clients could lead to charges against the spine specialist.

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Justin Quackenbush told the federal government to grant immunity to Kabins by Friday or he will dismiss a criminal case against personal injury attorney Noel Gage.

Gage's attorneys pushed for Kabins' immunity, saying that his testimony will contradict that of Dr. John Thalgott, a government witness who was granted immunity before Gage's trial in February. The defense team claims the government declined to offer protection to Kabins because his testimony would benefit Gage.

Quackenbush declared a mistrial last month after a jury deadlocked on charges against Gage, who is accused of conspiring with doctors and attorneys to inflate clients' medical costs, protect physicians from medical malpractice lawsuits and share kickbacks from legal settlements.


Most Popular Stories
  • MOUNT CHARLESTON: Four die in plane crash
  • Two couples died in crash
  • NORM: Steve Wynn goes for mega-yacht
  • FAMILY SERVICES: Three visits preceded boy's death
  • NORM: Kirshner works on big Vegas project
  • NORM: Playboy models in state spotlight
  • Body of diver who jumped off 90-foot Lake Mead cliff found
  • NORM: Playboy 'coed': Dad's OK with it
  • NORM: Elvis fan club will have star its way
  • NORM: Curtain falling on Stage Deli



  • At issue is Gage's treatment of Melodie Simon, a woman who hired Gage after she underwent back surgery in 2000 and emerged from the hospital a paraplegic. Prosecutors claim Gage did not pursue medical malpractice lawsuits against Simon's surgeons, Kabins and Thalgott, because they were part of a network overseen by self-proclaimed medical consultant Howard Awand.

    In return for backing off the doctors, the government claims, Awand referred a case to Gage that ultimately settled for $18 million.

    A secret meeting between Gage, Kabins and Thalgott in 2001 is key to Kabins' testimony, the defense claims.

    Thalgott told jurors in March that the three conspired to blame an anesthesiologist for Simon's injuries.

    The two physicians agreed to testify at Simon's trial and craft their testimony to point the finger at the anesthesiologist.

    Simon received a $2.3 million settlement from the case, but prosecutors claim that if Gage had pursued the surgeons, her reward would have jumped to between $8 million and $12 million.

    Defense attorneys claim Kabins told the FBI that during the secret meeting, Gage said "he was not going to commit legal malpractice by promising not to sue them."

    In its motion obtained Tuesday, the government claims Kabins' testimony would not contradict that of Thalgott.

    Thalgott testified he was still unsure whether Gage would file a lawsuit against him after that meeting.

    "Kabins purports to say nothing different in his anticipated testimony," according to the federal government's motion.

    "Whether or not Gage said, at the meeting in the fall of 2001, that he was not going to promise not to sue them does not undercut Thalgott's recollection of the meeting, his interpretation of the meeting or his interpretation of events subsequent to the meeting."

    The defense also claims Kabins will counter Thalgott's statements that Kabins never believed he was responsible for Simon's injuries. Prosecutors said Kabins waited several hours before performing emergency surgery to stop the internal bleeding that contributed to Simon's paralysis.

    The government says Kabins can testify that Thalgott lied because Thalgott never stated a "proximate cause" of Simon's injuries. Thalgott testified only that both surgeons were concerned about being sued.

    The government claims it is up to prosecutors to decide whether to grant immunity, not a judge.

    "As the investigation continues, the government seeks to preserve its discretion in making a charging decision against Kabins," the prosecution's motion says. "A grant of testimonial use immunity to Kabins, on the other hand, would remove that decision from the prosecution and foreclose any prosecution of Kabins."

    Contact reporter Adrienne Packer at apacker @reviewjournal.com or 702-384-8710.



    Leave Your Comment 4 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Getthepicture??? wrote on April 30, 2008 07:59 PM: Read between the lines here ... the big game in this hunt are Kabins and Awand. Gage may take a walk on this (and, indeed he really does not deserve to) but the government prosecutors will be able to take Kabins and Awand out of the game forever.


    Much Smarter Than Sad wrote on April 30, 2008 11:31 AM: Hey Sad ----

    What was the highest level of education you completed? Kindgergarten? Just curious!


    Client wrote on April 30, 2008 08:37 AM: I am so sick of people like "sad" saying things like "Quackenbush was an attorney long before he was a judge. They look after their own." WAKE UP! The men (well, if you want to call them men) putting on the case against Mr. Gage are ATTORNEYS!!! So you can't say Quackenbush is protecting "his own", when "his own" are both the defense attorneys and the prosecuting attorneys!


    Sad wrote on April 30, 2008 07:58 AM: The sad part is Quackenbush has done all he can to blow the case. Quackenbush was an attorney long before he was a judge. They look after their own.

    Quackenbush really whittled this case down. The public deserves better. The jury instructions were confusing.

    Don't worry Noel "The Quack" has your back.